JonU - great shots! I'd definitely see about submitting stuff like that to a stock agency... They're very solid shots. Don't settle for the crowdsourced stock sites (istockphoto, ultrashock, etc) - shoot high and see what you can do from there.
I can tell you for a fact - that the stock agencies would call it "overprocessing" and eventually it might work against you on the photos you submit. Lightly done though and it can be a very attractive way to present the subject.
do you have a 1.4? It adds a lot of reach for zero negative effect. Might think about picking one up if you don't already have one. And a monopod too!
Could be. I feel like each photo is processed just right...for me. I doubt I would process them much for stock submission. Maybe up till the vignette point... Man I love the vignette....
I don't have a 1.4. I did...and sold it like a tool. I do have a kick ass mono pod and knee pads....
I wish I still had a spare body for the 70-200....
Something tells me I will be picking up a spare body and a 1.4 again soon.....
jbear2000 wrote:
I like your shot too Smoov - i know you didn't ask for C&C - but the vignetting is an issue that a little tighter crop would fix - but the color saturation in the water and the sharpness around the boats is just superior! The vignetting thing works when it adds to the image - but when it detracts - it hurts it a lot. This image is so strong in so many ways that it would do nothing negative to crop it. - my 2 cents - worth what you paid
I do like the vignetting, much like Uhler That picture is older, before I had the 5D and probably when I was a post-processing lunatic. I like Uhler's picture much better than mine, particularly the sky. So striking, the day I was there it was a bit overcast. And I had kids rushing me to hurry up so we could run back down the damn lighthouse stairs again. Blah.
Well - i know I'm old school - i was taught that vignetting was a an amateur mistake. So its sorta ingrained as synonymous - that was before the art explosion of the 60's and 70s where anything goes and "breaking the rules" was hip. I tend to agree that it can be a positive aspect of some photos in some situations. But I would hate the day it becomes the norm - cause it just doesn't work in all situations. Even if it did, we'd soon get tired of it and "break the new rules" to get away from it.
Its sorta like the last photog guru sideshow i went to, his thing he kept trying to drill into his listeners is that "what is old, is new."
One of the hard lessons I've been learning this last two weeks is this - just because I like the way I processed my own image - and am insulted that someone might suggest doing otherwise - its not about me. Its about whether the image is "marketable". In that regard - I know I have a lot more to learn.
I guess I could just shoot nudes... anything will sell - vingetting, cropped, or crapped. Its all in the standards of your target market! We can always justify what we do by saying, "i shoot/process/crop to suit myself and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks!" As in the old "i meant to do that" cat into the wall approach. I've been around too many of "those" kinds of arti'sts. We all have.
Here are some shots from last week's season opener for Georgia Tech - marks the first game for new coach Paul Johnson (formerly of Navy) and the triple option offense for GT. The main issue with this game is I shot it with a 1DMkII and now I want one. That's not good.
Love your shots Colin. Man I hope I get something close to this good this weekend at UGA/CMU.
I went through a portfolio review the other day trying to get ready to get into sportshooters.com. I learned alot from listening to these guys. I see in your photos most of what we talked about. Good exposure, good framing, and your photos tell a story. Very well done sir.
Yeah...shooting the MKII with tlong was my downfall too.....
I would be interested in one of your 30D's if you go that way....
Edited by Jon Uhler on Sep 04, 2008 at 08:41 AM GMT
jbear2000 wrote:
Well - i know I'm old school - i was taught that vignetting was a an amateur mistake. So its sorta ingrained as synonymous - that was before the art explosion of the 60's and 70s where anything goes and "breaking the rules" was hip. I tend to agree that it can be a positive aspect of some photos in some situations. But I would hate the day it becomes the norm - cause it just doesn't work in all situations. Even if it did, we'd soon get tired of it and "break the new rules" to get away from it.
Its sorta like the last photog guru sideshow i went to, his thing he kept trying to drill into his listeners is that "what is old, is new."
One of the hard lessons I've been learning this last two weeks is this - just because I like the way I processed my own image - and am insulted that someone might suggest doing otherwise - its not about me. Its about whether the image is "marketable". In that regard - I know I have a lot more to learn.
I guess I could just shoot nudes... anything will sell - vingetting, cropped, or crapped. Its all in the standards of your target market! We can always justify what we do by saying, "i shoot/process/crop to suit myself and it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks!" As in the old "i meant to do that" cat into the wall approach. I've been around too many of "those" kinds of arti'sts. We all have....Show more →
JB - Sometimes you say some things that just makes me want to slap you...
First off...vignetting was a an amateur mistake.... I hope you mean allowing your lens hood to vignette your shot could be considered an amateur mistake...but actual processing it into an image - either on the computer or in a darkroom - has always been a technique used by many a master. Sure, like anything it can be over used....but I hope that isn't what you are saying is an amateur mistake. Also....when you say you were "taught" this.....I hope you are not one to fall into the trap of...."Well my professor said it was a mistake...so therefore it is...." If anything we learn things like this so we can then make an educated decision on how we want our photography to be. I too have been "trained"...in high school as well as college. I apply what I learned...how I want to. Period. If it goes against what the old school says...then more the better....
Second off....just because I like the way I processed my own image - and am insulted that someone might suggest doing otherwise - its not about me....if you are not doing photography for yourself first...then what is the point? I am not buying (Ha ha I crack myself up) this whole "marketable" thingy... I mean I don't sell my pictures. So I don't care what is marketable. I sure would hate this "hobby" if everytime I clicked the shutter I thought...man I hope that one was marketable. I am also not going to process my pictures so they are marketable. I am going to process them so they meet MY desires. It is all about me. If and when I share my pictures with my friends, and I get a "Great shot!" response...then I have done all that I wanted to do when I clicked the shutter. Of course when I share then get responses that may outline ways to improve my shots....I listen to the ideas....decided if I want to try that out...then see how the idea suits me. Most times I am still very happy with my out come... Now of course when I am out shooting T&I or youth sports...sure I want a marketable picture and I try very hard to achieve that....but when I am shooting otherwise...it is for me and me alone. I don't care if a stock company would buy it. Not my bag at this point....
Sometimes when I read your response I get the feeling that you think we all approach our photography the same way....and that couldn't be further from the truth. There are no hard set rules....there is no marketable to some of us...there is just the joy of shooting and learning out to get better.
lets see - 4 paragraphs - hardly worth that much friction - its not personal - but i'll answer, cause that is what forums are for...
1) don't try it - neither of us will like the outcome - besides, it's not personal - remember we're talking about a technique. My statements go to the technique - just as my statements on usefulness of med. length telephoto lenses go to the realities of space. Don't make this another personal attack. The first time it was a serious slanderous personal attack you made against me - now you are moving toward physical violence. I don't believe its me that needs to get help if this trend continues. As far as I'm concerned - i'm talking about concepts and techniques and what has been universally accepted technical points in photography long before you or i ever picked up a camera. Don't blame me if we are relatively knew to this very old science.
2) as a technique - vignetting is fine - though personally i believe it detracts more than adds to an image - so it doesn't meet my own personal standards. I would never think to impose my standards on anyone else. Some standards are beyond personality though. If the image isn't strong enough to stand on its own - vignetting only hurts it. It is usually an amateur mistake either with a lens hood or an obstructive object - but overused in the darkroom or in photoshop - and it is also amateurish at best. I believe i did say it has its place and that it can actually add to the right image. In fact i was just looking at a photo in the Photography and the Art of Seeing book where the photog crushed himself deeply into a bush and shot through a hole in the foilage at a colorful group of trees - all vignetted by the colors of the bush in which he was standing. Now that is an original, brilliant and beautiful use of vignetting. Putting a dark ring around an otherwise strong image just leaves me flat.
3) We are both intelligent people - who probably have learned from other intelligent people. Learning doesn't have to stop either as we leave our institutions of learning or where our ego gets tripped. If all we are doing is putting our shots up for the "great shots" comment from people who really couldn't care less - then it is nothing more than mental masturbation we are expecting people to participate in. That's ugly. That said - when someone gets a critical comment - that goes to a technical or scientific point - it has nothing to do with the "art" involved. Again please yourself... no gratify yourself - any way you wish - but if the images are put up for criticism, don't be a child and react angrily when you don't get your ears tickled. Case in point - our friend dave put up some picts and asked for opinions. Proudly claimed he was trying hard to get it right in the camera first before he messed it up with photoshop. He gets angry when I put up a serious and meaningful critique of all the different things he didn't do right - "in the camera" to begin with. Things like framing, focus, depth of field, controlling horizon lines, eliminating clutter like dirty socks. That isn't an art thing - its crap in the camera. All that said - too much of that or too much vignetting makes your images unmarketable.
You can shoot - like i have done - for many years and fill the walls of every room in your house - as i have done for 40+ years - with great shots that gratify you. But it comes to nothing if the house burns down. Artist starve because they are too into their own heads so much they think art sells itself. It doesn't and never has. Art usually sells after the artist is dead and thats about it. Photography at the amateur level is a very expensive hobby and all of us would love to be able to buy all the toys we want to feed our need. I am merely suggesting that to offset those expenses, try selling your work, make it marketable, adhere to some standards that make it more marketable - cause there is nothing more gratifying than getting paid for what you have done. You will find you can still shoot all the images you ever wanted to shoot - you will just enjoy the thinking process behind it a bit better and gain confidence that will release you from having to get peer approval for your work. I know a number of very good artists - only a handful are making a decent living from it - most have stuff stacked in every corner that will never sell and probably never be hung. We don't want that, now do we?
4) Actually there are hard fast rules - that is why we have as a culture post 1960 - decided to break those rules. Some can be, and some can't. We ALL approach photography the same way... we put our nose to the back of the camera and trip the shutter when we see stuff we like to look at. Beyond that the only question was were we intelligent enough to do the hard stuff - learn the science of proper exposure, framing, composition, depth of field...
A friend of mine - a graduate of the "Art Students League" in New York city once said it was art if you threw your camera at the wall and the force of the impact happened to trip the shutter. The resulting image was by definition "art". If art is your claim to fame - power to you. Hope it sells.
As artists - we all would like to think we are free autonomous creatures roaming around and making art at every whim. That is a bit of over reaching.
To some degree we all approach photography - either the science or the art - exactly the same way. And that IS the truth.
The funny thing about all this - and Debbie has commented about these discussions. I don't care if anyone disagrees with me. She is amazed i take the time to bother replying when it goes unappreciated. I'm by far not the best photographer on FM - that is for sure. But i do know some stuff I've learned over the years and I'm generally a teacher by heart. I'm willing to share things i have learned and i try to do so freely and with enough information to help someone get something more than a "nice shot" comment - which i think is totally useless. I have worked in a highly technical field that takes 5 years to learn, 10 years to get good at and 20+ to master. I've been doing my line of work for over 30 now. I've seen other technicians hide their techniques and refuse to teach anyone out of the fear they may be replaced by the student. That's not me - I've taught many of my replacements and i don't mind. My career has progressed into 6 figures regardless. I'm not here to argue with anyone - i'm here to learn from and share the knowledge I've been given where possible.
Lets leave it at that and understand when you or me or anyone else puts up pictures, snapshots or "photographic images aspiring to be art" - that you open yourself to criticism. Learn how to take it without threatening violence - its a mark of maturity.
Colin - damn! I hate... those windscreens the players have taken to wearing. Really screws up the "eyes" part of "eyes and balls". So you scored a 300 and a Mark II - you're never going to shoot the same way again - you know that! Better start spending your spare time figuring out how to make some money - cause you're up to about 5 grand now and you are just getting started.
I just finished my taxes for last year and part of that included new camera purchases last year... over 10 grand! I'm no rocket scientist - but hobby or profession - making money from this thing is now a necessity.
JB - Okay...I know this is pointless but I will respond none the less.
1) I was joking. See the smilie? Ah...yeah...common internet lingo that follows a tongue in cheek comment.
2) This is the most intelligent post you have made yet up to a point. You say you like to teach...well then can't you teach without putting someone down? This is amateurish at best, that guy is an idiot, it’s a mark of maturity..and on and on... You don't teach...you preach. And not only do you preach...but you preach in absolutes. There are no absolutes when something is up to human interpretation.
3) Once again...not everyone wants to be marketable....and it is too bad that 40 plus years of nice images doesn't mean much to you. It also to bad that you care less about your peers opinions. Actually it explains a lot. I can a sure you that no mental masturbating will be spent in your direction. Wow...I have read that line time and time again...and it really explains a lot. You drone on and on about people making a decent living out of their photography. Why do you continue to base this as your argument for how everyone should shoot? I don't get this...really don't. I think you are frustrated maybe that you are not making a decent living at photography? I mean I don't know. As you like to say...get over yourself. I don't post my shots here or anywhere to get peer approval. I post them to share with people and to get constructive criticism. Of course posting them online opens one up to people that feel they know it all and must talk about hard fast rules as well....and unfortunately it is not in my nature to read dribble without responding. I think however, that is one thing I have learned from you...you can't participate in a conversation with someone who thinks they know it all. Someone that is all about absolutes and doesn't have an open mind.
One last thing since I believe you made it personal this time.....why is it that you "get in to it" with so many people on line? I mean I can count on both hands how many you have offended with your wizdom....
You say you love to teach....I would highly recommend you learn how to deal and talk to people...if you plan on trying to teach them something. I seriously think it is an online thing with you. In person you are very humble....very nice. Online.....not so much.
Edited by Jon Uhler on Sep 04, 2008 at 11:14 AM GMT
Edited by Jon Uhler on Sep 04, 2008 at 11:28 AM GMT
jbear2000 wrote:
Well - i know I'm old school - i was taught that vignetting was a an amateur mistake. So its sorta ingrained as synonymous - that was before the art explosion of the 60's and 70s where anything goes and "breaking the rules" was hip. I tend to agree that it can be a positive aspect of some photos in some situations. But I would hate the day it becomes the norm - cause it just doesn't work in all situations. Even if it did, we'd soon get tired of it and "break the new rules" to get away from it.
Its sorta like the last photog guru sideshow i went to, his thing he kept trying to drill into his listeners is that "what is old, is new."
One of the hard lessons I've been learning this last two weeks is this - just because I like the way I processed my own image - and am insulted that someone might suggest doing otherwise - its not about me. Its about whether the image is "marketable". In that regard - I know I have a lot more to learn.
....Show more →
Just how old ARE you JB? Lol...... I haven't been in any position to become educated about what is marketable, that's not where I am now know what I mean? I like what I like, so that's what I do. I suppose if I were to be in a position where I needed to rely on photography to earn a living I might feel differently, but I am not in that position so it leaves me freedom to do whatever I feel like doing Math has rules that really can't be broken...how many rules can art really have before it's not artistic expression anymore?
Jon Uhler wrote:
You say you love to teach....I would highly recommend you learn how to deal and talk to people...if you plan on trying to teach them something. I seriously think it is an online thing with you. In person you are very humble....very nice. Online.....not so much.
+1
JB needs start acting like the senior his photo indicates him to be, have some class, and stop harassing people. That or his keyboard needs to be taken away or lost under that pile of trash for good.
A teacher by nature? definitely got my ab workout for the day. I personally get alot of satisfaction out of explaining things to people and seeing marked results or improvements. JB on the other hand must have blinders on and apparently a big fun house mirror in front of him. I would say JB, if anyone needs to get over themselves as you said to me, its you. No one else on this forum is "caught up" in themselves the way you are, the rest of us are interested in interacting with people who have a similar interest, not putting them down. Individuals like you are very common on the internet, they type whatever vomit comes to their mind and think its gold. I'm just used to it coming from a much younger person, but for some reason you haven't developed maturity, compassion, or the ability to get along with others - something most learned by the time they were in college. People dont appreciate your comments because they are worthless, but it never occured to you to even remotely consider that...
So to answer your question, yes I do believe you are in some kind of twilight zone and I feel bad for you that you can't participate in a constructive and meaningful way with FM Forum ATL which I think has some very nice, generous, intelligent, and sincere people excluding yourself.
atlphoto222 wrote:
JB needs start acting like the senior his photo indicates him to be, have some class, and stop harassing people. That or his keyboard needs to be taken away or lost under that pile of trash for good.
+1 to that
Agreed... I don't post much, but I am watching, this gets some feedback. Agreed 100%.
yeah the actual IQ of a non -moving portrait will be very similar between any of the new generation sensors. I just need to work on the sharpness and focus on the shot and see if i can get some more detail into focus and perhaps more DOF.
That picture is older, before I had the 5D and probably when I was a post-processing lunatic. I like Uhler's picture much better than mine, particularly the sky. So striking, the day I was there it was a bit overcast. And I had kids rushing me to hurry up so we could run back down the damn lighthouse stairs again. Blah.