Bob, my email did not mean that I think all technically proficient
photographers were not good photographers and I hope you did not infer
that. I simply meant that photography required more than technical
proficiency. Is email that inadequate a medium for communication?
Answering my own question, yes, it is.
Don
Bob Blakely wrote:
Almost all of the worlds best photos are expertly exposed. Further,
almost all freeze moving subjects or allow them to blur as is most
appropriate for the work. In addition, focus and appropriate deph of
field are apparent.
Is there something about photographers that prevents them from walking
and chewing gum at the same time?
Regards,
Bob Blakely
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A mother takes twenty years to make a man of her boy,
and another woman makes a fool of him in twenty minutes."
- Robert Frost
----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Roberts" <droberts@xxxxxxxxxx>
And, to address the first part of your question, which is not the
same as the last about the rule of thirds, I think that technical
knowledge can absolutely impair the production of a good photograph.
We have all seen technically proficient photographers who don't make
good photos. They may think they do, and by their criteria they are,
but they are lacking in any artistic sensitivity or thought. As a
matter of fact, we may all be guilty of that when we shoot something
that doesn't really inspire us or shoot for the sake of shooting. I
know that I am guilty of that sometimes. We fall back on exposure
and latitude and composition etc. without really thinking about content.
Don
