Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Check out Printers and Color Printing Forum section of our forum.
Main Photography Discussion
What makes a great photograph "great"?
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
Jan 15, 2014 11:00:29   #
Samuraiz Loc: Central Florida
 
Emotional response. It could be positive or possibly negative. If the image is compelling and you can't look a way, you may have a photograph that others will refer to as great.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 11:12:18   #
GAH1944 Loc: SW Mich.
 
SharpShooter wrote:
I hear this all the time, "I shoot only for myself, I don't have to please anyone else".
READ, my work sucks, but I'm happy with it.
A great shot, regardless of rules etc., has to WOW a great slice of the public. Regardless of the light, the shadow or the composition, all of that only matters to those that understand such things.
It is when the general populace, can be mesmerized by a pic, that the pic has really arrived.
A photo can be very simple, or very complex, it doesn't matter, a great shot has the same affect on a high percentage of viewers. I have not outlined any rules or about composi----------------------------------------------------------------surely those aspects are there, but they are irrelevant, to the layperson, who sees only the impact of the foto, and is thus drawn to it. They don't even have to like it, but it still moves them. ;-)
SS
I hear this all the time, "I shoot only for m... (show quote)

-----------------yes,yes, you nailed it !!!
:thumbup:

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 11:16:15   #
wj cody Loc: springfield illinois
 
Dbez1 wrote:
In music, one of the litmus tests for "great" music is that every time you listen to it, you hear something new and fresh. Another test is; does it remain interesting over the course of many years or even centuries? I suppose these same criteria translate to great photographs and somehow the rules of composition fit into the equation also. But then, we sometimes call a photograph "great" even when it breaks all the rules of composition. I think of the works of Ansel Adams and other masters and was wondering what some of you UHH'ers feel makes their work (or even some of our own images) worthy of the classification of "great"?
In music, one of the litmus tests for "great&... (show quote)


whether a photograph, painting, print, music: for every day you experience it, it grows right along with you, through all life's changes. the Imogen Cunningham photo of "the unmade bed", that Erica bought for us, 37 years ago now, has aged with me and contributed to whatever soul i have. it also brings me back to Erica, and when she surprised me with it.

that's the nice thing about film, it's archival and always there.

Reply
Check out Panorama section of our forum.
Jan 15, 2014 11:47:21   #
ronwande Loc: Hendersonville NC
 
Our local camera club has what we call a Forum quarterly. Members submit up to three images for digital projection. Prints are accepted too, but these days few are submitted. A pro photographer is invited to critique the images. Some do very well to encourage members, suggesting improvements etc. Some to terribly and are not invited back.

When an image brings responses of ooooooooooooooo and ahhhhhhhhh, which doesn't happen very often, I would say the image falls into the great category.

Most of the critics say up front that they are expressing their opinion of the images and that the photographer doesn't necessarily have to agree with them.

The club has an annual contest. After one of them I remarked to another member that I thought all of the winners were very much oversaturated with color. He sells a significant number of images. His comment was "That is what sells". I guess I have a choice. I can make an image that I think is "correct" and that pleases me, or I can make one that has a better chance of selling.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 12:06:09   #
gee4time
 
Music to one's ear is sweet, if we are raise to listen and enjoy the classics of Strauss, Brahm's, Chopin, etc. But to another raise in another world, it maybe alien and disharmonious. In other words, good music, good art and beauty is in the mind of the individual sensing it.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 12:08:05   #
BooIsMyCat Loc: Somewhere
 
gee4time wrote:
Music to one's ear is sweet, if we are raise to listen and enjoy the classics of Strauss, Brahm's, Chopin, etc. But to another raise in another world, it maybe alien and disharmonious. In other words, good music, good art and beauty is in the mind of the individual sensing it.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 12:15:01   #
duckshots Loc: Burlington VT
 
That someone likes a photo matters not very much, unless you are the artist trying to sell it. That someone thinks a photo is "great" wreaks of the same thing. Notable photographers put out work worth looking at for more than a glance. An objective standard other than this doesn't exist, unless the photographer seeks the approval of others. Then, the standard for the museum, show, advertisement, wedding or whatever determines the level of excellence.

Reply
 
 
Jan 15, 2014 13:10:28   #
RAFriedman Loc: NYC/ Philadelphia
 
Photography, just like any art form is subject to the taste of the times. People like Cabanel, Bourgereau, and Sargent were revered as the toasts of the town in their day. Now, they take a back seat.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 13:27:01   #
Boobarf Loc: Kyle, TX
 
[quote=Meives]
Dbez1 wrote:
This is a set of 12 element s that I use. David

1. IMPACT
2. TECHNICAL EXCELLENCE
3. CREATIVITY
4. STYLE
5. COMPOSITION
6. PRESENTATION
7. COLOR BALANCE
8. CENTER OF INTEREST
9. LIGHTING
10. SUBJECT MATTER
11. TECHNIQUE
12. STORY TELLING


I love these elements. What I'm thinking may have already been stated (however I fell off my ladder taking down Christmas lights on Jan 3, and went head first about 15' onto my cement mowing strip- 40 staples in head later and a concussion- I may have missed a few posts)- so my take: It's like "painting art", many styles capturing many different genres and subjects please many different people. I see photography in the same way- landscape, wildlife, portrait, street journalism, etc. Different views of greatness by what the individual sees as "great". For my passion, which is Landscape, I try to incorporate the above elements into my photos. If I get the 80 for the 20 of those elements and someone who appreciates landscape photos, says "wow, that is a great photo", then I've met my criteria. And if they don't and I still like it, then that is good too!! Done with ramble.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 13:30:01   #
Dbez1 Loc: Ford City, PA
 
ronwande wrote:
Our local camera club has what we call a Forum quarterly. Members submit up to three images for digital projection. Prints are accepted too, but these days few are submitted. A pro photographer is invited to critique the images. Some do very well to encourage members, suggesting improvements etc. Some to terribly and are not invited back.

When an image brings responses of ooooooooooooooo and ahhhhhhhhh, which doesn't happen very often, I would say the image falls into the great category.

The club has an annual contest. After one of them I remarked to another member that I thought all of the winners were very much oversaturated with color. He sells a significant number of images. His comment was "That is what sells". I guess I have a choice. I can make an image that I think is "correct" and that pleases me, or I can make one that has a better chance of selling.
Our local camera club has what we call a Forum qua... (show quote)


I wish we had a local camera club like that but I'm afraid we are too rural. Your post, however, got me thinking so let me muddy the waters a little by pointing out that the current #1 selling single on radio is obviously very popular and is making someone very rich. Will it be remembered 200 years from now? Probably not. Handel's "Hallelujah Chorus" has endured the test of time and I suspect that even the most die hard rocker (as well as the majority of the cultures in today's world) would instantly recognize it as a great work, even if "classical" music isn't their thing. Maybe I'm wrong but shouldn't a truly great photograph transcend cultural lines? Is there a difference between greatness and popularity? Perhaps the oversaturated images you refer to is the photographic equivalent of the hot selling #1 song on the radio. Maybe I'm trying too hard to make the similarity between great music and a great photograph. I'm just trying to get handle on what makes a great photograph great and we have had some very helpful insights so far.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 13:34:40   #
ExTech2
 
SharpShooter wrote:
I hear this all the time, "I shoot only for myself, I don't have to please anyone else".
READ, my work sucks, but I'm happy with it.
A great shot, regardless of rules etc., has to WOW a great slice of the public. Regardless of the light, the shadow or the composition, all of that only matters to those that understand such things.
It is when the general populace, can be mesmerized by a pic, that the pic has really arrived.
A photo can be very simple, or very complex, it doesn't matter, a great shot has the same affect on a high percentage of viewers. I have not outlined any rules or about composition, surely those aspects are there, but they are irrelevant, to the layperson, who sees only the impact of the foto, and is thus drawn to it. They don't even have to like it, but it still moves them. ;-)
SS
I hear this all the time, "I shoot only for m... (show quote)


MT I agree with you 100 percent. First of all it must make the shooter happy (in most cases).

Reply
Check out Software and Computer Support for Photographers section of our forum.
Jan 15, 2014 13:35:56   #
RAFriedman Loc: NYC/ Philadelphia
 
Greatness versus popularity? Yes, two very different things!

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 13:39:04   #
ExTech2
 
Boobarf wrote:
I love these elements. What I'm thinking may have already been stated (however I fell off my ladder taking down Christmas lights on Jan 3, and went head first about 15' onto my cement mowing strip- 40 staples in head later and a concussion- I may have missed a few posts)- so my take: It's like "painting art", many styles capturing many different genres and subjects please many different people. I see photography in the same way- landscape, wildlife, portrait, street journalism, etc. Different views of greatness by what the individual sees as "great". For my passion, which is Landscape, I try to incorporate the above elements into my photos. If I get the 80 for the 20 of those elements and someone who appreciates landscape photos, says "wow, that is a great photo", then I've met my criteria. And if they don't and I still like it, then that is good too!! Done with ramble.
I love these elements. What I'm thinking may have ... (show quote)


I agree with these elements but all must fall under the umbrella of story telling. I have seen photos that were technically crap but still rendered a beautiful story, especially to two people, the shooter and the subject.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 14:37:16   #
Snapit Loc: Texas
 
A great photo tells a story, shows us things in a different perspective, and/or sets a mood.

Reply
Jan 15, 2014 16:14:15   #
Dontrain Loc: Chicago suburb
 
I would like to ask the Natl Geo editors what they think makes a great shot. They and their photographers have a knack for photos that tell a story - a visual "Song without Word" if you will. Yes, they have the time talent, equipment, and travel budget but they introduce us to much more.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Wedding Photography section of our forum.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.