Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
What is a Snapshot?
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
Dec 22, 2018 23:07:17   #
dat2ra Loc: Sacramento
 
CHF Canon - Right on! :-)

Reply
Dec 23, 2018 13:20:48   #
axiesdad Loc: Monticello, Indiana
 
Longshadow wrote:
Neat information!
Yes, Bipod did present some interesting history; too bad he felt the need to include all those opinions that make him sound like he's got a monopod stuck up his ....

Reply
Dec 23, 2018 13:32:10   #
jcboy3
 
burkphoto wrote:
Photographs are MADE. Snapshots are "taken."

A photograph is a consciously composed, carefully executed image that includes passion, insight, point of view, perspective, proportion, story, message, purpose, timing, planning, attention to lighting and other details, and at least some modicum of technical mastery.

A snapshot is just a quick grab of a moment. Composition may be random. Timing may be random (or just plain off). Posing of human subjects may be contrived, stiff, awkward, or non-existent. The purpose may be there (such as recording a memory, or remembering a grocery list on your phone), but there is little regard for the other qualities of great photography.

As for art — that's in the eye of the beholder. If it grabs me, moves me, tells me a story, elicits an emotional reaction or calls me to action or changes my mind, *and* it is aesthetically pleasing, that's a start. But what does that for me may not do that for someone else.

I try not to think too much about it. As a Supreme Court justice once said about pornography, "I know it (in this case, art) when I see it."
Photographs are MADE. Snapshots are "taken.&q... (show quote)


My first shot of something is almost always a "snapshot". Then I follow up with a more studied approach; moving around to change angle, change focal length, change aperture and/or shutter speed, verifying exposure, verifying focus, bracket, use filters, etc. Sometimes, the "snapshot" is the only shot that works because it changes from what originally drew my attention.

Reply
 
 
Dec 23, 2018 15:50:37   #
donald4u Loc: California
 
Your regular snap shot is mom and dad and kids standing together. The difference between a snap shot and a great photo is. It makes you stop to look. It gets a response . It has Impact. Oh look at the big cats at the zoo. Snap. Now another Water is dripping from his mouth. You take the picture. It makes someone stop. Look a the falls . The water looks like silk. Impact.

Reply
Dec 23, 2018 15:58:11   #
kktim Loc: Zachary, La
 
"De photographibus non est disputandem" (Shouldn't this white box for replies to this forum type "Typed comments"???? When is a comment a "quick reply" vs a "well thought out reply" "a story" or "a play? Can a play be one if it isn't played?

Reply
Dec 23, 2018 16:51:02   #
kktim Loc: Zachary, La
 
Maybe that should have been, "De gustibus (photographibus) non est disputandem." It all depends on how you were brought up as to if it is an insult or praise. Down here, it is crawfish not crayfish; New Awlins not NewOrleans; gumbo only if it has okra and the plural of 'you' is 'yall'! A snapshot by a professional can be Art. A snapshot by the rest of us is called "what else did you take." Like someone else said, call it whatever your payee is calling it. After all, concerning "ART"; some 'art to have known better!!!

Reply
Dec 23, 2018 17:01:23   #
boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander
 
Curmudgeon wrote:
With derision in her voice she says "Henry only takes snapshots". Later in the evening he says with awe, "Did you seen Mary's photographs?" Can anyone tell me what a snapshot is, when a snapshot becomes a photograph or when a photograph becomes art?


A snap shot is a picture taken with a crop sensor snap camera. The Mk 2 in full frame is due in a month or two. (I just couldn't help myself)

Reply
 
 
Dec 23, 2018 19:28:15   #
old poet
 
Snapshot = when your camera makes a snapping sound when you press the shutter release. 😉

Reply
Dec 23, 2018 22:12:39   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
NOSTALGIA!

I remember little booklets with yellow textured cardstock covers- the words "YOUR SNAPSHOTS" were printed in red- in the corner was the Kodak logo. In it were 8, 12, 24 or 36 black and white photographs. The were printed on high gloss paper with white borders and deckled edges. On the back of each print there was a watermark "Kodak Velox Paper" and a stamped batch number. The perforated edge on the left side enabled easily removal of the prints so that I could place them in my album with black pages and black photo corners. The prints could be ordered in regular or JUMBO size. I shot 2 1/4 (Brownie Hawkeye) ordered 5x5s

You would bring you rolls of film (usually Verichrome) 120, 620, 127. 116 616 or Plus-X 828 or 35mm to the drug store or camera shop from where they were usually sent to a mass production semi-automated photo finishing lab. It usually took about a week and my booklet was returned in an envelope- the negatives were in some kind of protector- cellophane or white paper.

I could return you favorite negative to the store for a BIG 5x7 or 8x10 enlargement and for an additional small fee, have it tinted in transparent oils.

The pharmacist in the drug store saw my snapshots and thought I had talent and should be a photographer when I grow up- I agreed. My mother wanted me to become a doctor- I was leaning toward being a fireman at the time. My grandmother suggest plumbing as a career- she had just paid the plumber and figured that they made lots of money. My English teacher said I should be a doctor because I spoke like doctors write! Ended up as a photographer!

Those were indeed SNAPSHOTS! Merry Christmas Folks!

Reply
Dec 24, 2018 11:13:19   #
axiesdad Loc: Monticello, Indiana
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
NOSTALGIA!

I remember little booklets with yellow textured cardstock covers- the words "YOUR SNAPSHOTS" were printed in red- in the corner was the Kodak logo. In it were 8, 12, 24 or 36 black and white photographs. The were printed on high gloss paper with white borders and deckled edges. On the back of each print there was a watermark "Kodak Velox Paper" and a stamped batch number. The perforated edge on the left side enabled easily removal of the prints so that I could place them in my album with black pages and black photo corners. The prints could be ordered in regular or JUMBO size. I shot 2 1/4 (Brownie Hawkeye) ordered 5x5s

You would bring you rolls of film (usually Verichrome) 120, 620, 127. 116 616 or Plus-X 828 or 35mm to the drug store or camera shop from where they were usually sent to a mass production semi-automated photo finishing lab. It usually took about a week and my booklet was returned in an envelope- the negatives were in some kind of protector- cellophane or white paper.

I could return you favorite negative to the store for a BIG 5x7 or 8x10 enlargement and for an additional small fee, have it tinted in transparent oils.

The pharmacist in the drug store saw my snapshots and thought I had talent and should be a photographer when I grow up- I agreed. My mother wanted me to become a doctor- I was leaning toward being a fireman at the time. My grandmother suggest plumbing as a career- she had just paid the plumber and figured that they made lots of money. My English teacher said I should be a doctor because I spoke like doctors write! Ended up as a photographer!

Those were indeed SNAPSHOTS! Merry Christmas Folks!
NOSTALGIA! br br I remember little booklets with... (show quote)


Thanks for the memories!

Reply
Dec 24, 2018 17:36:31   #
hassighedgehog Loc: Corona, CA
 
I have a box full of my family's photos. I believe some of them are just like that. A few years ago I digitized some of them with a flat bed scanner. Then took some of them and printed them in a book for uncles and aunts. Included a CD for them to share with other relatives if they wanted to. Turns out many of their pictures had been destroyed in a fire.

Reply
 
 
Dec 24, 2018 22:46:46   #
Bipod
 
Fredrick wrote:
Photo Clubs are a double edged sword. I joined one a few years ago, and eventually became their President. In competitions you can submit your prized images, and be shot down ruthlessly by a judge. Submit the same image later with another judge, and get subjective feedback. The real benefit of competitions at Photo Clubs is to listen to the judges comments on all photos submitted, and you will begin to develop your artists eye. It can be learned through a lot of trial and error. Also, buy a book on Composition, study it and practice.

One other thing, Photo Club feedback is highly subjective. What may show poorly at a Photo Club competition may be a wonderful photo. Most clubs are hung up on the “rule of thirds” rule. While appropriate in probably most cases ... the keyword here is “most,” not all.

I recently came across a framed photograph I took of my son when he was 8 years old (he’s 44 now.). Took it one summer day at Point Lobos State Reserve in Carmel CA. He was sitting on a rock looking out at the water, and a seagull landed right next to him on another rock, with the seagull just sitting there looking around.

I submitted it (below) at our local Photography Club in a competition, and the judge said “oh, just another typical amateur grab shot ... would have been nice to see his face ... next.” I just laughed. It’s now hanging in my house, is one of my favorite photographs, and I get compliments on it all the time. Sometimes you need to take some feedback with a grain of salt.

Just remember, Composition, and practice.
Photo Clubs are a double edged sword. I joined one... (show quote)

So far as I know, Ansel Adams never entered a photography club competition.
Neither did Alfred Stieglitz , Edward Weston, Edward Steichen, Paul Strand or
Dorothea Lange.

But then, neither Frank Sinatra nor Mick Jagger was never a contestant on The Voice.
Nor were Billie Holliday, Aretha Franklin, Dione Warwick, Patti Labelle, Anita Baker or
Chrissie Hynde.

We live in the era of diminishing expectations.

I like many new recordings...but how does the engineering and musicianship sound--really--
compared to, say, Steely Dan? Is that Wayne Shorter on sax? Alas, not any more.

And how does that print look -- really look--compared to Ansel Adams, Minor White--or
or Bruce Barnbaum?

And color prints--how do they really stack up against Eliot Porter? Digital should be
able to equal dye transfer process, but rarely does---thanks to garish saturated color
and cheap attention-grabbing gimmicks. Deep commitmentand integrity is hard to fake.

Reply
Dec 28, 2018 11:28:35   #
scsdesphotography Loc: Southeastern Michigan
 
I'll add one last comment, but first, post Happy Christmas everyone! I'm not going to repeat the definitions I posted earlier, no one has taken exception them. The quality of the image determines which category it falls in, period. It doesn't matter who took the image, how much skill the photographer had, how much planning went into it, or how much thought was applied. There is only one rule, either the image is impactful (emotionally impactful) or it's not. The technical aspects of how image the came to exist are interesting but do not affect the assessment of whether it is of good enough to qualify as a 'photograph.' It would be great if it were otherwise true, but it's not.

Reply
Dec 28, 2018 14:01:15   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
scsdesphotography wrote:
I'll add one last comment, but first, post Happy Christmas everyone! I'm not going to repeat the definitions I posted earlier, no one has taken exception them. The quality of the image determines which category it falls in, period. It doesn't matter who took the image, how much skill the photographer had, how much planning went into it, or how much thought was applied. There is only one rule, either the image is impactful (emotionally impactful) or it's not. The technical aspects of how image the came to exist are interesting but do not affect the assessment of whether it is of good enough to qualify as a 'photograph.' It would be great if it were otherwise true, but it's not.
I'll add one last comment, but first, post Happy C... (show quote)



Reply
Dec 28, 2018 15:43:20   #
JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco
 
scsdesphotography wrote:
I'll add one last comment, but first, post Happy Christmas everyone! I'm not going to repeat the definitions I posted earlier, no one has taken exception them. The quality of the image determines which category it falls in, period. It doesn't matter who took the image, how much skill the photographer had, how much planning went into it, or how much thought was applied. There is only one rule, either the image is impactful (emotionally impactful) or it's not. The technical aspects of how image the came to exist are interesting but do not affect the assessment of whether it is of good enough to qualify as a 'photograph.' It would be great if it were otherwise true, but it's not.
I'll add one last comment, but first, post Happy C... (show quote)


I will take exception. There is no definition of photograph in any dictionary which defines a photograph by its quality. A photograph is an image that is the result of the action of light on a light sensitive material. Period. Snapshots ARE photographs. Lousy photographs are still photographs.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.