artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Here are two snapshots of my dad. One, a display at a Veterans Day Exhibition, Dad, his wartime harmonica, and a model of the B-25 in which he was a radioman/navigator. The other the "snapshot," a poor scan sent to me, which I tried, not to rehabilitate exactly, but to make it realistic with a subtle visual emphasis of an idea of Dad. Dad was a humble man, here with a humble catch--but meaningful for this quiet man.

All comments are welcome, good and bad, because I want to do a good job. As usual with me, feel free to show me any changes you suggest.

(Download)


(Download)

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Of course, a snapshot can be a good, even great, photo. Google Frank Capra + Dday for proof.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Of course of course. In the example I presented?

repleo Loc: Boston

Hi Bob,
I like them both - for different reasons.

The second one is a really nice portrait of a '...humble .. quite.. man'. I almost feel I know him and could trust him. I don't usually like 'painterly' effects but it is quite subtle and works well. I would cherish a shot like that of my Dad.

I really like the concept of the first one. Perhaps you have other mementos of his that you could use to expand the scope of his life. I'm sure WWII was a formative part of his life, but maybe not so important in your relationship with him.

A snapshot can be a good photo, but more important - it can be a treasure.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Thanks for the good comments, repleo.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

m

Hi, ArtBob,

An old snapshot likely will be of some sentimental significance / value to its maker, or to a relative of the subject, as these, obviously, are to you..but “... a good photo” ???

For any meaningful attempts at delivering a specific “yes” or “no” to your explicit question, you will have to let us in on what, in your most ...er...humble ... opinion, characterizes the ...”good photo” that you had in mind when you posed your question. Only then will you be able to expect those informed yeses or nos to come rolling in!

Of course, I somehow suspect that you had hoped for respondents to do the requisite heavy definitional lifting for you, to which you could then freely respond with your own extemporaneous opinions. However, had that been your hope, you ought better have simply asked “What constitutes a good photo?”

But, ArtBob, you didn’t do that, did you?

Thus, the ball’s in your court, and, with ‘bated breath, we ... or, at least, I, await your wisdom. I’m sure that I’m not alone in eagerly hoping to learn, at long last, the definitive answer to that profound and probing question: “...what characterizes ..a good photo”!

So hit it, Bob! I’m all-a-twitter!

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Well, bless your heart! First you imply we all have different definitions. Then you act as if I'd actually learn something if people who agree with that definition agree with me and those who don't, don't.

I don't want you to stress your heart with the "heavy lifting" of having an idea of what is a good photo, much less the impossible "explicit" answer. Breathe.....breathe....breathe

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

oyOh my, Bob; you do so disappoint.
so...lacking in substance!

I can’t help that you posed the question as you posed it!

As Lady McB said: “Screw your courage to the sticking point...” and have at the definitional game you started. For you, one would think the lifting ought not be all that heavy. C’mon, show us the benefits of that ol’ B.F.A. and your years of experience proffering professorial profundities!

The ball’s feeling woefully ignored in your court!

C’mon, Bob; you’ve convinced us you can do it! What DOES characterize a “good photo”? (your words, not ours)

The collective Hedgehog awaits!

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Please verify you speak for everybody on UHH, as you claim.

Also, for some strange reason, I get the impression you are not really after an honest discussion.

Finally, this was about a son's attempt to elevate a snapshot of his dad to a more immortalizing fine art photograph. Your disrespect for that process is shameful.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

nAgain, you disappoint.

You fail in recognizing the substance of the problem, to wit, your failure to accept responsibility for obvious lack of clarity of intent of the title you assigned to this thread, and then with pitiful attempts to self justification by deflection.

And please...no egregious pretense of umbrage at purported disrespect by me of “...a son’s attempt to elevate a snapshot of his dad to a more immortalizing fine art.” B.S.! This gambit is a pathetically simple and unsuccessful attempt to deflect attention from a direct and specific response to your thread as posted and titled.
You know perfectly well that not a scintilla of disrespect was intended and to imply that I somehow bear a burden of shame is another pathetic attempt at pure, distracting, unadulterated B-S

Read your title: “Can a snapshot be a good photo” ( question mark absent via ???)
A simple question requiring an evidently expected simple answer, but only when “good photo” is adequately characterized.


The fact remains that your question, faulted by the glaringly obvious and unfortunate point of ambiguity, requires disambiguation by the questioner - that would be you - in order that it might be rationally answered. One can only hope that your titular question does not represent the clarity of the test questions by means of which you evaluate your students’ performance.

So , how’s about getting back into the spirit of discussion arising from your clumsy attempt at formulating a question, own the problem, offer your characterization of a “good photo”, and let”s get on with this thread.

That ball is getting dusty in the corner of your court where you obviously have hoped it would not be noticed!

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

"Pretense" outrage? That attitude is despicable, if not unhinged. Rant away, I'm through with you.

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

fOh good heavens! Now he’s a victim! that’s a common gambit of such as he!

And “unhinged”? Check you own hinges, Lad; ‘tis you that is flapping like a loose-hinged shutter in a storm’s wind!

Ah, well..”...through...”? Music to my ears! I’m sure a number of other folks would also welcome that sentiment from you who refuses to accept responsibility for problems of his own devising

And now, let’s see if you, having pledged that you are “through” will attempt to have the last word!? It has seemed obvious that you cannot rest until you are assured the the last word is yours.

Unless, of course, you are willing to humbly dismount from your high horse ( a mare named “Pomposity”...right?) and actually start the discussion on “Can a snapshot be a good photo” .
Could be worthwhile...or will your ...pride....frustration?...bruised ego?...prevent us from ever knowing?

You really need to dust that ball in a corner of your court!

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

As a portrait, the "snapshot" isn't all that bad; there are plenty of good things about it - the pose and facial expression of the subject, the lighting, the pleasing color combination, and of course the communicative power of the included elements within the composition. As we don't see the original image you were presented with, it is hard to judge the improvements you made on the original through editing. I assume the original image was rather fuzzy with very faded colors.

There is quite a bit of edge harshness to your processed image that I don't care for, but for small-sized print (5x7 or smaller), this certainly wouldn't be noticeable anyway.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

I think I understand what you are writing. An earlier "fixing" of the photo, in early Photoshop, had created some of the sharp edges I think you are talking about. Stuck with that, I tried to leverage them into making the a "statue," without taking out the life. That way, dad would b e solid, even though simple.

From what you write, and from my own worries, I'm thinking that may be impossible. Thanks for pointing out the specifics. Arbus and Sally Mann do this "elevating" from snapshot to fine art. More work remains for me. Thanks again.

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

A photograph, regardless of type, is judged as a photograph. I have seen wonderful "snapshots" and lousy photographs. When a picture is judged on it's merits, the viewer probably has no idea how it was done. Whats more is that the entire discussion is purely academic. I always thought that any picture made by a camera is a photograph. Is a picture of soup cans art?