The photographer takes a picture of the photographer. Is the photographer taking photos or taking photographs? Natural light: "golden hour"

Guys, we put our soul into the site. Thanks for that
for discovering this beauty. Thanks for the inspiration and goosebumps.
Join us at Facebook And In contact with

Love taking pictures and posing, but not sure if you're doing everything right? Some simple rules, which we have collected in this article, will help you learn how to take shots almost like a pro, you just need a little skill, patience and a smartphone.

website assures: after reading this short guide, the photos are guaranteed to be successful.

1. Pay attention to the background

Sometimes a good shot can easily ruin a pole that has grown out of your head. Such trifles can be noticed not immediately, but they spoil the impression of the picture.

A suitable background can even be where you don’t expect to see it at all. For example, it can be a transformer box with a textured wall, or a service entrance that looks completely unpresentable from a distance, but looks quite good up close. Look for interesting materials and textures for the background even in the most unexpected places, only then get ready to fend off questions like “Where did you find such a cool background ?!”

2. Be careful with close-ups

The fact is that when shooting close, the geometry of the frame changes, as a result, the appearance is distorted. The face becomes like that of a hamster, and this is unlikely to be to your advantage. Move the lens away a little and you will see that the picture will turn out much better.

3. Experiment with the angle of inclination

Let's compare with our example. We have a cute carousel and an equally cute model, how to combine them? You can just stand next to the attraction and take a picture, or you can take a selfie and change the angle of inclination - you get a mischievous and funny shot. So we will see both the round roof of the carousel and the swing, and give the picture liveliness. Don't be afraid to experiment with angles when appropriate.

4. Don't put the subject in the center of the composition

If you are photographing a single subject, do not place it in the center of the frame. Remember the rule of thirds, according to which the frame is divided by lines, along which it is recommended to place objects.

5. Beauty is around

6. Learn to catch good light

Good lighting is an important part of a good photo. The difference in these two frames is literally one and a half steps, and the result is obvious. In the second picture, we managed to catch more than soft light, besides, the background very successfully “fell” into the darkness and hid unnecessary details.

Rotate the camera a little, try to catch the light with your face. Do not forget that the lighting should fall on you, and not shine from behind, otherwise you will get only a silhouette.

7. But don't overdo it

Too bright light can also play a cruel joke. Shooting in bright daylight can be difficult even for experienced photographers, and portraits in the sun will most likely turn out with squinted eyes. Therefore, try not to take pictures during hours of high solar activity. Look for the most beautiful natural light during the morning hours and at sunset.

8. Avoid HDR Mode

The HDR effect was once very popular on Instagram, and even now some photo editing applications offer filters with this effect. But the fashion for HDR has long passed, but the unnaturalness of such frames remains. Leave these filters in the past, they belong there.

9. Wait for the perfect moment to take a picture

Alas, but for the sake of an elegant frame, sometimes it is worth showing patience. Catching a good moment is easier than photoshopping random passers-by. A little exposure, and here is a great shot in your hands! That is, in a smartphone.

Finding the perfect angle with full-length shots is a little more difficult than with selfies. If you want to get a full-length shot, it is better to ask for it to be taken slightly from below: this way you will add a lot of height to yourself. True, this trick works best with slender models.

With staff, everything is different. If you shoot from the side, then the frame runs the risk of turning out to be “flat”, but if you shoot from below, you can easily get a distortion of the picture (besides, here the leg is directed directly into the lens, which does not add beauty). The result will be much better if you shoot a little from above: both the proportions will be respected, and the surrounding landscape will fall into the frame.

Most people talk about the process of photography as being photographed. However, many serious photographers instead turn to creation photos.

One might be inclined to dismiss it as jargon, but there is clearly a difference in attitude. "Creation" means creative process, while "receiving" has a negative connotation: appropriation or even theft. Or not so negative: “capture the moment”; the ability of photography to capture the essence of a scene, preserve it, and share it. But going back, is it possible to do this well without creating something new? Even when the scene is not staged, the photographer has some level of copyright responsibility.

So the question is: is it really that bad? Does this mean inherently frivolity and quick shots? Should every genuine photographer be encouraged to creation? Or can photographing as observation alone be a valid, serious art form?

Itay

Clap! Get ready for battle... Just kidding ;) I use shooting, making, shooting and filming interchangeably in my tutorials, course notes and presentations. If I kept using the same world all the time, I would sound like a broken record. For some reason I never use the word rig, maybe I should consult a therapist to find out why. At least we don't have the same problem as in the TV industry where sometimes you have to "shoot the pilot".

Greg

When I shoot on vacation and I do it just for memory, I take pictures. I'm too busy enjoying myself to worry about composition (very much), so I take a shot and leave. If I'm working or shooting creatively, then it's a much more thoughtful thing; I compose, analyze, think about exposure and depth of field. I will be taking/shooting/shooting/shooting and taking pictures, but at this moment I am not taking pictures.

Reid

On a related note, I try to avoid shooting because of its negative (violent) connotations. It's a little tricky. :)

Stefan Pechar

"And in the end, the love you accept is equal to the love you do- Sir Paul McCartney

Graham Hutchison

I remember moments

Answers

John Cavan

I think every process has equal merit based on my own own experience creating Project 365. In doing this project with the express purpose of not being overly repetitive, I had to do a lot of different things, and that really means taking pictures and taking pictures:

Adoption

For me it is the art of seeing the moment and perceive his. Maybe the jargon doesn't really mean it, but that's how I see it. Henri Cartier-Bresson was a master of this kind of thing, holding on to ordinary moments in time in a way that inspires and educates us. He did not create a picture, he saw it and captured it. This, I think, is the essence of photography. Candid photography or photojournalism is really about it, and to master it is to have an eye for a moment.

Now, the negative connotation on this would probably be the style of the shot, basically just capturing the image without the concept of framing, lighting, obstacles, etc. It's, in a way, classic travel photography I guess and serves as a basis for differentiating casual shooters against advanced amateurs or pros.

Manufacturing

At this end of the spectrum, it's about framing the image. It's about about creating lighting or observing lighting, and positioning for the image you know should come. It can be as detailed and controlled as the almost cinematic work of Dave Hill, or as studied and patient as the work of Ansel Adams. This is the place where art, landscape and similar works fall into, and in order to master this, you must be able to anticipate the result and prepare for it.

To take a picture, a negative connotation, for me, it's a complete setup, it does everything for you. For example, you can buy devices like StopShot which, when everything is set up, perform all operation, including shutter release. It's basically all inclusive and lets you work and you'll see this often with water drops. Don't get me wrong, images can be great, but for me it loses something when the finger is not on the shutter but on the machine.

Conclusion

Obviously I'm not putting my meager effort into the same class as some of the wizards I've listed, but I think I've tried both of these at different times. To be honest, I think I'm more successful with taking pictures, controlling the conditions of the outcome, but taking pictures is also fun and rewarding, the element of surprise can be a bonus. I think doing both modes can make you a better photographer. At least I think it's more fun. :)

CadentOrange

I think Henri Cartier Bresson's example is too simplistic. His candid photography was carefully planned, as he would position himself in the right place, carefully photograph the frame, and then release the shutter at the decisive moment. Take this as an example. tinyurl.com/3wh2fmn You can't expect me to believe that he was walking, saw an approaching bike, and then took out his camera? Most likely, he was located at the top of the stairs, carefully composed the shot and waited for the appearance of the cyclist. He certainly did more than just "photograph" photos!

John Cavan

@Philip Goh - What if the cyclist never showed up? That was the difference, and of course this post looks rather simplistic, as this is not a forum for a doctoral thesis on the work of famous street photographers. :)

jrista ♦

I think @Philip Goh's example shows what most photographers are probably doing both things... do at the same time And take photographs. I'm not sure if it's always one or the other... I think quite often it's a combination of both. Even in landscape photography you come across one of these rare, just fantastic scenes with great lighting, and you just have to "photograph" it... and in the process, you can just "make" a piece of art at the same time. ;)

John Cavan

Cartier-Bresson is also quoted as saying, "Of course it's all luck." He also said, "I've been wandering the streets all day feeling very excited and ready to jump in, determined to 'trap' life—save life in the process of living."

Anonymous

My answer is yes". There are photos I take (things I happen to be in the right place at the right time to record) and photos I take (things I can research or organize). In both cases, they are an expression of myself. It may be easier to see that when I have big problems organizing the image, but even reportage-type photos depend on how far I get into a situation that I think has photographic value.

On this note, there are two significant portraits by Yusuf Karsh of Winston Churchill. Even though the camera and light were pre-installed, it's fair to say that the first (and by far the most famous of them all, the shot of a frowning Churchill who had just had his cigar stolen from his lips) was "taken" and the second, of a smiling , relaxed Churchill, was "done". Karsh preferred the latter; It can be argued that the former, representing British defiance, had enough propaganda value to trigger Lend-Lease and prevent the British conquest. You decide which one was "art".

Lindes

Personally, I think that these are two different, equally significant activities. And while I say and mean "different", they are not necessarily mutually exclusive to me.

To take a picture, I think, means to make something that exists. Whether it's a facial expression, a pattern of movement (anything from flowing water to animals to various human creatures)... Any moment (short or long) in time that exists apart from the photographer.

To "take" a picture, it seems to me, means to create conditions under which the image can be taken in accordance with a certain vision (or, if you prefer, foresight) of the photographer. This can include everything from simply choosing a camera position, angle, focal length, focus distances and exposure settings, all the way down to the carefully crafted scene, scenery, lighting and whatever else you have.

Often a good photo will be (in my opinion) both options. For example, a complex portrait setup - with a set (or at least a background), lighting, costume, hair styling and makeup, etc. - is a portrait that is made... But also, if the subject is given any control what they do in this setting is the portrait that is being done.

In other cases, it may be closer to one or the other, although I suspect it is almost always, at least a little off each. A “made” still life “takes” from the objects located in it, and even in a quickly “taken” picture, the photographers “made a choice”, even if only to aim and when to press the button.

Of course, there will be numerous opinions on such a question, often contradictory. However, after listening to a few of them over the years and thinking to myself, I hope the above is an accurate reflection of the philosophy I have adopted regarding this matter.

If this needs any clarification, please ask in the comments and I'll do my best to update it to increase clarity.

Thanks for the interesting question!

labnut

Great question, but when I first read it, it seemed like semantics (how wrong could I be?).

Now that I'm reading the answers, I understand that there is a deeper process that is very similar to De Bono's Six Thinking Hats approach. With this approach, you consciously put on a certain type of thinking. This means that you consciously enter this mode of thinking and apply this approach to the problem.

In the same way, as photographers, we wear different photographic hats at different times:
- A journalist's hat. Photographing (Red Hat)
- Director's cap. Taking a photo (Blue Hat)
- An artist's hat. We create photo. (Green Hat)
- Critic's hat. We evaluate photo. (black hat)

You ask

So the question is: is it really that bad? Does this mean inherently frivolity and quick shots? Should every genuine photographer be encouraged to create? Or can photographing as observation alone be a valid, serious art form?

First Good photographer intuitively uses his stock of experience when he "takes" a photograph. He does not need to consciously collect this knowledge or plan the photo. It arises without conscious will. This is often desirable because creativity thrives without the restrictions placed on us by our conscious "creative" mind.

Second Every photographer should be encouraged to "create" in the early stages of their photographic journey. By consciously attracting and practicing skills, we build them into deeper knowledge repositories so that they are quickly available to you, without thinking about when you will later engage in “taking”.

Thus, we must distinguish between the "taking" of a non-professional amateur (snapshots) and the "taking" of an experienced photographer. In his case, it is the fluency of a practiced skill.

The diagram below depicts De Bono's Six Thinking Hats (copyright from the De Bono Group). Everyone is supposed to put on each hat in turn when you approach a given subject so that you approach it from all angles.

Chuqui

I do both. but I put more time and effort into making them, planning the trip, planning the images I want to acquire (subject and style) and understanding what I want to achieve before I start and then adapting to what's going on, when I get there and start working on the spot. There is a positive aspect to photographing and recording what you see; The advantage in quality and reliability is that you work up front to ensure that your time and energy is not wasted and that you get the images you want/need and can use.

Grant Palin

Good question. I do both.

I sometimes take "snapshots" of anything that looks remotely interesting. In that case, I don't worry too much about the subject or the result. These pictures are mostly so-so, although I do get a gem out of it from time to time.

The rest of the time (I guess it's about half and half), I really thought and planned my photos. I look for interesting subjects, find an interesting perspective, check color and lighting, and then leave. The results here are consistently good, rarely less than that. And sometimes I get especially nice photos(IMO).

Simply "photographing" does not always produce reasonable results, although snapshots may need to be taken. On the other hand, "creating" photographs such as still life, landscape, and architecture take more time to adjust for best results.

mattdm

So you do both, but for you "to do" is best approach, and "take" what you are doing when you don't really think about it due to lack of care or lack of time.

Fake name

Pedantic here

I would say "takes pictures" or " removes" photos.

You can never "take" a photo, since photography is based on a group of semi-ordered photons focused through a lens. Unless you personally host every photon that goes into creating images, you don't "do" anything, Just capture what is already there.

Even if you have full control of the scene, you are still filming the representation of it rather than presenting it (perhaps if you are not painting a picture).

Think of it like an animal - you can "catch" a bird or "take" a bird, but you can never "make" a bird.

Basically, you can say whatever you want but requiring "take" photos will always be technically incorrect .

Caveat: I'm an engineer and I work with professional scientists, so maybe I'm more versed in technical aspects wording than most. However, from a dictionary point of view, the above is true.

Personally, I tend to use snapshot/photo instead of "make/make" respectively, as the other answers describe their usage as it conveys the same information while being semantically correct.

Opinion: If you ask me, this whole "Do it" photo sounds like professional photographers are snobs, and try to claim that they are doing something fundamentally different than tourists on vacation, and not just a refinement of it. In the category of finesse, there is more than enough room to accommodate both.

Change:(slightly more mature look)

I think it's better to think about what you can "make" or "choose" composition photos (and indeed it is, and processing is where all the creativity lies), or even make/change camera, used for shooting images (to do some really creative stuff). However, you still don't photograph, You doing composition, which is just reflected On the photo.

The transfer of a composition into an image is a purely mechanistic process that does not require creativity and creativity. This is all surrounding occupation, where art.

mattdm

By this definition anyone ever doing anything other than nuclear fusion? I mean, the molecules are already there; people just suit them.

mattdm

The question of whether professional (or other non-professional) photographers do something fundamentally different than vacation tourists is interesting, although I'm afraid it falls pretty heavily on the argumentative side of "subjective and argumentative".

Fake name

@mattdm (3rd comment) - that's why I did it as a subtext.

mattdm

Oh! I think that's exactly what it is, actually. The main difference between "tourist" , making picture, and photographer, making photograph, is that in the first case, the click of the shutter is the entire photographic process, while for the latter it is the key moment, but only Part creating a finished photograph. (There are steps before and after.)

happytotakephotos

The difference is in pure elitist semantics. I know many photographers who are better photographers than me, who say "take" pictures and never say "take" pictures. It's pure jargon, and although their quality is better than mine, they don't do anything, and I just take something. If you and I had a garden using the same methods and my tomatoes grew better than yours, there should be no other term in how I grew tomatoes compared to how you grew them. I just grew tomatoes better than you. "Taking" photos is the most common way to use a camera with a camera. Many people try to do something artful (at least at some point) while taking a photo, and this is done with varying degrees of success. Enter new term like "taking photos" is really unnecessary. If we both run really fast and I'm faster than you, I don't run while you just run. We both run or run, I'm just better. Don't be snobs, photographers. Everyone who has a camera is trying to do something for some reason. The motive does not change the terminology of the action.

John Cavan

The term "taking a photograph" is not new, Ansel Adams coined the term decades ago and even published a book in 1935 called "Making a Photo" which was widely circulated. Instead of assuming that there is elitism behind this, you might think that he is trying to tell you something about how to think about the subject you are photographing.

Ornello

Since you asked: none. Photographers take (or take) photographs, not "photographs". Artists make "paintings". A picture is a "picture". And there is no photo. People have used these terms freely, but since you're asking for clarification, I'm offering this. The word "photography" predates photography, and since photography was something new, it had to be given a new name. Some people who weren't philosophers weren't so careful about such things and used the old term instead of the new (and then less familiar) term photography. A "painting" is a work of art created by hand. Photography is neither. It's more of a class distinction, especially in England. "Painting" still means the "painting" of those who own the paintings. Degas and Munch made "pictures". Steichen and Stieglitz took "photographs".

In a random situation, you will hear people refer to photographs as "photos". However, in more serious or formal contexts, this usage is incorrect.

This entry from the dictionary of the century should be helpful:

mattdm

Do you want to develop? Merriam-Webster's definition of photography is " photo or an image taken with a photograph" (emphasis added), and the OED is almost identical: " photo or an image taken with a photograph. Sometimes words have special meanings in certain areas beyond their general definition, but I don't Think, that it is. Can you explain what the distinction you are making is, and more importantly, why is it important?

mattdm

Yes, indeed. And like I said, you can be as reckless as you want, but this kind of quest is to freeze (or, in this case, very explicitly wish return his) language in its meanings Victorian era- useless.

mattdm

Then perhaps it should be discussed with those populist crooks at the OED.

Michael Clark

@Ornello Teenage girls - not the only English speakers who include photography in possible definitions Images. So only the upper classes in Victorian England, who owned the paintings, could define words for the entire English-speaking world until the end of history? Yet some accuse photographers who insist on the distinction between "take" and "make" of being snobs?

Michael Clark

Word " engine" predates the invention of the automobile. This does not cancel the acceptance of the word to enable the operation of the vehicle. Or do the owners of English pictures of the Victorian upper class refuse to use any word in such a way that it can be applied to the evolution of the original meaning?

Photographers are special people. They are completely in love with their profession, and if it is a hobby, then they subordinate everything to it. free time. I would even say that they are insane in their love of photography. It is not for nothing that a huge number of films have been shot about photographers, thousands of anecdotes have been invented, millions of photographs have been taken. Photographers are always in the center of attention of photographers themselves. The photographer sees the photographer from afar. In this publication, we will introduce you to funny photographs, the heroes of which were photographers, and funny anecdotes about these wonderful people with cameras.

Dear readers! Surely you have had to take funny pictures of your colleagues, people with cameras, hear funny stories about photographers and photographs. Send them to our editorial office. The best materials will be published in the journal, and their authors will receive a prize! Our address: [email protected]

Text: Oles Slipy

Jokes and photos

For example, I believe that a person who buys a camera immediately falls into the category of photographers. When I got my first camera, I immediately felt special, not like everyone else. I immediately began to actively photograph everything around, registered on several sites and won two competitions: “Clouds” and “My Lunch”. It was very nice when they handed me a saucepan and a diploma. But then there was trouble when I was photographing a storm, I was washed away by a wave and my camera died. But it was even more unpleasant when the photographer who photographed how I was washed away into the sea received a prize of 15,000 euros in a photo contest for this photograph of mine. At the same time, I signed that I was dead. I had to sue him and I won 25,000 euros. I bought myself a camera and now during a storm I walk near the waves. Suddenly someone else wants to win the competition. (Photographer Petrenko)

And how did it happen that in the photograph of the coat of arms, a double-headed eagle turned out?

He turned his head when he was photographed.

Are you responsible for making me look like myself in the photo?

I give you a full guarantee.

And for how long?

A man with his mother-in-law is walking down Deribasovskaya Street. The photographer stops them.

Would you like to take a picture with a monkey?

The mother-in-law suddenly hugs the man tenderly and asks: “Take it off!”

Husband prints photos locked in the bathroom. The wife says loudly

I can imagine what kind of pictures they are if they have to be printed in the dark!

On the sea beach, the photographer asks permission from a pretty blonde to photograph her for a fashion magazine.

Of course, but on one condition: I will take off my bathing suit so that my husband does not recognize me.

If you are photographing a rabbit, then you don’t need a flash, he already has red eyes.

Newspaper "Pravda". A large photograph is published on the front page: Brezhnev visits an advanced pigsty. The entire editorial staff thinks about what signature to put:

Brezhnev in an advanced pigsty;

Brezhnev among record-breaking pigs;

The best pigs and Leonid Ilyich...

Final version: third from left - General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev!

The watchman, drunk in the smoke, carefully peers into the mirror, then studies the picture on his pass for a long time and says: - Everything is n-normal, it matches. Pr-oh-go!

Model Photographer:

I'll take small photos so you don't have to smile so wide.

Dear Private Vasya! I am sending you, as you requested, my photo. Sorry, only to the waist! And below we all have the same.

I am three years old in this photo.

Oh, it turns out that you had a bald head in infancy?

No, you turned the picture upside down!

The blonde from the podium shouts into the audience:

Remove the photographer immediately! With his long and thick lens, he interferes with the flow of my thoughts!

Stop a moment! I will change the card, replace the lens and battery!

Will I be a fashion model?

Photocopy only.

Today in the photo studio "Bird" a bird really flew out of the camera lens. The child laughed and clapped, the photographer fell unconscious and was taken away ambulance. The security services took over the camera.

When checking the camera, the bird flew out again, but when it saw the major, it returned back.

Photographer:

And now, beauty, show deep thoughtfulness on your face. I'll help you now: what is 8 times 7?

Many faces on the negative look positive.

How is it that in the photographs of your photo studio everyone laughs so naturally and naturally?

Oh, if you could see our photographer!

Two photographers are walking with cameras. Do not take your eyes off the viewfinders, take pictures. Suddenly one tripped and fell to the ground. The second one falls right next to it:

Excellent position! What are we filming?

I can disfigure anyone with one finger!

Oh, do you know karate?

No, I'm a photographer!

A man comes to a photo studio, and there is a girl photographer. He undresses and says:

Take an erotic photo of me.

We don't do macro photography.

A photographer walks along the seashore.

A woman chases him:

Quicker! My friend is drowning! - screams.

Sorry, - the photographer smiles guiltily, - but my card is already filled out ...

If the photo album is thin and very small, and the picture is one and ugly - this is a passport!

The photographer shoots the wedding for a long time and finally proclaims:

And now, finally, I want to capture the happiest couple.

The guests are at a loss: hundreds of photographs have already been taken.

The bride and her mother, - explains the photographer.

The client, receiving her photo in a photo studio, swears:

Who is this? Look scary!

Look at yourself in the mirror! – the photographer says offendedly.

Reshoot!

In the morning, the photographer issues a new photo.

Great! You can if you want!

Sure you can. This is a picture of my assistant in a gas mask, - the photographer grumbles in response.

I recently found out: a photo for memory and a photo on paper are two big differences!

At the photographer:

Mr photographer, this is not my photo.

How is it, yours, and it seems that it turned out.

Well, it's not my nose.

In fact, it doesn't look like you.

And this mole! Where is this mole on my face? No!

Hm, really, no.

And then this old one, and I'm young. This one lies in a coffin, and I'm still alive.

Mr. photographer, I'm with my daughter, I just want to warn you, she has a squint.

It's okay, we'll align the eyes.

But she's very naughty.

We will press the ears.

She's missing teeth.

Let's draw the teeth. By the way, if it's not a secret, why are you photographing her?

Isn't it clear? For a passport! Who will marry her without a passport?

Chukchi are removed for a passport. The photographer cheated, took one photo and distributed it to everyone. One Chukchi says:

The photo is definitely not mine.

The photographer was genuinely surprised:

Are your eyes?

Is this nose yours?

Your face?

So why isn't this your photo?

The jacket is not mine.

A geographer is assigned to photograph a large forest fire. But due to the large smoke on the ground, good shots did not work out, and he calls the editorial office with a request to rent a small plane for him. Chief Editor assures that the plane will be waiting for him at the local airfield. And indeed, in the morning, having reached the airfield, he sees an airplane standing on the runway and warming up the engines. Excited to get started, the photographer jumps in with his many cameras and shouts to the pilot:

Forward, forward, fly!

The pilot accelerates the plane and they take off.

Fly to the north side of the fire, the photographer tells the pilot, and make three or four approaches at low altitude.

For what? he asks.

Then I have to take pictures! I'm a photographer, and all photographers take pictures! - the photographer is annoyed.

After a long pause, the pilot says:

Are you saying you're not a flight instructor?

Once a photographer took a picture of actress Greta Garbo. She didn't like the picture very much.

What happened to you all of a sudden? Last time you photographed me so well, but here I don’t look like myself at all!

Oh,” said the photographer, smiling sadly, “then I was twenty-five years younger.

Whoever found a passport in the name of Vasily Vasilyevich Popin, a big request not to laugh at my

Photograph.

Citizens! Use the urgent phototelegraph to send money. In one hour, the addressee will receive an exact photocopy of your money!

The old woman brought a portrait of her late husband to the photo studio.

Can you make more of it?

No problem madam.

Can you take off your hat?

Certainly. Please describe what hairstyle he had.

For what? You'll see when you take your hat off his head.

Mr. photographer, do you take pictures of the blind?

No? For the blind, we already have ready-made photographs.

After friendly party one of its participants, a photographer by profession, brings a friend to his studio.

Dr-r-roo... w... w... now!.. Can you m-make me a group... photo... graphic?

Of course! P-please... get up half-bow-ru-gom!

Seven Chinese people come to the photo studio, stand - three below, and four on their shoulders, then vice versa - four below, and three on their shoulders.

The stunned photographer, having done his job, asks:

Are you an acrobat?

No, why do you think so! It's just that one of us was told to bring a photo for documents, but he forgot which one, either 3x4 or 4x3.

The police sent to all stations a picture of the wanted criminal from seven angles. Some time later, a coded message was received from one precinct: "Six have been arrested, the seventh is under surveillance."

Private Petrenko received a letter from his girlfriend. He said that he met another and asks to return her photo. Petrenko grieved, then collected all the unnecessary photographs of women from the whole company and sent them to the girl with a note:

"Honey, unfortunately I can't remember which one you are.

Please leave your photo and send the rest back to me."

"New Russian" bought a photo studio. He advertised in the newspaper: "A fashion model is required for erotica. An hour of work is 10,000 bucks!"

Many applicants came, one was selected. Photographed for 3 hours. Then the owner comes out and announces:

Payment on the spot, in cash. Hey, photographer, how many times did you click?

One hundred and twenty frames.

What exposure did you set?

One five hundredth of a second.

The owner turns to the fashion model:

Well, you, in kind, didn’t even work for half a second ...

Sarah Bernhardt and Elizabeth Taylor pose for the photographer: One:

Lift your chin up, dear... Other: -You too, especially the second one!

If you think you didn't turn out well in a picture, don't rush to throw it away. Just take it out in 20 years and your opinion will change dramatically.

Once, after a photo shoot, the photographer was invited to dinner with the customer, he took with him finished work to give them to the client. The customer's wife, seeing the photos, exclaimed: What wonderful photos! You definitely have a very expensive camera. The photographer did not answer, but as he went home he said: Thank you so much, the dinner was amazingly prepared. You must have very expensive pans.

On international competition photo titled "The Gulf of Finland" was won by a picture that depicts a Finn drinking vodka from a bottle right out of the neck on the Neva embankment.

Photo-Lefty: On a 1x1 pixel image, a pixel managed to fit his name and a photo of the woman he loves...

As soon as you notice that you look like your passport photo, you urgently need a vacation.

Photomodel competition. The organizer enters the hall and calls the names of three models:

Ivanenko, Petrenko, Sidorenko...

Me, me too, me too ... - another one asked, bouncing.

The organizer looked at her carefully:

Okay, so are you. Get out of here immediately!

I always take pictures of people on the streets... Why? So that's the fun part! :) November 23rd, 2017

Today's topic of my duty is street photography. Those who have been reading me for a long time know that I really love photographing people while traveling. Moreover, I consider only those posts in which there are a lot of life scenes and portraits to be the most successful in photography. Why? Everything is simple. The city is people, not houses. And it is human stories that add liveliness to the posts and allow you to show the shades of a particular city or country as best as possible. I am often asked: how do you do it?

I'm telling.

1. How do I do it?

Previously, specifically in order to photograph people, I carried a telephoto with me. With a telephoto, you can "aim" and catch interesting faces or scenes. The trouble is that it is heavy, and sometimes, while I was lifting it, I lost precious seconds. Telephoto is good because you can photograph people from afar. And don't embarrass anyone. But what if the most interesting thing happens in front of your eyes? And then my wonderful smartphone with a cool camera came to my aid. When I walk through crowded streets, it is always on. Always ready to hunt. People don't realize that I'm filming them... My next question follows from this statement.

2. Am I embarrassed to film people without warning? It's not good, it's dishonest, and so on!!!

I do not think so. And that's why. I have a principle - I never post ugly photos of people. If, for example, a person is photographed in an unsuccessful angle or pose. I love people and I take pictures with good attitude, not wanting to offend them, but trying to convey their individuality. Well, then, I do not take pictures where it is impossible to do so.

And sometimes strangers are happy to pose for me :)

3. How do I distinguish between locals and non-locals?

This is what I have been studying for a long time. Before, I used to proudly post a post of "Frenchwoman", and then I review it, and there most of them are just tourist girls. Now I do it differently. I do not take pictures in large areas full of tourists. I try to delve into non-tourist places and catch scenes there :)

Many of those whose blogs have already been featured in my reviews are very good at photographing colorful people on their travels. For example, api_ano And zhzhitel But I decided not to repeat myself. Therefore, I asked a question about street photography to other bloggers whose photos I also like :)

Master of Photography - Vitaly Ragulin dervishv . Experienced photographer, master of his craft. His photographs are poignant, about life...

When I asked him to tell me how he does it, he answered briefly. "I'm watching."

And here is another one - from Kaliningrad, his nickname in LiveJournal - rumyantsevphoto

He spoke very well about reportage photography:

"In any reportage, the most important thing is, of course, people. It does not matter what you are shooting: an industrial facility, a football match, or a street travel report. Without people in the frame, factory floors, an empty stadium, and even a pretty old street will be look boring.

However, when photographing people, it is very important to follow a few important rules. To make the photos come alive, people in the frame should do their usual thing: communicate easily, buy fruits, work, play sports, do some kind of creativity, etc. Not a single staged photo session can be compared in terms of "depth of the picture" with a real live reportage.

The photographer must be able to be invisible. Seeing a camera aimed at him, any person will subconsciously tense up, and a smile is unlikely to come out natural. And here, without a telephoto lens, of course, nowhere.

The photographer must also take into account that not all people in the frame are interesting or photogenic. The ability to choose the right subject for shooting does not come immediately, but only with the passage of time and experience gained. Sometimes you have to follow a person through the lens for about 15 minutes, holding your finger on the shutter in order to wait for that very single frame ...

And the last thing I want to say ... Photographer with a huge reflex camera and with the same huge lens, it is sometimes very noticeable and attracts attention in a crowd or in places where its presence is not particularly welcome. And here, modern mirrorless compact systems will always come to the rescue, making it easy to take high-quality shots, without particularly standing out."

platpaul - a great blogger from Germany. I highly recommend it to everyone! I absolutely agree with his statement: "On trips and travels, there is always a huge component of impressions - of course, people, I always like to photograph interesting characters, just characteristic personalities, some kind of life scenes on the streets of cities."

Inga Melnikov - arctic-inga.ru I have known for several years. Before my eyes, Inga improved and honed her blogging style. I started taking pictures of people not so long ago. And she's progressing!
Here is how Inga answered my question why she does it :)
"First of all, I love emotions, experiences, impressions reflected on faces, if I shoot at some event. It's very interesting. Seeing these emotions, I have stories in the form of comics, one of which I did anyway)) I like look and think through their thoughts, guess what they see and feel, what they think.Or interesting faces, extraordinary in their images, hairstyles, clothes, some movements, actions. Such a visual psychology turns out. And I just shoot, I see an interesting character ", I throw up the camera and seize the moment. It happens that a person is clearly dissatisfied with the shooting of his person, then I don’t post his photo, I delete it. And sometimes they smile, and then the face opens up more fully, it transforms)) I smile back and thank you with a nod for permission to take a photo. If they don’t notice my shooting, which is more interesting to me, then I look, I don’t post very negative emotions, you never know what happened to a person, but I share it on my blog with people who are disposed to a more positive look. Street photography is my favorite genre) )"

Do you photograph people on the streets while traveling? If not, why not?

Here is a poll :)