Publisher don't like to include irrelevant information regarding photography in books and lives because public like to read only photographers experiences. They love to read imaginary story and pictures. They don't like to read which camera photographer's used to captured great pictures and why they love to used that camera as well as what's features of camera. How they captured pictures? So that's why no one like to include additional information of camera and their techniques.
Portraits By Mina Oakville Photographers
is famous portrait Professional Studio that offer all type of portrait photography with best customer services like business portraits
, family portraits
and executive portraits
I doubt this is true because I always want to know that stuff but then again I'm not normal lol
Originally Posted by ScarletBrown
We know you're not normal Stone.
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
I doubt it's true also, but I think the reason has to do with the intent/focus of the book. Is the book about "the content/the pretty pictures" or is it a "how to".
Not saying it can't do both, it just normally isn't.
Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR
"We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin
I just was introduced to this photographer in another thread: http://www.craigvarjabedian.com/
One of the links on his main page is called Processes & Tools. Seems like what you are looking for. I think it is interesting to see what materials and equipment photographers choose.
I would be more interested in why heor she took the picture and what the photographer is trying to communicate with it. equipment is secondary at best.
Originally Posted by horacekenneth
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I just flipped to the back of John Sexton's Recollections (which is getting very dusty) and re-glanced over the tech pages. With all due respect to this revered photographer, even for his own students, is there anything more arbitrary than f stops? I've seen interviews with him, he's a very thoughtful guy, and I'm sure the addition of that information is nothing more than a genre convention. I've only ever observed it with traditional landscape photographers, who are usually engaged in 'workshop culture', where it might be encouraged to jot this information on the back of every print. It's quite a finicky habit then.
This Craig Varjabedian guy linked (whose images are very nice incidentally) clearly comes from the same school as Sexton. I think it comes down to the old 'taking/making' anxiety of this classic landscape genre - as if focal length, speed, aperture, developer etc. are somehow 'evidence' which can be supplied in the event of being challenged!
'Cows are very fond of being photographed, and, unlike architecture, don't move.' - Oscar Wilde
It's my thought, that other than mentioned above, it limits one to use the information. By trying to copy what tools and techniques a photographer used you limit yourself to the status of a mimic.
By knowing why and the photographers thoughts, a better impression can be gained. You also have some understanding of how to approach a similar subject or situation, whether to make it different or express a similar attitude.
That's the beautiful part of Ansel Adams "Examples," the stories and recollections. His impression and thoughts at the time clarify the image. By knowing the values and where they were placed, you can calculate the rest of the expossure. He usually tells his development, N, -, or +, so without giving you his development time, he tells the experienced photographer what to do with scenes like that if they wish to make something similar in expression or values.
He does the same in his Basic Photography series, which makes it a more useful tool than saying "I shot this at f/8, 1/60 and that's how you do it!" Remember, in photography, there is no true right and wrong. Right is what works for you.
f-stops are not arbitrary at all, and to someone learning the craft this information can be of value, or at the very least, of interest.
Originally Posted by batwister
There's no "getting it". The book in itself is the whole idea about why she took the pictures and blaba.
Originally Posted by Sirius Glass
A few extra pages with shooting infos would be super welcome. I personally spend a lot of time determining which developer to use and why. As a photo amateur, I would LOVE to know what other photographers use in their books.
I'm astounded that some apug members don't give more importance to this. Is this APUG or what?