Your Kids and Your Pets - DPChallenge Forums

09/29/2003 07:20:16 PM · #151

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

AMEN!!!! Flight was actually a very bad challenge. How many dang snapshots do we have to look at of birds and planes. What has happened where is the creative minds? Being held back cause this site has become so studio sterile?

If it's not about subject matter, what difference does it make?

09/29/2003 07:49:02 PM · #152

thanks for the kind words :) .. the point, which might gone missing in the flip exchange that followed the posting of my picture, was that, you can create a 'photograph' as opposed to a 'snapshot' from even the so-called 'mundane subjects'. even said 'pedestrian' subjects can become worthy and enjoyable, if shot with an eye for light, focus, and composition. :)

Originally posted by neenee1999:

There are some really good tips in here and some really good pictures. I loved the kitten in the basket and so did my 3 year old.. .:)

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR

09/29/2003 07:51:57 PM · #153

i think that was the whole point of this thread. it's not about the subject matter at all, it's about taking something and showing it in an interesting way with some thought put it. kids, flowers, and pets just happen to be the first resort of the would-be picture maker who doesn't want to look too far afield.

Originally posted by myqyl:

Ed, take a look at flight... There's an awful lot of uninteresting birds and planes there... It isn't about the subject matter.

myqyl

Nikon D3100

09/29/2003 08:00:26 PM · #154

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

If it's not about subject matter, what difference does it make?

The difference is not the subject matter. It's the viewer's reaction to the subject. If I was an airplane fanatic, most of the flight shots would not have seemed like snapshots.

The preference of each viewer determines the quality of the shot. People without an emotional investment in children will find less value in photos of them, just as people with little or no emotional investment in a certain flag will likewise find less value in a shot of that flag. A shot that can bring a tear to my eye will bring a snore from someone else, and vice versa...

It's not about children, pets, flags, airplanes, trains, cars, nudes, feet, bugs, tools, birds, crosses, or the ever popular keyboard... It's about the viewers feelings about the subject. Ansel Adams is boring to many city dwellers that could care less about a mountain...

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

09/29/2003 08:04:10 PM · #155

I don't know how we spun off to this... but you are right. Back to the original point, it's HOW you photograph whatever your subject choice is that matters.

ScottK

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

09/29/2003 08:32:35 PM · #156

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

Speaking for myself, just lack of time this week. Got a bird picture I liked on my lunch break. I wanted to try some other stuff - hang gliders, RC planes, frisbees, etc., but just didn't have time.

Message edited by author 2003-09-29 20:33:35.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR

09/29/2003 08:50:17 PM · #157

'snapshot' is not a subjective term, though.

a snapshot is a pic you didn't spend any time, energy or effort, or especially *thought* creating or even framing and composing even if it was an off-the cuff effort.

has nothing to do with subject matter ...

Message edited by author 2003-09-29 20:54:31.

myqyl

Nikon D3100

09/29/2003 09:20:11 PM · #158

If nothing else, this thread made me haul my daughter outside to snap a stick full of snapshots :) I'm going to try and explain what I mean one last time, then I'll give up :)

Here is a snapshot of my daughter...

It is far from perfect... Little if any thought was given to composition, lighting, focus... It was taken with a telephoto lens while she was playing...

Would I show this to a stranger? Whoever sits next to me on my next flight to Asia will find out that yes I will... In fact, to answer John's original question, Yes, I do carry around a photo album. If I sit next to someone I feel might be interested (or want to drive an insurance salesman away) I will pull it out in a heartbeat.

Is it a snapshot unworthy of the valuable time someone would spend voting on it here? That depends on who is voting. Someone that has children is much more likely to see merit in this shot. They may even enjoy it... It could even bring a smile to their face. While someone with no interest in children will have wasted 2, maybe 3 seconds before they give it a 1 and open a rant thread on people wasting their time.

Personally I enjoy many of the child photos that get raked over the coals and left with votes of 3.21... I don't feel they are a waste of my time... So to the other parents out there, I say Bring um on!!!

Edit : I guess what I really mean is maybe viewers need to look closer at the merits of a shot and not rush to judgement... I just don't seem to be saying it well...

Message edited by author 2003-09-29 21:39:22.

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/29/2003 09:48:17 PM · #159

But that wasn't your original statement, was it? It singled out personal sujects, which is a contradiction of this statement you now make that it's not the subject matter that matters, but rather the fashion in which you take it. I'm not sure I agree with this. Furthermore, your message is confusing. I myself find it very hard to make an objective judgement on a photo with subject matter that's personal to me. This whole discussion is tenuous because:

1. It's possible to have a terrific photograph with universal appeal, which is technically very, very bad. Open a LIFE magazine compilation sometime and you can pick the photographs apart technically, as many are poor in that regard.

2. It's possible to have a photograph which is exceptional in its technique, but boring as hell.

There are two variables here. Isolating one doesn't make the equation complete. Technique means nothing without interest, and yet interest can still be held where technique is bad.

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

I don't know how we spun off to this... but you are right. Back to the original point, it's HOW you photograph whatever your subject choice is that matters.

myqyl

Nikon D3100

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR

09/29/2003 09:54:41 PM · #160

Actually Jimmy, we both may have misread John's original post. I thought he was singling out children and pets too, but we were likely mistaken. I assume children and pets were an 'example' and not the actual point of the post...

Say La V :)

Edit : Spell checked for your protection...

Message edited by author 2003-09-29 21:57:46.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/29/2003 10:10:34 PM · #161

Originally posted by jimmythefish:

Yes. It was the entire purpose of my original and subsequent posts.

jimmythefish

Canon EOS-10D

09/30/2003 02:33:11 AM · #162

No, I didn't misread it. Furthermore, it was a rant in the rant forum, so I have just as much right to rant back, for whatever it may be worth. I have the utmost respect for John and his contribution to this site. That is not in question. What is in qestion is the topic of the rant. I still think that there's an issue with subject matter vs. technique that isn't fully addressed with this kind of rebuke of all things snapshot.

If a snapshot is transcended by subject matter and not the nature in which it is shot (think the lemonade shot John posted a while back) then isn't the very idea of the technique of the snapshot in and of itself valuable on a universal level? Can there be meaning in a shot that turned out by mistake? Art in accident? Or is the process of shooting snapshots worthy in its own right? If people are forced to constrain their candid and impulsive nature towards composition and subject matter (a veritable hallmark of digital photography), might some gems not be lost forever?

So this leaves discretion being the critical factor in posting, in so far as one may post a snapshot as opposed to a planned shot. We're making the bold assumption that what we see as a snapshot is indeed unplanned, and taken with subject and personal interest in mind. It might well have been a personal shot with no regard to a wider audience. It might well have been best efforts for the person involved. Well, doesn't it become a question of taste and talent? Stuff which cannot be taught?

My question to the forum (which still hasn't been answered):

What makes a photograph taken as a snapshot interesting on a universal level?

I am still confused as to the point of the original post...other than a ranting frustration brought on by a bunch of admittedly rather poor photographs. As I said in my previous post, there are situations where technique matters. There are also situations where subject matters. Subject will always win, I think, and this has been proven time and time again through photojournalist shots that are deeply flawed on a compositional level. To post a comment to a new/inexperienced/untalented photographer here would be sending mixed messages.

There are unquanitfiable combinations of subject and technique which work to make a good photograph.

Message edited by author 2003-09-30 02:35:48.

09/30/2003 08:28:35 AM · #163

"My question to the forum (which still hasn't been answered):

What makes a photograph taken as a snapshot interesting on a universal level? "

If we knew the answer to this, life would be great :)

"I am still confused as to the point of the original post...other than a ranting frustration brought on by a bunch of admittedly rather poor photographs. "

This is the point of the post.

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

09/30/2003 09:22:55 AM · #164

why doesn't someone lock this thing, there hasn't been a good post in like 3 pages

bod

09/30/2003 09:36:33 AM · #165

Originally posted by achiral:

why doesn't someone lock this thing, there hasn't been a good post in like 3 pages

Not before I get my pet shot in ; )

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

09/30/2003 09:44:58 AM · #166

Originally posted by achiral:

why doesn't someone lock this thing, there hasn't been a good post in like 3 pages

That include your one ?

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/30/2003 10:15:28 AM · #167

ROFL! Indeed.

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

"My question to the forum (which still hasn't been answered):

What makes a photograph taken as a snapshot interesting on a universal level? "

If we knew the answer to this, life would be great :)

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

09/30/2003 10:21:08 AM · #168

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by achiral:
why doesn't someone lock this thing, there hasn't been a good post in like 3 pages

That include your one ?

definitely

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

09/30/2003 12:40:58 PM · #169

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

"My question to the forum (which still hasn't been answered):

What makes a photograph taken as a snapshot interesting on a universal level? "

A successful snapshot with universal appeal, IMO, is

1. one which communicates whatever it does with irrepressible freshness (news that stays news);

2. one where intent, aesthetics, technical proficiency typically follow the immediate demands of a given situation or moment;

3. one stimulating a transitory feeling or sense, often an incomplete one... ?

Message edited by author 2003-09-30 18:17:33.