10 Easy Steps To Advanced Photography Skills
By Trey Ratcliff (aka Stuck in Customs), one of the most famous and renowned HDR photographers on Flickr. In his article Trey describes some professional insights and useful photography tips that he collected over the years of his career.
A camera does not work like an eye; film does not work like memory. There is a fine line between a photo that is quite nice and one that is quite breathtaking. At some unknown point, a photo can cross the Rubicon and be forever a piece of beautiful art. That hinterland between a regular photo and evocative art is a shifting area from person to person and taste to taste. However, that zone can be narrowed a bit once you start to consider the way the brain stores memories and emotions.
And yes, it gets a bit touchy-feely here trying to determine if your work has crossed that line. With rigorous practice and peer feedback, you can start to appreciate where that zone is and, consequently, improve your hit ratio.
The back of the Taj Mahal during a summer sunset.
The good news is that divining your way to more beautiful photos does not require rune rites of scapulimancy. There are some basic things and mantras to keep in mind as you practice and fail, then practice and succeed, then practice and fail, then practice and succeed, and rinse and repeat. We’ll detail a few of these below.
1. Think About The Brain
I’ve always thought about photography differently. I grew up seeing out of only one eye, thanks to several botched surgeries in the 1970s using refurbished archaeological tools of the Australopithecus medicine men.
When you see out of one eye your whole life and then start using a camera in your mid-30s, something happens to you! You come to realize that a camera works nothing like the eye. Forget 3D; I’m talking about the way the brain stores images and scenes.
Upon birth, you have legs, but it takes a few years for your legs to get along with your brain well enough to actually walk you around the savanna a bit. The eyes are the same. They get wired faster than the legs, but the neural pathways from the optic nerve to the parts of the brain that matter take a while to find their chemical trails. You start to sense light levels, then shapes, then edges, then relative positions and the like. And then, around the age 2 or 3, you finally come up with a tagging system that allows you to know generally what a “barn” looks like. Your brain has been working nonstop over that time to give you the visual and memory infrastructure to enable this watershed event.
Fourth of July on Lake Austin: the first HDR photograph to hang in the Smithsonian.
Now, let’s fast forward to today. You’re older, your brain is more or less fully formed, and you happen upon a barn in a field. But it’s not just any barn: it’s the barn you’ve been wanting to see your entire life. And in the distance, a storm is brewing as a gentle sun sets. It’s beautiful; you lock it into memory. The way you lock it into memory is nothing like the way a camera records the image on film (or a CCD). This is what I quickly came to realize as I sat there, looking at a photo I took with a fabulously expensive Nikon and showing it to a friend. “Well, you really had to be there.” I’m sure you’ve all said that!
Now, this first step is a big step: it’s a philosophical re-assessment of how the camera works in contrast to how the memory maps a scene, the latter being a process of layering visual reality with the emotions and memories linked to that scene. You see, you are not just remembering that barn but are remembering every barn; you are not just remembering that storm but are remembering every storm. A beautiful photo must tell the epic tale of the memory, linked with the other emotions that fold into a whole.
2. Engage In The New Global Salon
In the 1860s, all art roads led to the Salon in Paris, which was the most important judged competition of art in the western world. During a period of just over 10 years, the Impressionist masters battled it out in a competitive and cooperative tour de force that created a panoply of creations that we now cannot imagine the world without.
The reason Paris became the center of the art world and an explosion of new art is the combination of new technology in travel and communications combined with Napoleon III’s focus on infrastructure around the Salon.
Hong Kong from a peak on a summer night as the city comes alive.
Today the same thing is happening, although perhaps not everyone really realizes it in a grand historical sense. It’s called Flickr. Flickr has become a techno-Salon, allowing the world to easily use the Internet to enter the competition and force each other to evolve and improve their art. The automated “Explore Algorithm” does a pretty good job of automatically filtering the best photos that are uploaded every day. Go ahead and look at some of the current best of the last 7 days.
Click “Reload” a few times and I promise you will have seen something that impresses. It is quite unbelievable the level of art and beauty that is created every single day. Now, all of this amazing art on Flickr can either inspire or intimidate you, depending on your mindset for competition. I hope it inspires you to upload one photo a day and see if you can make it in the top 500 or even the top 10. And don’t give up. Competition makes everyone better; this is an undeniable truth, and you are not realizing your full potential if you remove yourself from the process.
I can think of a number of things Flickr can do to improve this new global competition. Its AI algorithm to find the most interesting new artists still makes many mistakes. Maybe I will save that for another article! But in many ways, Flickr is close to squandering an amazing opportunity to set the art world on fire.
3. Get Rid Of Your Toy Camera
Oh, look at that camera you have! It’s so tiny and slim and techno-looking. Look! It fits right in your pocket! Oh my, you can take it to parties and sporting events, and it’s so convenient. Oh, it is 10 megapixels, too? Oh my. Well, that is a good camera then!
No, it’s not. It’s a toy: give it to your kids or the nearest gradeschooler (for whom it was designed) and get serious. I know that 19-year-old punk at Best Buy told you that your compact camera is really neat and just what you need. But are you gonna listen to him or me?
Get yourself a DSLR (I have suggestions on my page that aren’t very expensive for people just starting out). For those of you who don’t know, a DSLR is one of those cameras you see the pros carrying, but it doesn’t have to be a giant one like what you see in the NFL endzone.
Sorry to be rude about the toy thing, but you want to take more beautiful pictures, no? Well, a decent DSLR has such a good sensor chip, combined with more flexible lenses, that your batting average will dramatically improve.
An ancient Hindu temple at sunset in the jungles of Indonesia.
Also (people with DSLRs already know this), it is important to have a good wide-angle lens for landscapes. Beautiful photography does not have to be of a landscape, but it commonly is, and this is what many people envision when they want to make their own beautiful photos. So, we should talk about wide-angle lenses here for a moment.
If you are used to using a toy camera, then you have never really seen the world through a good 10 to 24mm lens. It’s almost the difference between regular TV and HDTV. The vistas are wide and bold; the clouds, sun and mountains all fit; the river and bridge are easy to compose; and so on. Once you go wide-angle, your landscape will never be the same!
4. Carry A Tripod For Those Beautiful Sunsets And Sunrises
Oh, what’s that? You don’t want to carry a tripod? What are you, a 9-year-old? Now, come on. You’re a grown-up, and you want to take some seriously beautiful photos. Do you think pros carry around tripods because they like the extra weight? No, of course not. They know what the heck they’re doing.
If you bit off on getting a DSLR, then you are going to need a tripod, especially for sunset and night shots. Unless you have the steady hand of a T-1000, you are going to get some camera shake.
A tripod allows you to do the following things with landscape photography (in no particular order): set up and take your time to compose a photo with serious intent; keep noise low as the shutter stays open longer; look cool as you carry it around; keep the shutter open for 5 or more seconds for those fleeting sunrise and sunset shots; use it as a weapon in a tight spot while traveling (not kidding).
Dresden, Germany
So, are you still worried about carrying it around? The problem, you understand, is mostly your attitude. Let me provide a different perspective. Nothing in life is worth doing unless you’re serious about it. Believe that you are going to shoot that sunset, and you are going to take your nice DSLR and tripod out there and make it happen, and no one is going to stop you. You’re carrying that tripod around because you’re serious about it. Otherwise, you could just go sit on a pretty beach at sunset and drink beer with your friends and not be serious about it. Go ahead… but you won’t be getting any beautiful photography out of it.
5. Admire Impressionism
I spoke earlier about the Salon of Paris and what happened during the Impressionist movement. While the process and examples of what happens when artists start cooperating and competing is interesting from a social-group evolutionary perspective, this section is more about the art itself.
Early critics of the art form found it crude, sloppy and unconventional, to the point that they felt it didn’t even deserve to be placed alongside the classic masters. But the public was awestruck by the new art form. It doesn’t take a critic to know good art, but it does take a careful and discerning eye.
Consider the colors and styles of Degas, Cézanne, Monet and Renoir. There is not a single detail about any well-known Impressionist painting that is the slightest bit “realistic.” But yet, the rough shapes and colors still make sense. Something about it just feels right. What is that something?
An icy lake at sunrise, fed from the seasonal melt at Glacier National Park; a panorama of 90 shots.
To me, what feels right about Impressionism is what we discussed above. These Impressionist images go deep into viewers’ brains and evoke memories of shared scenes and events. The memory is in fact an Impressionist playground of fleeting colors, shapes and edges. A face here, a blur there, a hint of something almost there, but not quite.
Look at Monet’s work. Think about how the yellows of a sun in the distance is the same yellow as an up-close flower. But something about the colors makes the sun feel brighter than the flower. How does he do that? Can you get closer to achieving this with your photography?
As you look at Impressionist paintings, juxtapose them with your own photography. If you want to evoke the same sort of feelings, then consider how it was done without resorting to realism.
6. Practice With HDR
What is HDR? It’s short for High Dynamic Range photography, and it’s all the rage. I have a tutorial on HDR on my blog. But here, I’ll explain HDR in a circuitous but meaningful way.
About 80% of my photos are in HDR, but I do something a little different. As you start looking into HDR (many of you already have), you will begin to notice how absolutely horrible most HDR looks. When many people begin experimenting with it (myself included), it is overdone and looks too psychedelic. Over time, mine have improved via rigorous self-examination and an evolving methodology.
Remember that bit about me growing up and seeing the world with one eye? Now, we come to the second part of this daring mini-biography as we are cross the stepping stones to my point. My background in college was Computer Science and Math, so I’ve always thought about things in terms of algorithms and software. The very first time I used a DSLR camera, when I was 35 or so, I very quickly came to the realization that something was missing.
A young Amish boy allows me to freeze time after I help him carry wood with his sisters.
That missing something was the “software” layer between the eye and the memory. Consider what you do with the barn and apply it to how the camera works. You survey the scene. Your eye jumps around from interesting object to interesting object, sometimes moving slowly, sometimes quickly. Your eye lets in more light in some areas, less in others as your pupil dilates. You squint into the setting sun and see warm colors splashed across the clouds, grass and barn. You remember other barns, other storms, other sunsets. You may have been with someone or were alone, but you certainly remember. You lock it all up in your mind’s eye forever.
Because we are visual creatures, a photo or painting can evoke great memories. But the only way to trigger some of those intense memories on a deep level is to adjust the light levels in the photograph, so that the light levels and color match those buried in your head. The HDR process can help achieve these goals.
7. Take Your Camera Everywhere
Don’t just take your camera out on those rare occasions when you actually decide to set aside a portion of your day for photography. Face it: we’re all busy people with real lives, and setting aside three to four hours for anything extracurricular is tough. But it takes only a few seconds to get inspired for a photo, and it’s no good if your camera is back home.
Gulfoss in Iceland. Catholic theologians of old believed this was the entrance to hell.
Keep it in the trunk of your car in a fun little photo backpack, with a small selection of lenses. You never know when you will see something wonderful. Use this opportunity to take at least one photo a day. It doesn’t have to be a grand landscape; just something small and nice that you may not have noticed before.
8. Understand The Fantasy/Reality Membrane
Do you have kids? Are you a kid at heart? Think about when you were a kid and what happened when you turned into a jaded old grown-up. Maybe by the end of this section you can ask yourself some new questions about reality.
Kids have this remarkable “membrane” between fantasy and reality. They can jump back and forth between the two in an effortless way. In fact, the membrane itself is wonderfully “thick,” in that there is a vast dream-state wilderness where the world is both fantasy and reality. When pressed, kids will tell you what is real and what is pretend, but that is often a painful process that pries them from the escapism they felt so viscerally just a few moments before.
My personal foray over the last year into learning how to draw.
When we are all grown up and serious, that membrane is razor thin, and there is little tolerance of “pretend” and “fantasy.” Why is this? Is it because we are surrounded by other serious people and want to conform? Is it because fantastic escapades are what “kids” do and thus not pertinent to our lives?
Obviously, we can all still get into that fantasy zone, and we all love it. That’s why movies are still such a potent force; they give us social permission to be like kids for two hours, once a week. It also explains the growing relevance of online games.
But when we start talking about photography — well now, that is a different subject! Photography is a serious art form, practiced by classically trained masters whose reality is quite serious indeed! There mustn’t be anything fantastical in the art form. The process goes from camera straight to the film, you see!
Poppycock.
9. Learn To Draw
This is a weird one, eh? Who on Earth has time to learn to draw? Well, you would have time if you stopped wasting it on less important activities. You’ve got one life here, so you might as well start applying yourself. “I don’t have any time! I have kids to look after, a full-time job, a bunch of cool games to play, books to read, exercising to do, a bit of photography, and blah blah blah.”
As a personal experiment, I wanted to see if anyone could learn to draw. This is similar to an earlier experiment I did on myself to see if I could take something I hated and turn it into something I enjoyed. That experiment was with coffee, but I was afraid that learning to draw would be harder, particularly because of the jitteryness introduced from the first experiment.
A tame wild-haired horse on the windy fjords of Iceland.
I’ve always admired people who can just grab a pencil and paper and make something amazing. Man, I’ve always wanted to be able to do that! I began the experiment with the hypothesis that great natural artists can draw anything without any instruction whatsoever. These are true masters, and I was unlikely unlikely to reach that level. However, I thought I could become adequate at drawing and be at least satisfied with myself. A great side-effect, I envisioned, would be new insight into photography: into line, shape, light and composition.
All of this turned out to be true. So, if you have hit a rough spot or are in the doldrums with photography, take up drawing. A few instructional books out there are practical hands-on guides that give you basic pointers. I think you will be quite impressed by how it starts to bleed into your photographic art!
10. Make Mistakes
Make a lot of mistakes. Throw yourself and your art out there and see what works and what doesn’t. Show your stuff to true friends who will give you frank feedback.
Don’t be like those sorry saps on American Idol who make fools of themselves in big auditions because they’ve spent their whole life listening to their tone-deaf mom tell them they are incredible at singing “Over the Rainbow” or because Aunt Mabel enjoyed it so much during the grade 2 play.
Get yourself online and begin making friends by finding other photographers who you respect. Beg and plead for them to come look at one or two of your photos and give frank feedback. They will cut you apart, but just take your medicine, lick your wounds, and go out there and improve.
Fin
And there we have it: 10 things to shake up your world a little bit. I’m no Baudelaire when it comes to writing these sorts of polemics. However, just as he drove Manet to be Manet, perhaps I can do my own little part to stoke the fires and help drive a new art revolution. Evolve and evoke, or whither into nothingness.
Extra Credit
To end off, here is a random selection of some of my other favorites.
The Lonely Trinity
An elderly woman, who has never cut her hair, ascends the stairs to her daily Hindu pilgrimage
Dante’s Gates of Hell, a sculpture by Rodin, captured in proper lighting
(al)
Steve
February 18th, 2009 5:07 amMaybe it’s because HDR is so new, but I tend to be distracted by the technique rather than the content of the photograph.
I’d also point out that in this 1984 world, it’s probably good to have a small pocket camera for those spontaneous moments that can often dissipate once a giant threatening camera is introduced to the scene.
littletommytrucker
February 18th, 2009 5:09 amWow Trey! Looks like you stirred up all the traditionalists. I’ve been following your work on Flickr for some time now (awesome). I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder (I use a point and shoot myself) and I admire you for making HDR part of what it is today. No, HDR is not appropriate for all occasions but the creative and aesthetic quality are undeniable when viewed as an art. When correctly done it is simply more pleasing to the eyes. Keep up the good work!
gazza
February 18th, 2009 5:49 amI hate tonemapped photos :(
Julius Koroll
February 18th, 2009 5:51 amThat’s the best article I’ve ever read about photography in the whole wide internet! Keep up the good work!
avianto
February 18th, 2009 6:04 amThe ancient Hindu is NOT in the jungles. Not even close to the jungles… There are barely even a jungle left in the island of Java, Indonesia…
DMartin
February 18th, 2009 6:17 amArt. Define art people? HDR photography is art.
Some of you are quick to be critical of this photogrpahers work. Remember he has multiple prints that have been dispalyed at the Smithsonian. How many of you haters have prints hanging there???
Alex
February 18th, 2009 6:20 amReally good points in this article (specially the Monet part and how we should see beyond and use our brains).
However, HDR has been overused and overdone.
Most anyone can HDR a shot to make it (according to them) pretty, but if the composition is missing, then HDR is not going to fix that.
Parallax
February 18th, 2009 6:23 amThe points made in the article are great, the example photos referenced are not.
Steve
February 18th, 2009 6:30 amGood work, Trey. I’m amused at all the jaded HDR haters. It’s true that the technique has been beaten to death by plenty of low-talent hacks (myself included), but that doesn’t mean that all is bad. Trey, your images are fantastic and inspiring, as are your helpful posts. Thanks for taking the time!
Mel
February 18th, 2009 6:31 amI think people like to criticize what they don’t likem, sometimes just because they don’t understand. Some people like HDR and some people don’t. It’s a fact! Wherever… if you don’t like HDR why the heck you wast your time doing comments about it?
Anyway, very nice article. I am more into web designs but I do enjoy those articles about photography also.
Trey, great article. Thanks for sharing with us.
SM keep this articles about photography coming, please!
dram
February 18th, 2009 6:38 amBad. Please don’t do this again.
Max-Design
February 18th, 2009 6:42 amBrilliant Article, love following your work on Flickr… Im still very new to HDR and personally still way overdo it, but im sure i will tone down once the novelty has worn off a little. With regards to the whole HDR scene being to some peoples dislike, i can fully understand this, but every single person i have shown my newbie prints to, really love them! So why stop? Luckily in life we have choices, so either choose to turn away, or, play with hdr, master it, then add it to your repertoire of photography skills… The more you can learn the better right? Plus if you ignore the range within the photographs, imagine them as they where shot, they are still really nice photos, composed well, and very pleasing content to ones eye…
Enk.
February 18th, 2009 6:44 amWow, Great Post ! I love HD..
Good Day Smash!
Minerva
February 18th, 2009 6:44 amOk… all of your hardcore fans are saying that the ones against your work are tradionalist, jealous and we can’t appreciate art and your point of view as an artist.
I’ve seen HDR photos that are fantastic (not in this article), because the treatment is subtle and enhances the photo instead of distorting it.
I think the main issue here, is the tittle of the article, and I think it should be illustrated with natural-looking photos instead of HDR, and at the point in where is sugested that we should try HDR, THEN use GOOD HDR examples, not this crap. I don’t know all of your work, but I do tell (and some others here think the same), this is a poor selection and it doesn’t make me feel curious about the rest of what you do.
So, it’s your artistic view of something. Perfect, I agree is your vision and then is not wrong. Therefore, don’t come and write an article, telling us what are advanced photographic skills when you are showing us that you can’t take a photo with photographic principles, and always have to use a photoshop technique.
Though, it is your right to do what you want with your photos, but it is ours not like it… and it looks like your hardcore fans can’t take that, so who’s really intolerant here?
Trey Ratcliff
February 18th, 2009 6:50 amhaha! And a vigorous discussion ensues!
Good feedback above… I appreciate all kinds.
Well, I suppose people that read the article know that only one or two of the 10 points dealt with HDR photography (even though 80% of the photos I featured in the article are HDR). I proffer that my points are applicable to all types of photography.
The fine crew here at Smashing had changed the name of the article a little bit. That’s okay and it’s their prerogative. My focus was more “My Principles of Beautiful Photography”, since I know I have a different take on things, and, on occasion, the world is ready for some different thinking on these sorts of matters.
I am totally sure, and reminded by the responses of this article, that people do see the world differently. Haven’t you ever wondered what “Orange” looks like to other people around you? So it’s not just orange, it’s every color, light level, contrast and shape. I think that everyone does not see the world in a vibrant way — others perhaps see it more in shadows and contrast. You can see many other photographers’ work deal with contrast and shapes in muted tones. Perhaps this is how their brain stores images differently than mine (or others that see like me).
There are plenty of photographers out there that take black and white pictures of some emo kid sitting in a corner with a shadow thrown across his morose expression. That’s all fine and well… if I can be so bold as to quote my favorite artist, Auguste Renoir: “Why shouldn’t art be pretty?”, he said, “There are enough unpleasant things in the world.”
Jeff
February 18th, 2009 6:54 amI love all of you haters out there. I seriously doubt any of you have a portfolio half as strong as Trey. If you have examples of better work, then post some links! I’d love and I am sure trey would love to see them so we can learn.
tx8
February 18th, 2009 7:01 amThanks for the tips !
Al
February 18th, 2009 7:20 amWhen I read title First thing pop to my mind is “This is probably good article how take great photos with digital camera”.
…But….
Article has nothing to do with it.
70% is about author talking about him self and promoting his HRD photos.
Another 30% philosofical aspect and image editing with photoshop and other softwares.
List of cameras author provided on his web site is lame.
What about other cameras like Canon, Pentax, Olympus?
Very dissapointed.
SM can do better.
Schwab
February 18th, 2009 7:22 amIt is called art. Who ever really liked an art critic. I personally don’t ever want to read another critisism of someones art. Whether it is an HDR photograph or a painting of a velvet Elvis. If you don’t like it STFU and move on. Why waste your time and ours with your useless drivel. Like I am doing now. I just wasted two minutes of my life defending Trey because I admire his work. I don’t like all of it but no one like ALL of someones work. But don’t criticize just to do it. Move on to something you do enjoy. Either way learn from it.
Fenraven
February 18th, 2009 7:26 amA friend of mine insists that processing photos in Photoshop is “cheating” somehow. I remind him that film used to be processed in a darkroom; digital photography requires Photoshop. Ever compare a one-shot picture straight out of the camera to one that was properly processed in Photoshop? Immense difference! I use HDR whenever possible, because I find that photos without it are often flat and boring. I need the extra “light” if you will, the illumination that HDR brings to the picture. I want to see what my eye saw. I love saturated colors (if they existed when I took the picture). I also use Pixel Lift to define the textures, because yes, they too go missing in a digital photo (Trey uses Lucis Art, which is too expensive for me). But most importantly, I always try to start with a superb photo; all the post-processing in the world won’t save a bad one. And I do always have my camera with me, everywhere. It’s not a DSLR, either, but a Canon prosumer point and shoot. http://www.pbase.com/zarabeth
Martin
February 18th, 2009 7:34 amThis reminds me of that one time SM posted all of those guest articles for a contest. And they were all rubbish. And so is this.
Possumposs
February 18th, 2009 7:39 amRegardless of what everyone says. HDR is beautiful! It really looks like another world.. a world in which we would love to see things. Author, you realy know how to bring out color..and color is beautiful! Dont let these other peeps bring you down :) I have a DSLR and LOVE my camera – I would NEVER go back to point and shoot. Yes you can take good pictures with a point and shoot but the artistic flexibility with a DSLR can NOT compare. Great article and keep up the great HDR photography – there are still us few who appreciate the different styles of art…especially when its beautiful — thanks!
james
February 18th, 2009 7:41 amThere are photographers who utilize HDR sparingly to supplement reality. OK, cool. There are photographers who utilize HDR to deliberately blur the lines between reality and fantasy. OK, cool, too. But don’t confuse the two approaches and then criticize the photographer for not conforming to your preference.
McFortner
February 18th, 2009 7:41 amDear heavens above, could you be any more stuck up? Trey, you really need to get over yourself. Your HDR look like garbage. They strain the eyes and border on visual vomit. Put down the mouse and stop Photoshopping everything. It’s not the camera, but the eyes that use it that makes art.
Chris
February 18th, 2009 7:52 amI am not that thrilled with HDR. I prefer “natural” color, or even better sometimes B&W photos. And as far as a camera, both a DSLR and a ‘Toy’ camera can be equally useful, for me though the ‘Toy’ has to have a good optical zoom.
Justin
February 18th, 2009 7:52 amHDR is played out! Move on!
Jason
February 18th, 2009 7:59 amThe comic book/video game comparison makes a lot of sense.
Pixelbaron
February 18th, 2009 8:06 amThe article is not as bad as many post here. HDR has its place, just like any other photography style has.
I think though the the heading was not wisely choosen ;)
The “must have DSLR” part is bollocks IMHO. It is not the camera that makes the pictures it is the photographer.
Minerva
February 18th, 2009 8:23 amlol… well I think that if SM haven’t change the title, then everything would be ok, haha… let’s torch them! (kidding)
Matt
February 18th, 2009 8:45 amWorst advice ever. DSLRs are for sports photographers and people who think theyre creative. Get over yourself sir.
To all others: Get a nice Rangefinder or MF camera. Your pictures will look amazing without all the post processing.
Shaithis
February 18th, 2009 8:56 amVery good points. This really give’s me a new way to think. Thanks for sharing.
diegotoast
February 18th, 2009 9:04 amWhat i don’t understand is why you waste this otherwise nice shots with loads of hdr crap.
please, talk about design/coding and let photography for other blogs.
Phil
February 18th, 2009 9:21 amWhat a bunch of terrible tips.
Pete
February 18th, 2009 9:22 am@Matt
I can’t tell if you’re being serious or not there. If you want to take an image that’s identical to the one you see through your viewfinder; you need an SLR.
Chris Robinson
February 18th, 2009 9:27 amI’ve got to start shooting again, I agree with everyone that you don’t need a DSLR like the article states (although I have one).
There are many different types of cameras out there that can produce interesting and professional results whether it be a toy or specialty camera, a medium format, large format, a Polaroid, etc…its really all about choosing the right camera for the job, knowing how it works and getting the most out of it.
A camera doesn’t make the photographer, the photographer makes the camera.
onucy
February 18th, 2009 9:36 amHmmm? There is no any practical advice in this article! Its a shame.
Ryan
February 18th, 2009 9:41 amI’m sorry, but this photography is terrible and the advice is lame. I would love to see this article completely rewritten!
Jennifer H
February 18th, 2009 9:49 am1.) An expensive, DSLR camera does not a photographer make.
Personally, I’ve taken more inspired, beautiful photos with my plastic Diana+ camera.
2.) Just like all other art forms, there is no “one answer” for photography or becoming a better photographer.
While I appreciate the effort, this guy shares his personal experiences like they are the Rosetta Stone for becoming the world’s best photographer! While some of the “advice” is valid (like having your camera always available), its nowhere close to revolutionary insight. As previously alluded-to in many other comments, a dash of humility would be well served.
3.) Anybody looking to learn to draw, especially if you are out of your teens, should look into the classic book “Drawing from the Right Side of the Brain” by Betty Edwards.
This is a great way to retrain your brain to see in the way necessary for drawing (lighting, spatial relation, perspective, etc.), at the same time learning the physical skill.
Deirdre
February 18th, 2009 9:50 amI think HDR has its place, and many of these examples of HDR are quite beautiful, IMO.
However — please don’t confuse HDR with advanced photography. It is advanced photoshopping. An “advanced” photograph shouldn’t need any HDR, although perhaps one can create a piece of HDR artwork out of an “advanced” photo.
Also — be careful of looking at Flickr Explore photos as the best photos. It can pick out some great photos, as well as some doozies, and some amazing photos never get into Explore. It can definitely be used as a source of inspiration, but it’s not foolproof.
Jennifer
February 18th, 2009 10:08 amBrilliant read, had me laughing a lot! Excellent advice, too!
heather van de mark
February 18th, 2009 10:12 ama truly inspiring post.
your selection of photos were exemplary. the one of rodin’s gates of hell is poetic.
and to know you picked up a camera in your mid-30s, shows that anyone can do anything if they want to be serious about it.
chris Kelly
February 18th, 2009 10:30 amWith regard to “getting a DSLR” and throwing away the toys: This is obviously a required step because of the flexibility and quality that it brings, however, it does kind of sound like your saying it is not possible to take amazing photos with any camera. So many people thing that a DSLR buys you a way to take good photos. It doesn’t. It is a tool like anything else. Take a look at pro photographer Chris Orwig his words are a very good read after this very good post…
Ed
February 18th, 2009 10:43 amThis is the worst article i’ve seen on this website so far.
“HDR” as more and more people are calling this awful method of combining pictures are just bo***cs. Does anyone even understand what it is??
It certainly is not something that is listed above. Awful pictures.
It reminds me of all the overload amazing “space spraycan paintings” you
can find everywhere amongst street artist…
Btw. a true HDR image means it contains pixel information in a wide range.
meaning you can take an overblown image and turn the exposure way down and
still keep pixel info without any clamping happening. this goes both ways on the scale.
Its NOT a layered/cut paste, erase what i dont need of lots of different photos taken at different exposure levels.
Using HDR files mostly every day in my job as a CG artist and calling a picture like the examples above “hdr” has nothing to do whit what a hdr file is..
how natural does it look?? it doesnt..
I’ve enjoyed most articles on photos so far but this is utter c**p… sorry..
For the rest of the overall ranting this guy is putting down as “steps to improve your photos” i got nothing to say..
its that useless, immature and waste of webspace.
Emanuel
February 18th, 2009 10:52 amThe article should be called “10 Easy Steps To Advanced HDR Photography Skills”.
HDR is generally eye candy.
David Morin
February 18th, 2009 10:52 amI have to say it’s pretty moving for a Tuesday morning. Great blog, I look forward to learn more about your tutorial and overall work.
Cheers!
BIFF
February 18th, 2009 11:19 amHDR killed my uncle in ‘Nam then came home and, under false pretenses, seduced my grieving Aunt and turned her into a junkie. When I tried to confront HDR, it cut my face with a straight razor and burned down my house (I have to say, the insurance photos are tone mapped with a spectacular glow…) I’m glad to see others who understand the true horror of HDR and its demon henchman, Trey.
chock Dee
February 18th, 2009 11:25 amOh boy,
so many haters. At first of all, I to think that HDR is easily overdone and a bit of a hype right now. But that does not mean it is crap, its just an possibility to make different pictures. How could anyone say those are “good” or “bad” pictures, they are just different.
And of course there are people like Bil Zalman or Avedon, who just hit it of on more natural stuff and are stunning at that. But that has nothing to do with each other, its just different applications of the same medium.
And I am so tired of the whole: It takes an good photographer not an good camera. Of course it does, but an better camera always helps to improve your pictures. And an crappy camera limits you in what you do, except when you want exactly that limitation to achieve an certain look (like with the Holga). I advise everybody to read this: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/Yes_It_Matters.shtml article on the Luminous Landscape.
@B: The G9/G10? Come on, its more expensive than most of the entry-level DSLRs.
Still the DSLR is superior in Image Quality to every P&S I know, just because of their bigger sensor.
And last but not least, what is it with you guys, so openly insulting the guy who wrote this article, and obviously did put a lot of effort in it? What about an little decency, would you do the same if you were in the same room with him?
Aahh now I need an beer…
Jimbo
February 18th, 2009 11:32 amI find the anti-HDR venom hilarious.
I’m sure of these people had been around when the camera was invented they’d be waving their paint brushes in the air screaming that “this so called ‘photo-graphy’ is the Devil’s work!”
It’s a tool – is using a tripod against the laws of photography? Is using a zoom lens cheating?
Great article – thanks :)
schrottplatz
February 18th, 2009 11:39 amthis article really sux! you arent taking better pictures if you have a DSLR…
inmagine
February 18th, 2009 11:46 amWow… a lot of bitter rhetoric here. Like it, hate it, or indifferent there is no reason to be rude. Trey is sharing his opinion (and art has nothing but opinion to define it) and when you disagree with him surely you can do it is a polite way. Make an argument, don’t just call him down.
I am fascinated by HDR, but I agree that it does not strictly represent reality. But then, neither dose an un photoshopped photo that is framed and composed to depict only a part of a scene. When any good photographer captures something they take it out of it’s context in a way that makes it more effective for the message that they wish to convey. To say that one of his images would not work if it was not a HDR is irrelevant… they ARE HDR and are composed and constructed to that end. This means slightly different cropping and composition as different aspects of the photo will be emphasized when you tone map it. Your center of focus changes with your medium.
I love the surrealism of highly processed HDR and tonemapped photos, although I can see how some think they are too much, I think that they have a place. I make both highly processed photos and some that are not altered at all, and both effects can help us to show the world as we see it.
Trey is a talented artist who was INVITED to share his opinion by this publication. Attacks on him for sharing that opinion are inappropriate. Complain to SM about their choice of artists to feature if you like, criticize the art all you like, and argue all you like, but please people! Be polite!
Tim Solley
February 18th, 2009 11:51 amWow, it’s clear that a lot of the Negative Nellies didn’t really read the article. The just saw HDR, skipped to the bottom, and left a comment condemning HDR. Read the article! Trey clearly says it’s a subjective art form, and NOT meant to depict reality. Sheesh! And I saw some mentioning that “the masses have spoken, and HDR is out”. B.S. The masses have spoken, and they clearly like it. Otherwise, Mr. Ratcliff wouldn’t have a shot in the Smithsonian!
I guess you same people hate black and white photography, sepia, and tilt-shift lenses, because they don’t look exactly as your eye sees the world.
Also, people totally took the part about P&S cameras out of context. I’m sure Trey doesn’t believe that no good photo can come from a P&S. But the fact of the matter is, if you want to make consistently good photos, with all your creative options open, then you need to get a SLR. If that weren’t the case, then all the big shot photographers in the world would be using toy cameras, and would save their 10 grand on a professional level camera. Case in point: how many of your P&S cameras have manual exposure control, allowing you to do multi-shot HDRs?
Rant over. Lighten up people! And Trey, keep up the good work. I look forward to your latest post every day.
Laynecom
February 18th, 2009 11:52 amI think the problem with this article is not that it talks too much about HDR. That is just a matter of taste. Some like flower photography, some don’t. The same goes for HDR.
The problem is that someone is being utterly dogmatic about photography as a whole here. The problem is that there is no formula you can stick to if you want to become a great photographer, at least not in terms of technical falderal (just looked this word up, I love it ;) ). Have a look at the World Press Photo Awards to see what I mean. Or look at Anton Corbijn, Martin Parr, [insert your favorite photographer here].
Mugros
February 18th, 2009 12:17 pmIf you really buy a DSLR, don’t forget to invest even more money in good lenses. Otherwise you get crappy pictures like this mountain majesty that is plagued by purple fringing. And no, the exaggerated colors don’t help.
One of the dumbest articles for quite some time.
HDR is very nice if done right. This articles features a lot of pictures to show how HDR is done wrong.
Marty
February 18th, 2009 12:36 pm@ Tim – I totally agree with you… people who can’t do? Bitch… To many haters out today with NO skills to back up their rants
TLH_BobCat, Flickr
February 18th, 2009 12:39 pmI actually read all of this article. Glad to know your thinking about photography as a creative process. You and “Kris Kraft” were the first to welcome me to Flickr, a couple of years ago. Wanted to post my comment here because of the mix of impressions, good and not so good. See too much favorable comments like people are fishing for favorable remarks on their own work. Looking forward to following your evolution as a thinker, artist, and photographer..
Tyler Tillage
February 18th, 2009 12:54 pmGood tips. Very Deep. Too much HDR. Especially the horse one, it’s way to unrealistic. It doesn’t even look like a picture. I think you just put something in about a balance between realism and high dynamic range
Kellie
February 18th, 2009 1:03 pmwow. i’ve never been a fan of “stuckincustoms” work. he uses a bit too much HDR for my taste and he uses it in EVERY photo he takes. there’s a place for HDR .. and it’s not in a portrait.
i don’t get why ALL of the photos featured in this article are from his website. it seems a bit biased.
for deidre .. i agree with you. but, there is authentic HDR photography which is actual advanced photography. the ones in this article seem to be “advanced photoshopping”, as you called it and shouldn’t not be called photography. :)
don’t get me wrong, both forms of this “art” take talent, but one shouldn’t be confused with the other.
people that are good at manipulating photos with post production techniques shouldn’t be called photographers, IMO. but, they are good at what they do, nonetheless.
roundsquare
February 18th, 2009 1:04 pmHDR is so overrated. I get that it allows you to work with tones beyond what’s REAL, but don’t we have enough fake shix out there already. Nauseating…. I’m a professional photographer who has been included by photography post writers here on Smashing before, but the Smashing editors cut my site….only to be replaced with the likes of this crap. What an insult…
cnara
February 18th, 2009 1:52 pmJust liked the article and find it very helpful.
For all the haters. Show your stuff and than tell us why it is so much better. And why people love your pictures.
Whatever these images from Trey Ratcliff are, they ewoke emotions.
stevacek
February 18th, 2009 2:02 pmMany of you are missing the point about HDR and Trey’s photography in general. Most of these shots would be great images even if they were shot on a cheap disposable camera. If a guy has the eye, then he has the eye. Sure, you can object to the processing but how many of you people could come up with shots like these in the first place?
As for the HDR, that’s just a matter of taste. It has no pretensions towards realism, I agree that poorly done HDR, which is most of it, is pretty awful – over-saturated, noisy, and in many cases an attempt to turn a crap photo into a brightly coloured crap photo. But take a good photo and know what you’re doing with the processing, then the results can be awesome. No-one can reasonably argue that the photos on this page are crap, that’s just pure envy.
Matt Palmer
February 18th, 2009 2:23 pmIf nothing is worth doing unless you’re serious about it, why publish this article full of pretentious bs?
Trey Ratcliff
February 18th, 2009 2:42 pmInteresting comments – thanks everyone…
In addition to my other two comments above…
I can say that the part about the “toy” camera is only for the really cheapo ones. Someone commented above about the G9. It’s a good camera. So is the LX3. These are handheld prosumer cameras that you can still do a lot with (nicer lenses, nice fstops, etc.). I know perfectly well you can take a great shot with these cameras and many other of a similar ilk. So if you have a littler camera, don’t despair! :) Yes you can still take good shots with it! :) But I do suggest you think about moving to a DSLR sooner or later.
I’m always interested in how HDR is such a divisive topic. It’s one of the few art forms in the world that is loved by one group and despised by another (in fact, they would not even call it an art form). I understand that some people don’t like it (my estimates are a very vocal 20% of people don’t dig the scene). But, the nature of the divisiveness itself is interesting, and it’s usually on par with discussing religion, guns, or Bush. Anyway, it’s all an interesting discussion an I am enjoying it on two levels! :)
Carlos
February 18th, 2009 3:32 pmI personally think this stuff is good. For those of you who are downing and dissing this article, What could be done differently. Do you have work that we can all see to show “how it is done right”. So many people can go around trashing someone elses’ work but not offer up any constructive criticism to go along with the bashing.
Sad really. I like the article and the way the images came out. That is me.
If you are the type of person who likes to down others’ work without offering anything positive or constructive to go along with your bashing then stay off of the comment boards.
Doesn’t help us who are actually trying to learn things if you don’t offer anything else for us to engage in.
Matt J.
February 18th, 2009 3:48 pmWhoa, way too much HDR.
Also, “Buy a nicer camera?” Come on. I didn’t come here to read that.
monn
February 18th, 2009 3:50 pmSure cool, but WAYYYY too much HDR guys.
HDR shouldnt even be mentioned until people have a grasp of all the other points (and more) imo.
Ed
February 18th, 2009 4:08 pmCan you please explain to me why you called the technique an HDR image??
Clearly when you finish your photos (which are good some of them btw in their raw state)
They are a mix of different photos taken at different exposure level.
A composite from different elements of different photos..
That’s my issue about this all HDR titling. It’s not HDR!!!!
I have no issues with the artist behind the photos it’s just a shame it’s plugged in this way
on a “professional” website.
Just call it something else. tone mapped or artistic composits.
Just anything else than HDR… that’s why its annoying to read..
For all others that rant on against anyone that is negative about this article.
Why do we have to back up our comments by posting photos that are better??
Clearly that is not the point here.. and any comment is valid in any open discussion.
Art for me in any form is about craftsmanship and ideas behind it from the artist.
And this “hdr” tonemapping thing is just a really simple cheap way of doing something
woooo. HDR that’s cool. When they don’t even know what they are doing really…
Study compositing..(2D postproduction) get it rigth… before starting to preach about
a technique… its just a bit ridicules…
Jim Fury
February 18th, 2009 4:11 pmWow… I found some relavent points but most of it, was pretentious crap. Regarding HDR, I’ve seen stuff done properly, where it doesn’t appear to be horribly over tone mapped, and then I’ve seen just horrible. HDR is not the problem, though I am about over it too, high dynamic range (without the term being coined) should be achieved in all photography to a certain degree, in that you want to capture what the eye captures, that’s the point. Heavy, overlly tone mapped is retarded looking.
My biggest gripe, and I own a DSLR, is that it’s not 100% the camera. It’s the talent. The camera makes a difference on overall clarity perhaps, but doesn’t make you a photographer. A true photographer can get great lighting, composition, and feeling from any camera.
The author of this article has a bad attitude, and I don’t think fits very well with Smashing Magazine. I’d be dissapointed to see another article from the same person. As well, his blog is oversized, and really doesn’t look all that great. Kthxbai.
BarbourImages
February 18th, 2009 4:51 pmTREY – YOUR HDR ROCKS. For all the negative commenters out there, step away from your Vic20, and head back to your darkroom. A toolbox has many tools in it, and HDR is merely a tool. It’s not the only tool, but for some – a very powerful one.
Photography is defined as “the art or practice of taking and processing photographs.” If this form of processing is not to your liking, then move on. HDR is one of the fastest growing processing techniques, and the majority of people drool over it.
Trey’s HDR shot of a custom chopper was what inspired me to get into it. I shot (2) large biker events (Ride for Sight, and Canadian Biker Build-Off) this past summer, and 99% of the clients wanted their images processed in HDR. Keep rock’n it Trey. Nuff Said.
Nathaniel
February 18th, 2009 4:58 pmNo more HDR… please… it looks trashy
Jamesepiscopal
February 18th, 2009 5:52 pmTrey- I think your work is inspiring. It is unfortunate that a lot of people here haven’t seen some of your non-hdr work before they trash your hdr work. I thought art was in the eye of the beholder? I guess here personal opinion has it’s place, but I would like to stress the opinion part! There is a ton of art out there I don’t like, I simply turn my cheek and look for something that interests me more, that pleases MY eye. To sit and trash what someone else has created on their own is simply narrow minded and sad to me.
-Also as far as a point and shoot: Sure you can get some great pictures, I think a lot of people here missed the point. to put it one way- I can play you a song on a toy guitar, and it will be a good song, but on a “real” acoustic guitar, it will sound much better! so, yes..you can do most of the same things, however the quality and diversity of the outcome will be substantially better with a superior product.
-Sean a.k.a James Episcopal
Anyways, I dig your work both HDR and non.
david
February 18th, 2009 7:48 pmwhilst i think your tips are good and many of your photos are great, i have to admit that i’m under-awed by your use of hdr.
my problem with hdr is the same problem i have with fisheye lenses (for example). seeing a few hdr shots is good and they’re an impressive technique. however, seeing too many hdr photos is boring and rather unimaginative.
your amish boy is a case in point. potentially an excellent photo but ruined by the overzealous use of hdr techniques. i’ve rarely seen a good hdr portrait … and this boy would have looked much nicer with less editing.
i guess the pitfall of hdr is that many people use it to overcome their lack of photo skills (which is what you’re talking about in your article). if someone takes a mediocre photo, by giving it the “hdr” treatment, suddenly that terrible photo becomes a work of art.
i’d like to see more of your work without the hdr … actually, i’d like to see fewer people use hdr and reserve that technique for photos which will do it justice.
this is not a criticism of you, it’s more of a criticism of the ‘fanboy’ attitude to hdr and the fact that hdr has become a cliche.
cheers
david
http://www.davidsmeaton.com
jdh
February 18th, 2009 8:11 pmthis article was really disappointing. Sorry moderators, but I’m not going to retype my response. It’s available here: http://tinyurl.com/c7ggj6
Brian
February 18th, 2009 9:02 pmLearn how to use a neutral density filter you noob!!
byajero
February 18th, 2009 9:33 pmHello there! Youve got this wonderful tips and I really appreciate your works. It inspires me once again to go into photography. But of course I have a toy camera with me and can’t do much of these things. But I always bring it to capture wonderful things. Where ever I go!
Nick
February 18th, 2009 10:07 pm1. Enough on the HDR on Smashing please. There is a massive body of work that is not HDR, in fact the majority of all photography.
2. “Think about the brain”? – you mean try to put some thought into the message you’re conveying with your image? Correct sentiment, but a really roundabout way to explain it.
3. Thumbs up for Flickr. A great place to learn and be inspired.
4. “Get rid of your toy camera”? – What a crock of $h!t. A great photographer will produce great images regardless of the tool. Yes, a DSLR can make a lot of photos easier to create, and a bit quicker, but unless you know how to create the image, having an expensive tool isn’t going to help.
5. No mention of learning composition? The relationship between exposure and depth-of-field? Correct lighting technique? The zone system?
This article needed to be edited by another pro photographer to give it more balance.
Vanessa
February 18th, 2009 11:12 pmthe pics look good.. too good that in fact they seem so un natural… thanks for the tip though.. =)
CyberGus
February 19th, 2009 12:01 amHorribles examples, just two good advices I could agree, learn to draw and make mistakes…
The understanding of photography is to “learn to tell stories”
From documental: http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
To commercial: http://krop.com/muller/
And here my own portfolio: http://www.evg3.com/photoblog
By the way, HDR is so abused, so newbie and so “computer graphics”, please wake up and learn to tell stories and get close to your subjects.
Pete
February 19th, 2009 12:53 amI love how only point 6 is about HDR yet most of the comments seem to be from people who have read the article by looking at the pictures…
Samantha
February 19th, 2009 4:58 amI thought art history has taught us not to be like the Salon and to break free of such pompous styles.
And I like my toy film camera. They are obviously not meant for landscapes, and not everyone is a landscape photographer. Leave them alone.
Beth
February 19th, 2009 5:44 amYou really ought to credit the photographer of each of these photos… that’s common courtesy. I recognized Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir’s icelandic pony photo right off the bat – she’ll hunt you down for posting this without permission.
Scott
February 19th, 2009 9:23 amTrey – thanks for writing this, it gives one many ideas on how to create better art with cameras. YOu defnitely stirred up a few people.
Scott
martin
February 19th, 2009 9:57 amGet yourself a DSLR???? eeeewwwwwwww!!!! Digital???eeeewwwwwwww!
martin
February 19th, 2009 10:00 amHDR…???eeeeeeewwwwwwwww!
Disposable_Hero
February 19th, 2009 11:11 amBefore Photoshop, before HDR, people were manipulating their pictures manually in the darkroom. I hate how people think just because a picture was edited in Photoshop that it’s not real photography. Photoshop is just bringing the darkroom to digital photography, and sure it gets overused, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t use it at all.
As for the “Buy a DSLR” comment, I partially agree. A DSLR definitely opens up the possibility for better pictures due to having more options than a “toy camera”, but it’s not required. I agree that people trying to be professional photographers should not be using a pocket-sized camera, but it’s not impossible to get a great shot while using one.
Philosaur
February 19th, 2009 11:34 amI’d wager dollars to donuts that since the dawn of artistic endeavor, there have been purists who object to any new methodology or medium as not being “true art”.
If you just don’t *like* something, then great. Whatever. I doubt anyone here (or anywhere) cares that you “hate HDR because it’s so overdone.”
But if you really have the audacity to spout off about what constitutes art and what doesn’t, keep in mind that you aren’t the first to speak and prove yourself a fool.
Photography (10 years ago): “Digital photography isn’t real photography, because the camera does all the work for you, and because real photography uses film and developer and toner.”
Painting: “Impressionist painting isn’t real painting because you aren’t even *trying* to achieve realism.”
Music: “All this synthesizer crap isn’t real music. You have to use acoustic instruments, otherwise it’s just computers doing the work.”
Cave painting: “Me use fingers. You use brush. You not real artist like me.”
Matt
February 19th, 2009 12:11 pmGreat article, and awesome images. Thanks!
Cristofani
February 19th, 2009 1:56 pmWell, if you really want to learn how to take a photograph,, stay away from photoshop. This is just a software for corrections and improvements… You must be able to `feel the light`while taking a photo… trust your photometer, practice a lot and forget about great equipment. Some of the the most impressive photos i`ve seen were captured with a tin can and a cheap paper… You just need to understaind how to balance some things… hey, and get of Auto stills… go for manual if your goal is to reach professional results… But all of this is just too basic and everyone know that… so why am I talking?
Becouse in every single pic of this article there was something reaaaaaly wrong with the dynamics of lighting… be aware of that!
Howie
February 19th, 2009 3:26 pmSuch a lot of old farts and gobshits making unfounded and shot from the hip remarks. They should also “get a life” and give HDR a try before uttering such uninspiring drivel. Maybe they are clever and can do it better than anyone else ever did, but I suppose they are just so lazy they never even tried. There are plenty of HDR shots which are very subtle and many left onthe cooker to burn, I can choose which ones I like!
Brian
February 19th, 2009 5:14 pmI second HOWIE’s remark.
Just a lot of old people wishing we were back in the good ol’ days, fighting progress.
chichichimama
February 19th, 2009 7:32 pmYa’ll are dissin’ an award winning photog…he was just honored by the Smithsonian a SECOND time. Take time to visit his blog. Sure he’s quirky, but that what makes stuckincustoms stuckincustoms…good job my friend.
Ross
February 19th, 2009 7:40 pmIt’s interesting how the anti-HDR brigade are so strident in their opposition. What evokes such dislike, even anger? I think it comes down to the fact that most people really like this sort of stuff, but it’s not achievable by everyone who knows how to use a camera well. A professional photographer might have studied for years, yet they are ‘left out’ of being able to produce what people are coming to enjoy more and more. Photography is only one skill in the production of a pleasing image. Advanced digital manipulation is here to stay and will only get bigger.
Michael B.
February 19th, 2009 7:45 pmTo all the haters…. WAAAAHHH
Go cry to your mama’s. Jesus. People are amazingly ignorant. I hate Any Warhol. Does that make me right? Many would disagree. But that is my prerogative. I would not go onto a public forum and pass judgment like I am some kind of photographic know it all. Who cares if HDR is overdone. I personally find Trey’s work a little much for me too but guess who’s tutorials I used when learning how to process my own HDR’s. He is an artist and whether you like it or not he is a driving force in the photographic world. So bitch if you want but all it shows is you are better at criticism than constructive comments or intelligent dialogue. Congratulations… You haters have made yourselves look like idiots. HDR is here to stay so if you are gonna wine and cry and bitch please do so privately to save us from your self important negativity.
Have a nice day. =)
Srenath
February 19th, 2009 9:45 pmIts Awesome man..
Jac
February 19th, 2009 10:05 pmHalf the images here look terribly fake. Photo enhancement must have a point. If the image is not taken in the right exposure, then editing it is fine. But for an image that’s already magnificent, extreme enhancement is ridiculous and takes away the essence of the subject in the first place, which is terribly sad. But some of the enhancements pictured here can apply to many a fairytale/Harry Potter setting, if that is ur purpose.
Penfold
February 20th, 2009 4:39 amWow im amazed at how many haters re commenting on his work, when as many people have already said im sure that art is how you interpret it, and trey sees this as his art and i find it amazing to look at, people need to get off their unsuccessful asses and try something new and maybe one day their work will be appreciated like Trey’s.
Mark
February 20th, 2009 6:01 amIt is funny the amount of people that say “enough of this hdr / hdr is just a fad” and so on. Do you really understand what you are saying? Really you should say “I dont like your images, they’re not for me” and move on, or “I dont like an oversaturated look to my images” instead of blanket banning High Dynamic Range.
Idiots.
Keep up the good work Stuck-in-customs. Inspirational.
elperroverde
February 20th, 2009 6:38 amHDR can be a great technique and give some truly beautiful results… unfortunately that’s not the case with the pictures on this article: they all look like shit to me.
Ed
February 20th, 2009 7:36 amMaybe everyone who is commenting on the “haters” should come with some constructive
comments instead. It doesn’t really put anything into this threads discussion..
And if you compare this “HDR” techniques to the impressionistic painters then i think
the art history books in the future regarding this century will be a sad and boring one..
Its not about how the “hdr” look is achieved, in this case its evaluating different software capabilities (i.e., their built in tools) to be able to get the final result.
For me as an artist i don’t think my artistic boundaries should lie within the limits of my tools. That’s just relying on 3rd parties to help you on your way of getting a look of your work. I think for many of the so called “haters” on this thread is the issue about how the HDR is presented. Its talked about as a style and compared to the impressionist.
I feel that is even more a cheap shot than anything else..
so yeah.. to create a new ground breaking art form..
take a picture.. search for a software with the right filters..
apply them.. voilà.. its done.
I’m going to start running all my work through the emboss filter, just because
its there. And start running tutorials on how to achieve this new ground breaking look.
it is on the same par as the cubists or modernism. confined within the limits of photoshop…
As for the examples used in this article its just unprofessional that they are not rightly credited.
john ebanks
February 20th, 2009 8:40 amWow. A one eyed photographer, who encourages paints. Do you wear a patch or a glass eye. I like the patch, it’s all pirate like.
rich
February 20th, 2009 9:05 amre Ed, post #198, “As for the examples used in this article its just unprofessional that they are not rightly credited.”
What makes you think the images in the article are not all by Trey Rattcliff? Do you see these photos elsewhere under a different photographer’s name? If so, please provide links to them. I agree, if these are not all original photos by Ratcliff, then that is unprofessional. Making an unfounded accusation is also unprofessional.
re Beth, post #180: “You really ought to credit the photographer of each of these photos… that’s common courtesy. I recognized Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir’s icelandic pony photo right off the bat – she’ll hunt you down for posting this without permission.”
I looked at Rebekkas website. I do see some icelandic pony photos, but I don’t see the one in this article. Nor is the style the same. What makes you think the pony image is hers?
Maybe I’m wrong and maybe not all the photos are original, but some proof that these are not TRs images would be useful.