and help to keep the site free for all
Has the 'technical' crowded out your creativity, or enhanced it?
- Thread starter gramps
- Start date
lindsay
Admin
- Messages
- 6,174
- Name
- Lindsay
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think for me it generally complicates but also has the potential to enhance what is achievable - there are times when I have a vision of what I want to see or portray in an image, but in order to achieve it I need to use a technique or tool/accessory that makes it possible.
I guess it's no different to having to master dodging and burning, masking, and the use of filters, and other techniques in the film days. They helped to achieve the sort of image that was wanted where simply opening and closing the shutter was/is not enough.
I guess it's no different to having to master dodging and burning, masking, and the use of filters, and other techniques in the film days. They helped to achieve the sort of image that was wanted where simply opening and closing the shutter was/is not enough.
Personally I would say enhanced - by increasing my technical ability I can get images i could not before and can apply my creativity to in the overall process rather than consider it to be a seperate thing - macro is a technically challanging type of photography - adding the technical aspect of a macro focusing rail allowed me to gain more detail more accurately. To be fair having said that these are more about the technical and not very artistic as this was a first test of the kit, the fungi head is circa 2mm across 
- Messages
- 8,056
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Photography is achieved by using a wide range of technical functions.
It is possible to leave all of them to the inbuilt algorithms of your equipment.
However if you do so who is in control of your artistic endeavours.?
The more you leave to inbuilt functions, the more it resembles painting by numbers.
It would seem to me that the more you understand your technical options and how they affect your image making.
The more you own your artistic results, and the wider your skills the greater your ability to match the results to your vision.
Like all art forms, the learning and development of the necessary skills and techniques, is an essential part of the artistic journey for all photographers.
There is always the equation between what you want to achieve and how to achieve it..
Successful artists understand the connection.
It is possible to leave all of them to the inbuilt algorithms of your equipment.
However if you do so who is in control of your artistic endeavours.?
The more you leave to inbuilt functions, the more it resembles painting by numbers.
It would seem to me that the more you understand your technical options and how they affect your image making.
The more you own your artistic results, and the wider your skills the greater your ability to match the results to your vision.
Like all art forms, the learning and development of the necessary skills and techniques, is an essential part of the artistic journey for all photographers.
There is always the equation between what you want to achieve and how to achieve it..
Successful artists understand the connection.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,253
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For me, it’s been an iterative process. Mastering the basics first—exposure, composition, light - followed by diving into creativity. When I hit limits, it’s back to the technical to find a solution to achieve the creative goal, for example, new skills or gear to push through. Each cycle has opened more creative possibilities keeping it fresh and rewarding.
- Messages
- 3,598
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
I think there is a progression in photography (and probably in all things) through different phases (which are iterative).Spotted this comment in an older article by photographer Eric Kim and it struck a chord with me ... it also made me think of a theme here at TP!
Eric Kim
How about you?
Has the 'technical' crowded out your creativity, or enhanced it?
Technique -> Skill-> Craft -> Expression (art, emotional, and creative)
Even if expression is initial driver, the previous steps can get in the way.
1. Technique stage: Mainly following step by step instructions.
2. Skill stage: Techniques are now memorised and applied without needing to refer to instructions.
3. Craft stage: With practice, skills are now applied intuitively.
4. Expressive phase (Art): Level of craft now "fit for purpose" allowing the mind to focus on the emotional and creative elements
Because the 4th Phase is the most difficult, even if that was the initial trigger, I think it's easy to get trapped in one of the earlier phases, or allow them to become dominant.
- Messages
- 46
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
Getting past the technical opens up the creativity
- Messages
- 16,419
- Edit My Images
- No
To me the camera is always the tool that I have to hand to create the photograph.
As technology has moved on the functionality has lent itself to getting (I hope?) more images that make sense (to me).
Thinking back to the late 1980's I was finding it more & more frustrating that I was missing 'moments' due to my speed with manual 'split' screen focusing and I got a Canon EOS650 and sold my Pentax P30. AF was a revelation
Now, to the present day Pro-Capture allows me to photograph what I can see but in the past could rarely 'get right'.
As for post processing my mantra is K.I.S.S , I try to get the exposure correct in camera but the pp translation of what I would create (cropping, exposure tweaks, and other light touch editing) to have the final image is hopefully "right". So like the camera is the first step tool....the software is the last step tool in the process.
As technology has moved on the functionality has lent itself to getting (I hope?) more images that make sense (to me).
Thinking back to the late 1980's I was finding it more & more frustrating that I was missing 'moments' due to my speed with manual 'split' screen focusing and I got a Canon EOS650 and sold my Pentax P30. AF was a revelation
Now, to the present day Pro-Capture allows me to photograph what I can see but in the past could rarely 'get right'.
As for post processing my mantra is K.I.S.S , I try to get the exposure correct in camera but the pp translation of what I would create (cropping, exposure tweaks, and other light touch editing) to have the final image is hopefully "right". So like the camera is the first step tool....the software is the last step tool in the process.
Eric Kim's context is very much within street photography, and I'd say it's the least technical genre out there. Spending weeks or months learning about F-Stops, Kelvins, Filters and Inverse Square Law isn't going to help you create more compelling street photography photos, nor will the latest camera that can eye detect focus through a brick wall!.
I do disagree with the quote a little bit though, I don;'t think being gear or technical focused is an experience thing- I kinda think there's two different types of photographer.. a photographer who is obsessed about photography, wants the learn everything about photography and have the gear, always testing stuff and learning techniques and the other type is someone who uses photography and learns what they need to know and gets on with it.
I do disagree with the quote a little bit though, I don;'t think being gear or technical focused is an experience thing- I kinda think there's two different types of photographer.. a photographer who is obsessed about photography, wants the learn everything about photography and have the gear, always testing stuff and learning techniques and the other type is someone who uses photography and learns what they need to know and gets on with it.
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 24,813
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
I would have said exactly the opposite was true from the quote - if you haven't learned the technique how can you achieve what you want to create? But I would agree that if the experience is just in the area of equipment then the photographer will remain a novice at photography.
- Messages
- 9,899
- Edit My Images
- No
I've always regarded the technical side as a necessary evil. That's why I find digital photography so much more pleasurable than chemical photography.
OP
- Messages
- 42,863
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
Interesting thoughtGetting past the technical opens up the creativity
True, but I don’t think his remarks are exclusive to ‘street’.
Quite agree with this. Photography as a hobby is not necessarily at all about the actual final image for some.
- Messages
- 8,204
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
The EK quote is just clickbait.
I take an interest in gear only in as much as it makes the picture making process easier.
It's nonsense to suggest that letting the gear do theboring technical stuff takes away a photographer's creativity or vision. I didn't see the need for autofocus when it was introduced, but now I wouldn't be without it. It hasn't made my pictures any poorer.
Only this morning I was remembering that all there is to photography is standing in the right place and opening the shutter at the right time. Everything else follows on from those two elements. It sounds simple, but it's harder to master than getting a good exposure!
I take an interest in gear only in as much as it makes the picture making process easier.
It's nonsense to suggest that letting the gear do the
Only this morning I was remembering that all there is to photography is standing in the right place and opening the shutter at the right time. Everything else follows on from those two elements. It sounds simple, but it's harder to master than getting a good exposure!
OP
- Messages
- 42,863
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes it's not automatically the case but the technical can clearly often be a stumbling block to creativity.
- Messages
- 8,551
- Name
- Ian
- Edit My Images
- No
Like Toni, I would say it's the opposite. The guy is talking nonsense.
- Messages
- 8,204
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
I'd say that a lack of technique can often be a spur to creativity.
- Messages
- 46
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
In what way can it?
Other than not knowing what you're doing I mean; if you are a competent tog, when is the technical side a barrier to creativity?
Gav.
Challenge Owner
- Messages
- 8,278
- Name
- Gav
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Enhanced creativity...
... I need good creativity for excuses to cover poor technicals...
OP
- Messages
- 42,863
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
It's a barrier if you become obsessed with the technical and gear to the point that you lose sight of what the point of photography is, or should be.In what way can it?
Other than not knowing what you're doing I mean; if you are a competent tog, when is the technical side a barrier to creativity?
- Messages
- 46
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
sk66
Advertiser
- Messages
- 9,002
- Name
- Steven
- Edit My Images
- Yes
IMO, it's more a cause and effect kind of thing...
You cannot intentionally "create" unless you know how to cause the desired result. That means knowing what technique(s) and gear are required to generate the result, and that comes with experience.
But the idea/message/image comes first (even if just seeing the opportunity develop)... the rest is just a means to an end.
You cannot intentionally "create" unless you know how to cause the desired result. That means knowing what technique(s) and gear are required to generate the result, and that comes with experience.
But the idea/message/image comes first (even if just seeing the opportunity develop)... the rest is just a means to an end.
- Messages
- 2,299
- Name
- Kevin
- Edit My Images
- No
One of my favourite forms of photography is pinhole. With nothing but a box (wood, plastic, or cardboard) with a hole in it and some film or darkroom paper, there’s not many technical issues to get in the way.
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 24,813
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
An issue with being more experienced *might* be that we start seeing things as photographers instead of seeing them as people. But that is PLAINLY NOT what he is talking about here with his reference to gear.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 41,130
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm another who thinks Eric is completely wrong. I think the more experienced we get the more we realise that although technicalities matter as we need to know how to take the pictures we want to take it's the picture and what it means to us that matters.
- Messages
- 8,056
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Spotted this comment in an older article by photographer Eric Kim and it struck a chord with me ... it also made me think of a theme here at TP!
Eric Kim
How about you?
Has the 'technical' crowded out your creativity, or enhanced it?
I would say that that is complete nonsense, the more the techniques of photography become ingrained in us. The freer we become to indulge or artistic talents.
It can take years for an artist to learn how to make the marks necessary to create a great painting.
it is only after they have mastered those skills that their strokes become free fluid and mature.
OP
- Messages
- 42,863
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think it's nonsense at all, there are quite a few photographers who are more concerned with the technical & gear aspect of photography than creativity.
He isn't saying that technical knowledge and gear aren't (relatively) important but that those things can crowd out what photography is all about.
- Messages
- 3,184
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- No
It’s the creative and emotive elements of photography that I find most interesting. I find the challenge there infinitely fascinating - looking for the composition that best conveys what I feel about a scene, and then interpreting the raw file to best convey that so I can create the final print.
Despite being an engineer by profession, cameras and technical stuff bore me to tears.
Despite being an engineer by profession, cameras and technical stuff bore me to tears.
Garry Edwards
Moderator
- Messages
- 12,647
- Name
- Garry Edwards
- Edit My Images
- No
Some very good points in this thread, but these answers are the ones that really strike a chord with me.
In my view, the technical "issues" can only distract if we don't understand them, and if by some chance we produce a great shot without understanding the technical aspects then we've achieved it by accident, and not only have we learned nothing, we can't even replicate the effect in the future.
- Messages
- 8,056
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It is perfectly legitimate to confine your interests to collecting kit, and learning about photographic technical matters.
But such people are not photographers , and unlikely to be artists.
However it is difficult to be an even competent photographer, let alone one with artistic pretentions, if you are not well versed in the hows and warefors of photography..
Skills only come with practice and learning, without those basics, you are relying on luck.
After a lifetime in photography I have probably acquired a ridiculous amount of surplus and redundant knowledge about photography and technical details.
However most of the time it sits in the background, unloved and unused. It is only when I am faced with a problem or something new. That I consciously need to make use of it using first principals. The rest of the time I use it almost totally unaware of doing so. Any more than you think about times tables when multiplying in your head.
- Messages
- 25,720
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
I think I’d comfortably say I’m beyond stage 3*
But still struggling through stage 4, but that’s by nature a struggle
*Or am I?
I’ve never set out to take a great landscape photo. And I’m just venturing into wildlife. So there’s still ‘techniques’ to learn. Though I’d like to think my understanding of the principles makes it easier for me to learn a genre than a newbie.
- Messages
- 8,056
- Name
- Terry
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just like
the more you practice the luckier you get.
The more you learn the easier it gets.
Most knowledge and skills are transferable and accumulative.
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 24,813
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 8,204
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- No
I think the reason a lot of hobbyists get trapped in those earlier phases is because they don't have anything to say with their photos. The original driver is to replicate photos they've seen and liked. It was for me but I've moved away from that in recent years. (I was out of photography for 30 odd years)
There's this strange idea that you have to improve your photography through technique. I see it a lot on Youtube where people are being encouraged to 'take their photography to the next level'. But it's always about technical stuff, not what really matters. What you need is a drive to communicate your viewpoint through your photos. If you have that you'll find a way to do it technically.
How you do that can vary wildly. Ansel Adams had a message about American landscape and went down a highly technical route of exposure and printing to make pictures that made his point. Martin Parr shoots mostly in P mode and uses on-camera flash (with a much derided by the purists Fong dome) to make his point about consumerism. Two radically different styles and messages with the connection that they had something to say.
What people need is an opinion. The way to express it will come out of that.
Just my take on things.
PS There's nothing wrong with taking great photos by accident. This is another misconception held by hobbyists. Probably because they think they have to be in control all the time, tryig to not make mistakes. Yet the creative process is all about failures that lead to successful outcomes. That's a whole other worm can.
- Messages
- 3,598
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think you need to be good at, or even interested in, every type of photography. You only "need" to be in Phase 4 for the subject matter you are driven to photograph.
I very carefully used the term "fit for purpose" for Phase 4. As the level of technique, skill and craft needed will vary tremendously between photographers and the type of photography they are interested in. As will the balance between technical expertise and the creative and expressive expertise needed, vary with subject matter. And this obviously extends beyond the photographic: wildlife photography benefits from expertise in wildlife, being a wedding photographer needs expertise way beyond just being "good" with a camera etc.
I believe Eric Kim makes some good points in his article, indeed I made a similar argument on a post in TP, where I suggested using "P" mode (the point of Eric's article) to allow beginners to focus on expressing themselves unhindered by technical distractions, and then learn the technical stuff when, and as, they realise their lack of technical skills is stopping them realising their photographic vision.
For some, as with Erics street photography example, P-mode might be all they ever need. Using slightly less than perfect exposure settings, but capturing the decisive moment , is going to be better than getting perfect exposure setting, for a "just missed decisive" moment.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,598
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- No
Nod
Tootles
- Messages
- 46,718
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Basically, it IS! The camera's initial suggestion/setting can easily be shifted one way or the other to get to the aperture/shutter speed that the user wants/needs and exposure compensation can also (usually) be easily applied should a different exposure value be wanted/needed. It's the knowing when to apply the changes that can be the hard part!