Always getting the (or at least a) shot
One thing I noticed while writing the appreciation of Annie Leibovitz was that she did seem to blow those dream gigs. And somehow I suspect that it's different from me; when I blow an opportunity, you just don't see it. But I'll bet you can't just call up Hillary Clinton, Barbara Bush, Opra, Claudia Kennedy, Jonnie Mitchell, John and Yoko, Carly Fiorona, and on and on, and say, "Sorry, I didn't get the shot. Can I have a new appointment?"
There is so much to impressed with in the work of the masters, sometimes one can forget this basic thing. They get the shots. Seemingly always.
Some of the Annie Leibovitz images aren't as great as others, but none is as bad as my best often is. (Of course, my best is never close to being on a par with her best, but that's different.) She seems always to come away with something good enough for publication.
So here's my question for Andy, Shay, and the other pros out there. Do you guys always get a shot on your gigs? Do you remember when that started to happen. Is there a trick to it? (Like having a safe second serve in tennis, perhaps?)
There is so much to impressed with in the work of the masters, sometimes one can forget this basic thing. They get the shots. Seemingly always.
Some of the Annie Leibovitz images aren't as great as others, but none is as bad as my best often is. (Of course, my best is never close to being on a par with her best, but that's different.) She seems always to come away with something good enough for publication.
So here's my question for Andy, Shay, and the other pros out there. Do you guys always get a shot on your gigs? Do you remember when that started to happen. Is there a trick to it? (Like having a safe second serve in tennis, perhaps?)
If not now, when?
0
Comments
do i always get the shot? well, mostly, yes and sometimes no. but i have infinite patience, and i think that's an example of one ingredient to success. lots of other stuff, too. since i shot mainly street and landscape, i'm subject to things often out of my control. but i do believe that we, as photographers, can make our own luck. how? one way is "f/8 and be there..." that is, have your camera with you always, and be ready, prepared. another is persistence... i often ply the same photographic waters looking for subjects or scenes, and sometimes i wonder "why?" but the reason i do it, is that everything changes all the time!
i think the closest thing in my experience that relates to your annie l comments is when i'm out for street portraits. i have to be quick ... these subjects won't give me a lot of time, and so here's where i will sometimes "not get the shot" but fortunately, as i get better and learn more, and as i apply my skills more diligently, my hit rate is going up fairly high. i've imporoved in my ability to engage these subjects, to get them to become uncaring about the camera, and exhibit their character... but yes, there have been some times that i tried really hard and simply got an "ordinary shot," and guess what ... i don't usually put those up in my gallery
with my landscape, streetscape, and other similar work, i'm trying new things.. i don't want to do the shot that you and 100 other photogs have made... i want the one that nobody's made... (by and large..heheh there are a few great shots that i'm trying to replicate!)... and so, i'm constantly challenging myself to think outside of the box while still at the same time adhere to some good compositional basics. it forces me to look at things differently, which i believe, is a good thing.
great topic, rutt, and thanks for bringing it up
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
there.. I've waxed poetic.. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way... cos I've seen the shots
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Do you always get the shot? Do you always get a shot even if it isn't the one you wanted? If you could have a dream subject like the ones HCB got or Annie Leibovitz gets, what percent of the time do you think you'd come away from the session with something you'd be proud of? What percent of the time do you think you'd have something that would at least fulfill the assignment? What percent of the time would it be a dead loss?
Actually, this is really sort of a question about professionalism and Andy ducked it. Maybe he doesn't get comissions to do portraits or shoot events. I don't like my batting average in situations where I'd really love to get a shot. OK, I'd love to get a dream shot, love to shoot the moon and win as many times as one an Annie Leibovitz or HCB, but first I'd just like to be sure that I'd come away with at least enough to feel I'd done a journeyman's job. I don't really have that confidence except in certain very controlled situations (like the after school play I shoot every year.)
My mother-in-law has a sage piece of advcie about raising teenagers: "Avoid felonies. Avoid permanent bodily damage." It seems like setting the bar a little low, doesn't it? But when you are raising teenagers, sometimes that's about right. It similar in photo sessions (or trips or events.) The first priority has to be just to get something that works. Once I knew I'd get that, then I could be braver. Or maybe I should be braver to start?
I'd really like every piece of advice there is on this subject, especially yours, Sid.
When you say "Getting the shot" are you referring to a task you set up in advance - as when you agree to shoot a portrait, or are you referring to someone who sets out to shoot some landscape shots and is dependent on the lighting and weather to cooperate?
I am sure the real PRO's in the studio will routinely come up with a useable image for their client. They have control of light, dark, weather, etc. And the real good ones are not in a hurry I suspect. Time pressure is the enemy of creativity in my eye.
But on the street there is that random element that Andy mentioned when he said always have your camera with you because things happen quickly and then they are gone whether it is a street scene or an unusual light in the sky and on the landscape.
Many of my preferred images were not planned at all - they were fortuitous - I was in the right spot at the right time and caught them. Sometimes I was actually planning on shooting something else entirely. Shooting animals is like that - they don't always cooperate, nor do children either sometimes. But you can have a tentative plan and secondary goals.
The previous thread on creativity speaks to your questions I think John. The photographer shows how he shoots an image and knows it is NOT the image he wants and thus he continues to work the scene with different angles and different lenses until he KNOWS he has captured the image he wants
This is the link again
http://www.hlpusd.k12.ca.us/go/dist...mc/ecreate1.wvx
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
i don't do many events, nor weddings, but i do get commissions... batting average? probably around .800 ... i can recall a only a few un-fulfilled clients. lotsa reasons. if i could only just do over 3 or 4 i'd nail them today, they were portrait jobs gone amok
yeah, i wanna hear from sid, too
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Avedon's studio work from the last 20 years is very good, but as you point out, he had complete control over lighting, background, etc. What was left was interacton with the subject and capturing just the right moment. I know a pretty famous pro, Elsa Dorfman. She works in a studio with a white background and lots of lighting and she has shot a zillion people there. "All" she has to do is get her subjects to be themselves for long enough to capture it. She is really great at this, she has this jewish aunt thing down to a science and I think it always works.
Annie Leibovitz and Cartier-Bresson are different. They go to their subjects and shoot them in their lairs. It's incredibly impressive to me.
no, for sure not that high, but i can tell you this: i've had the determination to "get the shot" ever since age 10... here's my first newspaper shot, it's my brother at 16, his first car wreck
i think, that it changed over time rather gradually. i can tell you that in the past two years, i feel that my skills and abilty have increased geometrically, in large part, due to folks just like you, rutt, who get me thinking, and discussing, and improving my art. what i'll do now, with this thread and topic in the front of my mind, is try and apply it yet more diligently, the next time i shoot.
i started taking jobs for portraits and other assignments about four years ago, still working film for the most part. over the past two years, gone digital fully, i've been able to take advantage of broader exposure via the internet and get myself a lot more work.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
can't wait to hear shay's input on this, he's way good at exactly this.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
She shoots, and she shoots and she shoots, and she shoots. I didn't like her work at first, so it annoyed me when she started getting so even I had to admit that she was nailing it.
I will never get the assignments she gets with the people she does, and I have not shot as many as she has. But she has not only been doing this all that time, she has been putting herself on the line all this time.
I don't know her life, I cannot imagine that it is anything but photography, no idea. But, well, she did it...........and probably not all that good, and she kept doing it.
Kind of like Nike used to say, Just Do It.
again, and again, and again, and again, and again. And you won't get them all right, so you have to do it again.........every chance. Driven, these people are driven.
ginger
I would imagine everyone has some poses they know will work, even if they are in different places. They hope. I cannot imagine going to a commission and using it only to develope my skills. I am being paid, I am there to please the client first, and yes, I think most people have something with which to do that. (It doesn't take much)
Then the rest is gravy. The mediocre, iMO, just don't go after the gravy.
ginger again
Obviously, no-one one's ever paid me to shoot. The measure of success for me would be at least one usuable shot from every outing with the camera. I guess I'm in the 70% category. But remember, I'm the one deciding that, not a third party with a more discriminating eye. If my PS skills were better, my average might be better. I see folks (hiya Andy!) take what look like dull shots and, with an understanding of lighting and color and mood, transform them into something special. They see the structure of a good shot, and are able to realize its potential.
My strength is a half-way decent eye. And I'm reasonably fearless about trying something... I don't feel embrassed about contorting in public, if I feel it might lead to a good shot. Add to that my tendency to shoot several hundred shots in an outing, and the odds of something good coming back are high.
Among my many weakensses is a lack of technical understanding of my equipment. I'm often unsure of exactly what kind of depth-of-field I'll get, for example. I have mental farts, like not checking ISO. My appreciation for light is inconsistent. I don't really know my tools or my craft all that well, yet. I'm not a quick street shooter, just a persistent one. I see a lot of images that I'm not quick enough to grab.
That being said, when I go for a specific shot, and know what I want, I feel like I do OK. Frankly, when you know what the final product's supposed to look like, half the work is done, IMHO. The hard part is having a mental picture of the image you want. When I do, things usually go smoothly, unless I have an uncooperative duck, er subject, to work with.
I think these are the last two shots that I envisoned and planned for. I was happy with the results.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
I do my best with teens, girls better than boys.
Girls are easy because they are into it. They feel like a model and it's easy to get them to let their personality out.
This may sound like a bad attitude.. but it's the truth. You dont have to break new photographic ground. You have to get shots they like and that make them feel good about themselves. There is nothing wrong with experementing with different things and you may get something that is over the top fantastic, but you start with the standards, standard poses, easy soft lighting, get the staple shots. Talk to them while you do it, get to know them a little and get them to relax. If they are happy and having fun you can get much better expressions from them.
Shoot a lot.
Go the extra in post, clean up blemishes, try some interesting effects and give them more than they expected.
For the most part your clients dont have a particular thing in mind, but if they do, try to find out before the shoot so that you are ready.
This young man had terrible acne it was a lot of work to get rid of it, but it is important.
Try to catch their personality and you will hit the target.
I just deleted them, they don't show. I tried to show them to someone a month or so ago, too. They showed when I went to bed, and the next morning these same photos were gone like they were this AM. Does anyone know why this would happen? At this point these photos are not on my hard drive, they are on a CD, but I thought smugmug kept the photos on its own hard drive. This is the only group of photos I have had that problem with.
ginger
Rutt, the first time i took a baptism photo, it was really the first time I put myself out there. I did things I liked, they didn't, but were nice about it. They talked to me, one liked the next one and the other person in charge didn't. So this is now the pose they want and only this pose. It can be vertical, but they prefer the family up close and personal. My main worries are trying to keep the candle from growing out of a head, stuff like that. Also I have to take enough photos that if someone is a blinker, or other things happen I have a good one for Judy, the person who decides what I do. This IS the baptism photo.
This is my photo. I like it much better. With Father McInerny over at the side, purposely darkened, I think it add so much to the photo. They would be no chance in heaven or hell that photo would be used. I take it for me, send it to them, just do, but also send them the one they want. I know it is not Leibowitz, but hey, I have reluctant people here, people in a hurry, etc.
This is my photo, MINE!
MINE
This actually worked for both of us, but they were a miserable looking family, I have a photo of that somewhere.
mine:
That baby above, that was the first baptism I photographed. I way over did it. I was sooo nervous. I think I was just more scared not to. I have not done things all my life because of fear of not being perfect, I guess I decided I should try to scare myself to death a few times.
I can walk in and out now, look at the LCD screen and know I have taken something for them. I am always looking for something for me.
One thing I wanted to tell you is that famous people are easier to pose than the normal person. They may have their own agenda which I would do, then I may have an agenda, theoretically, of just let's try this kind of thing, and I would do that. But they do know how to make themselves look good. And you can, if you want, usually catch other nuances. The thing is that they are happy very easily. All they care about is that they look good.
ginger
Rutt,
My opinion, for what it's worth, is that there's a big difference between Pros and hobbyists. That difference being TIME.
A pro has endless hours a day to do 'his thing', or at least the major part of his work day, with thousands of hours of experience behind him. If he's on a commisioned assignment then I assume he can put everything into it. He can shoot again and again (Dewitt's video - 400 rolls of film into a single article!), he can try different angles, he can keep looking for the extraordinary. He can afford 'patience'.
For me patience is a luxury. My day job takes 47.5 hours a week. My family takes another 47.5. By the time I grab my camera I'm running on loaned time from next week :lol .
Two of the most fullfilling photography experiences I have had were when I went off on my own for a few days, leaving work, family, bills, and other engagements behind. At these times I found patience, peace of mind, creativity and relative success (or at least satisfaction);
Ireland: http://niralon.smugmug.com/gallery/92800
Poland: http://niralon.smugmug.com/gallery/169240
I think realization of the fact that my daily routine doesn't allow me the photographic luxuries I would love to have, makes it easier to cope with a low batting average. Because I have proved to myself that under more 'comfortable' conditions I am able to create something with which I am content and satisified.
Is all this just an excuse for taking lousy pictures?
Nir Alon
images of my thoughts
I seem to almost always have pictures on my mind. All of my friends are used to me saying "look at that", not exclaiming loudly...just stating "look". 90% of those I can't get, because I'm involved in something that won't allow it to happen. This helps me remember places to shoot, time of day, weather, etc.
I also have my favorite haunts...they are different all day long and change all year long. But it seems like I've always got this little tape recorder going on in the back of my mind for things photographic.
Whenever I shoot (except for those spontaneous things that pop up), I always have a second or a few minutes to visualize what "I think I'm seeing" and what I want it to look like finished.
Then comes the other fun part for me, the Digital Darkroom, post processing, whatever you want to call it. This is where things come to life for me. "Can I make this picture look like what I have stored in my mind as to what is was supposed to look like when I took it?" or "Can I make this look like my vision?".
When I have a good handle on the equipment, how it works,and it's limitations...I will shoot between 50% & 60% keepers in familiar territor, and 10% to 20% in unfamiliar places.......the zoo comes to mind.
Right now though, I've just returned to the SLR world with my 20D and MKII. I'm probably getting 5% or less of what I want. So, I'm back in that learning my equipment phase that is sooooo important and soooo frustrating when you have an idea of the shot you want, but by the time you get the equipment ready..shots been gone a while. Oh well, a few more months, a few thousand more pictures and I'll be feeling ok with these toys.
Den
Both of you do this under controlled conditions where you know how to get a shot for sure that will make your clients happy. And it sounds like you get that over with and then if possible try to get a shot that will make you happy as well. That makes a lot of sense to me; it's sort of how I supposed it would be.
For me the most dangerous thing is shooting wide angle portraits. With a fairly long lens, I can be pretty confident of getting a shot, but the wider the lens the more visual elements there are to juggle and my compositions often don't work. Why couldn't I just have looked though the viewfinder and seen that stupid televisions in the background? One thing that's really impressive about master photographers is how often they nail it with wide angle shots and how much visual complexity they can manage and yet still end up with string compositions.
As to time, Annie Leibovitz, Cartier-Bresson, and Avedon all photographed people who have zillions of better things to do than getting their pictures taken. What are the chances that Avedon could call Carl Rove and say, "Sorry, Carl, I didn't really get a good one. Can we make a date for you to come back to my studio in NY and sit for me again?" What about HCB and (say) William Faulkner? Or Annie Leibovitz and Barbara Bush, Brooke Aster, Carly Fiorona, or Katherine Grahm? I think these were cases where the subject probably had a lot less patience than the photographer and a lot less at stake in getting a good shot. Can you imagine having a chance with one of these women? These are people who are used to having complete control over all situations, people far more famous than the photographer. It's good to keep this in mind when looking at these shots. Of them, the pictures of Brooke Aster and of Katherine Grahm are not the best of Leibovitz's work. I think these two women really never ceded control over the situation long enough to let the photographer really do her job and the pictures show it. But they are good pictures nontheless. I'd be proud of them and they work in the book. And somehow, she got great pictures of Barbara Bush and Brooke Aster.