Exactly correct...no examples needed. His thoughts were sufficiently descriptive about methodology that he didn't need to post examples, certainly not his own examples...which is what makes your reasoning fallacious...as in ad hominem fallacious.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
An honest answer to why your photos aren’t very good.
- Thread starter MisJay
- Start date
Brev00
Forum Pro
It just seems odd to me that you would deem yourself to be a middling photographer like everyone else here yet you know the secrets to being an excellent photographer. Usually I respect expertise and follow the advice of those I admire.
I probably could do a complete point by point analysis of your post but your thoughts about needing a Scarlett Johansen to make great portraits is laughable.
For the sake of argument, I will believe that the the photographs you appreciate as great are actually great. Salieri knew Mozart's music was superb but could do nothing to approach his level of artistry. No amount of analysis could help. Greatness does not come from reducing genius to a set of axioms. It is all in the eye.
I probably could do a complete point by point analysis of your post but your thoughts about needing a Scarlett Johansen to make great portraits is laughable.
For the sake of argument, I will believe that the the photographs you appreciate as great are actually great. Salieri knew Mozart's music was superb but could do nothing to approach his level of artistry. No amount of analysis could help. Greatness does not come from reducing genius to a set of axioms. It is all in the eye.
khunpapa
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,678
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,299
My honest answer to myself about this question : I-do-not-care.
I shoot for fun, for joy, for memory.
I challenge for fun, for joy, for socialize, for passing leisure time.
I was not, am not, will not, can not, be the master artist, nor I care to be one.
Photography is not everything in my life. Nor would it be.
Photography is not my bread money. It was not, is not, will not, can not.
I shoot for fun, for joy, for memory.
I challenge for fun, for joy, for socialize, for passing leisure time.
I was not, am not, will not, can not, be the master artist, nor I care to be one.
Photography is not everything in my life. Nor would it be.
Photography is not my bread money. It was not, is not, will not, can not.
Paul B Jones
Senior Member
You "saying" too much, Mr. "Professional".
Starting a thread, never come back (till now), dropping b*llsh*t and waiting for the flies.
Congratulation - it still works. How toxic.
You're right, that's not a good photo, it's a great photo.The photos I take at my kids' sports events are not "good," per se, but when a parent sees a shot of his kid connecting with the ball with a focused look on his face and likes it, that makes me feel good about my photography.
Most photographs say "look at this". Photographs are often used to illustrate a story and then become representative of that story - people then claim that they "tell the story" but unless you know the story behind the photo, the best they can do is suggest what may have been happening. In most cases, any message is something layered on top of the photo by the viewer; not something the photographer set out to say.
I don't. I take photos of things that beg to be photographed. I've watched videos showing how other photographers work - photographers like Jay Maisel - who just look around and shoot when they see something visually appealing. Juxtapositions. Contrasts. Motion. I don't think a lot of photographers are looking to say anything beyond "look at this". "Isn't this beautiful". And that's pretty much automatic - it's the reason you pick up a camera in the first place, not something you consciously think about.
*Jay Maisel talks a lot about gesture and how photographs that show gestures tend to be interesting because of the universal language of gestures. Just because you capture someone's gesture, though, doesn't mean you're trying to say something; it just means you recognized a good photo op.
- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com
"good", "not good" > "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"
The OP is talking about *staged* scenarios > beauty photography with hipster boys and girls on Ibiza. That's are 0,2% of the whole world of photography. And he is the unspoken master of it, called Grandmaster B (you know Bud from "Married... with Children"?).
He will drop different thread in this manner, then creating another account and here we are again. The next topic will be "Why it is not good to hold a hand in front of a lens, if you want to make a photo of a landscape".
But who knows ... could be that he give you a proper tip, like "well, nice but ugly boy. You need a model like Aida Ridic. And color. The world is full of color. And I would borrow you my Leica M10, if I had one. In 10 years, you are on the same level as I am. And I'm 12 years old...."
L
Lightpath48
Guest
If I’m missing one or more of these: a good subject in good light framed and exposed effectively with focus where needed. I’m still working at these things after many years.
yardcoyote
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 18,132
- Solutions
- 14
- Reaction score
- 18,310
This is a variation of what my own first teacher taught me, which was that a good photograph is in focus, correctly exposed and well composed. Beyond that, you need to pick a subject that you think is worth photographing, and make a photograph that shows why you think that.
All these factors you mentioned - equipment, skill, lighting, beautiful location, attractive model, etc. etc. but you never once mentioned the idea of content. A photo that makes you smile (not as in 'what a pretty waterfall', but) because it connects with your soul, a photo that makes you laugh or think or in some other way REACHES you more deeply than just your eyes.
Yes, I have seen some beautiful photos which have that as their obvious strong point, but even they in some way touch my soul, they're not just pretty pictures with technical perfection.
All this other stuff about models and lighting and such has little to nothing to do with the photos I like most.
Last edited:
Many of my favorite photos are totally lacking a beautiful subject, beautiful setting, perfect lighting, etc.
And maybe not a 'fantastic' photo but you've captured a neat moment in that young man's life and that is something he and his parents will long enjoy. THAT is what photography is most about to me, capturing the rare moments that mean something to the person looking the photo.
I might be inclined to try cropping this shot somewhat, and my personal preference for most 'kid' photos is to have them in color because nature blesses our youngsters with such great natural coloring of skin, hair, and eyes... seems a shame to turn it all to shades of gray. But the basics behind this photo are what I said, a moment of this boy's life captured forever, and I would sooner look at photos like this anytime than yet another waterfall or sunset or duck.
Last edited:
The world's most perfectly cooked oatmeal is still only mush.
And there we have the ruby slippers, the key to the whole thing that's under our noses the whole time. We need a photo that connects with our brain, not just our eyes.
Last edited:
Jon O'Brien
Active member
I don't believe a photograph HAS TO say something, that's not to say that some don't.
It may be that my images say something to people but, if they do, it's not a message I've intended to communicate. I hope they give pleasure to the people who see them but that's the limit of my aspirations.
Judge for yourself: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1711366318/albums/altered-perceptions
If I want to say anything I use words, spoken or written. That way I can be sure that I'm communicating effectively.
It may be that my images say something to people but, if they do, it's not a message I've intended to communicate. I hope they give pleasure to the people who see them but that's the limit of my aspirations.
Judge for yourself: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1711366318/albums/altered-perceptions
Jon O'Brien
Active member
I hate to be picky (actually, I don't) but our eyes are part of our brain,
Jon O'Brien
Active member
My feelings exactly.
Photojournalists are no doubt trying to get a message across but that's a rarefied environment and only the best succeed more times than not.
Jon O'Brien
Active member
"Good" is subjective judgement; there is no absolute definition of what a good photograph is.
If a parent likes one of your photographs, it's a good photograph in their eyes and, IMO, their judgement makes you a good photographer.
--
Jon O'Brien.
If a parent likes one of your photographs, it's a good photograph in their eyes and, IMO, their judgement makes you a good photographer.
--
Jon O'Brien.
Gerry Winterbourne
Forum Pro
To be really picky the retina is part of the brain the same way the brain is part of the head and the eye is part of the head; but the eye as a whole isn't part of the brain.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum