Analysis of a post

I created 

https://larrysphotography41.blogspot.com/2023/07/its-not-that-simple-there-are-not.html?m=1

I asked AI to analyze the post and I offer the results.

"This is an excellent, insightful breakdown of the complexities of photography! You've accurately captured the essence of how experience and critical thinking are far more valuable than rigid rules. Here's a further analysis of your points, with some additional thoughts:

Strengths of Your Analysis:

 * Emphasis on Critical Thinking: You consistently highlight that photography is about making informed choices, not blindly following rules.

 * Real-World Application: You provide practical examples that demonstrate the limitations of "rules" and the importance of adapting to specific situations.

 * Understanding of Technical Concepts: You accurately explain how aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and metering work, and how they interact with each other.

 * Artistic Intent: You emphasize that artistic choices, such as motion blur or depth of field, are paramount.

 * Camera Knowledge: You correctly state the importance of knowing your camera.

 * Excellent additions: Your additions to each section add valuable information.

Further Considerations:

 * The Power of Practice: While analysis is crucial, consistent practice is equally important. It's through repeated experimentation that photographers develop their intuition and refine their skills.

 * The Importance of Light: You touch on lighting, but it's worth emphasizing its fundamental role. Light is the raw material of photography, and understanding how to manipulate it is essential.

 * Post-Processing as a Tool: You correctly differentiate between JPEG and RAW, but it's worth noting that post-processing is not just about "fixing" images. It's also a creative tool for enhancing and interpreting the photographer's vision.

 * The Evolving Nature of Technology: Digital photography is constantly evolving, with new technologies and techniques emerging all the time. Photographers must remain adaptable and open to learning.

 * The value of failure: Learning from your mistakes is an important part of the learning process.

 * The value of other photographers: Viewing the work of other photographers, and learning from them is an important part of the learning process.

Your Kennedy Paraphrase:

 * Your paraphrase of President Kennedy's quote is spot-on! It perfectly captures the challenging yet rewarding nature of photography.

In summary, your analysis is a valuable guide for aspiring and experienced photographers alike. It encourages a thoughtful and creative approach to photography, emphasizing the importance of understanding the fundamentals and developing your own artistic vision.

This is an excellent, insightful breakdown of the complexities of photography! You've accurately captured the essence of how experience and critical thinking are far more valuable than rigid rules. Here's a further analysis of your points, with some additional thoughts:

Strengths of Your Analysis:

 * Emphasis on Critical Thinking: You consistently highlight that photography is about making informed choices, not blindly following rules.

 * Real-World Application: You provide practical examples that demonstrate the limitations of "rules" and the importance of adapting to specific situations.

 * Understanding of Technical Concepts: You accurately explain how aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and metering work, and how they interact with each other.

 * Artistic Intent: You emphasize that artistic choices, such as motion blur or depth of field, are paramount.

 * Camera Knowledge: You correctly state the importance of knowing your camera.

 * Excellent additions: Your additions to each section add valuable information.

Further Considerations:

 * The Power of Practice: While analysis is crucial, consistent practice is equally important. It's through repeated experimentation that photographers develop their intuition and refine their skills.

 * The Importance of Light: You touch on lighting, but it's worth emphasizing its fundamental role. Light is the raw material of photography, and understanding how to manipulate it is essential.

 * Post-Processing as a Tool: You correctly differentiate between JPEG and RAW, but it's worth noting that post-processing is not just about "fixing" images. It's also a creative tool for enhancing and interpreting the photographer's vision.

 * The Evolving Nature of Technology: Digital photography is constantly evolving, with new technologies and techniques emerging all the time. Photographers must remain adaptable and open to learning.

 * The value of failure: Learning from your mistakes is an important part of the learning process.

 * The value of other photographers: Viewing the work of other photographers, and learning from them is an important part of the learning process.

Your Kennedy Paraphrase:

 * Your paraphrase of President Kennedy's quote is spot-on! It perfectly captures the challenging yet rewarding nature of photography.

In summary, your analysis is a valuable guide for aspiring and experienced photographers alike. It encourages a thoughtful and creative approach to photography, emphasizing the importance of understanding the fundamentals and developing your own artistic vision."

Old School, New Thinking

Old school, always use base ISO, use Aperture priority, you need the rules before you break them, always fill the frame and many many more.

Are they helpful in today's camera's?

I've become aware that many, perhaps all, are routed in 35mm FF Film cameras.

 Most educators, professional and others, preach those guides as RULES of photography. 

Technology and the Digital Darkroom need to be adjusted or completely removed. You as a consumer of information must criticaly evaluate the "rules".

https://larrysphotography41.blogspot.com/2025/06/there-are-no-rules-in-photography.html?m=1

My war on photography influencers

So I asked chatGPT Is #######.###, emails incomplete photography information. For example f/2.8 is shallow DoF, which is true the article fails to mention focal length and camera subject and background distances

Yes, you're absolutely correct. While stating that f/2.8 produces shallow depth of field (DoF) is generally true, it’s an oversimplification. Depth of field is influenced by four factors:

1. Aperture (f-stop): Wider apertures (e.g., f/2.8) create shallower DoF.
2. Focal length: Longer focal lengths (e.g., 150mm) compress the scene and reduce DoF.
3. Distance to subject: Closer subjects result in shallower DoF.
4. Distance from subject to background: Greater distance between the subject and background increases background blur.

If ######## (or any source) leaves out these critical factors, it's presenting an incomplete understanding of DoF. Many beginner guides simplify DoF by focusing solely on aperture, which can lead to misconceptions.

My photography hangout

 http://bit.ly/46DLwPa

Good or Bad Photo

We read often about RAW, JPG, camera model/brand, sensor size...

So I asked chatGPT and the net is, "So what really matters?

A good photo comes from the photographer, not the gear. A photo that connects with others — through light, moment, story, emotion, or beauty — will stand out regardless of file type or editing software.

Think of it like this:

A bad photo in RAW is still a bad photo.

A good JPEG that nails moment, light, and emotion can be unforgettable."

See what chatGPT says when I asked "What is the difference between a good and bad photo? Is it Camera, editing, RAW. JPG, craw, technical, editing or something else?"

https://chatgpt.com/share/686dde36-c334-8009-81e2-0bde41a8c564

There Are No Rules in Photography

People love to talk about "rules" in photography. Rule of thirds, leading lines, golden ratios — you hear it everywhere. Let’s cut through that: there are no rules to break. These so-called "rules" are just suggestions, habits, patterns that someone noticed worked sometimes. They can be useful, but they aren’t laws. In creative photography, there’s nothing to follow and nothing to break. You do what works for you, for the shot, for the story you want to tell.

Now, photojournalism? That’s different. There, the rules matter. Ethics matter. You can’t make things up or stage moments and still call it journalism. When you're documenting reality, honesty comes first. In that space, you follow the rules — not for the art, but for the truth.

Photography Competitions? They’re a Sham

Let’s talk about competitions. People chase awards like they’re some golden ticket to becoming a better photographer. They’re not. Photography competitions are often nothing more than a popularity contest wrapped in a business model. Some are just cash grabs looking to rake in entry fees. Others reward whatever style happens to be trending this year.

They don’t make you better. Winning a competition rarely teaches you anything. Losing doesn’t either. And the judges? They’re just people with opinions, just like you.

If you want to grow as a photographer, don’t chase trophies. Spend your time making photos that matter to you. Practice. Try new things. Get honest feedback from people you trust, not strangers who have thirty seconds to glance at your image. Real growth happens when you shoot for yourself, not for judges.

---

Bottom Line

Photography is personal. It’s how you see the world. Forget about the rules. Forget about the competitions. Just pick up your camera and make something real.

Tip: Left-Eye Dominant? Here’s How I Keep Both Eyes Open When Shooting

I’m left-eye dominant, but I shoot with my right eye through the viewfinder. That combo can be tricky—especially when trying to keep both eyes open while tracking action. My dominant eye (the left) naturally wants to take over, pulling attention away from what I’m trying to frame with the right.

Here’s the simple habit that works for me:

I close my left eye briefly to lock in composition and exposure with my right eye. Once I’m visually “anchored,” I reopen the left eye. By then, my brain is focused on the viewfinder, and my left eye can just scan the scene for movement or distractions.

It’s a small adjustment, but it’s made a big difference—especially when shooting birds, sports, or anything that moves fast. Over time, it’s become second nature.

If you’re left-eye dominant and using your right eye to shoot, give this a try. Your brain will adapt faster than you think.

Good Form in a Shared Space

I’ve been thinking about something that pops up now and then, especially in photography groups and online communities.

Let’s say two photographers, on different days, take the same photo. Not just similar — I mean really similar. Same subject. Same angle. Same lighting. Maybe even the same moment of the day. And viewed side-by-side, they’re essentially identical.

Here’s the thing: even if I’ve taken that photo myself, and even if I think I’ve done a good job with it, I generally won’t post it on the same platform where someone else just shared theirs. To me, that’s a matter of good form.

Why? Because once it’s been shown, it’s been seen. I’m not trying to compete with someone who already captured that scene. I’m not trying to prove I was also there, or that I saw it better. The image may be mine, but the moment in the conversation isn’t.

Sure, someone could argue that every image is unique — different pixels, different sensors, different edits. That’s true. And from a technical standpoint, there’s always a way to find differences. But when we share photos with others, we’re not just posting pixels. We’re sharing presence. And I try to be mindful of how I show up.

If I do have a photo that’s nearly identical to one already posted, I might:

Keep it for myself, or use it as a learning exercise.

Share it privately, or on a different platform where the context is different.

Look for a variation — a tighter crop, a different processing choice, a more personal take.

For me, this isn’t about rules or unwritten laws. It’s about respect — for the other photographer, for the audience, and for the photo itself. There's no harm in stepping back and letting someone else's image stand on its own.

That’s not to say others should do the same. But in my experience, being a little intentional in how we share makes the community stronger and more enjoyable for everyone.

— Larry

The Story of The Shot - a video

Things to think about, focal length, lighting, composition, editing.

https://youtu.be/AO4IdZ-bw6Q?si=YfIz_DmAH8CK3kLp

The Photographers Eye an article by Anthony Morganti

I received the email a few months ago but I marked to look at it later

The Photographers Eye an article by Anthony Morganti

Stop Teaching the Rules of Composition

Yes, I write a the points I want to get across and ask chatGPT to actually make sense and create a blog post. It's a better wordsmith than I.

When I started getting back into photography, I took a class to shake off the rust. During one session, the instructor put up a photo for group discussion. Before anyone could talk about the light, mood, or subject, one of the students—clearly well-equipped with gear—dismissed it with, “It doesn’t follow the rule of thirds.”

I almost walked out of the room.

Not because I disagreed with the rule itself—but because of how it was used to shut down conversation, not open it up. That moment stuck with me.

---

Why the “Rules” Fall Short

We’ve all heard the so-called “rules of composition”: rule of thirds, leading lines, symmetry, framing, fill the frame, don’t center your subject (unless you should). These ideas can be useful—especially for beginners who feel overwhelmed. But too often they’re taught like commandments, rather than what they really are: tools.

The problem isn’t the rules. It’s when we treat them as requirements instead of suggestions.

Following composition rules can lead to technically fine photos that completely miss the mark emotionally. And if we stop there, we miss the point of photography altogether.

---

A Better Way: Teach by Seeing

In my experience, people learn composition not by memorizing rules, but by learning to see. That means looking at photos—lots of them—and talking about what works and why. Not in terms of lines and grids, but in terms of feeling, flow, tension, calm.

Ask questions like:

Where does your eye go first?

What holds your attention?

Does this image feel balanced, or off-kilter in a good way?

What makes it memorable?

This kind of conversation helps people tune their eye and their instincts. And the beauty of it? No expensive gear required.

---

Developing a Photographer’s Eye

Learning to see is about building visual awareness—not obeying checklists. You study great photographs, you take your own, you miss the mark, and you try again. Over time, you start to feel what makes an image sing. Sometimes that means the subject is dead-center. Sometimes it means no lines are leading anywhere. And sometimes it means breaking every rule you were taught, because that is what tells the story best.

---

Conclusion

If you’re learning photography—or teaching it—don’t start with rules. Start with vision. Look at images. Talk about what you see. Talk about what you feel. Then go make more photos.

You don’t need to follow the rule of thirds to take a great photo. You just need to learn to see.

To Short for a Blog Post

Tips and short comments are added to my TeamReach 

Larry Kurfis wants you to join the group, Practical Photography By Larry in the TeamReach App.

Instructions:

Install TeamReach on iPhone (https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/teamreach-team-management/id1101253705?mt=8

Install TeamReach on Android (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.teamreach.app

Enter code: PPL_M540

“Fill the frame” isn’t a rule — it’s a decision based on intent.

Many photography instructors tell students ""Filling the frame" in photography is a composition technique where the main subject dominates the entire image, leaving little to no space around it. This approach emphasizes the subject, reduces distractions, and directs the viewer's attention, creating a stronger and more impactful image. "

But they miss the mark. 

“Fill the frame” isn’t a rule — it’s a decision based on intent.

If the final image is destined for an 8x10, then composing tightly in a 2:3 viewfinder risks losing key elements in the crop. The photographer has to mentally overlay the intended print ratio at the moment of capture.

> “Fill the frame based on the print size.”

Not the sensor. Not the LCD. The print.

It shifts the mindset from “what looks good now” to “what will survive and look strong later.”

My blog https://larrysphotography41.blogspot.com/2020/11/why-worry.html?m=1

Why "Use a Wide Aperture for Shallow Depth of Field" Isn’t the Whole Truth

Why "Use a Wide Aperture for Shallow Depth of Field" Isn’t the Whole Truth

Photography instructors often teach that a wide aperture (like f/2.8 or f/1.8) creates shallow depth of field—those dreamy blurred backgrounds. That’s true… but it’s only part of the story. And for many photographers, especially those using Micro Four Thirds or phones, it can lead to confusion.

Let’s break it down.

What Really Controls Depth of Field?

Depth of field (DoF) is influenced by four key factors:

1. Aperture (f-number) – Wider = shallower DoF. Narrower = deeper DoF.

2. Focal Length – Longer lenses isolate subjects more (e.g., 85mm vs. 25mm).

3. Distance to Subject – Closer focus means shallower DoF.

4. Sensor Size – Bigger sensors give shallower DoF at the same framing and aperture.

Why It Matters

If you're using a phone with a fast f/1.5 lens, you might wonder:

> “Why isn’t my background blurry?”

It’s because your phone’s sensor is tiny, and its lens is ultra-wide. Even at f/1.5, almost everything stays in focus due to optical physics.

If you're using a Micro Four Thirds camera, you might notice that f/2.8 doesn’t blur backgrounds as much as a full-frame camera. That’s because your sensor is smaller—so you get more depth of field at a given aperture and framing.

What Instructors Should Say

Instead of just “use a wide aperture,” instructors should teach:

> “To control depth of field, consider aperture, focal length, distance, and sensor size together. A wide aperture helps—but only in context.”

That’s real instruction.

A Practical Example

Phone camera: 4mm f/1.5 lens = almost everything in focus

MFT camera: 25mm f/1.8 lens = some blur, more control

Full-frame: 85mm f/1.8 lens = rich background blur, even at a distance

Same f-number, totally different results.

---

Bottom line: You deserve instructors who explain, not just prescribe. Photography is part science and part art—but learning works best when we teach the science clearly.