dontaggart wrote:
I'd say reading light is the first thing. . . and the things you said would be next.  dt

ah ha so we have one and 2 so what is 3?

Benny wrote:
so whats the second thing to know?

If I knew the second thing, I'd be a pro by now.

Amanda Schlicher wrote:
If I knew the second thing, I'd be a pro by now.

I must know so I can go out and get a camera, so I can make another Benny profile

the options are
1. Craziest Benny
2. Insane Benny
3. F-ing Nuts  Benny

pw-gii photographics wrote:
Maybe I'm kinda dense, but I don't see the point of this thread.

Um...

the point of the thread is to get people's opinions on the most basic fundementals of the craft of photography.

I thought I would just try to put a clever spin on it with some colorful language.

I guess I have to dumb it down next time.

dontaggart wrote:
you must know the purpose of the photograph.

Amanda Schlicher wrote:
What is the first thing about photography?

I'd have to say, know your equipment.  It doesn't matter what kind of camera you are working with, from toy cams to high end digital and film SLRs, if you don't know how to use it, you won't get the best results.  Know its abilities and limitations, how to use its settings, etc.  Don't buy an expensive digital SLR and use it like a point n shoot because you haven't the slightest idea what to do with it. 
Also, don't make the mistake of thinking that buying a better camera will make you a better photographer.  It will not make you take better pictures, and it won't even make anyone who matters think you are a better photographer.  Practice, instruction, a good eye, and practice will make you take better pictures.  I can't even tell you the number of people who show up to photo club with the newest digital SLR and 3 lenses and they don't even know what aperature is.  They should have spent some time on a lower end camera instead of money on a higher end one.

You know what? This has got to be the best thread I've read in a long time (perhaps the best overall) Maybe it's because I am guilty of this very notion. I only WISH I was more intimately involved with the mechanics of the camera thereby making me a better photographer.

No offense against models, but this is why a compliment form an exceptional photographer means way more to me than from a great model. I'm always trying to learn more about aperture/f-stop relationships, shutter speeds, depth of field, white balance, iso effectiveness, etc etc etc.

I don't even own an SLR (Sony F828) but I often get complimented for my completed work - I thank the people but I long for the days when I master what I'm trying to accomplish by virtue of understanding how the camera functions and how to use the correct settings.

Remember Ansel Adams had NONE of this high tech equipment but who can challenge his mastery - his art?

Peter Dattolo wrote:
I Think before either of those, you have to know what a good photo is (a good eye).
You can have the best camera, best lighting, best teacher, best model....if you cannot see that spectacular photo opportunity and capture it...its all a waste of money.

Some people would say this is something that you either have, or you don't, but it can't be learned.  Lots of people with no eye (or "talent") spend lots of time and money learning what there is to know, but never make a great photograph.  I'm more concerned with what can be learned than what can't.

Amanda Schlicher wrote:
Um...

the point of the thread is to get people's opinions on the most basic fundementals of the craft of photography.

I thought I would just try to put a clever spin on it with some colorful language.

I guess I have to dumb it down next time.

Then maybe it might've been better to simply ask something like -'What do people think are the first things in photography?'

Amanda Schlicher wrote:
They walk around with it in auto mode snapping pictures like they think because they spent $3000 they should be taking pics like a pro.  They should have spent some time on a lower end camera instead of money on a higher end one.

Folks like that are known as Yuppies!

Does The Sharper Image sell high-end DSLR's?

pw-gii photographics wrote:
Then maybe it might've been better to simply ask something like -'What do people think are the first things in photography?'

The first line of the post is "What is the first thing about photography?" which serves as an invitation for people to share their opinions.  then I gave mine.

I'm not sure what the problem is.  I was just trying to be funny.

Manish wrote:
Love photography and sooner or latter you would end up becoming a good photographer.

I disagree.  I think it takes more than that.  You'd have to presume that loving photography means that you would seek instruction, camera knowledge, and experience.  Lots of people love photography their entire lives and never get any better because they don't know what questions to ask in order to improve.  Or don't care.

Ian Weintraub wrote:
the first step in taking a photo, let alone a good one..... take the lens cap off! ;-Þ

Bingo.

I'm not sure what the problem is.  I was just trying to be funny.

Fair enough, but that wasn't very clear!

dontaggart wrote:
I think I could teach anyone how to be a good photographer.

It's strange that you would start with things like balance, form, etc. . . and a student could learn these things.  But if you have a great photographer to teach these things you would see in there work from the start. 

dt

Balance, form, and compositional elements are a huge part of the foundation of making good photos, but I think that learning the equipment has to come before that.  You can develop an eye for better composition, but you can't do anything intentionally if you don't know how to work the camera.  You can't choose how much light, the depth of field, etc if you don't know how.

I think intention is the most important part, that you are doing things on purpose.  If you don't know how to change the depth of field, how can you choose the correct one?

dontaggart wrote:
But if you have a great photographer to teach these things you would see in there work from the start. 

dt

I should have wrote future great photographer.

Amanda Schlicher wrote:
I'm not sure what the problem is.  I was just trying to be funny.

i thought you were looking for a way to draw attention to your portfolio... ;-)

Benny wrote:
so whats the second thing to know?

remove the lenscap

Ian Weintraub wrote:

i thought you were looking for a way to draw attention to your portfolio... ;-)

Every time I take a picture it just comes out all black.  Can someone help me?

Amanda Schlicher wrote:
Balance, form, and compositional elements are a huge part of the foundation of making good photos, but I think that learning the equipment has to come before that.  You can develop an eye for better composition, but you can't do anything intentionally if you don't know how to work the camera.  You can't choose how much light, the depth of field, etc if you don't know how.

I think intention is the most important part, that you are doing things on purpose.  If you don't know how to change the depth of field, how can you choose the correct one?

i have to disagree with you here, amanda.  The equipment is a means to an end... if you first understand, either intuitively or through instruction, the concepts of composition, form, lighting, etc... , than you can make a good photograph with whatever equipment is at your disposal.  ... if the equipment is not so good, maybe not a good "quality" image but at least a strong photograph in terms of the fundamentals of what makes a good photo.

Amanda Schlicher wrote:

Every time I take a picture it just comes out all black.  Can someone help me?

well, there she goes again, trying to draw attention to her portfolio....
i thought all those blank, black images were a "statement".

Ian Weintraub wrote:

i have to disagree with you here, amanda.  The equipment is a means to an end... if you first understand, either intuitively or through instruction, the concepts of composition, form, lighting, etc... , than you can make a good photograph with whatever equipment is at your disposal.  ... if the equipment is not so good, maybe not a good "quality" image but at least a strong photograph in terms of the fundamentals of what makes a good photo.

I didn't mean to imply that one needs any certain kind of equipment to make it happen.  If you are using a Polaroid Land Camera and you know what it does, and how to use it, and you use these elements on purpose, it's the same deal.  It's not the level of the equipment, it's how good you are at using what you've got.

Amanda Schlicher wrote:

Every time I take a picture it just comes out all black.  Can someone help me?

Amanda Schlicher wrote:

Every time I take a picture it just comes out all black.  Can someone help me?

move to a better town.

Amanda Schlicher wrote:

I didn't mean to imply that one needs any certain kind of equipment to make it happen.  If you are using a Polaroid Land Camera and you know what it does, and how to use it, and you use these elements on purpose, it's the same deal.  It's not the level of the equipment, it's how good you are at using what you've got.

yes, i understand what your saying and i absolutely agree that knowing your equipment is very important.  But you said that one needs to know their equipment before understanding basic concepts of photography and i disagreed with that point.

Ian Weintraub wrote:

yes, i understand what your saying and i absolutely agree that knowing your equipment is very important.  But you said that one needs to know their equipment before understanding basic concepts of photography and i disagreed with that point.

I guess both points take some time to develop.  I guess I assumed that it normally takes longer to develop a sense of composition than it does to have a grasp of the effects of camera settings.

Marko Cecic-Karuzic wrote:
Ok, coming from a thoroughly schooled photographer with a very technical background, I've known people who know NOTHING that have made excellent photographs far more often than chance would dictate. They felt something, they saw something, they had something to say.

And, contrary to popular belief, that CAN BE LEARNED! I think there is such a thing as "innate" talent, but there is also talent that is developed by life and experience and desire and observation and self-critique.

Technique has little to do with "settings" etc. The real basis of all technique is about understanding the principles of light, sensitometry (as it relates to film or video), and optics. You understand that, then all you need is an owner's manual and you know every camera, power pack, head, lens, etc in the world.

But if a person can't even get correct exposure of an image because they don't know how to get out of auto mode, making pictures in order to develop a sense of light is impossible.  Barring instruction on optics, using the owner's manual is a good place to start.