Importance of a photographic eye

I don't know what you're all talking about. Whenever I show someone a photo I like, they immediately ask me what camera I use! Therefore, I concluded some time ago that it was the camera that made the photographer, any not anything else.

 

um.

 

right?

Also, I hear "your camera takes really good photos"

Underwater it's not how many pictures you take , it's how effectively you use your time.

You can swim around blindly snapping here and there hoping for something to happen or you can research an idea/area and then spend time trying to capture the best shots. Digital definitely allows you more freedom but there is no substitute for preparation and visualisation of what you want in an image.

Martin

Here is a good read on The Radiant Vista..

"The Myth of Talent"

http://www.radiantvista.com/archive/articles/1/

M.

I read and sorry, but people do have predispositions (talent?) for some aspects of life such as photography. These are honed by learning more, experience and hard work, but suggesting that anyone can do anything really is an absolute myth! I have met photographers to whom composition is inherent, and I have met would be photographers who have tried to learn how to compose - those with inherent compositional skills always win out - the photographic eye!

Here is a good read on The Radiant Vista..

 

"The Myth of Talent"

 

http://www.radiantvista.com/archive/articles/1/

 

M.

Yes, I do indeed agree this is a good read!! Thanks for posting it Michael!!

In regards to my search for the precise definition of the subject of this post a "photographic eye"...., I found no definition anywhere, including photography sites of it as a term, "photographic eye". I did find a few books written on it, with that term in the title but nothing defining just that term in my numerous dictionaries or on the web.

So then it must be being defined as separate words, "photographic" and "eye" and from what I came up with it is the definition of "eye" that is probably making this kind of mysterious. I won't bore everyone with definitions and word derivations that I found but it is very interesting to search for a precise definition of what we are talking about......., I recommend delving into it......

Finding out exactly what a "photographic eye" is certainly doesn't detract from those who have developed a "photographic eye" and its importance in today's digital photography; in fact I think it just validates those persons more for their success in learning to see through the lens! But do people just have a "photographic eye"? I don't think so, most likely it could be attained by most anyone given enough wherewithal and the correct circumstances and desire. But they have to know what it consists of first!!!

Carol

I don't know what you're all talking about. Whenever I show someone a photo I like, they immediately ask me what camera I use! Therefore, I concluded some time ago that it was the camera that made the photographer, any not anything else.

 

um.

 

right?

PS, Now I'm sure Eric's camera that (all on its own) makes him such a great photographer knows the definition of what a "photographic eye" is and where to get one!!!!

Chris Simmons eluded to a Beach Dive photo contest that often features very poor visibility, ie. lots of "stuff" in the water, etc. I have allways been amazed that those photographers that "have got it" consistently shoot amazing pictures, no matter what. It's not that the "grab-shooter" won't be able to generate a good image in decent conditions, shooting upwards of 200 shots. But poor conditions limit the off-chance that such shooting will generate a contest winner. Sure, technical photography skills are imperative in such situation. But again, the digital age has allowed even the rank amateur to "play".

A good friend of mine got into photography about a year ago. She can't afford a DSLR and thus is shooting a little A70 (I think). She consistently amazes me with the images she creates. And it is certainly not her equipment or even thorough understanding of "the cows". I can't wait to see what she does when she is no longer limited by her camera's limitations. She's definitely got "the eye".

GG

I remember, in the '70s, sitting with Bill Fallover, the second art-director of Nova after Harri Peccanotti, on my terrace in Spain. He pointed to a pile of chain I had pulled up from the seabed and remarked on the textures and colours. We had a non-drug fuelled discussion about it. He then noted that most people can only see a pile of chain because they are not visually aware. I have always remembered this.

I left that world and I now work with a lot of people who can only judge a picture by content. They judge what they see on a criteria-based system. They cannot say "Look, it's great!" Sadly, that could almost be described as normal but it can b e very frustrating for a creative person.

I once went to a BSAC Conference wearing a fabulous Chanel suit. Everyone was wearing anoraks and dirty trainers. I was an object of ridicule - they could not see the price tag. At the London Dive Show this weekend I shall be wearing appropriate clothing!

My wife was a fashion designer when I met her. Between us we have a house full of nice things that have no function apart from to give us visual pleasure. We have old clocks that tell innaccurate time. (It's OK, we also have battery-run digital watches too!) We have furniture that forms dust-traps. When we first bought the house an American friend asked why we didn't buy a new one. (It is very second-hand!) We even have Macs because they look nice! If you don't understand what I am talking about - don't worry. Be happy. Most people can only judge things by the dollar price. Few people are visually aware. I rather hope most reading this are.

My wife, the designer, has a great eye for a picture. Alas, she never bothered to find out what the knobs and dials do, which once lead to disappointments - but digital photography has saved her from that drudgery!

So what am I saying? Most people are not visually aware. It's a fact of life. Where can I buy the most expensive camera?

A great book on the artistic rather than technical side of photography is Freeman Patterson's "Photography and the Art of Seeing". It is not a "You can be Slim in 30 days" type quick fix, but it does explain some of the processes that go into creating interesting photographs.