I've always been a creative, artistic kind of person and photography is something I've always enjoyed. I want to start it as a proper full time hobby. Maybe even enter a few competitions, that sort of thing.

I was wondering, in your experience, how do you get the perfect photo? Do you edit the photo or do you make sure it's perfect as soon as you've taken it?

Would love to see your best work too!

To me getting the framing correct makes the photo. An otherwise technically perfect photo is pointless if its poorly composed. Also just be ready especially if you shooting wildlife/children etc - some of my favourite photos were spontaneous shots.

I very rarely edit any of mine partly out of laziness and partly I try to get it right first time (not to say that I do). The only photos I really ever edit are scuba photos which normally need a fair bit of colour correction but most aren't that good when it comes down to it as our camera isn't really good enough. We now use a gopro instead for video.

Wasn't there another thread on this subject late last year ?

Me, I'm into large format. Spontaneity is rare, simply because of the setup time. Though the camera I use most of the time does have a sports finder; I just need to carry the damn great heavy thing

I'm pretty useless at photography despite fooling myself otherwise for years and blowing a fortune constantly changing cameras (bad workman blames his tools and all that), but the one thing that helped me scrape some acceptable shots was learning more about composition. I found some really good tutorials on youtube about leading lines, what rules to use and when to break them that helped me lots (but then that was a pretty low starting point so may not be the same for you)...

From a DSLR user -
I don't edit, maybe crop - I just try to get the picture right. And if it doesn't turn out right then, try and remember why for next time...the ones that do turn out right become special then, kind of 'earned'.
All comments as above - there's loads of articles on the internet, try and learn about aperture, shutter speed, focal length, etc. It will help you get the picture you want - I take all my pictures in manual mode (well nearly all). Get good lenses, and find out about the qualities of different focal lengths. In most cases the lens is more important than the camera in the outcome of the picture.
But be careful though, if you get hooked on the kit, it can become very expensive!

To echo Simon, you can do all the post processing you want, a bad photo is still a bad photo.
You can also be "all the gear, no idea!" to be honest a good smart phone camera is sufficient now adays if your just starting out, no need to drop £1000 on a DSLR.

Get out there and decide what you like shooting, landscapes, people, buildings, wildlife. There are loads of forums out there that are geard to help and guide, Pbase I used to use alot, conseptart was good but its been many years since I looked.

Its something im trying to get back in to as the walking that comes with it is good for me!

NICE CARS!

There is something enjoyable about having a nice car, a nice background, nice lighting and then making all of that into a nice photograph.

Of course if you only really have a smartphone camera which isn't exactly good like samsite has said above, and not many nice cars to choose from, it's a bit difficult.

You know how most racing games these days have in game photo modes? Well Gran Turismo 6 has one which has got quite a few options such as shutter speed, filters, focal length, panning mode etc



Now if someone is able to take (what they think are) good pictures by using something like this and not editing them at all afterwards on a computer, would you say this actually counts for anything?

While it gives you an idea of the sudo settings used to compose a photo like DOF ect, no, I dont.

You know samsite, that's what I've always thought deep down. I'll take a 'photo' in that game, admire it for a minute or two and then think to myself, 'It's not exactly real is it?'

Of course that's one part of the problem, I mean are the 'photos' I'm taking actually even good?

Or am I 'fooling myself' like cyborg has said above? Although, at least his is tangible photography. What I'm doing doesn't seem to amount to much more than messing around in a video game!

<old fogey mode>

If it's not made with silver* salts, it's not a photograph.

</old fogey mode>

Which is of course bollocks. The reason I do large format photography is the control I have over the image, and the patience and skills I need to make it - and that I've had to learn over the years. How many of the tens of billions of phone images will ever be looked at after the first week, let alone archived for posterity?

But that's just my view. The camera is a tool to make the images *I* want; your mileage may vary.

* salts of platinum, palladium, and iron also acceptable. Or even gum arabic, though you can't legally get the chemistry for that any more, apparently.

its probably one of the cheapest easiest hobbies with such a low barrier to entry to go get in to, like cars, go find where a local track day is occurring, like landscapes, go for a walk, like people.... dont take photos in public of people regardless of legality, it wont end well.

If you want to do it, just do it! the only barrier to doing it, is your self. Talking is easy, doing is hard.














I like landscapes, I like sitting and looking at nice places. 2 of the above photos were done with a DSLR, the rest a camera phone

"like"

All excellent photos there samsite.

But which two are the DSLR photos? I really can't tell as they're all of a high, consistent quality. If I had to guess I'd say the 6th and last one, simply because they are in low light but they still look good and maybe smartphone cameras in general don't take low light photos that well?

Which smartphone do you use for photography?

the DSLR are the rocky outcrop pictures, 9 and 10.
Which ever phone I have, there is a mix between a nexus 5, sony z3, the wifes what ever she has. The point im making is it doesn't really matter, a expensive camera will improve the technical side of the photo, the light level you can shoot in, the angle, the zoom, the resolution. But it doesn't make the picture, its a tool for a job, you make the photo, not the camera

Yeah but surely there's a minimum standard that the camera quality has to be, right?

"That was a great dinner you cooked. You must have a very expensive oven."

A camera is a box with a lens on the front and some sort of light-sensitive stuff at the back. Big sensors - film or electric - give good resolution and low noise, small sensors need smaller lenses which means usually a lower F number.

The advantage with a camera vs a cellphone is firstly that the camera is designed to be held stable as the picture is taken - a mobile phone is about the worst thing possible to hold steady while poking around on the screen. The second advantage is that you can use an external lens to control the exposure time and the depth of field by adjusting the iris. And with a large format camera, there are *usually* movements available which change the relative positions of the lens and film, allowing you to change the focal plane and correct certain image distortions.

It's like anything else. If you are a good photographer, with a good knowledge of your tools and sufficient experience to visualise what you need to do to make the image you want, you'll get good images working with anything. But you'll get better images working with the things that allow you control.

"What's a camera, Daddy?"
"Well son, it's like a phone that can't make calls..."

This he way i learned it to , spend hours and hours in the dark room perfecting my pictures , 35mm , 645mm , en the big technical camera film ,also worked with the 16mm film camera, typing this down realizing that i am getting old

These where my first camera,s , i think it was in 1989

My most recent, built last year.

Just a point about dslr and phone...
Phones will (inevitably) have a wide angle lens to make it suitable for a wide range of pics, but this causes problems with depth of field distortions - for example, the fish-eye effect when taking portraits. Telephoto lens give a more natural image - portrait photographers will often use long focal length lens and take the photo from a distance, to flatten the face, and make sure there is nothing sticking out!
Also, there is not much glass on a phone and a tiny sensor, which means a lot less light, meaning low light shots use more electronic compensation = distortion.
There are other things....
Not 'dissing' the phone thing, of course you can take good compositions on a phone, but just pointing out more kit gives you more options, so more opportunities to get a good shot - you can compare a 'good' phone photo with a 'good' dslr photo, but you are likely to get more 'good' photos with the dslr.

Very nice , i have worked with Sinar and Kodak together Bronclolor studio flashers