Came across a comment by someone yesterday suggesting photographing stage shows is an easy job and so it cannot be considered as photography. When people consider themselves as photographers just by owning a camera, we may need to prepare for even worse ideas than this. It is the unfortunate fate of the photographers in current generation! If somebody defines performing art photography as something like clicking in auto mode (sometimes even with out knowing how to turn-off flash in camera!) or in any of those basic modes and using the pictures as they are obtained from the camera, then it is easy. Of course, there can be good images in that too. But, photography is all about the person behind the camera deciding what to shoot and what not to, how to shoot and how not to, from where to shoot and from where not to and so on. Photography is NOT, the camera decides everything for you and all that you need to do is to walk around and simply click click click... Photographing stage shows also involve a lot of decisions to be made, once the shooter move away from the automated basic modes. Thus, it very well qualifies as photography. In short, it is all about how you shoot and it is applicable not just for stage shows alone, but for any stream of photography. PS: When you buy a Violin, you will only become an owner of a Violin, not a Violinist. And when you buy a camera... you decide! :)
Posted on: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 02:20:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015