Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Isn’t showing snow as bright white and/or showing detail in the snow part of composition?

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

That is one of the reasons I no longer post pictures here. Most of my pictures are street/documentary, environmental/ecological. I want people to think and feel. “Nice shot” doesn’t do it for me.

srt101fan

I understand what you're saying. There is very little discussion of images. "Nice", "great capture", a thumbs up, a smiley (I never understood that one) - that's most of what you get, or maybe "abstracts are not my thing".

But part of it is that it's difficult, demanding and time-consuming to write about your "feeling" reaction to an image. Perhaps Larry's comment regarding the addition of a descriptive paragraph to a photo might help folks come up with more than just "nice".

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Not ALL people express feelings about an image, sculpture, oil painting, .......
They'll simply enjoy it,
or not.
Seems like you might be saying "If you can't say something about it, don't bother looking at it.".

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I don't consider proper, or perhaps more properly, expressive exposure as part of composition, which is the structural or geometric or tonal layout of the image. Both are obviously desirable, but I don't consider either of them as important as some sort of consequential content...something that compels me to stop and look and study what you have found or what has found you or what you have constructed or what you have experienced.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Every image I have ever captured of railroad equipment or operation is important and significant to me. Very few of them are of particular interest to 98% of the people I know. Some folks are engaged if there is an interesting or imposing bridge or building. Otherwise pretty much no. So those images are for me. If they go on the wall, it's in my hobby room.

When I took a photography class many years ago, I did a railroad series to satisfy a project assignment. It was quite well received by the professor and the class. But I was smart enough to build it around the color red, not the railroad equipment. Every image had a key element that was bright red. Even the folks that cared nothing about trains could get on board.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

In this case "creativity" is being suggested as one of the differences between a good photo and a snapshot (a photo taken with little or no pre-planning or pre-visualisation). Creativity is certainly one of the main ingredients and there's an element of truth in suggesting that too much automation is not conducive to the shooter developing his/her creativity.

But there is an up side to cameras that make it easy for us to get technically good shots. For those of us who do want to develop and become good photographers and not just snapshooters, freedom from distractions is a big bonus. A camera that's easy to operate will help us to concentrate on the stuff that does matter, from spotting opportunities in the first place to the process of getting good composition, catching the decisive moment etc.

There have always been snapshooters and there will always be people who want to become good at their craft. Phones and P&S cameras have made it easy for snapshooters to take an interest in photography, but just because we're outnumbered by them, that doesn't mean that we (the people who want to become better at photography) are a dying breed.

The best thing that we can do is to carry on providing a good example (and good examples of good photos). Every time we discuss the right or best approach there's a chance that a learner will have some of it rub off on them. Automation may encourage laziness but it doesn't have to be a creativity killer, and it's up to us to provide evidence of the benefits of developing creativity.

It would be a mistake to despair when seeing the proliferation of snapshots, because they provide examples of what's lacking in a photo, and anyone who's interested in learning can look at them and work out what could have been done better. We can learn from both good and bad examples if we're willing to make the effort to try to understand what works and what doesn't work and why. Good cameras help with that learning process by reducing the distractions and by making it easier for us to get successful shots.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I would have thought that the appropriate subsections (People Photography etc) would be good places to get feedback from people who will appreciate your efforts and who understand what's required for that particular genre. In addition to that, sharing ideas is generally a good idea and it can spark the very creativity that you see as lacking in so many people's efforts. If you think you're above improvement, my advice would be to think again, regardless of how good or how experienced you may be.

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

Creativity is always there, only how we express it and manifest it has changed. If you want to challenge yourself, pretend your digital camera has 36 exposures of fixed ISO film, and shoot M mode (no auto ISO!). Oh, and it's the last roll of film you have for 200 miles.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Yes, the delete key culls effectively our not worth sharing, even with ourselves, photographs.
"After taking a digital photo, it is easy to review and decide whether to keep or retake it. The decision to keep or discard an image can be made for a variety of reasons. In some cases, the subject of the photo
may have been moving or is not in the frame. In other cases, a more subjective decision may be made about whether or not it is a “good” photo, and explanations of why someone did or did not like a photo
may be harder to obtain. Having a good photo can inspire, quickly engender feelings or, ideally, capture the moment. Photos are used frequently in social media and for quick communication of ideas on-
line, but despite the seemingly disposable presence of photos, decision making about their suitability for communicative purposes need not be a solely intuitive process"
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1234&context=specedfacpub

Too few clean-up photographs with simple tools like straightening and cropping. IQ issues like noise are trivial, if the composition of a photo is psychologically pleasing then it is a winner. Keyword... COMPOSITION...

In Western culture, we read photographs in a surprisingly uniform way. rule of 1/3, light vs dark balance, diagonal framing, vanishing point, and so on are all important to the effectiveness of taking the photo and subsequent crop framing.

This reference gives 28 good composition types:
https://petapixel.com/photography-composition-techniques/

Photos have messages and cropping helps define the message... classic vs modern approach
https://www.primamateriainstitute.com/article/composition-why-its-so-important

Discussion with many references:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7963460/

cmc4214 Loc: S.W. Pennsylvania

I believe that a lot of "snapshots" today are about sharing ones' experiences, and are not intended to be about art or creativity....Nothing wrong with that, just a different use of photography.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Kodak advertised in 1888, "You press the button, "We do the rest."
Most people who take photos never worried about techniques like hobbiests do. That is why poles grow out of people's heads, etc.
I don't think that there is any decline as is being worried about. But who knows?
Good thought provoking question, I am curious about the responses.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Exactly!!!

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Some of the most interesting "artistic" photographs I have seen over the years are built around juxtapositions...some accidental, some intentional. Some humorous, some not. Some reasonable, some emotionally jarring. Some real, some contrived.

"Unusual reality" is one of the most important elements that can make an interesting but eventually believable photograph. And it's unique to photography as long as there in an underlying believability in photographs. Wonkiness can easily be built into a painting or even a sculpture. It's no big deal and not particularly distinctive. But something that isn't quite right, like a landscape where uphill is in the wrong place, or a building that doesn't quite fit in an environment, or a car with only three wheels rolling down the street...those are noteworthy subjects.

Perhaps we as photographers are suffocating ourselves with our own conventionalism. We are drowning in our own rules.