|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/22/2008 07:34:15 PM · #51 |
The top two in my portfolio were staged, but the top shot took one grandson and about 10 minutes and a rope swing in my yard, the other a DVD, a flashlight, and about 3 minutes right in front of the monitor at my computer. I can't really say that I stage anything complex. I like to find the scene, the angle, and get the shot without disturbing anything too much.
I have great respect for those who have learned the details, and take the time to set up elaborate lighting and capture a scene to technical perfection, but that just isn't the world that I operate in very well.
A lot of my most interesting and satisfying shots were captured while in motion, in or on some sort of transportation, or while walking.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2008 11:53:28 AM · #52 |
I think everything is staged to one degree or another, using different methods of capture.
Life is a stage for all of us. A captured moment can more happen naturally. WOWs can be impromptu acting or reacting by people and animals. You the photographer can set your stage, using more directing and setups. Or be more like a Hunter/scout. You can search the backgrounds and weather conditions you want to capture.
A photographer is always setting up the photo, whether directly or indirectly.
Indirectly = Natural-Lighting Direct-Involvement = Strobes. The same goes for the subjects involved. There is no right way, the end results are what count.
Which do I prefer? It depends on WHAT I'm shooting a photo of AND the TIME/WEATHER constraints. For Nature, I prefer Un-Staged, if possible. For Landscapes, we work with "Mother-Nature" as the Makeup-Artist. We all have Indoor Flower-Arrangements that are grown/staged.
Natural facial expressions are priceless. An experienced photographer/director may be able to solicit expressions and create desirable poses, too. You can hunt/search and find mos interesting sights/angles and lighting effects, too.
Message edited by author 2008-09-23 15:53:45. |
|
|
|
09/24/2008 01:25:10 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by justamistere:
There is no right way, the end results are what count.[/b] |
Perhaps we're talking apples and oranges?
Out of my Top 5 none were staged. Two of my Top 10 are Street Portraits.
I guess a point that presses me, is that how or what I like to shoot and more important how I wish to present my scene will almost never Ribbon against something similar that was staged. Regarding my work it's by chance or by design, because I personally refuse to edit whats in my frame to appease the voters, which you can easily do with a staged shot.
If you know or understand the check list of DPC Do's and Don'ts, you seriously up your odds of scoring well. Set one up (a check list) and stick to it. Make sure you don't cross the lines. You'll easily score 6's. If you have a good/great idea, a nice looking model(s), who can persuade, a nice scene/sky etc. you will do fine.
When you stage a shot you have great...maybe total control over the elements. If you stage things you can compose exactly what you want in frame or what the voters will not have an issues with, you can assure there are no distractions, choose any dof with the perfect exposure...use a tripod, lights, choose from multiple exposures and so on.
It's a challenge within itself and yes, it's ALL good.
There's nothing good or bad or better to it. Personally, I see it mostly as a formula not to offend the voters and after that, the best idea, best executed usually wins. Voters are trained to find fault, so don't give them anything to nail. Stage out the negatives. That will give you a pretty clean start out the gate.
As for me, I love the faults. That's what makes it personal. They're mine, they're real, they exist in my world and there they'll stay. No white wash but it mostly boils down to not giving the voters ammo to shoot you down.
Simply said...staging wins.
Message edited by author 2008-09-24 17:40:26. |
|
|
|
10/02/2008 10:14:39 AM · #54 |
| I'm not great at staged or captured. I just go out and shoot, and hope I'm in the right place at the right time. I look at my top five and would say two of them were planned out and staged. One was being in the right place at the right time. The other two were planned in my head and when out to find them. |
|
|
|
10/02/2008 10:33:58 AM · #55 |
Virtually none of the images I capture are staged. Every once in a while I'll set something up, but as my tagline says.....
|
|
|
|
10/02/2008 10:50:04 AM · #56 |
'Captured' photography is usually of people, isn't it? I mean, you can say you were in the right place at the right time to get that landscape shot, but it isn't as if that mountain is going to pack up and head to the beach all of the sudden.
I suppose 'captured' photography is any that is contingent on having a camera during a time-sensitive opportunity to take the picture, and 'staged' photography is pretty much everything else.
I've always had to grapple with the fact that it isn't hard to learn how to take a pretty picture. With that in mind, the definition I have for photographer is someone who has the technical ability to capture the image they want, and know how to use their gear to get it. That's what I feel being a photographer means. A really good photographer could switch out a lens, get his camera up and focused, meter the shot, and adjust his focal length and frame the shot quick as hell to catch a candid picture. When I took photo 1 & 2, one of the instructors that was always down in the lab could look at a negative on a light table and tell you how to expose it fairly accurately just from eyeballing it. He also could tell you aperture/shutter speed combos for different ISO speed films and lighting situations and be correct (we checked with our cameras) simply by being there. He could also do a pretty good ballpark guess for what kind of lens you would need to fill the frame with a subject, just by looking at how big and how far away it was. That guy was a good photographer.
Being a good artist is something entirely different, and you can still do wonderful photographic art, even if you're prone to dropping lenses, consistently put the flash card in backward, have to take 10 shots before you get the exposure right, constantly adjust the tripod, and spend five hours arranging items before even touching the camera.
I also want touch on the PP'ing argument. I think that some of the PP'ing you can do to a photo, or create a new image from composited photos, or employ any other digital trick you know pushes it further into the realm of digital art. I believe that the computer is a new artistic tool, just like the still camera and movie camera were at one point. Or even the paintbrush, or written word.
Just my two cents.
Message edited by author 2008-10-02 14:50:52. |
|
|
|
10/02/2008 11:04:58 AM · #57 |
Originally posted by MyeReadBik:
'Captured' photography is usually of people, isn't it? I mean, you can say you were in the right place at the right time to get that landscape shot, but it isn't as if that mountain is going to pack up and head to the beach all of the sudden. |
You mean as opposed to clouds, sun, moon, seasons changing, storms, time of day, or any other myriad of reasons that I keep going back to the same place for very different shots?
Also, if you hack a bunch of weeds out from in front of that perfect weathered barn door, or gather up a blue tarp or five gallon bucket laying there, that's kind of staging, too.
|
|
|
|
10/02/2008 11:18:46 AM · #58 |
I like to do both but 4 of my top 5 scoring images were captured and not staged so perhaps I should do more of the former?
This is an interesting subject because in a way I think all of my photos are staged. For example, this photo taken at a DPC GTG in Austin was shot in a very small room with lots of people crammed in it. The make shift stage area had all kinds of signs, equipment and other distractions behind the dancers. Overall it was a pretty noisy and chaotic place yet this photo conveys none of that. What it does convey is more of how i was feeling at the time. I had just met the other DPCers and most of them weren't even near me at the time so being in that crowded room I pretty much felt a lone, isolated and I ended up taking a picture of that so to speak. I find this happening in my other "non-staged" work as well. I'm pretty sure I would make a lousy PJ photographer. |
|
|
|
10/02/2008 11:54:43 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
When you stage a shot you have great...maybe total control over the elements. If you stage things you can compose exactly what you want in frame or what the voters will not have an issues with, you can assure there are no distractions, choose any dof with the perfect exposure...use a tripod, lights, choose from multiple exposures and so on.
It's a challenge within itself and yes, it's ALL good.
There's nothing good or bad or better to it. Personally, I see it mostly as a formula not to offend the voters and after that, the best idea, best executed usually wins. Voters are trained to find fault, so don't give them anything to nail. Stage out the negatives. That will give you a pretty clean start out the gate.
As for me, I love the faults. That's what makes it personal. They're mine, they're real, they exist in my world and there they'll stay. No white wash but it mostly boils down to not giving the voters ammo to shoot you down.
Simply said...staging wins. |
I agree in general but differ on one aspect and that is, is it "good or bad or better"? I say it depends. I think there is a much higher bar you have to reach if you do staged work for it to be on par with candids (not referring to the challenges just generally speaking). Candids are automatically original the moment it is captured. Staged work is not. For a staged work to be original it must come from a process that breeds originality and that is not copying, not mimicing others but using your own brain to figure out your own shot. Copying is great for learning and testing but that's it. The only people who say there's no originality left are those who don't excerise their brains because that's a lie. There may be a finite number of ideas out there but there's an infinite number of ways to express them. The latter is what makes it original and is what is needed if your staged work is to gain any real respect. |
|
|
|
10/02/2008 12:17:27 PM · #60 |
I agree generally with what was said below about it not being a better/worse thing, I just personally think 'captured' photos are more interesting because they're real, honest, and are visual depictions of life and the amazing, complex world we live in.
For me that's what photography is all about, but that is likely because I have a partial background in photojournalism and loved working for a newspaper.
Staged shots have their place and I appreciate the art in them, believe me, I just enjoy being the neutral observer of what is before me rather than creating a scene myself.
|
|
|
|
10/03/2008 08:47:52 PM · #61 |
We may be Hunters or Trappers, but both methods get dinnner.
Here are two "Candid Street Photography" photographs.
The first one was staged, the second was luck.
 
In my opinion even composing a shot, positioning youself to a vantage point, choosing Lens, DOF, and all camera settings, time of day, location, weather, that is all "setting the stage" for your subject, hence it is staged. For inanimate landscapes, we move, for animated people, we move them. Taken lightly, staging is planning an outcome. We still set the stage, even for a landscape, only less verbal interaction. |
|
|
|
10/03/2008 09:07:36 PM · #62 |
somewhere in the middle...I look for light or some other element, usually just play with that...if it is my kids or someone else my staging involves me not thinking just trying to breathe...at least if I end up liking it this is what happens, it is intuitive rather than forced...I'd call it incidental staging...
I have set up shots for DPC, but don't like doing that, so I don't anymore...
I like the playful interaction with what is available, and not knowing exactly what I am doing...
Message edited by author 2008-10-04 01:09:37. |
|
|
|
10/04/2008 01:05:48 AM · #63 |
| Out of my top 10, only 1 is staged. Not to say that I oppose staging, because I do not. It just isn't my usual shooting style. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/09/2025 08:12:37 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/09/2025 08:12:37 AM EDT.
|
