"Photographicness" of the image
Feb 12, 2024 15:24:00 #
There are many things that make images look photographic. I could probably list ten or more but I wont cuz I anticipate seeing such things in the replies. But I will briefly mention a few examples just to clarify the question.
Its not a question about techniques that promote or produce "photographicness" but only a question of what aspects or qualities within the image are especially photographic in nature.
For instance:
• Display, even enhancement, of texture.
• Depictions of motion.
• Subject is "tranformed" by the light.
Its not a question about techniques that promote or produce "photographicness" but only a question of what aspects or qualities within the image are especially photographic in nature.
For instance:
• Display, even enhancement, of texture.
• Depictions of motion.
• Subject is "tranformed" by the light.
Feb 12, 2024 15:35:38 #
Feb 12, 2024 15:46:29 #
Rongnongno wrote:
I really want this question in the Discussion section, so Ive removed the example photos. Gallery, please. You know better.
They were an after thought, and they might have doomed the question to The Gallery so thanks for the prompt warning. Good work !
(You could reply to the question now ... )
Feb 12, 2024 15:55:53 #
User ID wrote:
There are many things that make images look photog... (show quote)
Sometimes, it seems that trying to nail down a specfic definition of photograph, then accurately, specifically describe it's photographicness, could be like trying to successfully write an essay, giving a specfic, accurate, unmistakable, unshakable description of the taste of an apple to someone who has never, ever tasted fruit.
Feb 12, 2024 16:07:19 #
dustie wrote:
Sometimes, it seems that trying to nail down a specfic definition of photograph, then accurately, specifically describe it's photographicness.
I really hope most respondants dont follow your misreading of my question.
Your reply focuses on "a specific definition of photograph". I thought I did my best to ask about various and varied aspects that cause many different photographs to have a clearly photographic look to them.
I so agree with your comment about an all encompassing definition being impossible. But thaz a reply to a question I never asked, and tried very hard to not ask.
Feb 12, 2024 16:12:19 #
User ID wrote:
I really hope most respondants dont follow your misreading of my question.
You write of "a specific definition of photograph". I thought I did my best to ask about various and varied aspects that cause many different photographs to have a distinctly photographic look to them.
I agree with your comment about an all encompassing definition being impossible. But thaz a reply to a question I never asked, and tried hard to not ask.
You write of "a specific definition of photograph". I thought I did my best to ask about various and varied aspects that cause many different photographs to have a distinctly photographic look to them.
I agree with your comment about an all encompassing definition being impossible. But thaz a reply to a question I never asked, and tried hard to not ask.
I did not realize one can be described without defining the other, sorry.
There may be time enough left for me to scrub my replies, if you wish.
Feb 12, 2024 16:23:30 #
dustie wrote:
I did not realize one can be described without defining the other, sorry.
There may be time enough left for me to scrub my replies, if you wish.
There may be time enough left for me to scrub my replies, if you wish.
No no no. Please redirect the thread back on course by discussing or just listing the various things that you feel can give certain photos that particularly photographic look to them.
----------------------------------------------
Sometimes its texture, but not always. Sometimes its depiction of motion, but not always, sometimes its other things .... have you got some of those other things youd like add to the discussion or simply just list them ? Even just listing them will likely result in discussion by other Hawgsters.
Feb 12, 2024 16:34:07 #
I'm still not really sure what you're looking for, but up until recently I would say that the thing which most generally described "photographicness" (as you put it) is realism. Now, with AI, it may not BE real but it LOOKS real. like a photograph. I don't know if that helps or not.
Feb 12, 2024 16:41:49 #
Maybe I can restart ....
There are many many many different and diverse things we may find in some photos that make each of those photos appear "especially photographic" in nature.
No single photo has all the things. Usually theres just one, maybe two, per photo but that will deliver the effect, the special look that sets photos waaaaay far appart from other types of imaging.
What hits me in some photos can be the way motion is depicted. Verrrrrry photographic. In other photos its the way light nearly "recreates" the subject.
Im asking Hawgsters what various qualities seem especially photographic to you when some photo or other "really speaks to you".
There are many many many different and diverse things we may find in some photos that make each of those photos appear "especially photographic" in nature.
No single photo has all the things. Usually theres just one, maybe two, per photo but that will deliver the effect, the special look that sets photos waaaaay far appart from other types of imaging.
What hits me in some photos can be the way motion is depicted. Verrrrrry photographic. In other photos its the way light nearly "recreates" the subject.
Im asking Hawgsters what various qualities seem especially photographic to you when some photo or other "really speaks to you".
Feb 12, 2024 16:45:24 #
User ID wrote:
No no no. Please redirect the thread back on cours... (show quote)
It's not much of a list here, but a couple things that I believe can elevate the photographicness of an image are:
-- "unusualness".....
....could be a familiar scene recorded from a completely different vantage point, or perspective, or in not commonly used lighting,
....or, could be something not seen or witnessed before, recorded well enough that the viewer is deeply intrigued by looking at its presentation with concentrated interest.
-- "a cloak of suspense, or partial camouflage"
.....those aren't really the words I want to describe my thought, but I'm coming up with an empty hook in trying to find better ones, right now.
What I'm thinking, is that by use of light and shadow, or, if fog is present, or, by placement / relationship to other things within the frame, or, by some means the viewer must take a closer and closer look around the territory inside the frame to get the picture in mind.
Feb 12, 2024 16:51:37 #
dustie wrote:
It's not much of a list here, but a couple things ... (show quote)
Reading you, Im thinking I understand... and it is hard to find single word or very short phrase to name it.
Anywho, I think youre talking about a certain "Hey, didja ever notice this ?" or "Hey, check this out !" aspect to some photos. Non-photo images cant do that very well, or at all. So its a peculiarly photographic quality if an image can do that thing.
Feb 12, 2024 16:58:50 #
User ID wrote:
Reading you, Im thinking I understand... and it is hard to find single word or very short phrase to name it.
Anywho, I think youre talking about a certain "Hey, didja ever notice this ?" or "Hey, check this out !" aspect to some photos.
Anywho, I think youre talking about a certain "Hey, didja ever notice this ?" or "Hey, check this out !" aspect to some photos.
That could be..... and does that meet or miss a criterion of photographicness, and just put it into a classification of contemporary "odd stuff draws attention"?
Feb 12, 2024 17:28:01 #
dustie wrote:
That could be..... and does that meet or miss a criterion of photographicness, and just put it into a classification of contemporary "odd stuff draws attention"?
Seems to me it meets it. I originally had in mind qualities *within* image but I guess it doesnt hafta be that narrow.
Feb 12, 2024 17:40:47 #
Orphoto
Loc: Oregon
For me the overall answer that comes to mind is anything that interests me and grabs my attention.
In addition to the qualities you mentioned that might include:
Interesting and unusual subject matter
A combination with good storytelling vibes
An alluring dynamic between or among the subject elements
Illustration of a particular point
An unusual perspective or POV
Humor
Advocacy for an ideal, such as environmental fragility
Preservation for historical detail
Shapes, lines, color tones
In addition to the qualities you mentioned that might include:
Interesting and unusual subject matter
A combination with good storytelling vibes
An alluring dynamic between or among the subject elements
Illustration of a particular point
An unusual perspective or POV
Humor
Advocacy for an ideal, such as environmental fragility
Preservation for historical detail
Shapes, lines, color tones
Feb 12, 2024 17:51:44 #
Orphoto wrote:
For me the overall answer that comes to mind is an... (show quote)
Thanks for the list. But, other than Historical Preservation, all that you listed can be readily found in illustrations by Norman Rockwell and similar nonphotographic illustrators. Id guess that is what kept them in demand.
Either I have failed twice now to express my question, or Ive asked it in the wrong forum. Either-or, I leave this thread to go wherever its going but Ive already lost interest in it :-(
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.