Most of my pictures suck....

[Tarafrost Profile Private messageWebsite]

A tidbit I ran across on the John Nack's Blog. John is a senior marketing manager at Adobe.

From experienced photographer Mike Johnston:

"To be honest, most of my pictures suck. The saving grace of that admission is that most of your pictures suck, too. How could I possibly know such a thing? Because most of everybody's pictures suck, that's how. I've seen Cartier-Bresson's contact sheets, and most of his pictures sucked. One of my teachers said that it was an epiphany for him when he took a class from Garry Winogrand and learned that most of Winogrand's exposures sucked. It's the way it is."

And the moral of the story? Don't be despondent if most of your photographs suck! Mine sure do. I only show the best of the best.

[gpsmikey Profile Private message]

Very true -- I remember reading some years ago how many hundreds
of rolls of film the National Geographic "experts" went through to get
a few great shots. The key is to a) learn from your mistakes and b)
shoot, shoot, shoot - if you shoot the shot, it may suck, if you don't
shoot, there is no chance of getting a "great shot". People watch these
documentaries and think "gee I wish I could shoot like that" not realizing
that there was an entire crew with all sorts of support for a year to get
that 30 minute "show". You can really increase your chances with understanding
lighting and the "mechanical" side of it, but it just takes lots of shots and
experience to get the great ones.

mikey

[Tarafrost Profile Private messageWebsite]

Geez Mikey!

I make a new post and you have a reply to it in seconds it seems.

I don't know whether to be flattered, or call the cops about a stalker!

[gpsmikey Profile Private message]

Who me ??

Actually, I was just getting ready to take my machine down and
swap DVD burners around (as well as backing up my photos folder ... all
46 gigs of it).

mikey

[lostdutchman]

I had a friend back in the '80s who was a professional news photographer for Time, Newsweek, etc.
He did some probono work for a non-profit I worked for. He came in for a day with hundreds of rolls
of film. When I commented, he said, "The film is the least expensive part. My time is what is
expensive. The difference between a professional photographer and an amateur is simply the
amount of film they shoot. The amateur will agonize forever trying to capture 'that one special shot,'
trying to get everything just right, not wanting to waste film. The professional will come with his
motor drive and shoot a thousand frames. Likely he'll have that one good one. 999 get trashed."

I'm an amateur, but I learned that lesson and realize that most of the pictures I take suck. But if
I take enough pictures and vary the camera settings I can get some a few interesting and worthwhile
pictures, even with my little point-and-shoot.

Ken

[Tarafrost Profile Private messageWebsite]

backing up my photos folder ... all
46 gigs of it

I remember the days when I only had 46 gigs of photos fondly! I have over a terrabyte of storage spinning...though not all of it is for photos.

Heck...I did 16gig just for Kathy's wedding alone.

Youza! Glad that disk capacities keep going up and prices keep going down!

[HunnyB Profile Private message]

I have 4 grandchildren - and sometime I have to take 100 pics just to get 1 good shot of all of them together.
THANK GOODNESS FOR DIGITAL CAMERAS.

HunnyB