What should the serious amateur concern himself with?

(I'm inviting discussion/debate, not seeking personal, prescriptive
advice. I'm also cross-posting because I think it's a general issue
that's relevant to both. de-cross-post your reply if you wish)

What should the serious amateur concern himself with?

I guess a simple, individualistic answer could be to do whatever he
pleases. But there are a few who had learned the basics, settled on a
satisfying set of equipment, taken their happy snapshots, and are
seeking an artistic mission (hence, the *serious* designation I pose).
I oftentimes, unfortunately, see amateurs who seem to imitate
professional or commercial shots, reproducing cliche after cliche,
eventhough they're not bound by the demagoguery of the market. My
personal opinion is that amateurs should stay clear of professional or
commercial grounds, unless they're planning to turn professional at
some near point in time. But, of course, each to their own. I guess
some people get some satisfaction from thinking that their shots look
professional or commercial, which would be understandable if it was a
technical mastery that was the point, but disagrees with me when it
actually is the choice of topics and treatment, as is often the case.

One of the interesting views I've come across from some on these groups
is of the amateur being a historical documentarian, taking images for
posterity, particularly of a certain locale or populace that happens to
be his, that may not otherwise be covered.

So, after this introduction to clarify it, I pose the question again,
and invite views; What should the serious amateur concern himself with?

Mike Henley wrote:
(I'm inviting discussion/debate, not seeking personal, prescriptive
advice. I'm also cross-posting because I think it's a general issue
that's relevant to both. de-cross-post your reply if you wish)

What should the serious amateur concern himself with?

I guess a simple, individualistic answer could be to do whatever he
pleases. But there are a few who had learned the basics, settled on a
satisfying set of equipment, taken their happy snapshots, and are
seeking an artistic mission (hence, the *serious* designation I pose).
I oftentimes, unfortunately, see amateurs who seem to imitate
professional or commercial shots, reproducing cliche after cliche,
eventhough they're not bound by the demagoguery of the market. My
personal opinion is that amateurs should stay clear of professional or
commercial grounds, unless they're planning to turn professional at
some near point in time. But, of course, each to their own. I guess
some people get some satisfaction from thinking that their shots look
professional or commercial, which would be understandable if it was a
technical mastery that was the point, but disagrees with me when it
actually is the choice of topics and treatment, as is often the case.

One of the interesting views I've come across from some on these groups
is of the amateur being a historical documentarian, taking images for
posterity, particularly of a certain locale or populace that happens to
be his, that may not otherwise be covered.

So, after this introduction to clarify it, I pose the question again,
and invite views; What should the serious amateur concern himself with?

WOW! Good question!

But first! Let's link question with .... quest and quest means "The act
or an instance of seeking or pursuing something; a search"

with association: to Old Frech and Latin - to seek.

This turns the question into a quest about a quest (with me so far?)

And my view and answer?
To quest or to explore is inherent within us to a greater or lesser
degree in this case the answer is: I don't really know :-)

Prhaps the question should be rephrased to: what does the serious
amateur hope to gain?

Aerticeus

Photoshop/color management/hi quality ink jet printing.
If you can do those things you can spend the rest of your life pondering the
other stuff.

Photoshop/color management/hi quality ink jet printing.
If you can do those things you can spend the rest of your life pondering the
other stuff.

"Mike Henley" wrote in message
oups.com...


One of the interesting views I've come across from some on these groups
is of the amateur being a historical documentarian, taking images for
posterity, particularly of a certain locale or populace that happens to
be his, that may not otherwise be covered.

So, after this introduction to clarify it, I pose the question again,
and invite views; What should the serious amateur concern himself with?


I was the one that posted the epistle on freezing a moment in time. Let me
expand a bit on that subject.

I, too, was one of those guys who thought that he was going to become the
next Ansel Adams. But after several years of producing what were
essentially just snapshots that were a cut above what an Instamatic could
do, I lost interest in photography. I concluded that I could not ever
produce anything professional, because I did not have the time and the
commitment to doing this type of work. Also, I realized that I didn't have
an artistic bone in my body (bet you never heard anyone admit THAT before!)

It's true. I am no artist and never will be.

Then one day I fell into an entirely new genre--I submitted some photos of
very mundane scenes to my high school alumni web site. And people all
across the country--who had previously lived in the same home town as I
did--began emailing me thanking me for the memories. One year later, and
150,000 hits later, the site was quite a hit--at least it was to the many
folks that had memories of those very ordinary places that I had recorded
and posted on the Web for all to see.

And that is when I realized that there were other uses for cameras rather
than just trying to produce works of art. And my cameras took on anwhole
new meaning for me.

I have been taking documentary photos of all sorts of places over the past 5
years. And I truly believe that my photos of ordinary scenes will be worth
more over the long term than all those artsy images that appear every month
in the photo magazines. I mean, how many "interesting angles" do we need?

So I have developed a few principles about my style of picture-taking:

1: I almost always use a normal lens. I want to record the objects without
any apparent perspective distortion. When using my digicam I set the focal
length on my zoom lens to approximately 50mm. I never zoom in or out if
possible.

2: I use a tripod as often as possible, to maximize sharpness. I use a
cable release or the self-timer to fire the shutter. I swear, the
improvement in the images has been striking!

3: I use a lens hood virtually all the time (I even have a digital camera
that takes a lens hood).

4: I often bracket. I want to try for the best possible exposure, because
my photo may very well be the ONLY photo of that scene. I want to try to do
it right.

5: I do not try to embellish or improve the view in any way. If there is
litter on the ground, it appears in my photograph. I won't choose a better
angle, to get it out of the way. My goal is to shoot a very straightforward
image--one that accurately depicts what the scene looked like. The good,
the bad, the ugly--whatever was there.

6: My shooting style is more oriented toward what a Large Format
photographer would do. Lots of time spent setting up the camera, checking
the exposure, levelling the tripod, etc. I prefer a few good images over
hundreds of "machine gun" shots.

7: I try to see the artistic qualities of mundane things, rather than try to
manipulate the image to turn something that is ordinary into something
artsy. I'm getting better at doing this. Perhaps this is my artistic vein
after all.

I have found that I can literally stop time with my camera. I do not know
of any other photographer that does this sort of work, and I truly believe
that I have developed a style of shooting that is unique to myself. The
challenge is to train myself to look for interesting places, things, etc. in
the ordinary, everyday places that we all see every single day. The strange
thing is that those scenes are transitory. What we take for granted, and
think will always be there, one day disappears.

I am currently focusing on the many former industrial sites in Philadelphia
that have become abandoned after the City had shifted to a service economy.
The abandoned freight lines are still there, the signs painted on the brick
buildings are fading, and the City is talking about clearing it all away and
building residential developments on those former brownfields sites. I
intend to save their images while they can still be saved. Who knows what
value they will have in the future?

I may yet become famous for my work--but not until long after I'm dead.

"Jeremy" wrote in message
ink.net...


Here is an example of a postcard that was typical of what was being produced
in the first 2 decades of the last century. It is one of tons of similar
specimens being offered on eBay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...9995 677&rd=1

This style of photography was a big part of my inspiration for doing
documentary images. It was just an ordinary small-town street corner. Why
anyone would photograph it--and would try to sell it as a postcard--is
anyone's guess. But these images are priceless in the sense that they show
what a particular place looked like--long after the inhabitants have passed
on.

There are scenes like this all across America, that are going undocumented.
Search eBay for postcards, and you can see thousands of examples of this
very straightforward style of photography.

Is anyone doing this sort of work anymore? I am fascinated at seeing images
of places that no longer exist in the form they were when the image was
taken.

"Jeremy" wrote in message
ink.net...


Here is an example of a postcard that was typical of what was being produced
in the first 2 decades of the last century. It is one of tons of similar
specimens being offered on eBay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...9995 677&rd=1

This style of photography was a big part of my inspiration for doing
documentary images. It was just an ordinary small-town street corner. Why
anyone would photograph it--and would try to sell it as a postcard--is
anyone's guess. But these images are priceless in the sense that they show
what a particular place looked like--long after the inhabitants have passed
on.

There are scenes like this all across America, that are going undocumented.
Search eBay for postcards, and you can see thousands of examples of this
very straightforward style of photography.

Is anyone doing this sort of work anymore? I am fascinated at seeing images
of places that no longer exist in the form they were when the image was
taken.

"Jeremy" wrote in message
ink.net...

I, too, was one of those guys who thought that he was going to become the
next Ansel Adams. But after several years of producing what were
essentially just [techincally highly skilled] snapshots...

Yes, I hear you...

Then one day I fell into an entirely new genre--I submitted some photos of
very mundane scenes to my high school alumni web site. And people all
across the country--who had previously lived in the same home town as I
did--began emailing me thanking me for the memories. One year later, and
150,000 hits later, the site was quite a hit--at least it was to the many
folks that had memories of those very ordinary places that I had recorded
and posted on the Web for all to see.

And that is when I realized that there were other uses for cameras rather
than just trying to produce works of art. And my cameras took on a whole
new meaning for me.

Right. You've found your niche. Go for it!


So I have developed a few principles about my style of picture-taking:

1: I almost always use a normal lens. I want to record the objects
without
any apparent perspective distortion. When using my digicam I set the
focal
length on my zoom lens to approximately 50mm. I never zoom in or out if
possible.

There may be some theoretical matters you need to delve into. There's
nothing special about 50 mm. Artists' drawings often tend to be equivalent
to about 80 or 90 mm, I'm told. As for "perspective distortion," do you
mean unnatural perspective from shooting with a wide-angle lens too close to
the subject, or do you mean barrel and pincushion distortion? The latter
are lens faults and the remedy is to get a better lens.

2: I use a tripod as often as possible, to maximize sharpness. I use a
cable release or the self-timer to fire the shutter. I swear, the
improvement in the images has been striking!

Yes... How much attention have you been paying to shutter speed? I'll bet
at 1/200 or faster, the tripod doesn't make a difference.

But you're on the right track. People expect documentary pictures to be
full of fine detail.

3: I use a lens hood virtually all the time (I even have a digital camera
that takes a lens hood).

4: I often bracket. I want to try for the best possible exposure, because
my photo may very well be the ONLY photo of that scene. I want to try to
do
it right.

Good principles (including the ones I'm not re-quoting)...

I have found that I can literally stop time with my camera. I do not know
of any other photographer that does this sort of work, and I truly believe
that I have developed a style of shooting that is unique to myself. The
challenge is to train myself to look for interesting places, things, etc.
in
the ordinary, everyday places that we all see every single day. The
strange
thing is that those scenes are transitory. What we take for granted, and
think will always be there, one day disappears.

Right - There are many things around town that I wish I had photographed.
Old buildings with a story to tell... and one day they're gone!


I may yet become famous for my work--but not until long after I'm dead.

The approach I would take is: Make your work available to the public; don't
try to impress art critics; just put it out there somehow so that if people
like it, they can find it. The right audience will find you.

Keep going!

One of the interesting views I've come across from some on these groups
is of the amateur being a historical documentarian, taking images for
posterity, particularly of a certain locale or populace that happens to
be his, that may not otherwise be covered.
************************************************** ***********
I agree with this idea. The book that sort of made me realize that some day
the pictures I take that are just your average run of the mill shots is
"Steam Steel and Stars" with the photography of O.Winston Link. If you are
into trains and photography you will like this a lot but it is a book that
would be interesting to just history buffs. O. Winston Link is probably as
famous to some as Ansel Adams. Link took all the photos in this book a
night. This is at a time when he had to have his own flashes made and
rather large ones at that. Although at the time he was just capturing the
last steam trains of that railroad era, he also captured a time gone by that
we would be amazed at today. For example a man sitting at a railroad depot
office and there isn't a computer or touch tone telephone in sight. Kids
sitting in a big Buick watching a movie at an outdoor theater that shows a
jet on the screen which probably was something out of the Korean war. All
this as a steam locomotive goes by in the background. The pictures we take
today will be looked at by people 40 years from now and they will wonder how
we ever got by with those slow computers and cell phones that you had to
actually push buttons to dial out. Ric in Wisconsin.

One of the interesting views I've come across from some on these groups
is of the amateur being a historical documentarian, taking images for
posterity, particularly of a certain locale or populace that happens to
be his, that may not otherwise be covered.
************************************************** ***********
I agree with this idea. The book that sort of made me realize that some day
the pictures I take that are just your average run of the mill shots is
"Steam Steel and Stars" with the photography of O.Winston Link. If you are
into trains and photography you will like this a lot but it is a book that
would be interesting to just history buffs. O. Winston Link is probably as
famous to some as Ansel Adams. Link took all the photos in this book a
night. This is at a time when he had to have his own flashes made and
rather large ones at that. Although at the time he was just capturing the
last steam trains of that railroad era, he also captured a time gone by that
we would be amazed at today. For example a man sitting at a railroad depot
office and there isn't a computer or touch tone telephone in sight. Kids
sitting in a big Buick watching a movie at an outdoor theater that shows a
jet on the screen which probably was something out of the Korean war. All
this as a steam locomotive goes by in the background. The pictures we take
today will be looked at by people 40 years from now and they will wonder how
we ever got by with those slow computers and cell phones that you had to
actually push buttons to dial out. Ric in Wisconsin.