Maelstrom 

Serious question

In light of how difficult it is to get lighting, exposure and generally just good shots in the woods and on limited trails, is photography a learned ability or is it like a pure art. If you got it, you got it, if you don't. Go find something else to do. I have noticed (I will use me as an example) I can't photograph anything period. Tips, hints, proper setup. Nothing. I can't do it. Some people (no names as their are 3 I really enjoy) I have been looking at their photographs and movies for years. They all seem, even in the worst photos, to capture the event.

It can't "just" be a passion for what they are capturing as I do love mtbiking, but I take a pic...well they suck haha.

In short, learned, or natural.

Pete_Fagerlin1

A bit of both.

Take an intro photo class, buy a decent photo book (there have to be some out there, I don't know of any particular titles though), and see how much your images improve.

endform

It's some of both. Just like riding a mtn bike is learned, you're not (at least I wasn't and still not really) going to be able to flow through those ridiculous technical sections, you aren't going to be able to quickly get your fstops, shutter speeds and focus straight in fast moving situations without a little bit of practice. I am a bit of an amateur landscape (urban) photographer and while my subject is fairly static there are still decisive moments that need to be captured in order to make a truly compelling photo. Basically, practicing so that you can get your technical skills down is the most important and you just need to practice, practice, practice. If you are a whizz right off the bat at composing shots well that's a bonus. Try approaching how to shoot a rider from different angles (you know, "crouch down, make it art", TM). Don't limit yourself to shooting from one place, use your legs! move!

Knowing what lense, camera, and film to use are all important and without proper execution of technical procedures even a fantastically composed photograph is going to become severely hampered by flaws.

Also there are a lot of good books on photography that can help a lot.

wethepeople

Honestly, same problem with me, I would LOVE to have to ability to take pictures but I cant. Thats why every time I go riding I try to bring somebody that can take good pics. I have never really tried to take them in trails, that would probably be a lot harder then skateparks.

dminor 

It's both. The biggest motivator for me was a passion for capturing the moment, whether it was scenic or action. There's is definitely a lot that can be taught; and there is a lot that comes from having an 'eye' for what you are after (the same as in graphic design).

We had two photography curriculums at the college I attended. One was through the Fine Arts dept; the other through the Communications dept. (photojournalism-oriented). Even though I was a F.A. major, I took the Comm. Dept. class because it had a particularly good nuts-and-bolts darkroom lab component that taught me a LOT. When I later looked at some of the sorry work of the Fine Arts photography majors, their lack of basic technical skills in the darkroom was evident.

The passion part has it p[lace too - - it's part of what gives you (I think) a 'feel' for what makes what you're shooting exciting. For me it was motorcycle racing. I was thoroughly immersed in it; live it and breathed it. My folks got me a 35mm SLR when I was in Jr. High and it was always my quest to capture 'the' shot like the cool ones I saw in the mags and posters.

clonmult

There is definitely an element of both, and there is also the issue of getting a decent camera.

I was lucky though - both of my parents had a major "thing" about photography, I learnt with B&W 35mm totally manual cameras (separate light meters and focusing), then traded up to better SLRs, all the time doing my own developing as well.

As for the camera - your average point and shoot can still take a decent image, but you've got to put in the time to learn how to get the best of it. I'm surprised by how many people don't realise that pushing the release button half way tends to focus, so you can then be ready for "the moment", especially if you've got it planned.

And if you've got a relatively decent camera phone, like my N73, you absolutely have to do the focusing in advance, as it normally takes so darned long .... but it still beats the old pin hole cameras that I made at school

mirona

I'd say both as well. I was a crappy photographer before I took a photography course at the college. I am now a less crappy photographer.

Hopper

Someone who is naturally good with photography will always take a better shot than someone who isnt. However you can teach yourself to be a pretty damn good photographer. If you have the passion to keep at it will become better, you need passion for it. All I can say is just go out and shoot as much as you can and the results will show. Look for better angles, usually a low angle will give a nice shot but be creative, boarder a shot with trees or somehting.

A good camera (proper set up SLR, remote flashes and nice lens) will give you a really good shot but you need to know how to use them. A normal Point and Shoot camera will still give nice results, as you said even with lesser equipment it is possible to capture a moment. Just practice, take your camera off auto mode (if you can) and play with the shutter speeds, aperture and lenses. Leanr what works and what doesn't. Look around, I'm assuming you won't have remote flashes so look where the natural light is and try to get your setup between it and what you are aiming at (but different positions give different effects).

timmyquest

Indeed. To take great photographs you must have an eye. Certain aspects of this can be learned, but certain people are just far better at it then others and will always be.

That said, there is no reason the average individual can't invest in some camera gear, take some classes, and start pumping out photographs that they could be proud of. Will the end up here? Probably not, but i doubt that's most peoples goal.

mlh122

In High School I was one of the top photogs in my class, i had 2 years in the advanced photo class. I was kindof a mentor for the newbs. One thing i noticed between the people that immediately made great photos and those that for the life of them couldn't produce a nice picture, was that the "naturals" remembered to do everything on every picture. The newbs would set up a nice shot, but then under/over expose - or not bracket exposures, or use too long of an exposure time for an action shot, or not pay attention to where the shadows are, or where they're going to be when the flash goes off, or that one of the subjects has a booger, etc... But the "naturals" just seemed to have a checklist of everything to do, so all the technical stuff went smoothly, then they just had to frame a nice shot or wait for the right moment.

Eatadonut

Unless you're looking to be a pro, or enter contests, or be "that really awesome photographer guy", as long as you're not blind you can learn the skills necessary.

Natural ability does two things for you in any art: lets you learn easier, and lets you break that glass ceiling. A friend of mine (who incidentally, is a professional) also claims that 90% of good photography is taking more pictures than the other guy

FreeRidin'

All this talk about photography is getting me quite interested.

highrevs

Careful, it's a slippery slope.

To answer the original question:
I'm still trying to figure out what makes a "good" photographer. I'm still really new to photography, but i know its taken a lot of patience and effort to learn and retain what i have so far.

santiago

How often do you guys adjust the pics after the fact using software like Photoshop? Has it become a 'cheat' to use this software or is it okay to do?

PS - Highrevs, is that Gastro in your sig?

MgC

Many of the basic adjustments available in photoshop are also achievable in the dark room, or on a photofinishing machine for the film user. So most of it isn't "cheating".

dminor 

I personally don't view it as a cheat; but my perspective is a bit skewed anymore. I spend my days resurrecting/"enhancing" iffy digital photography so that it will reproduce well in print. Levels, curves, color balance, channels, shadow/highlight - -it's all fair game in my book.

Nothing beats good photography though. Especially with digital; if you do need to 'tweak' something, it's much better for the pixel depth and detail to be there to work with. It's the old GIGO thing - - the better it starts out, the better off you are.

Pete_Fagerlin1

Never.

cryptid01

ahaha, fantastic! I would love to run into that guy on the trail someday.

highrevs

Yep, thats me in the reflection of big foot's Oakleys from last years spring forum ride.
(edit: the photo Pete posted is freaking awesome)

Pete_Fagerlin1

I would be careful. I heard he goes REALLY big, to flat.

santiago

That must be Texas.

never

Hey, that's not me...I'm not that small...

timmyquest

None of it is cheating...art is art, you just have to know when to draw the line about graphic arts and photography.

Typically all you do is adjust contrast, saturation, sharpness, and crop in photoshop...don't let people fool you. There usually isn't much "magic" going on on the computer.

Furthermore, DSLR's don't enhance the photograph at all and they are generally fairly flat looking directly out of the camera (unless you allow the camera to do in-camera adjustments).

Hopper

I don't use photoshop for the sheer fact I don't have it. For me it's good old paint to crop them. Also who says you need photoshop to edit a photo, here is a pic taken on film edited in a dark room.

That shot was taken by a guy I used to know when I lived in sydney

Pete_Fagerlin1

NO WAY!

You mean you can edit photos in something called a "darkroom"???!?

Thanks for the heads up!

p.s. nobody said (wrote) that you need Photoshop to edit a photo.