Difference between snapshot and photograph
Yesterday our portraiture class went to a gallery that had two main exhibits...one by Sid Avery (The Art of the Hollywood Snapshot) and the other by Vivian Maier (an amazing street photographer whose work was discovered after her death). This led to an interesting discussion about the difference between "snapshots" and "photographs". A lot of photojournalism and street photography have the casual characteristics of snapshots but clearly there is something that distinguishes them to make them more. I thought I would post this question to learn your thoughts.
It's a subject that seems to have no end.
I see some images that to me, are just snappers and they are supposed to be the epitome of the art...so who am I to say?
I don't think that there is a right answer, only that there are interesting images, and not so interesting images.
HEART
Loc: God's Country - COLORADO
charryl wrote:
Yesterday our portraiture class went to a gallery that had two main exhibits...one by Sid Avery (The Art of the Hollywood Snapshot) and the other by Vivian Maier (an amazing street photographer whose work was discovered after her death). This led to an interesting discussion about the difference between "snapshots" and "photographs". A lot of photojournalism and street photography have the casual characteristics of snapshots but clearly there is something that distinguishes them to make them more. I thought I would post this question to learn your thoughts.
Yesterday our portraiture class went to a gallery ... (
show quote)
"Snapshot" was coined by instant-shot - e.g. point-and-shoot - cameras, mass produced in the mid-part of the 20th century. Fixed lens, little to/no control of elements or light, and processing done by commercial labs.
The camera development, with an ancient past going back nearly 2 centuries, has led us to modern cameras and controls. Ansel Adams, though not the first pioneer, was known to have brought the zone system to modern photography.
Vivian Maiers (God bless her!) would have been considered a master by any stretch of the imagination.
http://www.vivianmaierprints.com/ "Photographers" are classed as a group distinct from P&S in only one aspect - control. When you can control the elements within the photograph to respond to the photographer's lens, you have a "photographer"....
To me, the way that you are phrasing the question leads to a simple answer. A regular snap shot is a photo of a time and a place that is relegated to a photo album that when viewed, is simply a reminder of an event at a given time. But a photograph that evokes an immediate impact or emotion whether it be a candid or otherwise, would be in the category that you imply as being a "photograph".
For instance, some one goes on vacation and takes a picture of the Grand Canyon. Fine. Nice picture that goes in the scrap book. Then there are the photos of the grand Canyon that are absolutely stunning that one would see hanging on a wall.
To me, a snapshot is a rather flat picture. Nice but flat that says nothing other than what is shown. A good candid such as what Vivian shot brings out a story and a feeling that one can almost touch upon. This would be emotion. It does not matter if it is color or black & white. Visual impact is what sets them apart to me. A flower is another good example. Everyone has seen pictures of flowers. Very pretty. Then there are photographs of flowers that make one exclaim. "Wow!". That is the difference. This of course is just my opinion the best way that I can explain it.
Oh, and it makes no difference as to what type of camera is used. My daughter has had numerous showings of her photographic art and she used nothing but a Kodak Point & Shoot. Almost all in color. She has received lots of praise for her work. When her baby was born, I gave her a very nice dslr to use thinking that something will come of it. Nope. Just crappy photos of her kid.
JR1
Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK
To me a snapshot is what a person takes say, hey love, nice beach, snap, and ends up in the holiday album to be seen one in a lifetime, a photograph is where someone puts SOME thought into it.
I don't take snaps
JR1 wrote:
To me a snapshot is what a person takes say, hey love, nice beach, snap, and ends up in the holiday album to be seen one in a lifetime, a photograph is where someone puts SOME thought into it.
I don't take snaps
Please...That "kitty" post of yours and the son abducted by storm troopers are definitely snap shots.
ftpecktim wrote:
JR1 wrote:
To me a snapshot is what a person takes say, hey love, nice beach, snap, and ends up in the holiday album to be seen one in a lifetime, a photograph is where someone puts SOME thought into it.
I don't take snaps
Please...That "kitty" post of yours and the son abducted by storm troopers are definitely snap shots.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
ftpecktim wrote:
JR1 wrote:
To me a snapshot is what a person takes say, hey love, nice beach, snap, and ends up in the holiday album to be seen one in a lifetime, a photograph is where someone puts SOME thought into it.
I don't take snaps
Please...That "kitty" post of yours and the son abducted by storm troopers are definitely snap shots.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
To me, photography is a subjective medium, it means differnt things to differnt people. One persons "photograph" can be another presons "snap shot" and vise-versa.
tainkc wrote:
To me, the way that you are phrasing the question leads to a simple answer. A regular snap shot is a photo of a time and a place that is relegated to a photo album that when viewed, is simply a reminder of an event at a given time. But a photograph that evokes an immediate impact or emotion whether it be a candid or otherwise, would be in the category that you imply as being a "photograph".
For instance, some one goes on vacation and takes a picture of the Grand Canyon. Fine. Nice picture that goes in the scrap book. Then there are the photos of the grand Canyon that are absolutely stunning that one would see hanging on a wall.
I agree with your assessment. I think we all take snapshots that are meant for private viewing...they capture a place, a person, a thing...and viewing them brings back memories of that time and place. Others are composed with the thought of capturing an image that goes beyond that. And snapshots can transition. When another person (s) sees the image and it evokes an emotion it takes a snapshot from being an image of a private moment to one that has more universal impact...the specific place, person, thing is not important. Thanks for your input. I am enjoying the viewpoints from others on the forum.
To me, a snapshot is a rather flat picture. Nice but flat that says nothing other than what is shown. A good candid such as what Vivian shot brings out a story and a feeling that one can almost touch upon. This would be emotion. It does not matter if it is color or black & white. Visual impact is what sets them apart to me. A flower is another good example. Everyone has seen pictures of flowers. Very pretty. Then there are photographs of flowers that make one exclaim. "Wow!". That is the difference. This of course is just my opinion the best way that I can explain it.
To me, the way that you are phrasing the question ... (
show quote)
Check out
Panorama section of our forum.
charryl wrote:
tainkc wrote:
To me, the way that you are phrasing the question leads to a simple answer. A regular snap shot is a photo of a time and a place that is relegated to a photo album that when viewed, is simply a reminder of an event at a given time. But a photograph that evokes an immediate impact or emotion whether it be a candid or otherwise, would be in the category that you imply as being a "photograph".
For instance, some one goes on vacation and takes a picture of the Grand Canyon. Fine. Nice picture that goes in the scrap book. Then there are the photos of the grand Canyon that are absolutely stunning that one would see hanging on a wall.
I agree with your assessment. I think we all take snapshots that are meant for private viewing...they capture a place, a person, a thing...and viewing them brings back memories of that time and place. Others are composed with the thought of capturing an image that goes beyond that. And snapshots can transition. When another person (s) sees the image and it evokes an emotion it takes a snapshot from being an image of a private moment to one that has more universal impact...the specific place, person, thing is not important. Thanks for your input. I am enjoying the viewpoints from others on the forum.
To me, a snapshot is a rather flat picture. Nice but flat that says nothing other than what is shown. A good candid such as what Vivian shot brings out a story and a feeling that one can almost touch upon. This would be emotion. It does not matter if it is color or black & white. Visual impact is what sets them apart to me. A flower is another good example. Everyone has seen pictures of flowers. Very pretty. Then there are photographs of flowers that make one exclaim. "Wow!". That is the difference. This of course is just my opinion the best way that I can explain it.
To me, the way that you are phrasing the question ... (
show quote)
quote=tainkc To me, the way that you are phrasing... (
show quote)
Sorry...misplaced my response paragraph.
I think snapshots are done to remind us of special places, people, and times, capturing the reality of the moment as seen by the camera.
Photographs do likewise, but also show those same places,
people, and times with an artist's interpretation, which may be a reflection of reality, rather than reality itself.
Treepusher wrote:
I think snapshots are done to remind us of special places, people, and times, capturing the reality of the moment as seen by the camera.
Photographs do likewise, but also show those same places,
people, and times with an artist's interpretation, which may be a reflection of reality, rather than reality itself.
:thumbup: :thumbup:
charryl wrote:
Yesterday our portraiture class went to a gallery that had two main exhibits...one by Sid Avery (The Art of the Hollywood Snapshot) and the other by Vivian Maier (an amazing street photographer whose work was discovered after her death). This led to an interesting discussion about the difference between "snapshots" and "photographs". A lot of photojournalism and street photography have the casual characteristics of snapshots but clearly there is something that distinguishes them to make them more. I thought I would post this question to learn your thoughts.
Yesterday our portraiture class went to a gallery ... (
show quote)
Although I don't agree with this, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it... snapshots are shots you take in JPEG, and photographs are shots you Post from raw. I'm encouraged that ignorance has not reared its ugly head yet. :-)
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.