Quite right. Good picture - poor illustration.
Tools! the rite tools for the image in construction. Each person evolves through their own process and through this evolution needs to recognize what it takes to answer their questions that the images or statement or whatever they are attempting to complete requires to get to their point.
Stop trying to get into my mind, There is nothing there!
So what is a good photographer, competent photogrpaher? In what discipline, commercial, portraiture, fine art, photo journalism?
Essentially, Photo I is learning the craft, technique, Photo II is perfecting those abilities. Photo III is learning to apply the craft intuitively to vision and application and visa versa.
Everything after that depends on the end result, making images that work and elevate above the technique, mundane. This requires in part, self perception, that I AM a good photographer with the ability to produce speaking images so to actually invest the time and money to work. But also the acceptance and admiration of viewing public, peers and paying clients.
As far as being great photogrpahers, that requires more. Producing images that are individualistic so that viewers can just look at the image and know who the photographer is. Also admiration and adoration of the photographer in part while alive and more importantly, beyond the grave into history.
Not bad for a cold 7:30 Sunday morning in NJ.
Time & tides wait for no one, especially photographers.
COLD ain't the word for it! NASTY COLD is more like it...and I worked all night in it!
Besides parents, it is the work produced that makes the photographer good. He can be a passionate photographer, but not be a good one. He can have extreme technical skill, but still not be a good photographer.
Now for the tough part...
Who makes a good photograph?.....A good photographer, silly!
Harder still, WHAT makes a good photograph?
OH NO! Sorry dude, I'm only going to help open that can o worms, not dump it all over myself. Besides...I gotta get some shut eye...
I think what makes a good photographer is the same as what makes a good artist, or as mentioned earlier, a good teacher.
Someone who has ideas/vision, a desire to communicate those ideas/that vision, and the ability to communicate those ideas/that vision so that it resonates emotionally not only with their intended audience, but also those who they did not intend to reach.
If you only reach your intended audience, you're nothing more than an effective PowerPoint briefer. If someone you never intended to speak to can look at your work/hear your message and be moved by it, your work can be said to be great.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
It would seem IMHO that asking a room full of photographers "what makes a good photographer", is akin to asking a room full of anthropologists "What is cuture"
art is about managing compromise
The opposite of "That which makes a BAD photographer".
Anyone want to tackle that one? What DOES make a "bad" photographer, assuming that such a type exists?
Ed Sukach, FFP.
You are a good photographer when you take artistic nude photos.
I am just joking!
Originally Posted by Ed Sukach
Someone who allows technical perfection (or the illusion thereof) to overwhelm the message of the medium. Someone who mismatches the medium to the message - there are some images that were better paintings, drawings, or sculpture.
A genius is someone who can photograph in such a way as to convince you the photo IS a painting or drawing, but you don't feel let down when you find out it isn't (I'm leaving sculpture out of this since it's kind of hard to confuse 2D for 3D).
A bad photographer is someone who fails, and doesn't even realize it.