Hi all,

Like everything else, it depends upon what you like to do. ;-)

Ansel famously said, "You don't take a photograph, you make it," and what I try to do.

Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't.

My best,

Mike

The guy at my local camera shop and I were just joking about this 2 weeks ago. We both agreed that we just didn't feel comfortable "directing" people. We joked that maybe this was an indicator that we're both anti-social (although I work with people all day long and play very nicely with others). He prefers shooting food, because it just sits there.

msmoto said:
<snip> nor do I have a lot of expectations regarding the end results when I do go out on a shoot. Only a thought process regarding what I want to communicate.

It is alway good to exchange ideas here on NRF

Thanks for distilling what has been rattling around in my mind too msmoto. I felt 'less than' because I don't do what some people say they do - go out to take an image with that image in mind before they see it. My brain just doesn't work like that - or I am missing something altogether.

I just have to add that when I first read the title of this thread I thought it was going to be about people that had taken pictures and missing people had been in the picture unknown until someone spotted them :-P

Each of us has a set of "objects" we like to record as images. Most us us, including "Msmoto" do not fully understand the "why" of this. We just like to shoot certain subjects. I have not done the bug stuff, mainly because I do not know how, exactly. But I also do not like bugs. I like the technical challenge of the fast moving cars and bikes... Dark, low light shots, and some risk involved. And, I love to shoot photos of people.... to the point I will walk up on the street and do my work.

But, this makes me neither plus or minus on the scale. I do not shoot landscapes as a rule, definitely do not go out with any "Photo groups" to do "assignments", nor do I have a lot of expectations regarding the end results when I do go out on a shoot. Only a thought process regarding what I want to communicate.

It is alway good to exchange ideas here on NRF

shutterdancer said:
Shame us as you like bjrichus.....call us afraid....call us mentally deranged,but those of us who don't find shooting people challenging....will never change.....I think that you need to shoot more bugs ;>).....Think about it...no model releases.....no need to satisfy them.....and man..what unique expressions ;>)

Many people ARE bugs ... but I prefer the human kind....

Juergen said:
I believe it was Ansel Adams who said: There are always two people in my photos, the photographer, and the viewer

Jürgen

Ah but there was only one Ansel Adams.

Us lesser mortals need more people in our pictures.

I believe it was Ansel Adams who said: There are always two people in my photos, the photographer, and the viewer

Jürgen

Shame us as you like bjrichus.....call us afraid....call us mentally deranged,but those of us who don't find shooting people challenging....will never change.....I think that you need to shoot more bugs ;>).....Think about it...no model releases.....no need to satisfy them.....and man..what unique expressions ;>)

elvishefer said:
It could be!

People are weird with beliefs and photography.

'aint that the truth! (me too).

elvishefer said:
I know someone who has a great eye for photos that adamantly refuses to do post production of any kind.

I know someone else, who I would say is by far a better photographer than I, who refuses to use artificial lighting (flash/studio lights/etc.) no matter what.

I think they're both crazy.

/shrug

I certainly do post processing - Come on now ... even in film days, we spotted, toned, dodged & burned, and cropped.

While I prefer natural light I also use a reflector more than I thought I would for portraits and have been know to bounce a flash or two (but its not my normal modus...), so I guess my summary is not to be rigid and get around to everything once in a while, as NEVER doing one thing (i.e. all work and no play), makes Jack a dull boy.

It could be!

People are weird with beliefs and photography.

I know someone who has a great eye for photos that adamantly refuses to do post production of any kind.

I know someone else, who I would say is by far a better photographer than I, who refuses to use artificial lighting (flash/studio lights/etc.) no matter what.

I think they're both crazy.

/shrug

Godless said:
And why is this a problem, if the images are good?

IMO, they are repetitive and boring.

Godless said:
A good photo is a good photo even if it does not contain any organic lifeforms.
A landscape without people can be very relaxing to watch.

*A* ... you used the singular. Many shots with no living things in it are to my mind boring.

Consider that all great art over the history of humanity includes at least SOME life forms, from cave paintings of the hunt, through to the impressionists have mostly included people. It's only when we get to the modernists and now the post-modernists in art when form is considered an end in itself that recognizable shapes that mean anything is not the point so city or landscapes are also very passe. (That's the end of my personal art critique for today).

My conclusion is that these two people are AFRAID of some very important aspects of their fellow man. The weekend conversation I had one of them didn't even pretend otherwise. This means his "view", "vision" (whatever you want to call it), was shaped or at the very least 'restricted' by his fear.

This is not about mere preference, it is about someone who ****NEVER**** makes shots of one subject or another because of this fear and even sets up his life to and deliberately avoids situations where he might be asked to make a photograph that would expose him to his fear. This sounds more like someone with a personality issue to me!

(That's the end of my personal therapy sessions for today).

LOL!!!

bjrichus said:
Yet while to my eye, they are indeed outstanding technically (I cannot fault the technique, image quality as in the quantity of detail, shadow gradation and so on), the subjects they choose to take shots of all have what appears to me to be a similar problem: NO PEOPLE.

And why is this a problem, if the images are good?

A good photo is a good photo even if it does not contain any organic lifeforms.
A landscape without people can be very relaxing to watch.

Geoff_K said:
People can detract from a shot. We tend to look at people in a photo and that could pull you away from the rock, building or flower the person wanted to showcase. Maybe ??

I will +1 you with my post...

Pierre said:
...I find interesting, scene or cityscape void of people; it brings back the focus to the scene, something we are not accustomed to, instead of putting people on the forefront blocking the view as always

...it’s good to take a break plus there are tons of other stuff deserving attention.

I feel relieved by all the comments above, looks like people are trouble subjects to all and for similar reasons just when I thought I was the exception.

I sometime would edit-out all the people in a scene but leave one to give size perspective.

People can detract from a shot. We tend to look at people in a photo and that could pull you away from the rock, building or flower the person wanted to showcase. Maybe ??

msmoto said:
However, the action of keeping the subject/model involved will in many cases reduce anxieties enough to get the photo taken.

Very true.

The problem with the two people I am talking about, is that they simply won't even do a model shoot, even a one on one private, informal portrait of the wife is very often beyond them.

To his credit, the guy I was with yesterday, does use a P&S and shoots pictures of his family, but he only prints those 4x5 or sends them by email to his kids; NEVER on facebook or flikr by him.

As for us guys needing encouragement, its supposed to be an activity that you take part in isn't it? Guess someone never told HER that!!! Its also why she is an "ex"....

bjrichus said:
Sounds like an ex of mine when we were between the sheets ... ;-)

Yeah, you guys need lots of encouragement....ha, ha, ha....

However, the action of keeping the subject/model involved will in many cases reduce anxieties enough to get the photo taken. And, as photogs, when we are nervous, this is so easily read by our subject, they get nervous as well. The technique described above, helps to keep us calm by being simply a thought out process, as opposed to a spontaneous reacting situation in which we may not be exactly certain what to say or do other than push the button.

msmoto said:
say something like "oh great, yes, that is it, you are doing great".

Sounds like an ex of mine when we were between the sheets ... ;-)

msmoto said:
And, my teenage years were in the fifties....so no old f... stuff, please.

Hey now ... *I* said *I* was trying to avoid using that phrase - I'm almost there myself!!!

OK< I am going to try and be serious here......

Well, maybe not. But, here is a technique you can practice which may help to shoot photos of folks you know. First, sit down with a photo of a stranger and practice using the tools in your post processing to reduce the wrinkles, skin blemishes, etc. Once this is mastered, then ask one of your relatives who is a little reluctant, but not adamantly refusing, to help you with a project. Important here to ask them to HELP you with this photos project. Sit down, talk with them in good enough light so you can point and shoot. And this is just the two of you. Then, hold the camera, talk about how you are trying to do some new photos and tell them they can help you. Chat for a few minutes, ask if they take photos, ask what their interests are, or how their day is going, and very gently let hem know you are going to do some shots. Keep talking to them and ask them to move, click away a few shots and no matter what you think the shots look like say something like "oh great, yes, that is it, you are doing great". Just talk to them positively. Often it helps to use 4-6FPS. But, keep talking, asking them to look up, look down, sometimes to wiggle the head back and forth, lick the lips, and keep encouraging.

After five or ten minutes you should have shot maybe 50-100 shots. Let them know how appreciative you are. If they ask to se them, tell them you have to edit first as that is what photographers do now days.

Then go to your post processing and after editing from 100 down to 3 - 5, and this means deleting from the disc all 95 rejects, then begin to make the subject look about 10years younger in post processing.

What you will have accomplished is to reduce the fear of your subject, increase you down confidence you can do this, and might even get a photo of the subject which is one they like.

Now, if you had trouble following the directions, then you know what the problem is. You simply cannot follow directions....ha, ha,ha....I have done this with a young man who could hardly hold a camera and before the shoot was finished, he was talking like a pro. Of course in that situation we had a New York model with about 15 years experience. That did make it a bit easier.

And, my teenage years were in the fifties....so no old f... stuff, please.

shutterdancer said:
LOL bjrichus, [...] being an old fart myself ...

You have no idea how long I wrestled over NOT putting that phrase in my post instead of the one I used! :-)

Interesting Dr. donaldeøjose....that explains why your secretary told me that you were off shooting people portraits when I arrived for our last session ;)

As I suspected, his photography reveals a limitation in his comfort level in relating with other people. It is hard for him to engage emotionally with others; hence the feelings of intimidation. He can relate best to other people when talking technical details and not emotional subjects.

bgrichus said,

"Lets just say that I do have a picture forming in my mind of the kind of person involved here. The two individuals I am thinking of are both 'wasp', over 60, well off enough to buy whatever gear they want and able to shoot whatever they want."

LOL bjrichus,I resemble that remark,being an old fart myself ;>).I figure why spend all of that money on equipment just to shoot something that we see every day.Almost all of us are only a few minutes away from a spot that we can go to....close our eyes....spin around a few times...press the shutter button and capture a snap of a person.The thrill of photography for me is chasing down that beautiful dragon fly that I have never photographed before,or an animal or bird that may soon be endangered.That doesn’t mean that my way is the best way...or the only way...that just means that I shoot what I like to shoot!

Photography would become boring quickly if there were a set of rules that dictated what you could or couldn’t include in your photographs ;>)

bjrichus said:
If I post another comment this afternoon, it's because my man has not whacked me with his D300... (He does NOT read NR, in fact neither of them are online very much at all).

:-)

Just got home after my meeting (a lunch appointment actually) and am in one piece. HAHAHA…

Before I tell you what went on, when I was a teenager (late 1960’s), I went to a photo club once and got really discouraged by the entire experience. All these old snobs worrying about the latest changes to some obscure developer formula and measuring eighths of an inch between a still life arrangement and the front of a lens to confirm focus and telling me not to bother with 35mm as it was a waste of time and that it had all been done by some obscure little Frenchman 60 years ago. Oh yes, and there were no hot chicks there to try my luck with, so I was very turned off by it all. ;-)

So … Today we discussed several things art and photography related. I didn’t really have to prod my man too much, as I have just picked up a few prints and we spent a few minutes looking them. I am actually preparing a redesign of a web site bringing an archive online of prints made by my uncle in the 1950’s and 60’s that a relative and I updated as a memorial after he died nearly 18 years ago and I was picking up a new set of them. We were looking at a number of these prints (mostly shots of people) and he remarked how he wished he could “shoot photographs of people like that”. As you can imagine, that sparked the conversation.

I just wrote a lengthy analysis of our conversation but I’ve deleted it; cutting the story down to size, turns out he feels intimidated by people photography and does not feel able to show confrontation and emotion. I do think he has issues to do with (I am sure MrsMoto will comment), either a fear of others or maybe even just an over active fear of failure. I got him to agree he validates his position (not quite using those words) by going to his photo club once a month and dissecting photographs by others purely from the technical perspective and as a result, gets the approval of his other “old curmudgeon” club-mates. He actually thinks he is a bit worse than just an old curmudgeon and actually feels some guilt at his position on some things – so there is hope for all of us! I feel suddenly vindicated….

I’m going to get back to work on my revised web site, I’ve got about 6 pages of Eulogy and a whole bunch of scans to get uploaded into a slide show.

There are some interesting comments here - thanks all - and keep 'em coming.

I'm not going to respond directly to any one by quoting, because as has been pointed out, people are complex and I certainly have my own views.

One point of clarification, as Ms.M. says, if we exclude those who specialize in specific non-people related subjects, what are we left with? This question was uppermost in my mind a couple of days ago.

Lets just say that I do have a picture forming in my mind of the kind of person involved here. The two individuals I am thinking of are both 'wasp', over 60, well off enough to buy whatever gear they want and able to shoot whatever they want. I know one of them well enough to ask him "why no people?" and not get a really negative reaction. If I post another comment this afternoon, it's because my man has not whacked me with his D300... (He does NOT read NR, in fact neither of them are online very much at all).

:-)