A Creative Life for Photographer


Status
Not open for further replies.

forward

New Member
May 27, 2002
390
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#1
A creative life for photographers - is it necessary or not?

As a photographer you aim to be in a continued quest
to lead a creative life.

1. What have you done so far to achieve this aim?

2. You didn't realize this adaptation is necessary and have done nothing.

3. You find it difficult understanding the word "creativity" and you are too busy to explore.

4. On the other hand you didn't even know you have to seek to understand the unfamiliar
parts of yourself.

:):think:
 

Last edited:

ortega

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 2, 2004
23,694
10
38
Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
#2
not all photographers need to be creative

some are technical masters while others are more creative

very few are creative + technical masters
 

Jan 10, 2008
80
0
0
#3
Which brings to mind this. Is creativity nature or nurture? :)
 

#7
I completely disagree. It is far easier to be technically competent than to be artistically creative.
Agree or disagree.

If one learns the technical first, the artistic expression tends to be hindered by thoughts of "how am I going to achieve this". Not only photography, but other art-related fields
 

Dream Merchant

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 11, 2007
9,660
6
38
#8
I know of one photographer ... really really damned artistic. Technically almost totally ZERO!

Anyways, it depends on which school of thought you belong to.

Some schools teach the technical first, and approach aesthetics as a matter of course.

Some schools teach the technical as a means to freedom, like a bird. Must learn how to fly first in all sorts of winds, then hopefully, one day can soar beautifully!

Some address both as seperate but inseperable areas.

Do you treat a means as an end, or a means to an end, and to what end does one want to arriave at, and how? Or strike a symbiotic balance in an ever transitional state?

BTW, there are studies and books on creative thinking, creative thought processes as well as critical analysis. NONE of them includes a topic about exposure or lenses, or the latest sensors! :bsmilie:
 

phoakm

Senior Member
Dec 15, 2003
7,385
0
36
42
Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
www.flickr.com
#9
I know of one photographer ... really really damned artistic. Technically almost totally ZERO!

Anyways, it depends on which school of thought you belong to.

Some schools teach the technical first, and approach aesthetics as a matter of course.

Some schools teach the technical as a means to freedom, like a bird. Must learn how to fly first in all sorts of winds, then hopefully, one day can soar beautifully!

Some address both as seperate but inseperable areas.

Do you treat a means as an end, or a means to an end, and to what end does one want to arriave at, and how? Or strike a symbiotic balance in an ever transitional state?

BTW, there are studies and books on creative thinking, creative thought processes as well as critical analysis. NONE of them includes a topic about exposure or lenses, or the latest sensors! :bsmilie:
Words very chim. :think::bsmilie:
 

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#10
A creative life for photographers - is it necessary or not?
it's all been done before, one way or another.

the result is what matters, you can be creative, got the nicest concept, end up get all black frames also no point. similarly, if your technique good, know how to come up with all the correct lighting ratios, exposure steady no horse run.. but you shoot boring, cliched stuff.. it's only a matter of time before people realise this.

in short, everything means everything. but few can reach the pinnacle of even one world, let alone both.
 

phoakm

Senior Member
Dec 15, 2003
7,385
0
36
42
Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
www.flickr.com
#11
it's all been done before, one way or another.

the result is what matters, you can be creative, got the nicest concept, end up get all black frames also no point. similarly, if your technique good, know how to come up with all the correct lighting ratios, exposure steady no horse run.. but you shoot boring, cliched stuff.. it's only a matter of time before people realise this.

in short, everything means everything. but few can reach the pinnacle of even one world, let alone both.
Nowadays, I realised that oversea photographers are looking into efficiency and effectiveness ...... creativity becomes part of the tool to that. :think:
 

velasco

Senior Member
Jul 7, 2006
2,627
0
0
29
PARISris , Singapore
ukellyclarkson.com
#12
I completely disagree. It is far easier to be technically competent than to be artistically creative.
I agree with this stand.

Mastering a technically is like attaining a skill. It can be learnt over time thru various means.
Creativity on the other hand, is innate. Its natural for someone to possess a great eye for art.
This is evident through the massive tutorials, tips and sharing of the technical aspects of photography - how to reduce noise? How to make full use of spot metering etc?
But are they any guides on being creative? ;
  • the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.; originality, progressiveness, or imagination:​

Creativity derives from how you see things, how you perceive, how you arrange your train of thoughts. It is very exclusive to your discretion, imagination and interest, I dont know how anyone can obtain that niche from lessons and whatnots.
That is how we distinguish a skilled person to one with natural capabilities/ talent.
Skill vs Talent- it all boils down to that. You discover a talent , then you hone it. Same goes for this.

However, we cannot dispense the fact that these two aspects can corelate/cohabit in a photographer's craft. We can have a creative yet techinical one. If we look at it from another angle, being technically inclined is somehow essential to manifest and translate your visions/ideas(creativity) into a masterpiece which does not neglect the technical aspects like how you play with the flash set up and so on.

I always believe that a balance of these two will go a long way in a journey of a photographer :D

PS: There's lotsa technical photographers here who lacks the artistic/creative eye here, in my humble opinion.
 

Last edited:

Tupi Guy

Senior Member
Jan 6, 2003
2,133
0
0
#13
it's all been done before, one way or another.

the result is what matters, you can be creative, got the nicest concept, end up get all black frames also no point. similarly, if your technique good, know how to come up with all the correct lighting ratios, exposure steady no horse run.. but you shoot boring, cliched stuff.. it's only a matter of time before people realise this.

in short, everything means everything. but few can reach the pinnacle of even one world, let alone both.
sighz..... both also dont have leh :sweat::bsmilie:
 

Jan 5, 2009
377
0
0
#14
Sorry I disagree.

I think the Artistic aspect is more important, and could be nurtured. At least for myself. I consider technical skills a hygiene factor that any beginner artists should already have given the vast amount of easily accesible materials and resources. Rare are the talents. And they are the cream of the crop

Was browsing thru the winning photos of a local photo competition. Realised that 90% of them are just taking "ordinary" scene and either used difficult photography techniques, expensive equipment or photoshop to make them "Synthetically Extraordinary". As a full-time staff working in the org, I felt revolted. What we wanted are the "Emotions", "Art" and "People", and not photos that "show-off" how technically competent the photographers are.

I rather the prize be given to a kid who shoots a highly emotional/artistic scene using a compact or instantmatic. After all the camera is just a tool. The moment is priceless. And to be technically competent makes you a photography engineer, not an artistic photographer
 

Last edited:

night86mare

Deregistered
Aug 25, 2006
25,541
0
0
www.pbase.com
#15
What we wanted are the "Emotions", "Art" and "People", and not photos that "show-off" how technically competent the photographers are.
what we wanted are the visions, the realisations of visions, and not photos that "show off" how emotionally arty-farty the photographers are.

the converse applies as well.

you call technically competent photographers "engineers", i see them as people who know what they are doing, have an end result in mind, and work hard to realise it. they deserve as much credit as the person who manages to capture a scene full of emotion and took the effort to do so.

i am always perturbed why people expect winning photographs of any competition to be some epic globally shocking, dazzling, slice-your-throat-cross-my-heart-fall-to-the-ground in awe production. has SINGAPORE produced any like that in recent years? has the world even produced anything so mind-grabbing that no one could find no fault with? i do not like some works, but i can appreciate why people like them, and just putting down works because they do not agree with you doesn't sit well with me. especially when you acknowledge that the work has merit of some form.
 

Last edited:

agape01

Senior Member
Feb 13, 2003
2,574
0
36
Somewhere Out There
Visit site
#16
best example where I think being technically creative comes into play is when Annie Leibovitz was given 20 minutes or less to shoot the Queen of England from the orginal agreed time of 1hr. On top of that, her entire production plan went down the drain because Queen Elizabeth didn't come out and dress out the way that she had planned it. The video can be seen on youtube.

If you're not technically competent, you will not get the shot that you want.

If you're not artistically competent, the value of your image would not be sellable and basically you've wasted everyone's time.

Annie Leibovitz is such a photographer that can combine both aspects together. Period.
 

#18
Creative can be nutured with knowledge and experience. The more you know the more ideas and concept you know and get to visualize the output you want.

Technical is less important I guess. Getting a photo without knowing what setting to use will determind the mood of the output. Photoshop if needed. :bsmilie:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom