"Are photographers born with an "eye" or is it a learned skill"
It, the question, always make me wonder. I used to, emphatically or maybe somewhat
arrogantly, believe that one was indeed born with an "eye" or one simply was
not.
Eve Arnold said something like "You can't make a great musician or a photographer if the magic isn't there".
My eldest brother Andrew was the one who exposed me to photography, driving me, in my pre-teen years, around the West Coast of Scotland and handing me the proverbial "brownie" camera. Thing was he didn't just hand me the camera, he patiently explained composition, foreground, background, focal points and the importance of "seeing" the image before pressing the button. I do recall him telling me on more than one occasion that the image I was looking for wasn't there, it was across the fence and down the hill.
Once I could be trusted with a "real" camera he would lend me one of his "Nikkormat" cameras with one lens. This is where the real lessons began. When he left, for two or three months at a time, he would say things like "This is a telephoto or a wide-angle lens, now go figure out what it is good for, not good for and how to make the best of it when it is all that you have".
What a lesson that was and one that I still practice, and teach, today. While it may be considered sheer folly to attempt a professional assignment with only one lens it is tremendously important that one knows before the camera is held to the eye what the desired image is and which lens, from which perspective will produce it.
Loch Nevis, One of Andrew's images.
- I've written elsewhere on this blog about how a dozen contact sheets tell far more about a photographer
- than a dozen good pictures.
I review all of the weddings my son Tom shoots for us as well as seeing a lot of his other work.
It's always interesting and informative, to see how he shot, sometimes the "keeper" image was the result of several as he maneuvered or changed camera, other times it was a "one-off", i.e. it was the only one he shot of a particular scene. I have to say that how he reacts to and anticipates light, movement and scenes always makes me wonder how did he know to shoot in that way or where did he learn to see like that?
This was a one off moment; seconds before he was shooting inside, in manual mode, he switched to one of the auto modes, dialed-in some compensation and fired off this one frame then continued shooting inside in manual mode in the short space of a few seconds, see below.
This frame above fall squarely into the category of "I-truly-wish-I-had-shot-this". I love it, there is so much going on in this image, I love the lines, the composition and the timing.
Perhaps he was influenced by images like this.
I know that every time he goes out shooting I'm going to have more than a few images that make me smile a little, perhaps even letting a little "That's ma bhoy!" escape my lips as I see how he saw and captured some moments that many just do not see.
Well the answer in Tom's case anyway, if there is an answer at all, is that he has been exposed (if you'll pardon the pun) to photography all his life. He's helped me by cutting my negatives for pocket money, then assisting me at weddings. He's watched as I edit, listened as I've critiques images, mine and others but most importantly he's gone out to find images on his own influenced not only by me but by many other sources.
Paris Metro
The following frames are from one of his portfolios:
The answer in many cases is that just as one can always lead a horse to water you can always put a camera in someone's hands, and with the current offerings; auto-this, auto-that, smile-recognition functions even it doesn't mean that they have an "eye" no matter how much practice they have.
When one does have an "eye" though it is magic and a joy to behold :)
For information about having Tom photograph your wedding please feel free to contact us.
