The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Any tips for deciding the moment?

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
If I may, I think, I was more in to asking about deciding the moment rather than how to capture it. :)
That's where "time" enters the stage. To know what or when the decisive moment is, you need to learn the history behind it, to spend time observing. There are exceptions of course, but those are mostly called "luck".

This goes for all photography really. If you're going to take a photo of Bill Gates or Miley Cyrus, your photo will be influenced by what you know about them, at least if you're a good photographer and manage to create something that reflects your view. A photo of aunt Nellie will look different, because you relationship with aunt Nellie is different from that with Miley Cyrus.

Even portrait photographers who specialise in a certain style and whose portraits look very similar on the surface, pose and light different subjects differently, depending on the personality and background of that subject. With exception of mass production senior portraits etc. of course. They mostly look terrible.

So, to be able to tell a "one-click-story", you need time to observe, and when the decisive moment gets closer, you mostly feel it. Take my photo above. I had watched those kids for something like 20 minutes, drinking my water, eating my rice. They knew I was there with a camera. Westerners are easy to spot in rural Cambodian villages. As time progressed, the boys got increasingly daring, and the girls more giggly. When one of the girls looked up towards me with a telling smile, I knew that the boys had passed a threshold and that it was "clicking time", and quite right; the game was finished a few seconds later.

Every instance is different of course, and the sequence that leads to the photo can take anything from a few seconds to many hours, but the anticipation that Jono mentioned earlier is mostly something that comes through observation. The ability to see, and the patience to wait.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Well, anticipate is the answer, and practice, and trust your reactions (I'm not saying I'm good at this, but I know when I'm in the 'zone' and I don't think it's very compatable with conscious thought).
Jono, your last sentence is key thought IMO.

I've always believed that heightened sensitivity and intuitions played a huge role in doing this sort of photography. It was more apparently so when using a film camera since you didn't really know what you actually got until inspecting the contact sheets later and the real still image magic revealed itself.

- Marc
I can relate to this very strongly. The feeling of wellbeing while exploring a location and its people gives me a shot of "Photonalin" directly into the centre of the brain. It's the strongest drug there is, 100% virtual and highly addictive. Luckily, there's no known cure against the addiction, but the addiction in itself reduces GAS to near zero while the addict is on a high :p

I think that there are two really dangerous words here: instinct and intuition.

My Father (who was a wonderful photographer) always used to say to me "Get a grab shot, and then stop and think and get it right". What I've found to be more and more the case is that the grab shot is the best one.

Then, last year I heard a program about 'First Stage Thinking'. The research was done at Imperial College in London and was done with the co-operation of a lot of chess grand masters - basically they wrote down their 'instinctive' 'Grab Shot' move (within the first seconds) - and then what they actually did - and evaluated which was better (when it was different). The result was startling - I can't remember the exact figure, but something like 95% of the time the 'instinctive' move was the correct one. They then went on to do brain scans and discovered that there was a huge amount more brain activity in the first few seconds than in the rest of the time available for the move.

Of course, if you're no grand master your 'instinctive' move is going to be rubbish . . .

Anyway, the upshot of the research was to realise that "First Stage Thinking" is not conscious, but it encompasses in extremely short time everything you know about a situation - everything you've read and everything you've seen and everything you've been taught. 'Instinct' and 'Intuition' imply some kind of magic and are thus slightly derogatory. . . . . . and Luck is not really the point either - I certainly find these days that I get many many more 'lucky' shots than I used to - my brain knows that juxtaposition of motifs has just occurred , but not my conscious brain.

As far as the kit is concerned - of course I prefer to use a rangefinder as well, but in actual fact the only real requirement is that you know how to make it work really well, so that you don't waste precious time making (the wrong) decision and muddling up the special results of your " first stage thinking"

Realising all this has really changed my approach to shooting almost everything - I trust myself to get it right without having to work it out, and that changes everything.

Sorry - blather blather :lecture:
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
My opinion (and it is just my own opinion) is that the gear CAN play a factor in capturing a decisive moment based on the comfort level of the photographer and their ability to anticipate the "decisive moment." It also is dependent on how long that moment lasts.

Looking through and thinking about some of the shots I've taken over the last 5-10 years that I've gotten more into photography as a hobby I'e had decisive moment type shots taken with my D-Lux 4, my Panasonic G1, my Leica M9's, and my Sony FE/E/A mount cameras... Ironically I don't have many taken with my Canon Digital Rebel but that was more about my lack of comfort with it at the time rather than the capability of the camera.

Some of the shots that have stood out for me were a homeless guy looking in my direction shot in San Francisco at Union Square taken with a G1.

I_Shot_It_March 5 by HiredArm, on Flickr

A group of children conversing and playing at an orphanage in Africa (but only once was paying attention to the fact I was taking a picture with the M9.)

Prints-4 by HiredArm, on Flickr

A bird about to fly away taken with a GF1.

Alcatraz by HiredArm, on Flickr

Or a hartebeest feeling comfortable enough to eat once they sensed I was of no danger to it taken with an A7R (the shutter actually didn't scare it away either.)

Hartebeest by HiredArm, on Flickr
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Luck, instinct and intuition are mostly results of long training and hard work. Not any training and not any work though.

As for being comfortable with the gear; yes, that's very important, and it does in no way have to be the best gear from an objective point of view. But, being able to change any vital camera setting within a fraction of a second without looking at the camera helps a lot sometimes.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
...But, being able to change any vital camera setting within a fraction of a second without looking at the camera helps a lot sometimes.
Or having it already set up for the correct situation from the get go. :thumbup:

When you're in those decisive situations I think that it's rare that you're afforded the luxury to switch settings. Believe me I've missed plenty of shots by not being ready at an equipment level with all of my cameras from the Canon DSLR, Micro 4/3 Mirrorless, the Sony whatevers, and even the simplistic Leica. If you aren't ready before the moment is about to occur then you'll just miss it altogether more often than not.
 
J

JohnW

Guest
If I may, I think, I was more in to asking about deciding the moment rather than how to capture it. :)
Vivek, I don't mean to be esoteric, but I think if we're deciding, we've likely missed it.

To me the decisive moment is entirely internal -- a flash of perception, a spark of recognition. At least that's the prerequisite. Something internal, instinctual triggers and compels a photograph. It's those internal triggers that we need to watch for and respond to.

Of course, if there's time to study and analyze and wait for a scene to develop, that's good. But the telling moment originates in that flash of perception. And that requires moving through the streets with an openness and attentiveness to what's outside, but equally so to our responses.

Here's one of mine. Definitely a flash of perception, almost unconscious, to which I responded with one quick shot. Fortunately, I had a 25mm on my M9, so no focusing or fiddling at all.

John

 
Last edited:

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Or having it already set up for the correct situation from the get go. :thumbup:

When you're in those decisive situations I think that it's rare that you're afforded the luxury to switch settings. Believe me I've missed plenty of shots by not being ready at an equipment level with all of my cameras from the Canon DSLR, Micro 4/3 Mirrorless, the Sony whatevers, and even the simplistic Leica. If you aren't ready before the moment is about to occur then you'll just miss it altogether more often than not.
... but then, something unexpected happens, something that requires a different DOF, a faster shutter speed or exposure compensation. Often, I've been able to take a shot because I've been able to change a vital setting on the fly. Even more often, I've missed it because I couldn't.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I think that there are two really dangerous words here: instinct and intuition.

My Father (who was a wonderful photographer) always used to say to me "Get a grab shot, and then stop and think and get it right". What I've found to be more and more the case is that the grab shot is the best one.

Then, last year I heard a program about 'First Stage Thinking'. The research was done at Imperial College in London and was done with the co-operation of a lot of chess grand masters - basically they wrote down their 'instinctive' 'Grab Shot' move (within the first seconds) - and then what they actually did - and evaluated which was better (when it was different). The result was startling - I can't remember the exact figure, but something like 95% of the time the 'instinctive' move was the correct one. They then went on to do brain scans and discovered that there was a huge amount more brain activity in the first few seconds than in the rest of the time available for the move.

Of course, if you're no grand master your 'instinctive' move is going to be rubbish . . .

Anyway, the upshot of the research was to realise that "First Stage Thinking" is not conscious, but it encompasses in extremely short time everything you know about a situation - everything you've read and everything you've seen and everything you've been taught. 'Instinct' and 'Intuition' imply some kind of magic and are thus slightly derogatory. . . . . . and Luck is not really the point either - I certainly find these days that I get many many more 'lucky' shots than I used to - my brain knows that juxtaposition of motifs has just occurred , but not my conscious brain.

As far as the kit is concerned - of course I prefer to use a rangefinder as well, but in actual fact the only real requirement is that you know how to make it work really well, so that you don't waste precious time making (the wrong) decision and muddling up the special results of your " first stage thinking"

Realising all this has really changed my approach to shooting almost everything - I trust myself to get it right without having to work it out, and that changes everything.

Sorry - blather blather :lecture:
Hmm, sounds like an academic attempt to validate instinctual and intuitive reactions. Hardly "magic", both are informed by our own personal combination of attained knowledge, creative experience and emotional sensitivity (how open and connected we may be with our surroundings?).

What none of this explains is the murky territory of "Talent". Seems some naturally have it, some gain it, some never get in touch with it.

As example, "Prodigies" rarely have had the training, experience or apparent emotional maturity to academically explain their heightened level of ability or talent. IMO, it stands to reason that if there are Prodigies at one end of the talent scale, there exists degrees of it.

We explain those with an artistic talent as having an "ear for music" or an "eye for drawing". When my son was 7 years old, he was introduced to music at school, and chose the flute. Once he understood the basics of how to make a sound with it, he could hear most any piece of music and play it "by ear". As he moved through life and pursued other interests, he lost that raw intuitive musical talent, (or more likely applied the creative thinking to the other pursuits).

When shown children painting in a classroom, Picasso was asked what he thought of their efforts ... "When I was their age I could draw like Raphael. It has taken me a lifetime to learn to draw like them."

The point is that we can become over-informed, over-taught, over-exposed to the point of polluting our own unique and intuitive take on the world around us.

What resonates with me is your comment on "Trust". If we trust our initial instincts and intuitions, try to get in touch with them and stay aware of them as we "learn" by trial-and-error, exposure to different thinking, or academically, I believe that experience/knowledge then serves rather than leads our particular creative efforts.

When I teach photography, I promote the notion of looking without the camera. To learn to see, to become aware of those around you more intensely, to see the light, to feel the pulse of life ... it seems to help keep the logical operation of the photographic tool in perspective a bit better.

What I particularly like about the "Decisive Moment" approach, it that it is never ending because life's milli-moments are in constant flux ... both our's and everyone/everthing around us.

Anyway ...

- Marc
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Vivek, I don't mean to be esoteric, but I think if we're deciding, we've likely missed it.
John, We speak the same language or at least the dialect. :)



Never seek to tell thy love
Love that never told can be
For the gentle wind does move
Silently invisibly

I told my love I told my love
I told her all my heart
Trembling cold in ghastly fears
Ah she doth depart


- William Blake

There is an element of mystique. One can not be caught in the moment to capture it. I think most here have tried to express it in various ways.

Nice stuff gents. :)
 

jonoslack

Active member
HI There Marc
Hmm, sounds like an academic attempt to validate instinctual and intuitive reactions. Hardly "magic", both are informed by our own personal combination of attained knowledge, creative experience and emotional sensitivity (how open and connected we may be with our surroundings?).
Well - I heard about the research and it clarified my mind about the way I actually work (and made me realise that you really do make your own 'Luck'

What none of this explains is the murky territory of "Talent". Seems some naturally have it, some gain it, some never get in touch with it.
Indeed -first of all you must define talent!


The point is that we can become over-informed, over-taught, over-exposed to the point of polluting our own unique and intuitive take on the world around us.
We can - but of course this stuff never enters one's head when actually shooting . . .to be honest nothing much enters my head, I'm simply concentrating on what I'm doing.

I actually think you've got a really good point here - when I see a line of photographers waiting for the dawn with cameras on tripods . . . . . actually, when I see pictures of them, because I'll be tucked up in bed!

What resonates with me is your comment on "Trust". If we trust our initial instincts and intuitions, try to get in touch with them and stay aware of them as we "learn" by trial-and-error, exposure to different thinking, or academically, I believe that experience/knowledge then serves rather than leads our particular creative efforts.
I think so -
 

jlm

Workshop Member
words of wisdom provided in a photoworskhop long ago (Heceta Head, Oregon, 1776)
"you bang away and bang away, and sometimes you get one."
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Pure Skill and Anticipation! :D :ROTFL: :ROTFL: :ROTFL:



Olympus E-M5 Mark II + Leica/Panasonic 42.5/1.2 Nocticron
 

Tim

Active member
Decisive moment is something you do during taking or making an image that you or a viewer of your image like the outcome.
It can be planned or not and even just a "lucky" shot.

If it evokes a feeling other than boredom its a decisive moment photo.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Decisive moment is something you do during taking or making an image that you or a viewer of your image like the outcome.
It can be planned or not and even just a "lucky" shot.

If it evokes a feeling other than boredom its a decisive moment photo.
The decisive coincidence?
 

Tim

Active member
The decisive coincidence?
Perhaps there is such a thing, but the intent is generally always to make a good photo, so the intent is there even if you have lucky timing. I think many of my better images are lucky timing, but I was trying at the time to get a good image.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Perhaps there is such a thing, but the intent is generally always to make a good photo, so the intent is there even if you have lucky timing. I think many of my better images are lucky timing, but I was trying at the time to get a good image.
Most of the time I am just trying to get an image. Full stop. Whether that turns out to be appealing (to me and or the others) can not be foreseen.
 
Top