What I wish I had known about Photography

This is my list of things about photography I had to learn for myself.  Some can't be taught, some are common sense, and some are secrets some photographers don't share:

1: Photographers paint with light.  Gag, how cliche does that sound?  I ignored this.  Obviously light is what is recorded on the sensor (or on the film), and how that light is captured will yield different results.  I know that.  However it took me a long time to realize the power light has.  The quality and direction can make a "ho hum" image POP.  My advice:  Pay attention to light.  Watch how other photographers use it.  You will soon find that the mediocre photographers use light just to light up an image to capture it, a GREAT photographer will use it to their advantage.  They know how to harness it, control it, manipulate it and when just to leave it alone and let it do it's thing.

2: Photographers that create beautiful images will succede.  Yeah, maybe, but not no matter what.  Average photographers can make just as much if not more money.  You must either have a talent for business and marketing or develop the skills you will need to sell your photography.  If no one knows about you then how can they give you money???

3:  Get it right in camera.  That's false.  Get it the best you can in camera.  Then use modern technology to make your image perfect.  Why not?  Look at every glamour magazine.  If you think that person looks that way naturally you are kidding yourself.  Between fantastic makeup artists and Photoshop anyone can look fabulous.  There is nothing unethical about this.  Do you really think the food in commercials is realistic?  In a marketing class I learned that ice cream is usually mashed potatoes in commericals.  It won't melt, it can be colored, sprinkles can be added, it's edible, that model can really lick it... false advertising?  maybe, smart - yes!

4:  Purchased actions & templates are necessary.  Nope, their not.  The person selling you their Photoshop add-ons and special gadgets to attach to your flash are business men.  They want your money.  Don't be afraid to spend money to get the equipment you need but be careful about buying every new widget on the market that promises to take your photography to "another level".  Just like losing weight, there is no magic pill that will make you take better photographs.  Diet and excercise are hard work, so is practicing with your camera and studying the work of the masters.

5:  You have to do business just like Mr. Photographer-down-the-street.  It's your business.  Do what works for you.  If you aren't comfortable with something - don't do it.  If you think of a new innovative way to do something - try it.  The greatest success stories happen to people that think outside the box.

6:  Shooting beautiful people makes beautiful photographs.  Hardly.  There are two flaws here.  First, everyone is beautiful, I have really found this to be true.  Sometimes corrective lighting and poses are needed to minimize problems.  Sometimes these "problems" are what make someone beautiful and unique!  Learn to see beauty in everyone, you will be a better photographer and a better people person.
The second problem is just like the saying about missing the forest for the trees.  Sometimes we don't see a huge flaw in a photograph because a beautiful girl is taking away the attention.  I believe it is easier to make mistake with models than average people.  You don't see the problem for the beauty.

7:  ...but my clients like it.  Don't fall into this trap.  It's an excuse.  I see this all the time - a photographer will post a picture of a beautiful child that is of poor quality.  The photographer will get their feelings hurt when honest critique is given and they will say "but the mom likes the picture".  Of course they do, it's their child (see the second part of the above point).  If you can't get over this you will never get better.  That's great if your customers like your work.  Think how much more they will like it (and pay you) as your work gets better.

These are just some thoughts I wanted to share.  I hope someone can benefit from these.

I agree,

I was just at the P.P.O.C. convention this weekend. I had a look at the print competition. There were very few, "Photography"
The majority was reliability on photoshop/effects/filters etc.
I was saddened and surprised that awards of acceptance, merit and excellence were laced on these so called images. The real photography were not even given excellent. I recall seeing a moment in time, a photograph that one could not spend time on in photoshop, it was a photograph of "Wagon" race maybe at the Calgary Stampeed. The lighting was phenomenal, the colors etc. Other Photo journalistic images didn't rise to the excellence. I guess you had to be there to see, I think Ed S would have been surprised as well. O well, I know what to do for next year. LOL No, I had no submissions.

Not only that, skin is in and skin to win, majority, 98% were not the artistic style of photographic or quality and use of lighting.

What is the American version called? here it's called Professional Photographers of Canada, America, P.P.O.A?

Anyway, sorry for going off track, thanks for the write up.

First, EXCELLENT comments!!

Second, There is no difference between using photoshop to "finish" an image and using mask/ink/gels/etc in the dark room. The only real differance is there are now a lot more people with access to the tools.

Third, I would like to add one to the list above.

An artist starts with a blank canvas and adds things to it until its just right. A photographer starts with a full canvas, and removes things until its "just right".  Its not just the subject that makes a photo, but everything that is or isn't in the frame as well.

No, I disagree.
If you want the funky looks, diffused glow, soft tar look, etc. it can be done with filters/gels on lights, lenses, it's called "Photography"

A flat image that comes out of the camera is given a "Basic" photoshop touch.

The ones that require in photoshop emulation of such filters and gels and coloration have gone beyond "Photography" it's called digital manipulation, therefore, should be in its own classification.

What about B/Ws, as long as it does not take away from your "Photography"

Are both wrong? or one wrong?
Heck no, just properly classify them.

I've copied Mikes reply and started a new thread, we've drifted off topic.