What is a "boring" focal length?

[John NYC]

The whole concept that a focal length is boring is ludicrous. What matters is what you do with an image.

Boring is in quotes for a reason. See my quote of Ansel for a more tip toe-ing, less short hand manner of describing what I am referring to regarding his view.

[Vaughn]

John, thanks for the AA quote. Personally I prefer "normal" focal lengths.

Are there "boring" formats as well as focal lengths? I have heard some say that the 4x5 proportion is a bit stumpy and "boring", but I use it a lot. And some do not like the square -- another of my favorites. But then I like 4x10, too!

[Don7x17]

I rarely see very much originality, personality, or creativity in telephoto wildlife photos. And it's really hard to do with macro or sports... not that the results aren't interesting or good, but they are pretty dependent on having the right bird in the right place aren't they?

I mean come on, sitting out in a blind with a 600mm - people do it because they love nature and the challenge is getting a technically good shot. It's art, but it's not ART.

We've digressed from the OP point of lens length, into what constitutes art (and even why largeformat photography is so much better than other choices) and a digression into bird photography.

Let's reuse your point of view as a template, but take a different point of view(from a non-B&W Large format photographer) :

"I rarely see very much originality, personality, or creativity in large format art photos. And it's really hard to do with nudes, still life, or landscape ... not that the results aren't interesting or good, but they've all been done before and are pretty dependent on having a nude model, or traveling to some (distant) place that already has plenty of tripod holes and hoping that the weather is favorable?

I mean come on, taking yet another large format image - people do it because they love the format and the challenge is getting a technically good shot. It's art, but it's not ART."

So is any of bird photography, wildlife photography, nude photography, landscape photography, still life photography..etc art? Only to the beholder. The art world buys a very small number of all of these images each year, including bird photography.

Would any of us get into a MFA program with a portfolio stuffed with any/all of the above genre of images? Hardly likely. Its not art! would be the response.

But back to the points you make on bird photography -- rarely do bird photographers sit in blinds. Wildlife photographers choose longer lenses both for their reach and to blur the background.

Here's some images (not mine) made by bird photographers with very long lenses (800mm) that are art, not wildlife images. Are they any less art because they are wildlife???

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/
check Nov 30 blog entry - 2nd picture made with 500mm lens and Nov 23rd entry using a 800mm lens
check this one with 800mm lens http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...089-Snow-Storm

Are these any less art than a well-crafted B&W large format traditional photograph?

[Heroique]

I have a three-lens kit: 110-150-240.

Every shot I take, two lenses are boring.

I hope I get better so this doesn’t keep happening.

[Heroique]

I just noticed that AA continues in the same quote:

“…On the other hand, some photographers prefer to use only the normal lens (sometimes for reasons of economy!), and visualize all their images in reference to its properties of focal length and angle of view.”

If I’d known the man, it’d be easier to tell whether his “open-mindedness” is touched w/ gentle sarcasm.

[Frank Petronio]

check this one with 800mm lens http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...089-Snow-Storm

I can see the motivational poster now, "You Gotta Stick Your Neck Out to Get Ahead".

[Steve M Hostetter]

I can see the motivational poster now, "You Gotta Stick Your Neck Out to Get Ahead".

thats a great shot! reminds me of Reelfoot lake Tenn in jan. millions of snow geese everywhere

[John NYC]

I just noticed that AA continues in the same quote:

“…On the other hand, some photographers prefer to use only the normal lens (sometimes for reasons of economy!), and visualize all their images in reference to its properties of focal length and angle of view.”

If I’d known the man, it’d be easier to tell whether his “open-mindedness” is touched w/ gentle sarcasm.

I don't understand your point. He says what he prefers, very decidedly, then acknowledges that it might not be the same for everyone else. I don't sense any sarcasm here.

[Brian C. Miller]

So AA says what he prefers, then acknowledges that others prefer to use "normal" lenses.

OK, so what??

I don't see the big deal here. You use what you have to make a photograph. I use a wide-angle lens to isolate subject from the background, distorting the distance to provide emphasis. I use telephoto to isolate a subject, say a foot bridge on the other side of a pond. Most of the time I use a slightly-wide lens.

AA said that painters don't discuss paint brushes. However, they do discuss paint brushes, and do so quite a bit.

[John NYC]

So AA says what he prefers, then acknowledges that others prefer to use "normal" lenses.

OK, so what??

I don't see the big deal here. You use what you have to make a photograph. I use a wide-angle lens to isolate subject from the background, distorting the distance to provide emphasis. I use telephoto to isolate a subject, say a foot bridge on the other side of a pond. Most of the time I use a slightly-wide lens.

AA said that painters don't discuss paint brushes. However, they do discuss paint brushes, and do so quite a bit.

There is no "big deal", Brian.

If you re-read my original post, you can see i am just making a personal observation and wondering if others feel this same way. Obviously you do not. And i am ok with that. My point in quoting from Adams was simply to clarify that he did feel that way (at least at that time) and that i wasnt just making that up, since you were challenging that factual part of what i was saying.