how about you /p/? How do you rate your photography skills?
>inb4 everyone on this boar secretly thinks theyre the best here
http://bokeh.digitalrev.com/article/80-of-consumers-think-their-photography-skills-are-excellent
Absolute shit but making progress.
>>2837624
I take a mean snapshit
I know I'm garbage right now, but I think I have the eye for it and I'm excited to see what I produce in a couple of years.
>>2837648
Sounds about right.
lowest of the low
>>2837624
I'm one of the best out there to be honest
>>2837624
Like, to be honest, I think I might be the best there is
/p/ makes me want to kill myself so iknow i'm on the right track cuz im gonna keep working on shit
Based on the photos I see on /p/, I know that statistic to be true.
I rank myself as better than 99% of people that take photos because I actually know what an aperture does, which automatically makes me better than most people.
Am I more skilled than photographers? Probably in the lower 50% since it's only a hobby and not my job, I only take a few thousands shots per year.
*tips katana*
>>2837624
i rate myself snapshitty and not progressing
I like my photos, /p/ hates most of them. So yeah...
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Mark II Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 4800 dpi Vertical Resolution 4800 dpi Image Created 2016:04:29 11:12:19 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 3200 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
i call it "kino-graphy"
/p/ has hated everything I've ever displayed and that's when they even bother to comment on it.
I personally think I'm shit, but I have very good self awareness, I think. I know I struggle with composition and finding interesting subject matter.
I consider myself shit but I've been told my photos look professional and that I should sell them about a dozen times so who knows.
how hard is taking pictures anyway? you see it and press the shutter button. it's not rocket science people
i'm absolute shit at photography
i only take pictures so i can remember
>>2837834
gr8 b8 m8
i think im pretty fucking good.
Utter tripe. Maybe someday I'll fully intentionally produce an image I don't feel is a waste of film/storage space.
Pretty low. I'm terrible at finding interesting form in my compositions. Sad part is that I'm probably better than most the retards that say they are excellent. The people who say they are excellent probably only do so because they understand the basic technical elements of photography. That or they are carried by presets/filters/general gimmicks and get positive responses from plebs.
I feel that I'm progressing though. Studying tog history is helping me create and search for more complex imagery. I've shot thousands of photos in the past month. Someday I'll be proud of my work, but that day will not be anytime soon.
Everyone who says they're shit is just pretending to be humble out of some warped idea that it makes their photos better.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS REBEL T3 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/5.7 Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4272 Image Height 2848 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2014:11:14 12:14:07 Exposure Time 1/500 sec F-Number f/5.6 Exposure Program Not Defined ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/5.7 Exposure Bias -1 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 55.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 3991 Image Height 2661 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
I'd rate my technical skills 9/10 which is easy to achieve after a couple years.
The important part, artistic skills after 20 years doing this shit? 2/10
>55% of those surveyed said that they took photos of their food on a regular basis, and almost 60% of people said that they take photos of their pets
Of fucking course.
I consider myself alright, I'm starting to notice my dependence on particular techniques that I need to break away from.
>>2837624
Like, if I'm honest with myself? I'm not super fantastic. I'm not shit, but I'm not the greatest. I can operate a camera, I can recognize a good scene based on light and composition. I'm not the best at staged photos. And I need more practice with artificial lighting (flashes and strobes). Either that, or I need to bite the bullet and start traveling outside of my own area for longer periods of time. But money and time means that isn't the easiest thing to do....
>>2837857
that would be true if we were posting our picture along with said statement. my shots are consistently called shit on rpt
In terms of technical skills, lighting and basic composition, etc, I'm better than the vast majority of amateurs and shittier pros (CL wedding photogs, memetographers, etc). I'm far behind the actual good pros, though, especially in terms of consistency.
The "art" side, however, I'm shit at. Fortunately I'm not in a field where that matters very much.
>>2837929
this,
better than the plebs, worse than the pros
I like to think im finally coming into my own, and not copying everyone else, but thats it for now
>80% OF CONSUMERS
A survery of 1000 people. God damn, I fucking hate how people think if it has the word "survey" or "study" in it then it must be a factual representation of the entire population of the world.
Honestly think my photos range from average to uninspired and mediocre. I used to think all my stuff was great like six years ago and I don't know if I just got worse after not taking photos for a while, or if I'm just so used to what my stuff looks like.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:05:13 02:43:37 Exposure Time 1/20 sec Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 1600 Brightness -4.4 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
>>2837624
Technically so-so. I suck at artificial lighting. I shoot things that /p/ considers universally mundane and pretty much the only feedback I get is "uninteresting". These would be abandoned buildings, empty city streets, plants, and other static subjects like that. I strongly dislike having to deal with people on my spare time so I avoid shooting them and prefer isolated locations. Shooting makes me feel happy and relaxed, the photos are sort of a by-product that I tend to treat with neglect. Comfy thread best thread.
>>2837624
Technically I think my images are like a 4/10. Personally I try to love even my worst snapshit. I'm proud of my photos even if I'm aware of that they are not very good. That must be what having kids is like.
>>2837624
>How do you rate your photography skills?
FLAWLESS
Ehh, I'm okay. Much room to improve, but I'm not terrible at all, I don't believe. Personally, /p/ either generally likes my photos or ignores them. I don't get TOO much outright disapproval for my photos on here so maybe I'm on the right track.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS REBEL T3i Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1 (Windows) Photographer K.B. Mensah Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:12 18:40:21 Exposure Time 1/4000 sec F-Number f/1.4 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 1600 Lens Aperture f/1.4 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Spot Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2837857
Nah I call mine shit because I'm aware they do not stack up at all against actually decent photos. Recognising they're shit is just recognising what's wrong with them and where to improve.
>>2838011
A Curly literally Who?
>>2837944
Found the dude who doesn't understand statistics
>>2838001
I kinda like that desu
>>2837660
This
How do you know if you're good or bad?
>>2838124
if you get (You)s on /p/, it either means you are terrible or really good. If you get nothing, that could mean that you're good or just average
>>2838131
That's one way to look at it.
I took photography as an extra circular in my highschool once, the teacher liked only 1 out of 40 to 60 I had submitted.
>>2837624
Calling himself excellent seems a little pretentious but I think that anyone that can have fun taking photos can make at least some great ones
Quick question that may potentially receive banter:
Do any of you ever feel as if you preform better on one format than another? Certain knowledge based on the technical aspects of film and/or digital photography seem to affect outcomes of certain photos when I shoot. May seem obvious at first, but there are little inconsistencies between the two.
>>2837624
I'm better than everyone I know, because I don't know any photographers. I'm worse than everyone I respect and enjoy, because I don't have the confidence, creativity, or bravery to go after the photos that I like and want to shoot.
>>2838023
W, the 23rd letter
>>2838131
Silence means indifference as far as I'm concerned, as for some reason I consider /p/ as arguably the best sounding board on the Internet. If an image elicits no comment it gets relegated to "never mind, try again" status.
Anything receiving multiple positive comments gets elevated to pro tier and I go shill it on the norm platforms!
>>2838404
Put your trip on isi you attention whore faggot cross dresser
>>2838439
>seeing Isi in every post
Seek help anon, your paranoia levels are now completely off the fucking scale.
>>2838449
He's probably the "Crossboarding Sony shills" guy too.
>>2838439
Where *has* isi been, anyway? Is she in jail?
>>2838478
She's a symbol now
>>2838485
The one that looks like a pentagram/waffle?
>>2838488
I guess?
>>2837816
Yeah, that's shit.
>>2838498
Yes that is clearly her memesty
>>2838485
>the symbol for the artist formerly known as isi
Kek
The survey was poorly worded...
They should have separated good and excellent, instead they grouped them together. It makes sense that a majority of amateur photographers would think their photos are 'good', but I doubt many would say their photos are 'excellent'. What reason would they have to think their photos are bad? Unless they study the works of known and famous photographers, then critique their own work based on that, they have no reason to think poorly of their photography.
>>2838491
Why do you think it's shit? This is my personal favorite from that night's show. Not like it matters, but it's published on a music publication's website.
>how about you /p/? How do you rate your photography skills?
About a 2/10.
I get basic exposure.
I get how I should compose.
The other 8 points lack creativity, courage and bringing the previous two points in.
There are so many rolls that I process and just discard straight away because I know I can do better. At this point I'm not sure if I've peaked.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SEIKO EPSON CORP. Camera Model EPSON scanner Camera Software EPSON Scan Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 1600 dpi Vertical Resolution 1600 dpi Image Created 2016-05-14T02:24:33+01:00
>>2838572
not him but pp is very basic, almost none. it has no energy, background looks lame, light is bad.
>>2838627
>There are so many rolls that I process and just discard straight away
that must be hell on earth to a photog. i have a friend that has been on that bad trip for about a year. everytime he develops a roll or half dozen of them, he says "only shit, nothing good".. i mean, come on. 6 rolls and not even one keeper. fuck.
>because I know I can do better.
but you dont. you havent. dont tell yourself lies.
>>2838630
Yeah there's not much I could've done post-processing wise because that tiny little venue used harsh blue and purple lights the entire night, except for one band, which surprised me (I'll post a photo when the venue used normal lighting) and when editing photos taken in said lighting doesn't do much.
As for background, not much I could've done either, it was a very tiny venue about 150-200 people capacity in a basement of a bar. The band literally had to walk around to the front of the stage to get on the stage, no backstage area to come out from.
Honestly concert photography is probably the easiest types of photography I've personally dealt with so far in my short time as a "photographer" Getting those amazing shots is just being in the right spot at the right time, other than that it's just generic looking concert shots that anyone can pull off.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Mark II Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 4800 dpi Vertical Resolution 4800 dpi Image Created 2016:04:29 11:13:58 Exposure Time 1/125 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 3200 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2838668
neat excuses, bro.
>>2838671
Not excuses, legitimate reasons. That type of lighting is the devil when it comes to concert photography. Ask anyone else that shoots concerts that.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Mark II Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.4 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 4800 dpi Vertical Resolution 4800 dpi Image Created 2016:04:17 17:56:43 Exposure Time 1/160 sec F-Number f/3.2 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 800 Lens Aperture f/3.2 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2838100
Thx bro
>>2838668
I've tried doing music photography and I just can't get into it. I have a lot of friends in bands so they often ask me to come out, and I always find the conditions shitty and the pictures I take kind of boring.
I'm used to photojournalism, especially sports, so it's not like I don't enjoy shooting stuff that I'm not in control of either, I just find bands kind of boring.
>>2838705
Not going to lie, the main reason I got into concert photography was for free shows. But it's more than that for me now.
I understand where you come from when you say it can be boring, most of the shots I get look very generic, and it's kinda hard to get creative with it while still pleasing my publishers.
Yes some bands are very boring, while others are over the top exciting. I shot a band early last month, and it was literally five band members standing in a line up on stage barely moving (typical for bluegrass music) I really enjoy shooting rap shows because the performers get very energetic and show a lot of raw emotion, but I have only shot one rap show so far. Looking forward to more in the future.
>>2837624
well I have the technical part down but I'm not very creative and I don't take very interesting pictures
so I'd say I'm slightly above the average snapshitter but nowhere near a good photographer
I would rate myself as an amateur. There is skilled involved yes, but as with all art, it is very subjective. Though I do not make any money from my photography, nor have I ever tried to, I thoroughly enjoy shooting. Mainly for myself as it is very calming and relaxing. Have I had any formal training? No. Do I think all my photos are good? No. Though some people like some of my photos that I think aren't very good and I definitely see photos getting a ton of attention that I think aren't very good at all, even in galleries. But again, it's all subjective. So I either see it as you are either a novice, intermediate, or expert and doing it for skill/knowledge/criticism/etc. Or you are an amateur, semi-pro, or professional where you are doing it for fun and the love of it and to make money as well. But both are still art, and both are still extremely subjective. Also, here is a photo I took Tuesday evening.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D5200 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.0 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 802 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 40 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2016:05:13 20:45:58 Exposure Time 1/200 sec F-Number f/3.5 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/3.5 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Focal Length 40.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2837828
Alternatively post good stuff and recieve shit because you cba explaining to faggots your entire editing process. Pretty much why I never post anything here apart from social media share threads
>>2837624
I have no delusions of grandeur. I'm shit, utter shit, but I am trying to improve.
>>2837624
I'm decent at live events, for the most part.
I can't take a landscape photo for the life of me. Planning to work on that after I move further North.
My portraits are stiff but technically competent. Not a huge achievement. Not big into setting up a studio environment so I'll keep practicing on whoever is nearby and friendly while out and about.
Fuck conceptual photography.
I don't like LA, so I don't practice street stuff near me. It was fun in Europe though. I'd like a smaller camera to take on walks.
End result: Above average for the normal person, slightly below for a 'photographer.' Give me two decades and I could maybe even describe what an excellent photo is, but I'll likely never take one.
>>2840887
Wow are you me? I even live in LA too.
>>2837624
>>2837624 (OP)
There are only two skills needed in photography.
1) finding nice subjects
2) translating what you find nice about them when you look at them with your eye to a photograph using your brain (before you even take the camera to your eye).
You can constantly get better at them all throughout your life and it's impossible to master them completely and forever.
Handling a camera (whichever camera) is not a skill, it is absolutely taken for granted. Knowing for example how ISO, shutter speed, aperture work together is just a set of tools, just like the color filter on your flash is a tool.
Being a professional (i.e. someone who makes money with photography) does not make you a good photographer, it makes you a good businessman and an adequate photographer. Just like stuff that's in the music top 100 is not necessarily good music.
I would rate myself as a 1 or 2/10 photographer compared to legends like HBC and AA just to name a few that everyone knows. Those two people had taste in subject selection and a major pre-visualization talent. And that's all it takes.
Lol I hate my own work so bad that I still don't want to create a Facebook page.
