RE: The Sam Abell thread (1)
I met him last spring at an ASMP lecture where I go to school. I don't remember everything he said, but there are a few recurrent themes or concepts (?) that appear in his images. 1. Images are built in layers from background to foreground. In both the branding photograph and his photo of pears on a Moscow hotel window sill: http://events.nationalgeographic.com/media/images/photos/Abell-promo-tp.jpg ... the image is built up in layers. You have the cowboy on the horse framed by the mid-ground pair wrestling the calf framed by the pair in the foreground. You have the cathedral framed by the street, framed by the window also framing the pears. The light on cathedral is the light on the pears, all framed by the sheer lace curtain with just enough of a breeze to pull the hem up into the image.. 2. The hidden/implied face can sometimes be more powerful than the face itself: http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0202/images/35DENISE.jpg ... in the image we see Abell's wife with just the outline of her cheek revealed, while in the branding image the cowboy's eyes are hidden by the brim of his hat. http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0206/sam11.htm 3. Separation of the subject and background: http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0202/abell03.htm ... what a difference that tiny sliver of light separating his father from depot makes in the image. In the branding image and in the image of Abell's wife, the heads are above the horizon separating the subjects from the background. From: CheekyGeek I'd like to try something, and if it goes well perhaps it will provide a new sort of PDML thread for members to start periodically. Conversations will, no doubt, evolve like wheel spokes off of a central topic (hub), but I'd like this threads hub to be National Geographic photographer Sam Abell. I think there may be multiple pieces of my commentary (below) that you may have different reactions to. I look forward to the discussions that will hopefully ensue. My son-in-law, Ryan McGinnis ( http://www.bigstormpicture.com http://www.bigstormpicture.com/blog ) and I drove to Hastings College in Hastings, Nebraska a couple of weeks ago to see a presentation by Mr. Sam Abell (sponsored by Canon). Now this is not going to be a worshipful thread (by any means) at least not from me. Maybe I'm a harsh critic, or maybe I just had my expectations set too high, but I did not see as many photographs in his presentation that I said to myself, WoW. I wish I had taken THAT. That surprised me. Perhaps it was simply his choice of images for this presentation, because when I look at this page ( http://compassrosebooks.blogspot.com/2010/03/sam-abell-national-geographic-stylist.html ) I see a lot of images that I wish I had taken. Only three images on that particular page were included in his 2 hour presentation. What Mr. Abell's presentation and work DID do, however, is stimulate some thinking on my part (which is always good, in my book). As a National Geographic photographer, Mr. Abell has been sent to some of the really interesting places on earth to photograph really interesting subjects that most of us will never get the chance to photograph. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of subjects: Nominally very uninteresting to nominally very interesting. And there is also a spectrum of photographic images: Nominally uninteresting to nominally very interesting. The two spectrums are independent of each other, or perhaps interdependent - depending upon the skill (or luck) of the photographer. Obviously, this is highly subjective. But when I look at a photograph I sometimes ask myself: Is this a great image of what could otherwise be an uninteresting subject, or is this an average image of a very interesting subject? One example, I might suggest, is one of the three Sam Abell images that graced the COVER of National Geographic magazine: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg ( http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? On the other hand, consider this image: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FNndI0BvPNA/S7AXaamrd8I/BLA/HNtibpofTPA/s400/Abell7.jpg ( http://bit.ly/cU3pDu ) At his presentation, he included a farther away image. There are a lot of different groups in this branding scene that the photographer had to choose from. He made conscious decisions (which group to focus on, how close to get, framing, etc.) and then he had to have the timing to capture the image when elements converged at an interesting fraction of a second. This is an incredible image and one he says for which other photographers wish to trade him prints (the ultimate compliment). Yes, it is interesting subject matter, but it could be treated in a pedestrian way, which this image is not. While still
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
From: Steven Desjardins I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. One subplot is that out plucky reporter has a camera with one shot left. As the story gets stranger and stranger, she has to decide at what point to use the shot. My favorite line goes something like All the animals of the world being loaded two by two into a giant rocket and you're going to wait for something better? Yeah, and the *VERY* best part is when she finally takes her shot ... with a range-finder ... and she's left the lens cap on! I loved that movie. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Sam Abell thread (1)
From: Bob W I was once showing a group of friends some of my photos from Ethiopia and one of the people commented well, anyone can. Well, he's right. Anyone can take good photos in a place like that ... it's just that not everyone does. Exotic locations merely provide an opportunity. It's still up to the photographer to find the image. The only reason I prefer to shoot exotic locations is it gives me a reason to experience the exotic location. You gotta be there to photograph it. Hope my images are good enough, have enough appeal, that selling them will off-set some of the expenses of making the trip. I don't exactly expect to make money off the photography, but I won't complain if I do. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Sam Abell thread (1)
I don't exactly expect to make money off the photography, but I won't complain if I do. I refuse to compromise my artistic integrity by making money out of photography... B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Hear! Hear! I've got integrity out the wazoo. -- Walt On 11/23/2010 5:14 PM, Bob W wrote: I refuse to compromise my artistic integrity by making money out of photography... B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
From: Miserere On 17 November 2010 23:44, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: Yes, they *are* great, but anyone can take good photos on the set of Mad Max 4, Larry. I was just following your formula for great photos, so anyone can take great photos if they follow Miserere's advice. That's correct, Larry; and that's exactly what we want, have people taking photographs according to strict formulas. Hey, works for me. If they want to self-select themselves out of the competition, I'm all in favor of it. I think we should encourage the average photographer to become a mediocrity every chance we get. Increase the demand for good images while at the same time reducing the supply, so that we get to fill that demand. Maybe I *will* get a chance to make a living at this. Probably not, since I persist in giving anyone who asks how to take good photos the best advice I know how. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:16 AM, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to try something, and if it goes well perhaps it will provide a new sort of PDML thread for members to start periodically. Conversations will, no doubt, evolve like wheel spokes off of a central topic (hub), but I'd like this threads hub to be National Geographic photographer Sam Abell. I think there may be multiple pieces of my commentary (below) that you may have different reactions to. I look forward to the discussions that will hopefully ensue. My son-in-law, Ryan McGinnis ( http://www.bigstormpicture.com http://www.bigstormpicture.com/blog ) and I drove to Hastings College in Hastings, Nebraska a couple of weeks ago to see a presentation by Mr. Sam Abell (sponsored by Canon). Now this is not going to be a worshipful thread (by any means) at least not from me. Maybe I'm a harsh critic, or maybe I just had my expectations set too high, but I did not see as many photographs in his presentation that I said to myself, WoW. I wish I had taken THAT. That surprised me. Perhaps it was simply his choice of images for this presentation, because when I look at this page ( http://compassrosebooks.blogspot.com/2010/03/sam-abell-national-geographic-stylist.html ) I see a lot of images that I wish I had taken. Only three images on that particular page were included in his 2 hour presentation. What Mr. Abell's presentation and work DID do, however, is stimulate some thinking on my part (which is always good, in my book). As a National Geographic photographer, Mr. Abell has been sent to some of the really interesting places on earth to photograph really interesting subjects that most of us will never get the chance to photograph. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of subjects: Nominally very uninteresting to nominally very interesting. And there is also a spectrum of photographic images: Nominally uninteresting to nominally very interesting. The two spectrums are independent of each other, or perhaps interdependent - depending upon the skill (or luck) of the photographer. Obviously, this is highly subjective. But when I look at a photograph I sometimes ask myself: Is this a great image of what could otherwise be an uninteresting subject, or is this an average image of a very interesting subject? One example, I might suggest, is one of the three Sam Abell images that graced the COVER of National Geographic magazine: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg ( http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? On the other hand, consider this image: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FNndI0BvPNA/S7AXaamrd8I/BLA/HNtibpofTPA/s400/Abell7.jpg ( http://bit.ly/cU3pDu ) At his presentation, he included a farther away image. There are a lot of different groups in this branding scene that the photographer had to choose from. He made conscious decisions (which group to focus on, how close to get, framing, etc.) and then he had to have the timing to capture the image when elements converged at an interesting fraction of a second. This is an incredible image and one he says for which other photographers wish to trade him prints (the ultimate compliment). Yes, it is interesting subject matter, but it could be treated in a pedestrian way, which this image is not. While still subjective, I might argue that this is an EMPIRICALLY great photograph - in other words: If you are in the minority that don't think so, you are a moron. :) Sam also has some quotes that are worth of discussion, or at least consideration. One that I particularly like is: It matters little how much equipment we use; it matters much that we be masters of all we do use. Thoughts? Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Bob Sullivan rf.sulli...@gmail.com wrote: I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) Regards, Bob S. I realize that you are joking here, but I would posit that, for a good photographer, location or subject matter is never an adequate excuse for achieving a great image. Put another way, it is one's eye that determines how interesting or exotic ones photographic territory (or subject) is. Thanks for the link! Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Hey! I took a Great Photograph this summer! http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/5184984568/ Man, that was easy. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ http://polipix.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:10 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:16 AM, CheekyGeekcheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to try something, and if it goes well perhaps it will provide a new sort of PDML thread for members to start periodically. Conversations will, no doubt, evolve like wheel spokes off of a central topic (hub), but I'd like this threads hub to be National Geographic photographer Sam Abell. I think there may be multiple pieces of my commentary (below) that you may have different reactions to. I look forward to the discussions that will hopefully ensue. My son-in-law, Ryan McGinnis ( http://www.bigstormpicture.com; http://www.bigstormpicture.com/blog ) and I drove to Hastings College in Hastings, Nebraska a couple of weeks ago to see a presentation by Mr. Sam Abell (sponsored by Canon). Now this is not going to be a worshipful thread (by any means) at least not from me. Maybe I'm a harsh critic, or maybe I just had my expectations set too high, but I did not see as many photographs in his presentation that I said to myself, WoW. I wish I had taken THAT. That surprised me. Perhaps it was simply his choice of images for this presentation, because when I look at this page ( http://compassrosebooks.blogspot.com/2010/03/sam-abell-national-geographic-stylist.html ) I see a lot of images that I wish I had taken. Only three images on that particular page were included in his 2 hour presentation. What Mr. Abell's presentation and work DID do, however, is stimulate some thinking on my part (which is always good, in my book). As a National Geographic photographer, Mr. Abell has been sent to some of the really interesting places on earth to photograph really interesting subjects that most of us will never get the chance to photograph. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of subjects: Nominally very uninteresting to nominally very interesting. And there is also a spectrum of photographic images: Nominally uninteresting to nominally very interesting. The two spectrums are independent of each other, or perhaps interdependent - depending upon the skill (or luck) of the photographer. Obviously, this is highly subjective. But when I look at a photograph I sometimes ask myself: Is this a great image of what could otherwise be an uninteresting subject, or is this an average image of a very interesting subject? One example, I might suggest, is one of the three Sam Abell images that graced the COVER of National Geographic magazine: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg ( http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? On the other hand, consider this image: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FNndI0BvPNA/S7AXaamrd8I/BLA/HNtibpofTPA/s400/Abell7.jpg ( http://bit.ly/cU3pDu ) At his presentation, he included a farther away image. There are a lot of different groups in this branding scene that the photographer had to choose from. He made conscious decisions (which group to focus on, how close to get, framing, etc.) and then he had to have the timing to capture the image when elements converged at an interesting fraction of a second. This is an incredible image and one he says for which other photographers wish to trade him prints (the ultimate compliment). Yes, it is interesting subject matter, but it could be treated in a pedestrian way, which this image is not. While still subjective, I might argue that this is an EMPIRICALLY great photograph - in other words: If you are in the minority that don't think so, you are a moron. :) Sam also has some quotes that are worth of discussion, or at least consideration. One that I particularly like is: It matters little how much equipment we use; it matters much that we be masters of all we do use. Thoughts? Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Hey. I've been looking for that trike . . . On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hey! I took a Great Photograph this summer! http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/5184984568/ Man, that was easy. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ http://polipix.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:10 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:16 AM, CheekyGeekcheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to try something, and if it goes well perhaps it will provide a new sort of PDML thread for members to start periodically. Conversations will, no doubt, evolve like wheel spokes off of a central topic (hub), but I'd like this threads hub to be National Geographic photographer Sam Abell. I think there may be multiple pieces of my commentary (below) that you may have different reactions to. I look forward to the discussions that will hopefully ensue. My son-in-law, Ryan McGinnis ( http://www.bigstormpicture.com; http://www.bigstormpicture.com/blog ) and I drove to Hastings College in Hastings, Nebraska a couple of weeks ago to see a presentation by Mr. Sam Abell (sponsored by Canon). Now this is not going to be a worshipful thread (by any means) at least not from me. Maybe I'm a harsh critic, or maybe I just had my expectations set too high, but I did not see as many photographs in his presentation that I said to myself, WoW. I wish I had taken THAT. That surprised me. Perhaps it was simply his choice of images for this presentation, because when I look at this page ( http://compassrosebooks.blogspot.com/2010/03/sam-abell-national-geographic-stylist.html ) I see a lot of images that I wish I had taken. Only three images on that particular page were included in his 2 hour presentation. What Mr. Abell's presentation and work DID do, however, is stimulate some thinking on my part (which is always good, in my book). As a National Geographic photographer, Mr. Abell has been sent to some of the really interesting places on earth to photograph really interesting subjects that most of us will never get the chance to photograph. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of subjects: Nominally very uninteresting to nominally very interesting. And there is also a spectrum of photographic images: Nominally uninteresting to nominally very interesting. The two spectrums are independent of each other, or perhaps interdependent - depending upon the skill (or luck) of the photographer. Obviously, this is highly subjective. But when I look at a photograph I sometimes ask myself: Is this a great image of what could otherwise be an uninteresting subject, or is this an average image of a very interesting subject? One example, I might suggest, is one of the three Sam Abell images that graced the COVER of National Geographic magazine: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg ( http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? On the other hand, consider this image: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FNndI0BvPNA/S7AXaamrd8I/BLA/HNtibpofTPA/s400/Abell7.jpg ( http://bit.ly/cU3pDu ) At his presentation, he included a farther away image. There are a lot of different groups in this branding scene that the photographer had to choose from. He made conscious decisions (which group to focus on, how close to get, framing, etc.) and then he had to have the timing to capture the image when elements converged at an interesting fraction of a second. This is an incredible image and one he says for which other photographers wish to trade him prints (the ultimate compliment). Yes, it is interesting subject matter, but it could be treated in a pedestrian way, which this image is not. While still subjective, I might argue that this is an EMPIRICALLY great photograph - in other words: If you are in the minority that don't think so, you are a moron. :) Sam also has some quotes that are worth of discussion, or at least consideration. One that I particularly like is: It matters little how much equipment we use; it matters much that we be masters of all we do use. Thoughts? Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
You and my great niece. http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ http://polipix.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:40 AM, Steven Desjardins wrote: Hey. I've been looking for that trike . . . On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Walter Gilbertldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hey! I took a Great Photograph this summer! http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/5184984568/ Man, that was easy. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/http://polipix.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:10 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:16 AM, CheekyGeekcheekyg...@gmail.comwrote: I'd like to try something, and if it goes well perhaps it will provide a new sort of PDML thread for members to start periodically. Conversations will, no doubt, evolve like wheel spokes off of a central topic (hub), but I'd like this threads hub to be National Geographic photographer Sam Abell. I think there may be multiple pieces of my commentary (below) that you may have different reactions to. I look forward to the discussions that will hopefully ensue. My son-in-law, Ryan McGinnis ( http://www.bigstormpicture.com; http://www.bigstormpicture.com/blog ) and I drove to Hastings College in Hastings, Nebraska a couple of weeks ago to see a presentation by Mr. Sam Abell (sponsored by Canon). Now this is not going to be a worshipful thread (by any means) at least not from me. Maybe I'm a harsh critic, or maybe I just had my expectations set too high, but I did not see as many photographs in his presentation that I said to myself, WoW. I wish I had taken THAT. That surprised me. Perhaps it was simply his choice of images for this presentation, because when I look at this page ( http://compassrosebooks.blogspot.com/2010/03/sam-abell-national-geographic-stylist.html ) I see a lot of images that I wish I had taken. Only three images on that particular page were included in his 2 hour presentation. What Mr. Abell's presentation and work DID do, however, is stimulate some thinking on my part (which is always good, in my book). As a National Geographic photographer, Mr. Abell has been sent to some of the really interesting places on earth to photograph really interesting subjects that most of us will never get the chance to photograph. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of subjects: Nominally very uninteresting to nominally very interesting. And there is also a spectrum of photographic images: Nominally uninteresting to nominally very interesting. The two spectrums are independent of each other, or perhaps interdependent - depending upon the skill (or luck) of the photographer. Obviously, this is highly subjective. But when I look at a photograph I sometimes ask myself: Is this a great image of what could otherwise be an uninteresting subject, or is this an average image of a very interesting subject? One example, I might suggest, is one of the three Sam Abell images that graced the COVER of National Geographic magazine: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg ( http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? On the other hand, consider this image: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FNndI0BvPNA/S7AXaamrd8I/BLA/HNtibpofTPA/s400/Abell7.jpg ( http://bit.ly/cU3pDu ) At his presentation, he included a farther away image. There are a lot of different groups in this branding scene that the photographer had to choose from. He made conscious decisions (which group to focus on, how close to get, framing, etc.) and then he had to have the timing to capture the image when elements converged at an interesting fraction of a second. This is an incredible image and one he says for which other photographers wish to trade him prints (the ultimate compliment). Yes, it is interesting subject matter, but it could be treated in a pedestrian way, which this image is not. While still subjective, I might argue that this is an EMPIRICALLY great photograph - in other words: If you are in the minority that don't think so, you are a moron. :) Sam also has some quotes that are worth of discussion, or at least consideration. One that I particularly like is: It matters little how much equipment we use; it matters much that we be masters of all we do use. Thoughts? Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
If I'm not mistaken, a lot of what Miserere was saying in that article was with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Or maybe I just need new batteries in my sarcastometer/ironicalgraph. Darren Addy Kearney, NE -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. One subplot is that out plucky reporter has a camera with one shot left. As the story gets stranger and stranger, she has to decide at what point to use the shot. My favorite line goes something like All the animals of the world being loaded two by two into a giant rocket and you're going to wait for something better? On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com wrote: Hey. I've been looking for that trike . . . On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hey! I took a Great Photograph this summer! http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/5184984568/ Man, that was easy. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ http://polipix.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:10 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 9:16 AM, CheekyGeekcheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to try something, and if it goes well perhaps it will provide a new sort of PDML thread for members to start periodically. Conversations will, no doubt, evolve like wheel spokes off of a central topic (hub), but I'd like this threads hub to be National Geographic photographer Sam Abell. I think there may be multiple pieces of my commentary (below) that you may have different reactions to. I look forward to the discussions that will hopefully ensue. My son-in-law, Ryan McGinnis ( http://www.bigstormpicture.com; http://www.bigstormpicture.com/blog ) and I drove to Hastings College in Hastings, Nebraska a couple of weeks ago to see a presentation by Mr. Sam Abell (sponsored by Canon). Now this is not going to be a worshipful thread (by any means) at least not from me. Maybe I'm a harsh critic, or maybe I just had my expectations set too high, but I did not see as many photographs in his presentation that I said to myself, WoW. I wish I had taken THAT. That surprised me. Perhaps it was simply his choice of images for this presentation, because when I look at this page ( http://compassrosebooks.blogspot.com/2010/03/sam-abell-national-geographic-stylist.html ) I see a lot of images that I wish I had taken. Only three images on that particular page were included in his 2 hour presentation. What Mr. Abell's presentation and work DID do, however, is stimulate some thinking on my part (which is always good, in my book). As a National Geographic photographer, Mr. Abell has been sent to some of the really interesting places on earth to photograph really interesting subjects that most of us will never get the chance to photograph. It seems to me that there is a spectrum of subjects: Nominally very uninteresting to nominally very interesting. And there is also a spectrum of photographic images: Nominally uninteresting to nominally very interesting. The two spectrums are independent of each other, or perhaps interdependent - depending upon the skill (or luck) of the photographer. Obviously, this is highly subjective. But when I look at a photograph I sometimes ask myself: Is this a great image of what could otherwise be an uninteresting subject, or is this an average image of a very interesting subject? One example, I might suggest, is one of the three Sam Abell images that graced the COVER of National Geographic magazine: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg ( http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? On the other hand, consider this image: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FNndI0BvPNA/S7AXaamrd8I/BLA/HNtibpofTPA/s400/Abell7.jpg ( http://bit.ly/cU3pDu ) At his presentation, he included a farther away image. There are a lot of different groups in this branding scene that the photographer had to choose from. He made conscious decisions (which group to focus on, how close to get, framing, etc.) and then he had to have the timing to capture the image when elements converged at an interesting fraction of a second. This is an incredible image and one he says for which other photographers wish to trade him prints (the ultimate compliment). Yes, it is interesting subject matter, but it could be treated in a pedestrian way, which this image is not. While still subjective, I might argue that this is an EMPIRICALLY great photograph - in other words: If you are in the minority that don't think so, you are a
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hey! I took a Great Photograph this summer! http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/5184984568/ Man, that was easy. Wow, Kenny! That's a great photograph! -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth/ __o _'\,_ (*)/ (*) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
I think he simply points out there are different reasons why a picture is considered great. More to the point, some expect of the shot (location, subject, technique, composition, etc) has to be great, not necessarily all of them. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:43 AM, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: If I'm not mistaken, a lot of what Miserere was saying in that article was with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Or maybe I just need new batteries in my sarcastometer/ironicalgraph. Darren Addy Kearney, NE -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
I picked up on that. Could be I need batteries for my Sarcastoblaster and Ironichron. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:43 AM, CheekyGeek wrote: If I'm not mistaken, a lot of what Miserere was saying in that article was with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Or maybe I just need new batteries in my sarcastometer/ironicalgraph. Darren Addy Kearney, NE -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Message: 7 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:44:50 -0500 From: Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: The Sam Abell thread (1) Message-ID: aanlktikp0_knsoqyt=1069agc6ca4uhg-rgm=taru...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. One subplot is that out plucky reporter has a camera with one shot left. As the story gets stranger and stranger, she has to decide at what point to use the shot. My favorite line goes something like All the animals of the world being loaded two by two into a giant rocket and you're going to wait for something better? I love that movie. Right alongside Galaxy Quest for a fun time. Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
We need a better sarcasm emoticon. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Walter Gilbert ldott...@gmail.com wrote: I picked up on that. Could be I need batteries for my Sarcastoblaster and Ironichron. -- Walt http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:43 AM, CheekyGeek wrote: If I'm not mistaken, a lot of what Miserere was saying in that article was with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Or maybe I just need new batteries in my sarcastometer/ironicalgraph. Darren Addy Kearney, NE -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
I know. Just goes to show you, anyone can take great photos ... even with a Pentax. http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/waltergilbert http://waltgilbert.posterous.com/ On 11/17/2010 10:47 AM, Scott Loveless wrote: On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Walter Gilbertldott...@gmail.com wrote: Hey! I took a Great Photograph this summer! http://www.flickr.com/photos/walt_gilbert/5184984568/ Man, that was easy. Wow, Kenny! That's a great photograph! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Den 17. nov. 2010 kl. 17.10 skrev Bob Sullivan: Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) Regards, Bob S. But on the other hand it is easier to get photos accepted in competitions or in the Pentax Gallery if you photograph exotic locations .-) DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 04:48:12PM +, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: From: Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. I love that movie. Right alongside Galaxy Quest for a fun time. Sky Captain didn't do anything for me. Galaxy Quest, however, sits on the shelf alongside Flash Gordon, The Last Starfighter and Ice Pirates (and Barbarella, and Mars Attacks ...) There are a whole lot of really good B movies out there. There's a group I categorise as Arnie Movies (The Running Man, True Lies, Conan [I II], and Judge Dredd) - the last may not have actually had The Governator in it, but it would have been about the same movie with him playing the role. Then there are The Princess Bride, Young Frankenstein, Blazing Saddles, and even at least the first Pirates of the Caribbean -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On 2010-11-17 08:16 , CheekyGeek wrote: One example, I might suggest, is one of the three Sam Abell images that graced the COVER of National Geographic magazine: http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg (http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? what i have to say before reading any other comments: having worked in the magazine business, including art-directing and laying out many covers and working with great photography (e.g. James Balog, Sebastio Salgado), i think that is an excellent cover shot but not a photo i would hang on the wall; the form (with reflection) is interesting, and the gaze is penetrating (i can only hope it is better at a larger size), but mainly it grabs the looker with a quick glance and it has perfect backgrounds for titles; i also assume it is iconic for a larger topic included in the magazine issue in short, while some are stunning artworks on their own, in most magazines the cover shot is essentially a functional design element -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Right you are, but the link has lots of truth in it. It made me rethink some of what I was doing looking for photo opportunities. Regards, Bob S. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:43 AM, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: If I'm not mistaken, a lot of what Miserere was saying in that article was with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Or maybe I just need new batteries in my sarcastometer/ironicalgraph. Darren Addy Kearney, NE -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) I was once showing a group of friends some of my photos from Ethiopia and one of the people commented well, anyone can take good photos in a place like that. I was amazed at the comment, particularly given that the same person has seen many photos of Ethiopia by other friends which are completely shit, and plenty of mine taken locally which are pretty good. Everywhere is exotic to people who live on the other side of the world. I remember coming home one day to find a group of Japanese tourists peering into the window of my house, presumably taking an anthropological interest in the exotic native household. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: one of the people commented well, anyone can take good photos in a place like that. ^^^ How to diagnose an abusive personality in one sentence (or, at a minimum, Severe Social Retardation). Reminds me of the line Wow your camera takes nice pictures! To which the only reasonable response is Thanks! You mouth makes nice compliments! Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Great picture, what kind of camera did you use? Great meal, what brand of pots did you use? On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:21 PM, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: one of the people commented well, anyone can take good photos in a place like that. ^^^ How to diagnose an abusive personality in one sentence (or, at a minimum, Severe Social Retardation). Reminds me of the line Wow your camera takes nice pictures! To which the only reasonable response is Thanks! You mouth makes nice compliments! Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
Sky Captain is visually delightful but with a mediocre plot and screenplay. Gwyneth Paltrow is stunning, however, and I just love the photography subplot and jokes. Plus the other day it was on late at night and the couch was awfully comfy. On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:20 PM, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 04:48:12PM +, Collin Brendemuehl wrote: From: Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. I love that movie. Right alongside Galaxy Quest for a fun time. Sky Captain didn't do anything for me. Galaxy Quest, however, sits on the shelf alongside Flash Gordon, The Last Starfighter and Ice Pirates (and Barbarella, and Mars Attacks ...) There are a whole lot of really good B movies out there. There's a group I categorise as Arnie Movies (The Running Man, True Lies, Conan [I II], and Judge Dredd) - the last may not have actually had The Governator in it, but it would have been about the same movie with him playing the role. Then there are The Princess Bride, Young Frankenstein, Blazing Saddles, and even at least the first Pirates of the Caribbean -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
But on the other hand it is easier to get photos accepted in competitions or in the Pentax Gallery if you photograph exotic locations .-) DagT No wonder. Ohio is not considered exotic. Maybe if I shoot some images closer Kentucky ... :) Sincerely, Collin Brendemuehl http://kerygmainstitute.org He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose -- Jim Elliott -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On Nov 17, 2010, at 8:10 AM, Bob Sullivan wrote: Darren, Will comment more when I have time to look at your links. I think you and Miserere have some common opinions here. Look at this piece he has put up on 'What makes a good photograph.' http://enticingthelight.com/2010/02/21/what-makes-a-great-photograph/ I think we don't go to enough exoctic locations to have great photos. :-) And the Eggleston comments were made before our little fieldtrip last May. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On Nov 17, 2010, at 8:44 AM, Steven Desjardins wrote: I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. One subplot is that out plucky reporter has a camera with one shot left. As the story gets stranger and stranger, she has to decide at what point to use the shot. My favorite line goes something like All the animals of the world being loaded two by two into a giant rocket and you're going to wait for something better? A camera that looked very much like this on: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/4975699455/in/set-72157624960248756/ except that the one in the movie had an extra frame counter on top, which counted down. It was also special because she never had to cock the shutter to take a picture with it, and it took a flash photo without attaching a flash to it. Oh and the camera in the above photo, took all of these photos, which Miserere has explained that they are great because they were taken with an old camera at an exotic location (burning man) which is remote http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157624809385751/ -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
- Original Message - From: CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 9:16 AM Subject: The Sam Abell thread (1) http://photography.nationalgeographic.com/staticfiles/NGS/Shared/StaticFiles/Photography/Images/POD/a/aboriginal-teenager-504198-sw.jpg ( http://on.natgeo.com/903wXD ) Is the greatness of this image due to the photographer or the unusual subject? Put another way, if we put ME in that water, would this be a compelling image? It might be if the light was interesting, your expression was emotionally compelling, the colors helped to tell the portrait story, and the photographer made good camera-setting-decisions that complemented the subject matter or revealed the photographer's vision of the portrait story. I'm sure there are really crappy pictures of the exotic out there; exotic content doesn't guarentee a great photograph. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FNndI0BvPNA/S7AXaamrd8I/BLA/HNtibpofTPA/s400/Abell7.jpg ( http://bit.ly/cU3pDu ) Agreed. This is a great photograph. Very dynamic--great layering of images. Lovely tones. Course I had to say that or reveal myself a moron, didn't I :-). Sam also has some quotes that are worth of discussion, or at least consideration. One that I particularly like is: It matters little how much equipment we use; it matters much that we be masters of all we do use. This is a point I've read over and over in interviews with the world's great photographers, and despite my recent posting of my Pentax dream kit, I totally agree with Abell's point here. And I also agree with underwater Nat Geo Photographer Steven Doubilet's point, which he made in a documentary about Nat Geo photographers, that equipment does matter, but, of course, he would agree with Abell when he says it's the mastery of the equipment we do have that counts much too. In the end, when you can get the camera you've chosen to take the picture you envision, then you've succeeded. Here's Doubilet's web site if you're not familiar with his name; no doubt you've seen his pictures. http://www.daviddoubilet.com/ Cheers, Christine -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On 17 November 2010 18:40, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Nov 17, 2010, at 8:44 AM, Steven Desjardins wrote: I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. One subplot is that out plucky reporter has a camera with one shot left. As the story gets stranger and stranger, she has to decide at what point to use the shot. My favorite line goes something like All the animals of the world being loaded two by two into a giant rocket and you're going to wait for something better? A camera that looked very much like this on: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/4975699455/in/set-72157624960248756/ except that the one in the movie had an extra frame counter on top, which counted down. It was also special because she never had to cock the shutter to take a picture with it, and it took a flash photo without attaching a flash to it. Oh and the camera in the above photo, took all of these photos, which Miserere has explained that they are great because they were taken with an old camera at an exotic location (burning man) which is remote http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157624809385751/ Yes, they *are* great, but anyone can take good photos on the set of Mad Max 4, Larry. This one is especially lovely: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/4980514314/in/set-72157624809385751/ —M. \/\/o/\/\ -- http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On 17 November 2010 11:43, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote: If I'm not mistaken, a lot of what Miserere was saying in that article was with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Or maybe I just need new batteries in my sarcastometer/ironicalgraph. Darren Addy Kearney, NE You are correct, Darren, in your first assertion. I have a particular loathing for gimmick photography, which seems to pervade our little hobby/profession. I do my best to stay away from gimmicks myself, but one day, when I'm bored and feel like 15 minutes of fame, I'll come up with some gimmick and put it into play. Don't worry, I'll still talk to you guys. Or maybe I'll have my assistant type messages to the PDML. As far as what you're saying about Sam Abell I believe there is some truth to it; i.e., most semi-talented photographers could've been dropped in Ethiopia and they would've come back with great photographs. What many amateur photographers don't understand is that professional photographers aren't hired to take Great Photographs, they are hired for the following: * Be at the shoot location on time. * Be sober, or drunk if that's how he/she works best. * Take photos that the magazine editor wanted and that will work within the chosen format EVEN IF THE SUBJECT SUCKS. * If shift happens, the photos will still be taken and nobody will be the wiser. * Have those photos on the editor's hard drive a few short hours after the end of the shoot. * Make it back to base alive. * Be ready to do this again and again and again with consistent results EVERY TIME for years to come. Any idiot can press a button while pointing a camera in the general direction of the subject, but being consistent and delivering results under pressure time after time is no idiot's chore. Regarding equipment, I'll quote myself, simply because I was writing about this the other day; I'm preparing a series of articles on street photography and concerning gear I wrote in part: Sooner or later every Photography website will print the dreaded overused words: 'The camera doesn’t matter'. The problem with this statement is that it’s paradoxical and almost entirely misunderstood by most beginning photographers. Saying the camera doesn’t matter is like a millionaire saying that money doesn’t matter or a tennis champion saying the racquet doesn’t matter. These statements are perfectly true, but only if you have millions in the bank or Dunlop makes a custom racquet for you. What this means is that for the camera not to matter, you need to have a camera that matters. All these pros can say the equipment doesn't matter because they have the best available most of the time. They also say it because if they handed this equipment to the average Joe in a camera club, Joe wouldn't take as good pictures as they. Know thy camera is probably the best advice nobody ever gave me. To end my post, I'll agree with you that a good photographer is capable of taking a mundane subject and making it appealing. However, this doesn't mean that when presented with a Great Subject they'll take a photo that's vastly superior to what you or I would take. Some photos just take themselves. And with that, I'm off to take a Great Photograph of some carpet fluff with a large format camera. Peace, —M. \/\/o/\/\ -- http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On Nov 17, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Miserere wrote: On 17 November 2010 18:40, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Nov 17, 2010, at 8:44 AM, Steven Desjardins wrote: I have previously mentioned the movie Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. One subplot is that out plucky reporter has a camera with one shot left. As the story gets stranger and stranger, she has to decide at what point to use the shot. My favorite line goes something like All the animals of the world being loaded two by two into a giant rocket and you're going to wait for something better? A camera that looked very much like this on: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/4975699455/in/set-72157624960248756/ except that the one in the movie had an extra frame counter on top, which counted down. It was also special because she never had to cock the shutter to take a picture with it, and it took a flash photo without attaching a flash to it. Oh and the camera in the above photo, took all of these photos, which Miserere has explained that they are great because they were taken with an old camera at an exotic location (burning man) which is remote http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157624809385751/ Yes, they *are* great, but anyone can take good photos on the set of Mad Max 4, Larry. I was just following your formula for great photos, so anyone can take great photos if they follow Miserere's advice. This one is especially lovely: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/4980514314/in/set-72157624809385751/ Thanks, that was this years amazing piece of artwork. There must have been 58,000 photos taken of people at the base of that statue emulating it's pose. For reference, there were 48,000 people there. Details about it here: http://www.blissdance.org/ —M. \/\/o/\/\ -- http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: The Sam Abell thread (1)
On 17 November 2010 23:44, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: Yes, they *are* great, but anyone can take good photos on the set of Mad Max 4, Larry. I was just following your formula for great photos, so anyone can take great photos if they follow Miserere's advice. That's correct, Larry; and that's exactly what we want, have people taking photographs according to strict formulas. This one is especially lovely: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/4980514314/in/set-72157624809385751/ Thanks, that was this years amazing piece of artwork. There must have been 58,000 photos taken of people at the base of that statue emulating it's pose. For reference, there were 48,000 people there. I think your angle works wonderfully, precisely because scale is lost. Details about it here: http://www.blissdance.org/ Send him your photo to add to the galley! —M. \/\/o/\/\ -- http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
