What makes a great picture?

C

Callum Johnstone

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1
Edit My Images
No
Hello everyone, my first post on here so lets the conversation flowing.

My question today is what makes a great picture for you?
 
Picture, or photograph?

A great photograph, to me, is a record of something that is there, or happens, as it was or did, with no "adjustments".

Pictures I leave to the artists ☺
 
ashtennisguru said:
An image that tells me a story I haven't heard before or shows me something I may not have otherwise seen
Click to expand...

For me, that plus:

1. Produces an emnotional reaction or a feeling (even if it's just a winter scene that makes me feel the cold, rather than just showing something that's obviously cold)

2. Technical quality. If I see a print that misses the mark technically, I'll always spot it and have the pleasure of viewing reduced. Yes, technical quality isn't the be all and end all, but if it's missing it's preventing/reducing greatness for me. A fuzzy print of a sharp concept is better than a sharp print of a fuzzy concept, but I don't get a warm fuzzy feeling from "fuzzy" in either place :D

I feel compelled to add a rider: I'm not a fan of news type photos, so the various much praised war photos (to look no further) that obviously lack technical quality don't affect my second point above. This carries the implication that the type of photography you like will affect what you look for. The question as asked was "what made a great picture for you" so I've factored in what I like. I can recognise greatness in images I don't like, but I've confined myself to the simpler subset of ones I like.
 
RIR said:
Picture, or photograph?
Click to expand...

StephenM said:
If I see a print that misses the mark technically, I'll always spot it and have the pleasure of viewing reduced.
Click to expand...

That might be what makes a great photograph, but what about a great picture?

Subject, light, timing, gesture, focus or lack of, framing, and more. When the information and the aesthetics come together you get a great picture that just happens to be a photograph.

To many people are concerned with making good photographs rather than making good pictures.

IMO YMMV etc. :)
 
One that tells a story.
 
One which raises more questions than it provides answers..
 
Last edited:
Ed Sutton said:
That might be what makes a great photograph, but what about a great picture?
Click to expand...

By itself, certainly not. I've seen lots of photographs that have the technical quality and nothing more. But in my post it was the last point I gave, and with a reason. If a picture has all the other qualities I gave but misses on this one, it's fallen short of greatness for me because it's lacking something that it could have had. There are also nuances in the concept of technical quality anyway. For some, perfect sharpness throughout the whole of the picture area is a measure of quality, but there are times when application of differential focus and even having what might be considered a major part of the image out of focus is needed for artistic purposes. I can recall one picture which had a sloping horizon, out of focus rocks in the foreground and a blue colour cast, all of which could be regarded as technical faults but all of which were necessary for that particular image. This then raises the question of photographer's intent; if such "faults" were intended, then I wouldn't regard them as faults. Technical perfection means to me getting all the mechanical details (for want of a better term) right for the image as intended. A colour cast, imperfect leveling and missed focus on the foreground would be fatal to some architectural photographs.

The fact that a distinction can be made between "photograph" and "picture" supports my long held belief that there are photographers who use a camera and artists who use a camera, and never the twain shall meet (ideologically) :D:exit:
 
StephenM said:
The fact that a distinction can be made between "photograph" and "picture" supports my long held belief that there are photographers who use a camera and artists who use a camera, and never the twain shall meet (ideologically) :D:exit:
Click to expand...

Well I'm neither a photographer nor an artist. Just a bloke with a camera. :LOL:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top