Your opinion matters! What´s a good photo?
It´s often a fundamental point in dispute: defining quality of a photograph. You may ask yourself: just why is this photo in the gallery? Why get this photo so many comments, appreciations, clicks? There are so many much better photos, undeservedly receiving much less attention!
Years ago someone posted a photo from Henri Cartier-Bresson (published anonymously). What happened? Exactly what we would expect: the photo failed. Criticized. Photographic rules not met. Too simple for a higher standard. Just for the bin.
But would the viewers have decided the same way, if they would have known that they criticize a photo of a famous French photographer (1908 - 2004)?
What is it that defines quality or a high level of art? Is it the technical part? The choice of colors? The motif? The arrangement? What exactly means quality in the field of photography?
Which facts influences our perception of quality? Let us know! Just post your statement here!
Thank you very much for sharing your opinion!
your team fotocommunity.com Last edited by Matthias Moritz on 30.11.17, 14:57, edited 1 time in total.
Years ago someone posted a photo from Henri Cartier-Bresson (published anonymously). What happened? Exactly what we would expect: the photo failed. Criticized. Photographic rules not met. Too simple for a higher standard. Just for the bin.
But would the viewers have decided the same way, if they would have known that they criticize a photo of a famous French photographer (1908 - 2004)?
What is it that defines quality or a high level of art? Is it the technical part? The choice of colors? The motif? The arrangement? What exactly means quality in the field of photography?
Which facts influences our perception of quality? Let us know! Just post your statement here!
Thank you very much for sharing your opinion!
your team fotocommunity.com Last edited by Matthias Moritz on 30.11.17, 14:57, edited 1 time in total.
02.12.17, 20:50
Post 2 of 13
Wrote many times about it and imho FC is slowly changing in a buddie-world in which honest critiques are not done. The main goal to get as much friends (Facebook virus) as possible and then the praising starts back and forward and that will be rewarded with Stars which makes people think they are pro-photographers while many of them are working on the auto-pilot because they bought a decent camera and then it seems you can stop thinking. A photograph out of an expensive camera is always a perfect photo. On the gallery you see real good photographs getting contra's and dustbin material collecting stars. Now and then I see even admins giving friend-related pro's. The result is that more and more good photographers are leaving FC.
The general quality on FC is decreasing and most of us know that. This is my third round on FC and the uploads can't be compared with the ones I did see around 2008/2009
gr.Rob
The general quality on FC is decreasing and most of us know that. This is my third round on FC and the uploads can't be compared with the ones I did see around 2008/2009
gr.Rob
02.12.17, 21:41
Post 3 of 13
Think there are a few important things to start with creating a good photo. First thing is imho the composition. Then exposing the scene and focusing on the subject in the scene with the possibility to play with your aperture/iso-number to get different depth of fields. When you can control these parts you can do everything with your camera as you like instead of waiting and hoping for a lucky shot.
Gr. Rob
Gr. Rob
What makes for a good image is what peaks the individual person’s interest and will vary as much as individual opinions.
A good image captures your attention. Makes you stop and click on the image as you scroll through page after page of thumbnails.
For me, it is the genre, black & white street or documentary-style images that have a strong point of interest or main focal point. For others, it could be landscapes, portraits or still life.
It “speaks to me” this is where the art of a photograph loses out or wins you over. Like all art, it is, without exception, entirely dependent upon the viewer’s experience, interests and not necessarily the artistic craftsmanship of the photographer.
A good image captures your attention. Makes you stop and click on the image as you scroll through page after page of thumbnails.
For me, it is the genre, black & white street or documentary-style images that have a strong point of interest or main focal point. For others, it could be landscapes, portraits or still life.
It “speaks to me” this is where the art of a photograph loses out or wins you over. Like all art, it is, without exception, entirely dependent upon the viewer’s experience, interests and not necessarily the artistic craftsmanship of the photographer.
Quote: Matthias Moritz 30.11.17, 14:06To the cited post
Honestly, I've no idea what art is. I don't care if a photo "follows rules".
Either I like it - or not.
There were lots of phtos which got comments about this and that. The photo was praised about its art (and it was not a buddy piece) - for me it was a "next please" picture. Ohers were worsen by the comments, and I like the photo.
May be I'm just "mainstream" and have no idea about art...
BR,
Dirk
Honestly, I've no idea what art is. I don't care if a photo "follows rules".
Either I like it - or not.
There were lots of phtos which got comments about this and that. The photo was praised about its art (and it was not a buddy piece) - for me it was a "next please" picture. Ohers were worsen by the comments, and I like the photo.
May be I'm just "mainstream" and have no idea about art...
BR,
Dirk
08.12.17, 10:10
Post 6 of 13
Don't get me wrong because the qualification art is purely personal. But what I meant is the fact that more and more members are using that qualification to cover up their lack of knowledge how to operate their camera and not willing to spent time to learn that. And why should they after collecting many praises and stars. Maybe I see it the wrong way and time is changing a real photo-side in a sort of social community and maybe I should accept that other members having other ideas about photography then I do. After reading many responses on my thoughts it's about time I leave it as it is because I get ignored more and more.
So lets have a fine Christmas time and a good start of the New Year
Gr.Rob
So lets have a fine Christmas time and a good start of the New Year
Gr.Rob
08.12.17, 15:48
Post 7 of 13
I'm new here and I agree with Rob about the buddie-world issue - it has ruined other photography community sites where mediocre images showing no imagination, creativity or technical skill are routinely labelled as 'excellent'. The other problem I've encountered elsewhere is an obsession with post-processing, such as portraits where the skin has no wrinkles or blemishes and looks like porcelain, or the exact same crow appears in ten different images. I left one community after being told by more than one person that I'd never make a decent photographer if I kept using film and didn't go digital!
I joined fotocommunity because it doesn't appear (yet) to be as bad as the others in either regard. Non-manipulated street photography, for example, still seems to be appreciated here.
One way to keep the focus on the photography and not collecting tit for tat votes might be to add an 'advice' or 'critique' channel where other members are invited to write a proper critique of an image with the most constructive critiques highlighted on the front page.
As for 'art': well, some images just 'grab' me. And often that has little to do with technical skill and more to do with 'vision' or 'mood' or atmosphere'.
I joined fotocommunity because it doesn't appear (yet) to be as bad as the others in either regard. Non-manipulated street photography, for example, still seems to be appreciated here.
One way to keep the focus on the photography and not collecting tit for tat votes might be to add an 'advice' or 'critique' channel where other members are invited to write a proper critique of an image with the most constructive critiques highlighted on the front page.
As for 'art': well, some images just 'grab' me. And often that has little to do with technical skill and more to do with 'vision' or 'mood' or atmosphere'.
19.12.17, 20:25
Post 8 of 13
Here's a fine example of what I mean:
Desert silhouette
Ram Ramkumar
15.12.17
14
Reading the other comment makes me very sad
gr.Rob
Desert silhouette
Ram Ramkumar
15.12.17
14
Reading the other comment makes me very sad
gr.Rob
How was this silhouette made ? with a pair of scissors ??
A good photo is that photo which make us look at that photo for at least 1 minute. If someone does not look at your photo and see the details with time then that is not a good photo. A good photo is that photo which make people smile and it is that photo that people will sacrifice their valuable money to buy it. Not every photo is a good photo, a good photo makes memory and can also be a present to someone.
For me, a photo is pretty close to what Mariah said. In conclusion, is a picture in which when you look at it, you get some emotion raised by its good content and quality.
In general, I think there is not exist a generic rule to define a good picture, of course, there are some very basic attributes like not pixelated, a proper size, etc. But even thought, is difficult to ensure that is a solid rule.
In general, I think there is not exist a generic rule to define a good picture, of course, there are some very basic attributes like not pixelated, a proper size, etc. But even thought, is difficult to ensure that is a solid rule.
oh it's a good question, I agree with you