Is photography THAT subjective? or can most people agree/ disagree if a photo is "good"/ "bad"?

[Midwest]

Some of the winners of the contest of contests (or whatever it's called) here on DPREVIEW would have been delete-in-camera shots for me. I've visited photography exhibits at art museums without finding a single image I could tolerate.

That's why I find the contest here to be a ridiculous waste of time.

On very rare occasions I may enter a photo contest here but really the number of votes is so relatively small that if you enter in the slightest amount of sandbagging, a really good photo can get dragged halfway down the standings by one or two ridiculously low votes. I should point out that overall I have not done too badly in the challenges, but really, I've seen such ridiculous outcomes in some of the challenges that It's easy for me to not worry much about entering any.

I've had that same experience. However, it's wonderful to be so sure of one's self, but I find it interesting and sometimes even educational to discover what others might see (that I don't see) in a photograph or painting.

I've never been one with a compulsion to enter a bunch of challenges -OTOH I see peple who will enter ANY photo that comes even remotely close to the challenge theme, or maybe even doesn't at all.

When I first drank scotch whiskey I didn't like it....but it's an acquired taste and now I prefer it to all of the other hard stuff.

Every time I ever tried alcohol I hated it, so I stopped trying it - 35 years ago. Turns out I pretty much don't like anything that's been fermented, including yogurt and sour cream.

I'll drink an occasional beer but overall I agree with you - how do you know when yogurt has gone bad, anyhow? And as for alcohol in general, after too many morning-afters when I asked myself 'why did I do that?' I finally stopped doing it.

Our respective tastes in photography have some common threads; a few photos you have posted are favorites of mine.

 

[Midwest]

It should be mentioned too that we live on a beautiful planet.

Some of the best photos are just pure captures of the beauty in front of us.

Some to the most trite ones, too...

I've seen SO many sunsets, waterfalls, and other endlessly repeated photo themes, that by and large they do nothing for me. I DO have a favorite sunset photo, BTW, but I far and away prefer a photo that may not have 'beauty', but they connect with my soul. They make me smile or laugh or think, or make me wish I was where the photo was taken.

But photos of flowers and so many other 'beautiful' things say nothing to me except 'here is a flower / duck / whatever'.

Just playing kind of devil's advocate here - normally I prefer photography where the photographer does not intrude.

And then you look at some fantastic landscapes, e.g., and suddenly you realise that the photographer has a very large presence there.

So what is a pure capture? Is there absolutely no art involved in that?

The photographer should always be ready to step aside, when the situation calls for it, and not try to force his or her artistic aspirations into an image that really needs no art.

That's often also called documentary. You can question whether that is an art or a skill...

Here is a photo from DPR member MAGMATCICO62 that has won a couple of challenges. Viewed large where you can see the detail in the sky, I think this far transcends just the typical sunset shot of the sun on the horizon - it combines the beauty of a sunset with fantastic detail in the layers of clouds, and the equipment in the distance in silhouette.

 

[DenWil]

No one cares what most people think.

The minute you take a stand and say the photo is crap - even though the image is flat, horribly lit and utilizing an unflattering focal length - you will be a hater because it is someone's child or friend.

Pull a selection of commercial ads from W or Vogue, or exhibition work by John Sexton or portraits by Avedon... then we can have a real discussion of what constitutes good work. Also- good on what level? Technical expertise, good at selling the product, good at projecting a mood, good at generating sales for the client.

 

[lauwerecht]

Just curious as to how subjective photography is.

Is a Caravaggio 'better' than an Appel ? Depends on one's taste.

 

[SpiltMilk]

Just curious as to how subjective photography is.

Is a Caravaggio 'better' than an Appel ? Depends on one's taste.

Exactly - some people love Picasso Cubism, some people think Constable is "twee".

I don't particularly like Cubism but tend to like most of Constable's work (not all).

Neither is right or wrong, just personal opinion. Therefore "subjective".