Reading mode: Light Dark

"Just a snapshot"

Go to last post
M

MajorConfusion

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
355
Reaction score
0
Location
US
I like to move around and take pictures, without a tripod. I guess I've been "lucky" enough to take a few good shots here and there, but I always get comments like:

"While It's only a snapshot, it does deserve some credit."

I also notice some Flickr groups have rules that say "No snapshots."

Here is my question:

1. Do only well thought-out, tripod-supported photos count as real photography?

I can't remember a hobby where there were so many snobs and people that felt that they were superior to others just because they understand the fundamentals of exposure (even if they take crappy photographs).

MC

--

'When a task cannot be partitioned because of sequential constraints, the application of more effort has no effect on the schedule. The bearing of a child takes nine months, no matter how many women are assigned.' - Frederick P. Brooks Jr.
-------------
http://flickr.com/photos/majorconfusion
 
Nothing wrong with a snapshot.
--
Proud Pentax K10D and Hayabusa Owner

 
MajorConfusion said:
1. Do only well thought-out, tripod-supported photos count as real
photography?
Click to expand...
Nobody can answer this question, untill there is a widely accepted concensus on what is real photography. Hint: It'll never happen.
MajorConfusion said:
I can't remember a hobby where there were so many snobs and people
that felt that they were superior to others just because they
understand the fundamentals of exposure (even if they take crappy
photographs).
Click to expand...
You know, people have every right to be snob and feel superior. People also have every right to completely ignore this kind of people.
I exercise this right on a daily basis.
 
MajorConfusion said:
Some Flickr groups have rules that say "No snapshots."
Click to expand...
Good! A snapshot can never be a great photograph.
MajorConfusion said:
1. Do only well thought-out, tripod-supported photos count as real
photography?
Click to expand...
No, that's silly. Real photography has nothing to do with tripods, thought, composition, light, content, or execution.

All that matters is the snap . If the camera makes a snapping sound when it takes the picture, then it is a snapshot, and it is not real photography.

On the other hand, if the camera makes a "click" sound as it takes the photo, then it is real photography. That's why you should only buy cameras that make a "click" sound instead of a "snap" sound. "Clack" is OK, too. If you have a digicam or mobile phone that is totally silent, then you need to find a way to turn on a "click" shutter noise, or else your work will always be looked down upon.
MajorConfusion said:
I can't remember a hobby where there were so many snobs and people
that felt that they were superior to others just because
Click to expand...
All of my hobbies have snobs and people with superiority complexes, including astronomy, board gaming, book clubs, computers, etc.

--
Daniel
 
MajorConfusion said:
I like to move around and take pictures, without a tripod. I guess
I've been "lucky" enough to take a few good shots here and there, but
I always get comments like:

"While It's only a snapshot, it does deserve some credit."

I also notice some Flickr groups have rules that say "No snapshots."

Here is my question:

1. Do only well thought-out, tripod-supported photos count as real
photography?

I can't remember a hobby where there were so many snobs and people
that felt that they were superior to others just because they
understand the fundamentals of exposure (even if they take crappy
photographs).
Click to expand...
Welcome to DPReview . . .

Home of the self-professed know-it-alls of all things photography!

The place where you must be a physics major, have access to a terabyte full of meaningless charts and graphs, and either an owner of a full frame DSLR (doesn't matter which one as long as it is FF) or try to make us believe they own one, yet never use them except to create 1600% crops of 1600% crops, to be considered a true photographer!

Oh . . . and an $800 carbon fiber tripod . . . almost forgot about that.

NOT!

Screw them!

It is easy to profess to be the best when one is hiding facelessly behind a keyboard in some small corner of the planet.

Sometimes the least thought out photo taken handheld with the smallest and cheapest point and shoot camera is the best shot of them all!

The camera is just a box . . . which only captures the image, but doesn't create it.

--
J. D.
Colorful Colorado



Remember . . . always keep your receipt, the box, and everything that came in it!
 
MajorConfusion said:
I like to move around and take pictures, without a tripod. I guess
I've been "lucky" enough to take a few good shots here and there, but
I always get comments like:

"While It's only a snapshot, it does deserve some credit."

I also notice some Flickr groups have rules that say "No snapshots."
Click to expand...
Well, there is no commonly accepted definition of a "snapshot", so such rules are essentially meaningless.
MajorConfusion said:
Here is my question:

1. Do only well thought-out, tripod-supported photos count as real
photography?
Click to expand...
No. There are plenty of famous photographers who didn't or do not use tripods all the time. Needless to say, there is no commonly accepted definition of "real photography" either.
MajorConfusion said:
I can't remember a hobby where there were so many snobs and people
that felt that they were superior to others just because they
understand the fundamentals of exposure (even if they take crappy
photographs).
Click to expand...
It is certainly beneficial to understand the basics of exposure, but it isn't strictly necessary in order to make good photos. The ability to make good photos cannot be clearly tied to some spesific knowledge or skills, even if certain knowledge and skills definitely help.
 
SLove said:
It is certainly beneficial to understand the basics of exposure, but
it isn't strictly necessary in order to make good photos. The ability
to make good photos cannot be clearly tied to some spesific knowledge
or skills, even if certain knowledge and skills definitely help.
Click to expand...
However, recently around here there is a new high brow for level horizons! LOL

Like that is the only thing that makes a picture a picture.

--
J. D.
Colorful Colorado



Remember . . . always keep your receipt, the box, and everything that came in it!
 
Have you ever asked for an explanation as to what about the image deemed to be judged a snapshot, and what one could have done to make it otherwise?

There are a lot of viewpoints and perspectives, depending on the observers' current focus, experience level, and personal taste. This means no one is a true arbiter of the term, or assessment of another's craft.

But there are basic agreements on what works for particular types of imagery (such as can be picked up from introductory drawing classes/books) that do offer a common ground for rules of imagery. Knowing them means one can assess their own presentations, for their own taste, and break those rules purposely as desired. And it can help one understand why some presentations garner more respect than others (and why some can't recognize one's genius [g]).

I think generally, we each shoot for ourselves, but desire respect for our efforts of expression. Finding the balance takes some digging, in the process of evolving with the craft. What one found amazing when first getting into the endeavor might not hold up over time, as one becomes more discerning though experience. Observations will, hence, vary greatly. And the effort taken to present a scene will be assessed. Not all scenes take a lot of effort, and that is recognized as well.

That is to say, when someone suggests a presentation to be a snapshot, it might suggest a greater effort may have been taken to make a better presentation. Whether that matters for the photographer, or the particular image, is the photographer's call. Not everyone is out there snapping to be the next Magnum star, or Ansel Adams.

--
...Bob, NYC

'Well, sometimes the magic works. Sometimes, it doesn't.' - Little Big Man

Galleries: http://www.bobtullis.com
 
Did'nt Henri Cartier-Bresson use a small camera that he would quickly lift up at the "decisive moment"?, if it's good enough for old Henri, it's good enough for me!. :)
 
Calling your picture a Snap Shot is a pretty serious put down, meaning the photo has absolutely NO artistic merit.
MajorConfusion said:
I always get comments like: "While It's only a snapshot, it does deserve some credit."
Click to expand...
Real Meaning: If you improved the shot it could almost escape the POS category, although it's not likely you have either the talent or equipment to do it.
MajorConfusion said:
I also notice some Flickr groups have rules that say "No snapshots."
Click to expand...
Real Meaning: Don't even come around here with what us real photographers view as worthless ¢rap, and we are the only ones privileged to decide what is or is not "worthless ¢rap."

and the Real Question behind the "Real Meaning" is whether or not the picture was taken with a Canon or Nikon full frame camera. Like somehow a real photograph just can't be taken with a camera that cost less than a months salary.

--



Tacoma, Washington, USA
 
You mean this comment, obviously: "Although its just a simple snapshot you got to give some credit to this one! ;)"

I agree. It's a simple, quick snap of a blonde butt. At least, that's how I see it, centered as it is. It wasn't even straightened (it doesn't appear to be off-level in a creative attempt). That, for one, makes it a snapshot - no skill required here, no thoughtful process to the presentation. Effort in, respect out. Far from a 'decisive moment'.

Now, technically, it's fine. But I'd not linger on this for more than a second, as it tells no story, and has no interest that I can discern outside the jeans and hair. As a man, sure, I find it interesting to a degree (oh, BABY!), but not as a serious candid. If it were mine, I'd say I screwed it up, and would trash it (unless extremely lonely [g]).

I see you can do better, though. And every shot is an opportunity to judge one's own skills and progress. "Taking A Break", for example in your gallery, provides the observer more to work linger over, with several questions (as in what's the story about this guy? A traveller, worker, what's he listening to, what's caught his eye?)

Now maybe that's not a very thoughtful snap either, yet it engages one more, and has a few potential story lines for one to consider.

I'm not the 'artist' on this one, and I'd like to hear what you find to be the merits of this image, if I have it all wrong. Maybe my focus in photography doesn't give me the insight into this genre (I'm not the candid shooter), and I have something to learn about what inspired you to create and present this one (is testosterone a valid inspiration? [g]).

Now, I'd not have the same dismissal of that view of the woman if she were in a different setting, maybe with more people about her, where it 'features' this one person amid others, or. . . well, it's hard to say what could have been done, but I think you can do better. I hope this is more helpful than not.

--
...Bob, NYC

'Well, sometimes the magic works. Sometimes, it doesn't.' - Little Big Man

Galleries: http://www.bobtullis.com
 
Bob Tullis said:
You mean this comment, obviously: "Although its just a simple
snapshot you got to give some credit to this one! ;)"

I agree. It's a simple, quick snap of a blonde butt. At least,
that's how I see it, centered as it is. It wasn't even straightened
(it doesn't appear to be off-level in a creative attempt). That,
for one, makes it a snapshot - no skill required here, no thoughtful
process to the presentation. Effort in, respect out. Far from a
'decisive moment'.
Click to expand...
We have now defined snapshot. :)
Bobo Hodls said:
Now, technically, it's fine. But I'd not linger on this for more
than a second, as it tells no story, and has no interest that I can
discern outside the jeans and hair. As a man, sure, I find it
interesting to a degree (oh, BABY!), but not as a serious candid.
If it were mine, I'd say I screwed it up, and would trash it (unless
extremely lonely [g]).
Click to expand...
I agree, I'll delete it immediately. :) :)
Bobo Hodls said:
I see you can do better, though. And every shot is an opportunity
to judge one's own skills and progress. "Taking A Break", for
example in your gallery, provides the observer more to work linger
over, with several questions (as in what's the story about this guy?
A traveller, worker, what's he listening to, what's caught his eye?)
Now maybe that's not a very thoughtful snap either, yet it engages
one more, and has a few potential story lines for one to consider.
Click to expand...
I found "Taking a Break" to be far more interesting taking away the testosterone, but note that the other photo has 8 times as many views...it almost suggests that people looking at a photo decide whether they like it separately from what the photographer thought.

There are photos I've taken that I "love" but no one else seems to like. There are also some I don't like that much that others go nuts over. Then there are ones I know will have appeal and that is one of them.
Bobo Hodls said:
I'm not the 'artist' on this one, and I'd like to hear what you find
to be the merits of this image, if I have it all wrong. Maybe my
focus in photography doesn't give me the insight into this genre (I'm
not the candid shooter), and I have something to learn about what
inspired you to create and present this one (is testosterone a valid
inspiration? [g]).
Click to expand...
Testosterone is responsible for a whole lot in this world, it is certainly enough. And because its just a photo of a hot babe should not count against it. :)
Bobo Hodls said:
Now, I'd not have the same dismissal of that view of the woman if she
were in a different setting, maybe with more people about her, where
it 'features' this one person amid others, or. . . well, it's hard to
say what could have been done, but I think you can do better. I
hope this is more helpful than not.
Click to expand...
Sure, I've done way better shots, for example:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/majorconfusion/sets/72157607723629601

...but this is one of the ones that people like to look at, and I'm just starting to shoot urban photos of people so I have no idea what is "good." Honestely I tend to agree with the others that say it doesn't matter what/when/how/why the photo was taken, the response from people viewing it will be random.

I think photographers are not willing to give people credit for photos that didn't require "work" or "effort" or "technical skill" or were just "luck." The fact is that any shot can be good without effort, and any shot can be bad with hours of preparation.

MC
 
I follow.

Whatever churns your butter.

--
...Bob, NYC

'Well, sometimes the magic works. Sometimes, it doesn't.' - Little Big Man

Galleries: http://www.bobtullis.com
 
What is a snapshot, as an artist I have the luxury of being ble to move things around and leave them out or include other things in a painting, so does that raise art to a higher level than a photograph, of course not. A snapshot to one is a photograph to another, the same as one work of art is a masterpiece to one artist to another it's just a scruffy bed. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder if any viewer likes it then that is good for them, their is no need to justify it to any so called expert or anyone else for that matter. If it pleases you then that's fine.
--
artyman
http://www.artyman.co.uk
 
Well your photo does look ordinary in the sense that it is a think one might see everywhere and might feel its a photo so what.

But i would not comment saying that just another snapshot, because when i go out i also get loads of such photos.

further it is very difficult to get a shot which is extraordinary.

i looked at the person's who commented and i have to say that he is also from one of the ordinary photographer.

When someone says other's work is ordinary types he shall have something extraordinary in his portfolio.

He did not impress me at all. In fact the following few photos of his, i would have just deleted thinking that these are all 'snapshots'.
(i think these all photos are junk).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7960541@N02/3083015994/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7960541@N02/3099056006/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7960541@N02/3098220869/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7960541@N02/3100085169/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7960541@N02/3099056288/

--
one among others
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top