Every photo is a snapshot.
Jul 6, 2019 08:39:45 #
davyboy
Loc: Anoka Mn.
rmorrison1116 wrote:
Chew on this for a while and you may, or may not, ... (show quote)
I’m not so sure about that. I thought I read somewhere he took 7-10 minutes before he shot, might no that quality as a photograph?
Jul 6, 2019 08:53:35 #
davyboy wrote:
I’m not so sure about that. I thought I read somewhere he took 7-10 minutes before he shot, might no that quality as a photograph?
Why do people keep saying that a snapshot is not a photograph?
Jul 6, 2019 09:31:51 #
rmorrison1116 wrote:
Mmmmmm, snapper soup, with a splash of red wine, and an order of fried frog legs, yummy.
I grew up eating snapper (fish), long before I realized that the soup wasn't.
)Jul 6, 2019 09:32:24 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
Why do people keep saying that a snapshot is not a photograph?
They are splitting hairs.
A photograph≈quality, a snapshot, not so much.
A photograph≈planned, a snapshot, not.
Jul 6, 2019 09:36:13 #
rmorrison1116 wrote:
Chew on this for a while and you may, or may not, ... (show quote)
It's supposed to be a great photograph because it was a snapshot. However, some said it wasn't a snapshot and was planned. Of course I don't know if it's true but if it was planned it would be a lesser photograph than a snapshot.
Jul 6, 2019 10:19:39 #
Longshadow wrote:
They are splitting hairs.
A photograph≈quality, a snapshot, not so much.
A photograph≈planned, a snapshot, not.
A photograph≈quality, a snapshot, not so much.
A photograph≈planned, a snapshot, not.
No definition of photograph that I've ever seen would exclude snapshots. Snapshots can be very high quality, even if only by luck, and planned photographs can be lousy. They're all photographs.
Jul 6, 2019 11:01:22 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
No definition of photograph that I've ever seen would exclude snapshots. Snapshots can be very high quality, even if only by luck, and planned photographs can be lousy. They're all photographs.
Yes they are!
(I have seen "excellent" photographs and wondered, WTH !)
Jul 6, 2019 15:43:18 #
RodeoMan
Loc: St Joseph, Missouri
JohnSwanda wrote:
No definition of photograph that I've ever seen would exclude snapshots. Snapshots can be very high quality, even if only by luck, and planned photographs can be lousy. They're all photographs.
I agree.
Jul 7, 2019 23:57:28 #
BebuLamar wrote:
It's supposed to be a great photograph because it was a snapshot. However, some said it wasn't a snapshot and was planned. Of course I don't know if it's true but if it was planned it would be a lesser photograph than a snapshot.
It was actually the raising of the second, larger flag. It's a snapshot because as Joe didn't pose the photo. He was a fairly short man and he placed a few sandbags on top of some rocks to stand on. Standing on the sandbags, Joe lost his balance as he pointed the camera at the Marines lifting the flag; snap. A Pulitzer prize photo was captured. When Joe recovered from his mishap, he tried to gather the soldiers together for another photo but they had all headed back to their units.
It wasn't staged and it was a snapshot and a photograph.
Jul 8, 2019 00:00:20 #
JohnSwanda wrote:
Why do people keep saying that a snapshot is not a photograph?
Because they don't know better.
Jul 8, 2019 00:31:55 #
davyboy wrote:
I’m not so sure about that. I thought I read somewhere he took 7-10 minutes before he shot, might no that quality as a photograph?
It is a photograph. It was recorded with a camera thus making it a photograph. But then snapshots are also recorded with a camera, making them photographs.
It doesn't really matter if you're sure about it or not. Your own words say you are not sure, and you obviously never read Joe Rosenthal's own account of what took place. He may have taken 10 minutes to hike up the hill. I doubt if it took the soldiers 7 to 10 minutes to lift the flag. Think about it. It wasn't a stated event just for the photographers. They were still fighting a battle and some of the soldiers involved in the flag raising died that day.
Jul 8, 2019 03:15:22 #
RodeoMan
Loc: St Joseph, Missouri
Wasn't it Justice Potter Stewart, who said that he couldn't define pornography, but "knew it when he saw it". I wonder if we are not in a similar situation with the snapshot vs photography discussion. If we pick up an album of a family on vacation, opening Christmas gifts. standing around out in the yard and other depictions of daily life, often poorly composed, then we might be more inclined to label this as an album of snapshots, especially if the images seem clearly intended to document people, places and events directly personal to the photographer and without any demonstrated intention of making a an artistic appeal to a larger audience. Of course a particular image could, on its own, be exquisite.
If we were to pick up a collection of Ansel Adams photographs, or insert the name of some other similar photographer in whatever genre you care to choose, or even any number of excellent photographers who regularly post on this site, I think most of us would know that we are not looking at a collection of "snapshots". We might even envision an image by the photographer hanging on our wall. We could imagine it having an appeal to an audience beyond the photographer or his immediate family. We might even see a situation where images of the photographer would over time increase in value. I don't think that we would commonly expect an album of snapshots to increase in value unless there were something else going on, such as snapshots by a celebrity.
There will no doubt be shades of gray where a particular image would be difficult to catagorize and to be perfectly honest about it, why should we bother. Yes a snapshot is a photograph, in that an image is captured by a photographic process of some sort. If I were to take a palette of watercolors and with the canvas in front of me and with a similar sort of skills and effort that the snapshooter puts into his or her work, I painted an scene that had no appeal beyond myself, I would not expect my efforts to be regarded in the same light as the work of a competent watercolorist who created an image that would have an appeal to an unknown audience not only now but into the future. To return to my original statement, I think most of us know snapshots when we see them, but also accept that they are photographs in that they are made with a camera or someother photographic device.
If we were to pick up a collection of Ansel Adams photographs, or insert the name of some other similar photographer in whatever genre you care to choose, or even any number of excellent photographers who regularly post on this site, I think most of us would know that we are not looking at a collection of "snapshots". We might even envision an image by the photographer hanging on our wall. We could imagine it having an appeal to an audience beyond the photographer or his immediate family. We might even see a situation where images of the photographer would over time increase in value. I don't think that we would commonly expect an album of snapshots to increase in value unless there were something else going on, such as snapshots by a celebrity.
There will no doubt be shades of gray where a particular image would be difficult to catagorize and to be perfectly honest about it, why should we bother. Yes a snapshot is a photograph, in that an image is captured by a photographic process of some sort. If I were to take a palette of watercolors and with the canvas in front of me and with a similar sort of skills and effort that the snapshooter puts into his or her work, I painted an scene that had no appeal beyond myself, I would not expect my efforts to be regarded in the same light as the work of a competent watercolorist who created an image that would have an appeal to an unknown audience not only now but into the future. To return to my original statement, I think most of us know snapshots when we see them, but also accept that they are photographs in that they are made with a camera or someother photographic device.
Jul 8, 2019 04:27:18 #
Snapshots are photographs that were/are intended to be snapshots. They will all be different.
Photographs that aspire to be more than snapshots are often so similar that they are not different, which makes them less appealing.
Of course there ARE "different" photographs, for example Gursky's "Rhein II", sold for $4.000,000 and is obviously more than just a photograph. Such are few and far between.
Photographs that aspire to be more than snapshots are often so similar that they are not different, which makes them less appealing.
Of course there ARE "different" photographs, for example Gursky's "Rhein II", sold for $4.000,000 and is obviously more than just a photograph. Such are few and far between.
Jul 8, 2019 10:36:45 #
RodeoMan wrote:
Wasn't it Justice Potter Stewart, who said that he... (show quote)
It's not snapshot vs photography, it's snapshot vs photograph. The whole concept of a snapshot not being a photograph is absurd. Same goes for snapshots not being photography. All snapshots are photographs, thus snap-shooting is a form of photography. Not all photographs are snapshots. Why is it so had for so many to grasp...?!
Jul 8, 2019 10:51:56 #
Delderby wrote:
Snapshots are photographs that were/are intended to be snapshots. They will all be different.
Photographs that aspire to be more than snapshots are often so similar that they are not different, which makes them less appealing.
Of course there ARE "different" photographs, for example Gursky's "Rhein II", sold for $4.000,000 and is obviously more than just a photograph. Such are few and far between.
Photographs that aspire to be more than snapshots are often so similar that they are not different, which makes them less appealing.
Of course there ARE "different" photographs, for example Gursky's "Rhein II", sold for $4.000,000 and is obviously more than just a photograph. Such are few and far between.
I don't quite grasp the whole intended thing or photographs aspiring to be anything. I have no idea what you mean by photographs aspiring to be more...
You are correct; snapshots are photographs and there are different, why you quoted different I don't know, photographs; and the amount a photograph sold for doesn't make it any more or less a photograph.
I guess maybe there could be a language barrier/interpretation thing taking place here. Either way, keep on snapping and enjoy.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.