Comments on: What Makes a Photograph “Great?”

By: celebrity sextapes|celebrity Sex|celebrity Porn

celebrity sextapes|celebrity Sex|celebrity Porn — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:28:03 +0000

celebrity sextapes|celebrity Sex|celebrity Porn…

[...]What Makes a Photograph “Great?” | LIGHTING ESSENTIALS For Photographers[...]…

By: Tommy

Tommy — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 16:01:55 +0000

For me, the difference between a good image and a great image is how long the â€œWowâ€ factor stays with you. I’ve been in love with an image and upon revisiting it notice more and more, things I would have done different.(Good) Others, I still love today as much as the second the shutter clicked.(Great)

By: Thursday Links

Thursday Links — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:35:22 +0000

[...] What Makes A Photograph Great? Easy AdSense by Unreal [...]

By: wizwow

wizwow — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 17:13:16 +0000

One of the best blogs for discussion of creativity, style and vision, Bruce's site offers plenty of great posts. Visit the site at Permission to Suck.

By: Bruce DeBoer

Bruce DeBoer — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:40:01 +0000

I tend to break the elements of a great photograph int three topics for discussion: Curiosity, Imagination and Empathy. Naturally they overlap but I like using these because it’s very hard to apply concepts that blossom from these topics without very personal interpretation.

Once we speak of Depth, Line, Motion, Perspective, composition, etc., we are teaching craft and moving away from ideas. I write more about my thoughts on my site in a post with a similar title as this one if anyone is interested.

By: julie Edwards

julie Edwards — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:50:28 +0000

For me… trying to define this I come up with the phrase “does it take me there?”.

This can be applied to most images…

Am in in the landscape? DO I feel the desolation, peace, thunder etc?
Am I in the room with the portrait subject – do I expect them to speak?
Am I watching the police chief in Vietnam shooting a collaborator? (and I pick this to illustrate that I feel technical quality is less important… Every version I see of Eddie Adams image is grainy, “fuzzy” (not blurred) etc but it still takes you to that moment of death.

This is probably why most glamour/fashion photography leaves me cold. Yes I can admire great lighting but I feel feel (nor want to feel) “there”. (Maybe thats different for guys? ( lol)..

If a photo transports you from your seat/room whatever, then it’s great…..

wiz?

By: Paul Deveaux

Paul Deveaux — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 03:58:01 +0000

Thanks for dealing with my questions.

This is extremely helpful and forces me to ask some hard questions of myself and my photography. It seems that there are some objective pieces to this and some subjective pieces. For instance technique should always be in service to vision regardless. Context, emotion, and wow factor can be highly subjective. I’m not yet sure what to do with that but there enough there to wrestle with.

With the vision question it seems that we need to keep shooting until we have some kind of breakthrough. I imagine (I have yet to have a breakthrough) that once you hit that you ride that out until it no longer works and go back to shooting again. This time with a different vision or intent.

The lists of photographers is really, really helpful. It’s a lot easier to see greatness than to read about it!

Thanks again,
Paul

By: Mike Dooley

Mike Dooley — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 02:23:05 +0000

Thanks for posting this Don! I appreciate the list of photographers as well. This article caused me to stop and think about why i like the photographers that I do like, and to go back and look at their work more closely. Maybe if I can understand what it is I like, I can make my own work a little bit better. Thanks again!!!

Mike

By: wizwow

wizwow — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 23:08:15 +0000

You are most assuredly correct.

However….

You did notice that I am not a curator or a historian and that at several points I noted that this is what I look for. It is not a sweeping generalization of what others should look for. I am sure there is some cross over from my personal to many others. And some would choose other points for their own choice of excellence. That is what makes life cool.

Regarding Atget… I believe the first time I saw a book of his images I thought ‘wow’. His body of work is amazing – especially within the Context of its time and place. “Wow” doesn’t mean some sort of outwardly expressive, over the top presentation, but rather a response to the work. Taken as a one-off, however, it may be possible to say that some of Atget’s work was understated. Taken as a body of work… well… wow.

By: Ranger 9

Ranger 9 — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 23:01:09 +0000

Can’t resist observing that a historian or curator most likely would dismiss most of these “success factors” as trivial (did Atget’s work have a “wow factor”?)

Not that they’d be right and the working pros would be wrong, but as is often the case, the right answer depends on who’s asking the question…