so right

But what I actually wanted to share with you is Leonard Freed’s point of view, I just returned from his exhibition. His photgraphs were without exception technically superb. He knows his stuff but what matters most is that you can see in his images that he has pursued his projects over long periods of time. His photo documentaries took years to come to fruition. His quiet, respectful way of looking at life and people is what makes his work so fascinating, and what creates the visual power behind his poignant studies. And I studied what final image he has selected from a dozen of images lets say for for a magazine or an exhibition…It was the one with the best composition and where what he saw/felt was best expressed. But and here is the point, all of his other negatives were of technical perfection too. So he is a true master.

I still have a lot to learn but its fun and worth it! One day I will hopefully be able to express with photography how I feel about Berlin.

She says: “Creativity is more about ideas than techniques. Its about looking at things differently and developing an idea or a theme. Technique alone is not enopugh, because it doesnt say anything – you start with the idea and use techniques to make the image effective, not the other way around”.

Actually I think that we are all probably saying the same thing with a slightly different emphasis. Both craft and vision must grow together and this is just a “chicklen or the egg” argument.

Ray I liked your comment and I see it this way. A pro (on a commercial shoot anyway) it told what to photograph. Effectivly and efficiently achieving the aim is what he seeks to do and that is all about craft. Thats what earns the $$$. While and amateur (lets say an artist so we can include pros shooting for themselves) is driven by his own ideas so vision must be the driver.

Ian

-no I didn’t say that that’s possible now- I said “more people WILL produce technically perfect photos as the technology makes it progressively easier to do so.” and it was probably unfair and distracting to throw my vision of the future into the mix! But I do think that will be the case, VR lenses and faster autofocus, huge ISO’s, auto sensor cleaning etc etc are only just the beginning… It is more than possible the digi camera of 15 years from now could make any sort of shake a thing of the past, or complex LR programs fix all those little faults we try to currently fix in camera. They may be photos with absolutely no compositional merit at all. But will they have mirror slap? I think not. But this is not an invite to debate tech advances!!

However I do absolutely concede to using the term skill incorrectly (my husband says I never admit to being wrong so this is for him!)

SKILL: noun [C or U]
an ability to do an activity or job well, especially because you have practised it:
Ruth had/possessed great writing skills.
I have no skill at/in sewing… I’m not entirely sure my phrase “skill I have yet to master” doesn’t still have an element of truth!

But we are in agreement essentially about Mr Sedgewick Effington, I think (I have had a glass of Mummy’s pamol ie wine). I’m sure there was never an attempt to belittle the koha of your posts with the comments, rather an enthusiam to extrapolate further the idea, and hence learn. It’s all knowlege I both need and want…

megs last blog post..More for Mylie…

The first step any photographer makes is not made using a camera. The first step is made by seeing the drama in a sunset.
[/QUOTE]

Sorry but I have to agree (very much) with Ian’s phrase here. I’m sure Anthony Rupert has just the same technical skill as our Tony, but produces none of the emotion or drama or mystery which draws us in. And that’s not just because he misses chilly dawn shoots for him mum’s brekkie in bed!

I think with the advent of digital more and more people will produce technically perfect photos as the technology makes it progressively easier to do so. But those will not be the images which history will remember. Those images will have something extra. Many of them may well turn out to be Ian’s and Tony’s. (And I’m not just taking this side because of my issues with mirror slap!). Indeed (well hopefully!) with the joe public accessing more high end equipment (there are more than a few tourists who arrive here with D300’s, 5D’s and 40D’s firmly lodged in auto) it may become more and more essential for professional photographers to have a high level of creativity and art to survive in the industry. But I guess technique too if they want to have their prints big…

I can mostly capture expression and emotion reasonably well in humans. But to do it in the landscape is a true skill I have yet to master…

megs last blog post..More for Mylie…

I think the significant difference between the majority of photographers of today and Weston, group F64, and countless other great photographers in history is primarily that they were continually doing things that weren’t being done by their contemporaries.

Nobody at all escapes being limited by their skill and vision, there is no destination so you cant get there! and creativity is not a process, it is originality of thought or expression!
So being creative photographically can be as simple as avoiding making a picture when presented with a potential image you’ve seen countless times before! Exploring the possibilities within any given situation and asking yourself why you make photographs, and how you can express that in that moment will encourage originality, and therefore creativity. If you think back to Ansel Adams, he knew what his prints would look like at the time of making his exposure, but this was more than simply knowing how he was going to print them, he knew why he was making photographs! And those people who also know why he did rarely find his work boring, as many do!

What one has to say in their photographs will always outweigh and can even lessen the apparentness of any lack of skill. But no amount of skill can give one vision!