Mustang1 wrote:
Many people love to say, "lucky shot" upon seeing a photo they like. Is a great photo always one derived purely from luck. Or is there a great photographer responsible for that exposure? Your comments please . . .
"Good luck" to me, means you were at the right spot/place at the right time. Assume you went out to take some landscapes, and all of a sudden you hear some noise, and turn to see a couple of bucks are going at it locking horns, that's luck. Getting a good shot is not luck, it's knowing the camera and experience. A beginner might not get the shot, that would also be luck.
A person who can afford a Lamborghini or a Ferrari does not make them a good driver any more than a photographer with a high-end camera means that they must take good pictures.
A lot of practice will help you to have more great images or luck.
Luck is a combination of things.
You can plan all you want for a location, time of the day, time of the year, study about the habits of an animal, check the weather, etc., however, if the animal does show up, you are out of luck.
Mustang1 wrote:
Many people love to say, "lucky shot" upon seeing a photo they like. Is a great photo always one derived purely from luck. Or is there a great photographer responsible for that exposure? Your comments please . . .
Luck is what happens at the intersection of preparation and persistence.
genocolo
Loc: Vail and Gasparilla Island
Great composition? No. Pure Luck!
They say composition is the most artistic element under a photographers control.
Fotoartist wrote:
They say composition is the most artistic element under a photographers control.
I've always been a proponent of composition. Composition is King!
Mustang1 wrote:
Many people love to say, "lucky shot" upon seeing a photo they like. Is a great photo always one derived purely from luck. Or is there a great photographer responsible for that exposure? Your comments please . . .
I know it can happen both ways, and not happen both ways.
Mustang1 wrote:
Many people love to say, "lucky shot" upon seeing a photo they like. Is a great photo always one derived purely from luck. Or is there a great photographer responsible for that exposure? Your comments please . . .
I always remember Lee Trevino, who upon being congratulated by a reporter on his "lucky" shot, replied, "the more I practice, the luckier i get!"
Photography is easy. Get the image in focus and shoot lots of versions. Learn to keep only the best one or two.
IMHO, if the unexpected happens (something you couldn't do on purpose) and it's great, it's luck. If what you expect to happen happens and it's great, it's skill and you are a great photographer.
When I learned how to draw architectuly, I began to see.
Photographs that are planned or scheduled, as in a pre-determined venue, are the ones requiring skill by the photographer. Street photography, nature, weather, and similar photos result from being in the right place at the right time and being ready to get the photo are, in my definition, luck. The best example I can think of is the iconic photo of the sailor kissing a nurse in Times Square at the end of WWII. That was not posed, planned, or even expected. The photographer was in the right place at the right time; LUCK.
LouieP
Loc: Sebring/Avon Park, FL area
If Your being at the location was for some primary purpose other than taking a specific photo, then the photo is one that results from time—location -subject ‘luck’.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.