Pfiltz wrote:
I shoot for a living, and sell images to clients -vs- sitting on forums all day behind a cubicle and jumping into FM or some other site when the boss isn't looking...
You seem to have a thing against folks sitting in a cube checking out FM as you've mentioned this several times. I'm one of those cube jockies you so dislike. Guess I'm just curious where all that animosity comes from? Is it confined to all office workers or just the ones who attempt to do something creative?
Pfiltz wrote:
I shoot for a living, and sell images to clients -vs- sitting on forums all day behind a cubicle and jumping into FM or some other site when the boss isn't looking...
.
Buy a tokina 12-24 (old version).... have a light source anywhere near frame = boucoup flare...
For us amateurs (no cube for me though, I actually have an office with windows ), this is actually an interesting question and I appreciate those that troubled to answer sincerely.
Thankfully, I grew a filter (or what I call, a pfiltzer) so as to not get offended by those who have animosity toward cube jockies. Sorry for the tangent. Now back to flare...
I've noticed my crappier lenses are more prone to flaring than the better ones.
I've never ever gotten flare on a 70-200 f2.8 IS. The kit lens on the other hand, terrible.
As the others said though, keep your shooting style. I see your photos on FM all the time and I'm a huge fan of your style.
How did you develop to your current skill level? Self-taught or did you go to school somewhere?
Coincidentally, I watched a little "A Hard Day's Night" last night. When filming the TV performance, they shot George Harrison from a low angle with a nice rim light. He stepped back and they were shooting straight into the light, causing gobs of flare. When the UA studio execs saw the shot, they thought it was a technical mistake that Richard Lester would remove from the film. When he told them they did it on purpose, the execs were incredulous. That was just one of a number of ways they broke the filmmaking rules of the time.
@ JmsWms - No offense taken. I am pretty easy going. But it's more like "new" to me than trying to be "creative". Well, creative at least in my circles...
@ synthesist - Thanks man! It's all self taught, just be obsessive/addicted to photography for a while you will improve in no time! Or, you can just find pretty models and people will think you know what you are doing... Ha ha Oh, and stalk this thread day and night.
@ dmacmillian - Thanks for the input, but since this is art, everyone has their own taste on it... Some like it, some won't...
jeremy_clay wrote:
"I know this doesn't answer your question, but why would you think it is "creative" to copy what everybody else seems to be doing nowadays? "
lolwut.
But meh, no biggie.
Please explain how Jim's comment is "smartass". I thought it was a legitimate question. It reminds me of my college years in the late '60s when everyone started wearing jeans to express their individuality.
Maybe it's a matter of definition. I define creativity as having your own way of seeing things and effectively communicating it through your medium. That's what elevated the work of Henri Cartier Bressant, Eugene Smith, Diane Arbus and others. I'm all for exploiting the fad du jour to make money, but I don't confuse it with being creative.
dmacmillan wrote:
Please explain how Jim's comment is "smartass". I thought it was a legitimate question. It reminds me of my college years in the late '60s when everyone started wearing jeans to express their individuality.
Maybe it's a matter of definition. I define creativity as having your own way of seeing things and effectively communicating it through your medium. That's what elevated the work of Henri Cartier Bressant, Eugene Smith, Diane Arbus and others. I'm all for exploiting the fad du jour to make money, but I don't confuse it with being creative.
It wasn't what the OP asked and an insult who use the technique. It defines those who use flare in a certain light, as a pack of sheep. I don't want to argue over something else so silly - you're right, flare is awful, the comment was completely on the level, whatever, all good.
jeremy_clay wrote:
It wasn't what the OP asked and an insult who use the technique.I don't want to argue over something else so silly
Jeremy,
I agree it's a silly thing to argue about, but to quote the OP: "I know flare is not for everyone, but I see it as a creativity thing and like to give it a try." The "smartass" comment didn't slam the technique or those who use it, it questioned whether following trends (and the use of flare sure seems like a trend on FM) could be classified as creative.
I think flare can add drama to a photo and I've seen some great examples of its use by posters on FM.
