Your vision of a shot...

SlickYamaha · 12-23-2010, 09:52 AM

So just out of curiosity, how often do you plan out your shots? As in do you go into a shot with exactly how you want your result in your head already, or do you snap off a few shots until you find a good one?

It seems some people I talk to already see the end result picture before they even pull the camera out of the bag, and others just shoot pictures until something good comes out... I find I'm somewhere in the middle, I don't know exactly what the end result should look like, but I have a general idea of angles, distance...etc...

This goes for photoshop as well, do you plan out your end result before you grab the mouse or do you just tweak until you have the prefect picture?

**blackcloudbrew** · 12-23-2010, 10:19 AM

I don' t think that there is any norm here. Sometimes I see the shot, then take it, sometimes after I take it I see it's potential. Ideally, you should always see the shot before you take it but this is actually hard to do every time. I think you need to ask other questions like:

What is / was your motivation for the image?

What do/did you see that makes/made you take the shot?

What are you trying to say with the image?

Personally, I consider it a sign that I'm getting to be a better artist when occasionally I see the shot before I take it. Typically those tend to be some of my best work, but not always.

SlickYamaha · 12-23-2010, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by blackcloudbrew

Personally, I consider it a sign that I'm getting to be a better artist when occasionally I see the shot before I take it. Typically those tend to be some of my best work, but not always.

Thats basically my question. Say you come across a nice...hmm... church... and you know there is a great photo opportunity. Do you find that you can see the end result of that picture... and THEN take it.. or you just snap off pictures until something good comes?

Maybe im not making myself clear...

I took this photo (with my old P&S)... i had NO idea that it would turn out in this way until i started toying with photoshop, little tweak here, little filter there... and this is what i got. But when i snapped the shutter, i had no intentions of every having a shot like it. My question is, do you see the picture in your head, and then photograph it/photoshop it... or do you take the picture, then edit it until something good comes out of it?

KxBlaze · 12-23-2010, 03:51 PM

Most of the time for me something will catch my eye, I pull out my camera shoot then from there ideas will pop into my head then I may set up a shot. Perfect example was when I was on a hike I saw a waterfall and without thinking about it took a few shots of it then I thought it might look better this way or with this lens.

As for PP, I never know exactly what I want the photo to look like. Sometimes I think over saturation looks good, other times a warm tone, some black and white and the list goes on.

I really think that photography is all about trial and error (at least it is for me). I trash most of my shot anyways but there are always a few diamonds.

SpecialK · 12-23-2010, 09:15 PM

Apart from planning where I'm going, such as a marina or observatory, the "what I'm shooting" is whatever catches my eye when I'm there. Not much is planned in that regard.

JHD · 12-23-2010, 10:16 PM

Back in the days of film, I once I got to a location where I wanted to take pictures I'd stop think about the best way to go about taking my shots. With digital I don't do that any more. It's really become a matter of point and shoot.

deltoidjohn · 12-23-2010, 10:52 PM

I think it really is part of the film vs digital divide. With film, you had to know what you were going to end up with, because you couldn't review it straight away and reshoot. You also couldn't shoot 1000 frames a day and pick out the best ones due to the costs of film and processing. People who grew up with film probably have a better understanding of how a shot might turn out, even with a digital camera, but they might also have a less trigger-happy style and therefore miss certain sudden oportunites. So it's a matter of individual style.

I shoot surfing and with film, there is no way I would want to waste an entire roll or several trying to do speed blurs and not even knowing If I was getting close. With digital, I can keep trying until I nail it.

Having said that, it doesn't mean many digital-age photographers don't know what they'll end up with beforehand. It's just that these days they get instant feedback to gratify their expectations.

Ira · 12-24-2010, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by deltoidjohn

People who grew up with film probably have a better understanding of how a shot might turn out

I'm the exception to the rule:

I didn't learn a thing.

deltoidjohn · 12-26-2010, 06:09 PM

Haha Ira, there is an exception to every rule.

"If at first you don't succeed, ditch film and go digital."

magkelly · 12-26-2010, 06:17 PM

I'm totally visual not technical. I fully see the shot as it should be, then with that composition in mind I work out all the technical details trying to get what my mind sees. I'm like a painter with light and shadow and color. All I see is the picture in my head. I may not get it perfect at first and it may take me several shots to get it technically speaking, but the whole picture is definitely there in my head from the get go.

I'm not guessing as to what I will get. It's just getting there from conception to actual picture in hand that's work from me. My sense of composition is fine, but my technical skills are a bit raw as yet. I still have to think a lot about technique. I don't shoot on automatic. Not yet anyhow.

opiet70 · 12-26-2010, 06:57 PM

I go into many of my shots with a vision of what I want, but since 75% of my shots are waterfowl action shots, it really gets into luck of the draw. I know exactly what I want and set myself up accordingly to capture that, but controlling what the birds do is a trick I have yet to master!

However, I think every planned session should have an outcome in mind. I know what I want to achieve, I scout the area and determine the best options for achieving that shot, then plan on luck and (I like to think) a bit of skill to pull out what I want. In doing this, I usually take a lot of shots during the session and then pick the best out of what I get. In a normal day of 3-4 hours of shooting, I feel lucky to have 4-5 keepers for the day.

Then there's the rest of the time. I love driving the mountains and hiking the trails and there's really no way to plan for a moose walking out in the road, a deer jumping a log, the perfect conditions at a small mountain lake perfectly reflecting the early season snow in the mountain peaks as the trees surrounding the lake glow in late fall glory... Yeah, those can never be planned but those, combined with the experience, are what really make the hobby worth doing.

**Kerrowdown** · 12-27-2010, 05:59 AM

In truth I think it's experience and a sound knowledge of your own equipment and it's capabilities that allow for the pre vision of images.

There's no right of wrong here, at the end of the day it's getting the knockout image and that's done by whatever means possible.

RioRico · 12-27-2010, 10:02 AM

Some have it, some don't, some can be trained to it, some can't. I was raised to photography and graphics, as were my sisters, who are both artists, one professional. But whereas I can look at a scene and see compositions large and small, I have about zero art-direction instinct. I just don't pre-visualize images nor scenarios.

It may be related to story-telling. I write (rude) songs but not fictional narratives. I just don't have that storytelling gene, unlike a sister-in-law who is a prominent F&SF novelist. Sister B imagines scenes, and draws-paints-sculpts them. Sister-in-law B envisages storylines, and writes them. I have tried those approaches and I get nowhere. I can pre-visualize the steps necessary to write computer software -- t'ain't the same thang. Bother...

Maybe if I'd gone to art academy, I'd have had image-making pounded into my head. I'll note that some famous photographers started as trained painters. And some prominent film directors were previously leading still photographers; Gordon Parks and Stanley Kubrick come immediately to mind. But the images I see are in front of me, not inside me. So be it.

**mattb123** · 12-27-2010, 11:02 AM

I have a fine art background, so like paintings and drawings I used to do, I like to plan a lot of my shots. But when I'm looking through the viewfinder I like to take several shots, varying the framing, exposure, and f stop just to make sure the scene I imagined (or something similar to it) is what I got.
But much of the time, the "plan" is really just a concept, so I will try to turn the concept into an image I like if conditions are right for that one. I have a lot of concepts that I would like to shoot if I find myself in the right place at the right time.
Finally, I also just like to have the camera handy so I can grab it and shoot if I see something interesting. So I guess I do some of each and have success and failure with planned and spontaneous shots.

deltoidjohn · 12-27-2010, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by opiet70

I go into many of my shots with a vision of what I want, but since 75% of my shots are waterfowl action shots, it really gets into luck of the draw. I know exactly what I want and set myself up accordingly to capture that, but controlling what the birds do is a trick I have yet to master!

However, I think every planned session should have an outcome in mind. I know what I want to achieve, I scout the area and determine the best options for achieving that shot, then plan on luck and (I like to think) a bit of skill to pull out what I want. In doing this, I usually take a lot of shots during the session and then pick the best out of what I get. In a normal day of 3-4 hours of shooting, I feel lucky to have 4-5 keepers for the day.

Then there's the rest of the time. I love driving the mountains and hiking the trails and there's really no way to plan for a moose walking out in the road, a deer jumping a log, the perfect conditions at a small mountain lake perfectly reflecting the early season snow in the mountain peaks as the trees surrounding the lake glow in late fall glory... Yeah, those can never be planned but those, combined with the experience, are what really make the hobby worth doing.

It does come down to what you are shooting. A landscape photographer or portrait photographer has the ability to manipulate his subject before he/she photographs it, in order to better realise their imagination. They also have the luxery of time and freedom of space/location. Sports or wildlife photographers on the other hand, have to go with the flow and spot moments and opportunites as they arise.

Having said that, it still pays to know what you want in advance. To take my own personal experiences, the thing that seperates the best surf photos from the others is not always the action itself. The best photographers might approach a session knowing that they want to shoot more pulled back action shots with - for example - a pier in the background, or perhaps they will shoot from a very low angle - lying on the ground, even - in order to get more foreground and depth into the composition. They still need to deal with the variables of the surfer and the waves, but they have a solid, pre-formed idea of how the overall shot will look if it it all comes together.

12-23-2010, 09:52 AM	#1
SlickYamaha Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Bel Air MD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 840	Your vision of a shot... So just out of curiosity, how often do you plan out your shots? As in do you go into a shot with exactly how you want your result in your head already, or do you snap off a few shots until you find a good one? It seems some people I talk to already see the end result picture before they even pull the camera out of the bag, and others just shoot pictures until something good comes out... I find I'm somewhere in the middle, I don't know exactly what the end result should look like, but I have a general idea of angles, distance...etc... This goes for photoshop as well, do you plan out your end result before you grab the mouse or do you just tweak until you have the prefect picture?

12-26-2010, 06:17 PM	#10
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	I'm totally visual not technical. I fully see the shot as it should be, then with that composition in mind I work out all the technical details trying to get what my mind sees. I'm like a painter with light and shadow and color. All I see is the picture in my head. I may not get it perfect at first and it may take me several shots to get it technically speaking, but the whole picture is definitely there in my head from the get go. I'm not guessing as to what I will get. It's just getting there from conception to actual picture in hand that's work from me. My sense of composition is fine, but my technical skills are a bit raw as yet. I still have to think a lot about technique. I don't shoot on automatic. Not yet anyhow. Last edited by magkelly; 12-27-2010 at 07:25 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Vision Beyond	v.i.guy	Monthly Photo Contests	0	11-25-2010 03:00 AM
A President of vision	gokenin	General Talk	37	06-22-2010 11:44 AM
Macro carpet vision	rparmar	Post Your Photos!	28	04-14-2010 06:38 PM
My Vision	Eastern Shore Charlie	Post Your Photos!	6	03-02-2008 02:28 PM

12-23-2010, 10:19 AM	#2
blackcloudbrew Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Cotati, California USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,461	I don' t think that there is any norm here. Sometimes I see the shot, then take it, sometimes after I take it I see it's potential. Ideally, you should always see the shot before you take it but this is actually hard to do every time. I think you need to ask other questions like: What is / was your motivation for the image? What do/did you see that makes/made you take the shot? What are you trying to say with the image? Personally, I consider it a sign that I'm getting to be a better artist when occasionally I see the shot before I take it. Typically those tend to be some of my best work, but not always.

12-23-2010, 03:08 PM	#3
SlickYamaha Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Bel Air MD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 840 Original Poster	Originally posted by blackcloudbrew Personally, I consider it a sign that I'm getting to be a better artist when occasionally I see the shot before I take it. Typically those tend to be some of my best work, but not always. Thats basically my question. Say you come across a nice...hmm... church... and you know there is a great photo opportunity. Do you find that you can see the end result of that picture... and THEN take it.. or you just snap off pictures until something good comes? Maybe im not making myself clear... I took this photo (with my old P&S)... i had NO idea that it would turn out in this way until i started toying with photoshop, little tweak here, little filter there... and this is what i got. But when i snapped the shutter, i had no intentions of every having a shot like it. My question is, do you see the picture in your head, and then photograph it/photoshop it... or do you take the picture, then edit it until something good comes out of it?

12-23-2010, 03:51 PM	#4
KxBlaze Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,602	Most of the time for me something will catch my eye, I pull out my camera shoot then from there ideas will pop into my head then I may set up a shot. Perfect example was when I was on a hike I saw a waterfall and without thinking about it took a few shots of it then I thought it might look better this way or with this lens. As for PP, I never know exactly what I want the photo to look like. Sometimes I think over saturation looks good, other times a warm tone, some black and white and the list goes on. I really think that photography is all about trial and error (at least it is for me). I trash most of my shot anyways but there are always a few diamonds.

12-23-2010, 09:15 PM	#5
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	Apart from planning where I'm going, such as a marina or observatory, the "what I'm shooting" is whatever catches my eye when I'm there. Not much is planned in that regard.

12-23-2010, 10:16 PM	#6
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	Back in the days of film, I once I got to a location where I wanted to take pictures I'd stop think about the best way to go about taking my shots. With digital I don't do that any more. It's really become a matter of point and shoot.

12-23-2010, 10:52 PM	#7
deltoidjohn Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Gold Coast, QLD Posts: 88	I think it really is part of the film vs digital divide. With film, you had to know what you were going to end up with, because you couldn't review it straight away and reshoot. You also couldn't shoot 1000 frames a day and pick out the best ones due to the costs of film and processing. People who grew up with film probably have a better understanding of how a shot might turn out, even with a digital camera, but they might also have a less trigger-happy style and therefore miss certain sudden oportunites. So it's a matter of individual style. I shoot surfing and with film, there is no way I would want to waste an entire roll or several trying to do speed blurs and not even knowing If I was getting close. With digital, I can keep trying until I nail it. Having said that, it doesn't mean many digital-age photographers don't know what they'll end up with beforehand. It's just that these days they get instant feedback to gratify their expectations.

12-24-2010, 10:11 AM	#8
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by deltoidjohn People who grew up with film probably have a better understanding of how a shot might turn out I'm the exception to the rule: I didn't learn a thing.

12-26-2010, 06:09 PM	#9
deltoidjohn Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Gold Coast, QLD Posts: 88	Haha Ira, there is an exception to every rule. "If at first you don't succeed, ditch film and go digital."

12-26-2010, 06:57 PM	#11
opiet70 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 499	I go into many of my shots with a vision of what I want, but since 75% of my shots are waterfowl action shots, it really gets into luck of the draw. I know exactly what I want and set myself up accordingly to capture that, but controlling what the birds do is a trick I have yet to master! However, I think every planned session should have an outcome in mind. I know what I want to achieve, I scout the area and determine the best options for achieving that shot, then plan on luck and (I like to think) a bit of skill to pull out what I want. In doing this, I usually take a lot of shots during the session and then pick the best out of what I get. In a normal day of 3-4 hours of shooting, I feel lucky to have 4-5 keepers for the day. Then there's the rest of the time. I love driving the mountains and hiking the trails and there's really no way to plan for a moose walking out in the road, a deer jumping a log, the perfect conditions at a small mountain lake perfectly reflecting the early season snow in the mountain peaks as the trees surrounding the lake glow in late fall glory... Yeah, those can never be planned but those, combined with the experience, are what really make the hobby worth doing.

12-27-2010, 05:59 AM	#12
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,863	In truth I think it's experience and a sound knowledge of your own equipment and it's capabilities that allow for the pre vision of images. There's no right of wrong here, at the end of the day it's getting the knockout image and that's done by whatever means possible.

12-27-2010, 10:02 AM	#13
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Some have it, some don't, some can be trained to it, some can't. I was raised to photography and graphics, as were my sisters, who are both artists, one professional. But whereas I can look at a scene and see compositions large and small, I have about zero art-direction instinct. I just don't pre-visualize images nor scenarios. It may be related to story-telling. I write (rude) songs but not fictional narratives. I just don't have that storytelling gene, unlike a sister-in-law who is a prominent F&SF novelist. Sister B imagines scenes, and draws-paints-sculpts them. Sister-in-law B envisages storylines, and writes them. I have tried those approaches and I get nowhere. I can pre-visualize the steps necessary to write computer software -- t'ain't the same thang. Bother... Maybe if I'd gone to art academy, I'd have had image-making pounded into my head. I'll note that some famous photographers started as trained painters. And some prominent film directors were previously leading still photographers; Gordon Parks and Stanley Kubrick come immediately to mind. But the images I see are in front of me, not inside me. So be it.

12-27-2010, 11:02 AM	#14
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,873	I have a fine art background, so like paintings and drawings I used to do, I like to plan a lot of my shots. But when I'm looking through the viewfinder I like to take several shots, varying the framing, exposure, and f stop just to make sure the scene I imagined (or something similar to it) is what I got. But much of the time, the "plan" is really just a concept, so I will try to turn the concept into an image I like if conditions are right for that one. I have a lot of concepts that I would like to shoot if I find myself in the right place at the right time. Finally, I also just like to have the camera handy so I can grab it and shoot if I see something interesting. So I guess I do some of each and have success and failure with planned and spontaneous shots.

12-27-2010, 07:41 PM	#15
deltoidjohn Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Gold Coast, QLD Posts: 88	Originally posted by opiet70 I go into many of my shots with a vision of what I want, but since 75% of my shots are waterfowl action shots, it really gets into luck of the draw. I know exactly what I want and set myself up accordingly to capture that, but controlling what the birds do is a trick I have yet to master! However, I think every planned session should have an outcome in mind. I know what I want to achieve, I scout the area and determine the best options for achieving that shot, then plan on luck and (I like to think) a bit of skill to pull out what I want. In doing this, I usually take a lot of shots during the session and then pick the best out of what I get. In a normal day of 3-4 hours of shooting, I feel lucky to have 4-5 keepers for the day. Then there's the rest of the time. I love driving the mountains and hiking the trails and there's really no way to plan for a moose walking out in the road, a deer jumping a log, the perfect conditions at a small mountain lake perfectly reflecting the early season snow in the mountain peaks as the trees surrounding the lake glow in late fall glory... Yeah, those can never be planned but those, combined with the experience, are what really make the hobby worth doing. It does come down to what you are shooting. A landscape photographer or portrait photographer has the ability to manipulate his subject before he/she photographs it, in order to better realise their imagination. They also have the luxery of time and freedom of space/location. Sports or wildlife photographers on the other hand, have to go with the flow and spot moments and opportunites as they arise. Having said that, it still pays to know what you want in advance. To take my own personal experiences, the thing that seperates the best surf photos from the others is not always the action itself. The best photographers might approach a session knowing that they want to shoot more pulled back action shots with - for example - a pier in the background, or perhaps they will shoot from a very low angle - lying on the ground, even - in order to get more foreground and depth into the composition. They still need to deal with the variables of the surfer and the waves, but they have a solid, pre-formed idea of how the overall shot will look if it it all comes together.