skingfong Loc: Sacramento

Composition is a great start, but I think you have to have a basic understanding of the exposure triangle. You need both composition and technical skills to be well rounded. It's like yin and yang. Knowing what to expect and the limitations of your gear can't hurt. If you can great shots from in auto mode that's fine and dandy but it's also limiting. Then again shutter and aperture priority is semi-auto. So is P mode and manual mode with auto ISO. Knowing how to use apps for PP is another technical aspect also.

To get the complete picture I think you need both a good eye and tech knowledge. If I didn't have any technical knowledge, I would only use my phone to take pictures.

dar_clicks Loc: Utah

The Brownie had a couple of filters, yellow and close-up, and mine was without flash but had time exposure provision which was handy indoors or other dark situations — no tripod socket though, so finding a way to prop it up securely was ... interesting!
- The Instamatic had two shutter speeds. The slower one could be done by putting a used flash cube, or it’s base, into the flash cube socket which was useful sometimes. While skiing I’d wear the camera on a strap under my coat with a sunglasses lens between the camera lens and the hole in front of the case’s leather strap that went across the front. That got the exposure closer for the snow but didn’t do much for sharpness! —— To the point, the answer to your question is Yes. Obviously the camera’s controls were too limited and one had to pay attention to where the sun was, etc., and that affected composition. Later I had to break away from some of my elders’ advice like “always keep the sun at your back, ...” You can probably see a little better now why I can welcome many of the improvements that have been made to photo equipment. BTW, some very decent prints can be made from those old Brownie’s 6x6 negs!

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

Very very well said! It’s not always the tech perfect sharp phot that moves me but one that appeals to my emotions

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

Sometime back a sort of dumb question was asked and someone did some research on the guy that asked it and found out he was selling a lot of his work on the net and said he was a troll for asking such a thing. Then someone else dug a little deeper and all his photos were taken on Auto. A new guy that had a good eye. Just saying - Dave

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Granted, a technically imperfect photo can move people, and is better than a technically perfect photo which is boring. But the ideal is to have both.

srt101fan

John, several here, including the OP (SharpShooter) seem to agree with you. I always thought of composition differently, more along the lines of the definitions here:

https://photographylife.com/what-is-composition-in-photography

To quote from that site: "Simply put, composing an image means arranging elements within it in a way that suits the core idea or goal of your work best.....Composition is a way of guiding the viewer’s eye towards the most important elements of your work, sometimes – in a very specific order. A good composition can help make a masterpiece even out of the dullest objects and subjects in the plainest of environments. On the other hand, a bad composition can ruin a photograph completely, despite how interesting the subject may be."

I guess this points out again how important definitions are in allowing people to communicate effectively!

SharpShooter - Sorry if this goes a little too far afield from your "technical" issue!

autofocus Loc: North Central Connecticut

yes, emotion is very important in a photo, even if it's not technically perfect, I agree. But, as a shooter, wouldn't it be good to know how you got there should you want to duplicate something like that again?...or do you just leave it to chance? I opt for the former, but that's just me

BebuLamar

I agree with SS that one doesn't need to know much about the technical side of photography to be a good photographer. However, I am a hobbyist and not a professional the technical side is more fun and more definitive so I like to discuss about the technical aspect on the UHH and not the artistic. To me artistic is in the beholder. I do not judge or comment.

drklrd Loc: Cincinnati Ohio

After over 1500 weddings I say i could shoot a wedding with a point and shoot camera. Some shots i would do with a great camera might not be in the mix of shots because of the limitations of a point and shoot but a bride may not notice if she never saw those kind of shots when she hired the photographer. The dance i shot last night i think is proof of it. I set the camera to aperture mode f8 pre-focused the lens 6 or 7 feet and went around in the dark shooting the high school kids dancing. It was too dark for my Nikon D7200 to see to focus on auto focus and to dark to see to focus but still enough for the eye to see. I used ISO 3200 to try and get separation of the shots from the background. Just saying a point and shoot with flash would have been sufficient. I do not fully agree that as a pro I could fully without the added benefit of more lenses and camera bodies but for some shots point and shoot will work.

suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ

You need some understanding and technical skill to enhance your image in the camera and after but without good composition and an interesting subject technical skill is all for naught. It's not an either/or, it requires both skill sets. BUT it doesn't require the amount of technical knowledge that is discussed in excruciating detail here.

Frank W Loc: Adirondacks in NY

I'M DOOMED.... :-)

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

This may sound silly, but it has been my experience in teaching. You need to be concerned about: Subject, Intent (why take the pic, what moves you), Composition (reflects the intent, directs the eye), lighting (reflects the intent, directs the eye), depth of field (reflects the intent, directs the eye).
Each of those has many variations and techniques. If your shot does not look right, explore whichever area you need to work on. This goes on for approximately......forever.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Show me a fine composition technically well done without an interesting subject. I'll show you the reverse and I'll bet mine wins.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

There are three main elements, Content, Composition, and Technique. Lighting and depth of field fall under technique. Intent is usually reserved for legal proceedings.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

As it's said, a picture is worth a 1000 words. Here's two. All that was available to me was f/stop, shutter speed, and ISO. Nothing more, nothing less. In the second photo, the additional judgment to use of an X1 filter.

I do have a smattering knowledge of H-D curves. I guess that could be considered technical.
--Bob

(Download)


(Download)