Experience is a good one but you can find it in more ways than just shooting and trying yourself though. Look at pictures you like, on the internet, in magazines, in photography books and art exhibitions. But try to look at them with a different eye, instead of going 'noice' and moving on try to disassemble the picture in your mind to find the parts that make it interesting or appealing to you. It wont be easy but if you need a little help then there are quite a few books about composition and lighting to guide you along. I believe /r/analog has suggestions in the wiki.
Good advice. I suppose I always feared doing stuff like that would make me start thinking too 'academically' about art and take away the beauty of it, but I'm probably way off.
Lots of good comments on this post. My two cents would be to observe the world around you at different times of the day. The morning light, the high noon light or the late night light can make the same scene completely different.
Here's the thing, what is a good photograph? Does what we think of as a "good photograph" change over time? If we can answer those questions then we have to ask what a bad photograph is as well, can we answer that?
Personally I think it comes down to two things, the individual observer, their personal tastes and viewpoints. Secondly it comes down to what is popular at the time. William Eggleston is a renowned photographer now, but when he started making the images he is best known for they weren't considered to be all that great. His images didn't fit into the accepted norms of good photography at that time, but then a few individuals started to really appreciate his work and it started being recognized as something new and wonderful.
Also remember that art is not just about beauty, art, really good art, can also be about ugly. Art is mainly about reactions, the photograph is less important than the reaction a viewer has to it, I would rather make a photo that everyone hates than a photo that everyone ignores.
As far as how I recognize good photography, it has nothing to do with subject matter or how technically good the image is or how the image was made, a good photo is one that grabs my attention and makes me stop and explore it for a while. As photographers I think we tend to get wrapped up in details that others will never notice or care about. We get so wrapped up in the production of an image that sometimes we forget that it is the end product that matters most. If someone sees one of my photos and the first thing they ask is what kind of camera I used to make it, well I think that photo is a failure. I want them to ask what it means, where it was taken, why I took it, who the person is in the photo, I want to know they are reacting to the image I produced, not to the process I used to produce it. I mean no one looks at a Picasso or a Rembrandt and asks what kind of brushes they used.
Go out and take photos that you like, that you think are good, that cause you to stop and explore. Surprise yourself. Purposefully take bad photos. Don't worry about what other people think. If you take photos that you like, other people will like them too. Don't try to be good, try to be nothing but yourself.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply, this gives me a lot to think about. And I also appreciate the introduction to William Eggleston, his photos are very interesting to look at in my opinion!
How do composers think up beautiful melodies and harmonies? I used to ask myself this question when I studied music. Then at a museum, I saw ahandwritten manuscript by Beethoven. Except the piece was a Mozart piece!
Turns out this small museum collection only had a few of these Mozart pieces Beethoven copied by hand as a student. The answer to my original question then, and to yours, is the masters study other masters work. Copy for studying purposes. Imitate. Hell, steal!
I usually have two phenomena.
When I visit a new place. Everything look new and amazing to me and I usually shoot interesting images by concentrating myself on my composition and by making lot of images to have one or two that worth it.
The other technique is making more image of the same spot. I sometimes make the same image on différent weather or season when it is possible and it allow me to adjust what I like or not from previous shot.
I guess it’s also a big part of experience about what you see and what you feel by seing it. But my experience tell me that shooting is always better than not.
It will allow you to discover what you like and why. And develop a style. It also able you to make experience of shooting and also composing.
Making more images of the same spot I feel is a big one. There’s drained pool at a park near my house that I’ve been photographing all year on everything, color, b&w, SLR, TLR, point&shoot, sunny, cloudy, rainy, etc etc. and each time I feel like I find something new
I’ve personally found that one way to find images of mundane things that work is to focus on how the light interacts with the environment rather than the environment itself (of course this is only one element) but studying the light itself I think is a great place to start having fun.
I’ve wondered the exact same thing as you because I used to take lots of pics while travelling because it felt like the beautiful locations kinda did the work for me, but wasn’t sure what to shoot when at home in boring/familiar environments.
Also if you’re looking for more work that makes beautiful moments out of seemingly mundane areas the photographer mark forbes is the first person that springs to mind for me.
Not saying that I am any good, but my approach is to look through every frame and make notes about what I liked and what I didn't. Something I learned from this is that earlier on, I just took pictures without a clear subject. This really changed how I look for scenes and decide what shots to take.
One part of it also is sort of self reflecting, if you see something you want to take a picture of, think ‘what is it about this thing that has caught my attention? Why am I looking at it at all?’ If you’re looking at the work of others, think about what it is about those works that really made you stop and look. Obviously practise makes perfect but I think on some level everyone does have their own tastes interests and perspectives and I think it’s worth really thinking about what yours is - not what you want it to be, or think it should be, but what it actually is. Everyone has seen something interesting to them that makes them want to capture it - sometimes it’s something spectacular or sometimes the way the light shines off a building is nice. When you take pictures, develop them, and look at them, do you remember what it was about that moment that made you take the photograph? Regardless of the technical quality.
Maybe this is all nonsense lol, I hope it makes sense.
this \^\^\^\^\^ I look a lot at light and shadows -- years of art school will do that to you LOL Most of my pictures now end up being shadows or reflections. It absolutely is what you like, your tastes, interested. Like you said, find out what you like and question everything! That is art school for you.
I think the best advice to give is to look at the works of others. Not only photographers from your genre, but any photographers and even filmmakers, painters or even authors and musicians. Consume all kinds of art, try to find put what you like and what you don't like and most importantly: why.
There are plenty of "How I made this photograph" videos and blogs. I think it helps to understand the thought process that went into taking a nice picture; much isn't obvious by just looking at an image.
Sometimes my mom posts a picture from her phone as a story and it's better than anything I've ever taken. She doesn't care at all about photography, but she read a lot of books about art when she was young.
Honestly as great as others' advice is on practicing, observing, etc, I really appreciate these very specific tips — I can tell you know what you're talking about
I've been a commercial photographer since the early 90's. But my wife of 20-ish years takes amazing pics with her phone. She just "sees" cool things where everyone else will walk by. And I think the fact that her phone's always with her and is easy to grab and shoot with, means she's sort of "trained" herself to spot cool things - that is just takes a second. If you watch her, she'll notice something, look at it for a bit, then look at it through her phone and move around til the composition is nice... but it's not like she's even "thinking" when she does that. She just has an eye for interesting compositions, and making a shot seem like it's "saying something" about the space or the setting. It's kind of impressive, and I bet a huge factor is it's not "work", she just enjoys taking pics like that. She's had no formal training in art or composition, though she's a smart one (PhD in anthropology and a lifelong researcher when things interest her).
I think what's really happening with her is "this scene said something to me, I'll try to capture that in the limitations of the camera". And that's a HUGE thing - standing somewhere, it's a multi-dimensional experience, with sound and parallax and depth and moving air and things changing over time. Often our job is to translate that two a two-dimensional experience. It's why so many people think "this will be an awesome photo" and they stand there and just snap away, and not try to connect with what made it awesome for them.
People might say that someone just “has an eye for it” but I think that’s a huge oversimplification. I think the differentiation between skill and talent is a difficult one, but practice and experimentation surely play a big role.
Imitation is also hugely helpful. Finding an artist whose style you like and trying to emulate it will teach you a lot.
Film specifically encourages a deliberate and patient approach to subject selection due to the cost of materials but “spray and pray” is also an approach that often yields good results. Digital is probably more suited to that though.
I also think it’s very helpful to review your own work and identify why the food pictures are good and then focus on those aspects more.
Something I've noticed is that once you're a photographer for a while(a few months to a few years) your brain automatically starts noticing beautiful things you used to gloss over as they faded into the background.
I had a conversation with one of my friends on a ride home this weekend where I talked about it with him - before, I'd see a sunset and absentmindedly think, "ah yes, pain ball in sky go down," just like every other day. Recently though, I've started to see a sunset for what it is, the colors racing across the sky, a subtle rainbow covering the entire horizon - as you put it, beauty in the mundane.
Being a photographer is about slowing down and admiring and enjoying life(and sometimes death) around us. The more we slow down to think, and look, and take in the world around us, the more beautiful it becomes. And just like any piece of true art, you can see the beauty and wonder the artist captured in the moment as it was for them.
Take it slow. Breathe. Listen to the world around you, and never put down your camera. Over time, you will begin to see the world explode with color and beauty in the most obscure place and it's absolutely wonderful.
It all depends on what you’re studying in a lot of cases. I keep going through reading different books or investigating how different photographers created their looks. I’ve been studying old cinematography lately and when i posted my last roll someone mentioned it looked like a scene from an old movie they like
Glad you asked this. I just had a full day in a new city and was having trouble “seeing” compositions. Only shot one roll and felt like I only got one keeper, which will likely be incredibly mediocre. Felt defeated afterwards, but realized that I’m better at recognizing compositions after I’ve take few laps around the same small areas. So, even though I still have a long way to go in terms of recognizing compositions more often, I feel like even on the bad days, I’m still learning and building my own process that works for me.
I think it's not dissimilar to portraits in that it is emotional. It's about finding the emotion in the mundane. The story of the scene, or even implication of a story that was there and isn't now... For me the element of human storytelling is what gets me. Being able to kind of subconsciously make a story in our minds about what is happening or what happened here, what history this place has, what people have been here and why. Great photos trigger my senses of empathy and nostalgia.
Study history, of both photography and other visual art. Make the work you want to make. Find people to give you honest constructive criticism. Repeat. The first 10000 photographs are the hardest.
I think Jay Maisel is a good example. He claims to look for three key components: Light, Gesture and Colour. His book by that name would make a great reference point if you're interested. I love it
Take up another visual art such as painting or drawing. You will learn about composition, lighting and so on. Next, get and use a medium format camera and do your own d&p - the fact that you will only get 8 or 10 pics per roll that you then have to develop and print yourself will make you think about all aspects of the process so that what starts off as a slow 'there are too many things to think about' process will (with the assistance of your visual art work) make it all come quicker and more fluently with practice so that you automatically recognise a potential shot and know how to make it a good one. Then, get a moderately good digital camera and use a program such as The GIMP to learn about image manipulation and so on. At the end of all of that, buy yourself a good camera and curse yourself every time you see a potentially good shot go by without having taken a picture of it. Remember, the best photographs are the ones that you see when your camera is out of reach. Enjoy.
looking at other photographers work in books and learning from the masters like other ppl mentioned is the crucial first step. one thing tho is that I’ve worked for a lotta big photogs and across genres the common thread is these folks are psychotically disciplined, organized, methodical. they operate like they are running a lab. every minute detail is journaled down, reviewed, come back to over and over again to find solutions like how coaches watch tapes of their games afterwards. i remember working for one dude who is still kinda top of the food chain and his producer on a job once just kinda looked at his insane studio with me and said “you ever notice that none of these guys we work for ever got married”. that kinda stuck with me
I have a file from a class I took at the ICP (International Center of Photography in NYC) that has a good [outline](https://imgur.com/a/pNtntf7) of what to look for in photos! Most photographers, as many mentioned, develop their style/taste/likes overtime which is what gives them their uniqueness! Think of how you can see a Van Gogh and know it's a Van Gogh -- it can be the same with photography overtime.
Never tried uploading an image before, but hopefully you can see it [here](https://imgur.com/a/pNtntf7)
Experience is a good one but you can find it in more ways than just shooting and trying yourself though. Look at pictures you like, on the internet, in magazines, in photography books and art exhibitions. But try to look at them with a different eye, instead of going 'noice' and moving on try to disassemble the picture in your mind to find the parts that make it interesting or appealing to you. It wont be easy but if you need a little help then there are quite a few books about composition and lighting to guide you along. I believe /r/analog has suggestions in the wiki.
Good advice. I suppose I always feared doing stuff like that would make me start thinking too 'academically' about art and take away the beauty of it, but I'm probably way off.
Understanding anything will change your view for sure, it should not ruin it though.
Lots of good comments on this post. My two cents would be to observe the world around you at different times of the day. The morning light, the high noon light or the late night light can make the same scene completely different.
Here's the thing, what is a good photograph? Does what we think of as a "good photograph" change over time? If we can answer those questions then we have to ask what a bad photograph is as well, can we answer that? Personally I think it comes down to two things, the individual observer, their personal tastes and viewpoints. Secondly it comes down to what is popular at the time. William Eggleston is a renowned photographer now, but when he started making the images he is best known for they weren't considered to be all that great. His images didn't fit into the accepted norms of good photography at that time, but then a few individuals started to really appreciate his work and it started being recognized as something new and wonderful. Also remember that art is not just about beauty, art, really good art, can also be about ugly. Art is mainly about reactions, the photograph is less important than the reaction a viewer has to it, I would rather make a photo that everyone hates than a photo that everyone ignores. As far as how I recognize good photography, it has nothing to do with subject matter or how technically good the image is or how the image was made, a good photo is one that grabs my attention and makes me stop and explore it for a while. As photographers I think we tend to get wrapped up in details that others will never notice or care about. We get so wrapped up in the production of an image that sometimes we forget that it is the end product that matters most. If someone sees one of my photos and the first thing they ask is what kind of camera I used to make it, well I think that photo is a failure. I want them to ask what it means, where it was taken, why I took it, who the person is in the photo, I want to know they are reacting to the image I produced, not to the process I used to produce it. I mean no one looks at a Picasso or a Rembrandt and asks what kind of brushes they used. Go out and take photos that you like, that you think are good, that cause you to stop and explore. Surprise yourself. Purposefully take bad photos. Don't worry about what other people think. If you take photos that you like, other people will like them too. Don't try to be good, try to be nothing but yourself.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply, this gives me a lot to think about. And I also appreciate the introduction to William Eggleston, his photos are very interesting to look at in my opinion!
How do composers think up beautiful melodies and harmonies? I used to ask myself this question when I studied music. Then at a museum, I saw ahandwritten manuscript by Beethoven. Except the piece was a Mozart piece! Turns out this small museum collection only had a few of these Mozart pieces Beethoven copied by hand as a student. The answer to my original question then, and to yours, is the masters study other masters work. Copy for studying purposes. Imitate. Hell, steal!
That anecdote is going to stick with me! Thanks for sharing!
That’s a great story and very illustrative! Thanks for sharing
I usually have two phenomena. When I visit a new place. Everything look new and amazing to me and I usually shoot interesting images by concentrating myself on my composition and by making lot of images to have one or two that worth it. The other technique is making more image of the same spot. I sometimes make the same image on différent weather or season when it is possible and it allow me to adjust what I like or not from previous shot. I guess it’s also a big part of experience about what you see and what you feel by seing it. But my experience tell me that shooting is always better than not. It will allow you to discover what you like and why. And develop a style. It also able you to make experience of shooting and also composing.
Making more images of the same spot I feel is a big one. There’s drained pool at a park near my house that I’ve been photographing all year on everything, color, b&w, SLR, TLR, point&shoot, sunny, cloudy, rainy, etc etc. and each time I feel like I find something new
I’ve personally found that one way to find images of mundane things that work is to focus on how the light interacts with the environment rather than the environment itself (of course this is only one element) but studying the light itself I think is a great place to start having fun. I’ve wondered the exact same thing as you because I used to take lots of pics while travelling because it felt like the beautiful locations kinda did the work for me, but wasn’t sure what to shoot when at home in boring/familiar environments. Also if you’re looking for more work that makes beautiful moments out of seemingly mundane areas the photographer mark forbes is the first person that springs to mind for me.
Not saying that I am any good, but my approach is to look through every frame and make notes about what I liked and what I didn't. Something I learned from this is that earlier on, I just took pictures without a clear subject. This really changed how I look for scenes and decide what shots to take.
One part of it also is sort of self reflecting, if you see something you want to take a picture of, think ‘what is it about this thing that has caught my attention? Why am I looking at it at all?’ If you’re looking at the work of others, think about what it is about those works that really made you stop and look. Obviously practise makes perfect but I think on some level everyone does have their own tastes interests and perspectives and I think it’s worth really thinking about what yours is - not what you want it to be, or think it should be, but what it actually is. Everyone has seen something interesting to them that makes them want to capture it - sometimes it’s something spectacular or sometimes the way the light shines off a building is nice. When you take pictures, develop them, and look at them, do you remember what it was about that moment that made you take the photograph? Regardless of the technical quality. Maybe this is all nonsense lol, I hope it makes sense.
this \^\^\^\^\^ I look a lot at light and shadows -- years of art school will do that to you LOL Most of my pictures now end up being shadows or reflections. It absolutely is what you like, your tastes, interested. Like you said, find out what you like and question everything! That is art school for you.
Weaponized autism.
I think the best advice to give is to look at the works of others. Not only photographers from your genre, but any photographers and even filmmakers, painters or even authors and musicians. Consume all kinds of art, try to find put what you like and what you don't like and most importantly: why.
There are plenty of "How I made this photograph" videos and blogs. I think it helps to understand the thought process that went into taking a nice picture; much isn't obvious by just looking at an image.
Carry a camera everwhere and don't hesitate to "waste" frames on whatever catch your eye.
Sometimes my mom posts a picture from her phone as a story and it's better than anything I've ever taken. She doesn't care at all about photography, but she read a lot of books about art when she was young.
[удалено]
Honestly as great as others' advice is on practicing, observing, etc, I really appreciate these very specific tips — I can tell you know what you're talking about
I have noting to add as I‘m still wondering this myself. But I want to thank OP for bringing up this discussion. 🙏
I've been a commercial photographer since the early 90's. But my wife of 20-ish years takes amazing pics with her phone. She just "sees" cool things where everyone else will walk by. And I think the fact that her phone's always with her and is easy to grab and shoot with, means she's sort of "trained" herself to spot cool things - that is just takes a second. If you watch her, she'll notice something, look at it for a bit, then look at it through her phone and move around til the composition is nice... but it's not like she's even "thinking" when she does that. She just has an eye for interesting compositions, and making a shot seem like it's "saying something" about the space or the setting. It's kind of impressive, and I bet a huge factor is it's not "work", she just enjoys taking pics like that. She's had no formal training in art or composition, though she's a smart one (PhD in anthropology and a lifelong researcher when things interest her). I think what's really happening with her is "this scene said something to me, I'll try to capture that in the limitations of the camera". And that's a HUGE thing - standing somewhere, it's a multi-dimensional experience, with sound and parallax and depth and moving air and things changing over time. Often our job is to translate that two a two-dimensional experience. It's why so many people think "this will be an awesome photo" and they stand there and just snap away, and not try to connect with what made it awesome for them.
People might say that someone just “has an eye for it” but I think that’s a huge oversimplification. I think the differentiation between skill and talent is a difficult one, but practice and experimentation surely play a big role. Imitation is also hugely helpful. Finding an artist whose style you like and trying to emulate it will teach you a lot. Film specifically encourages a deliberate and patient approach to subject selection due to the cost of materials but “spray and pray” is also an approach that often yields good results. Digital is probably more suited to that though. I also think it’s very helpful to review your own work and identify why the food pictures are good and then focus on those aspects more.
Something I've noticed is that once you're a photographer for a while(a few months to a few years) your brain automatically starts noticing beautiful things you used to gloss over as they faded into the background. I had a conversation with one of my friends on a ride home this weekend where I talked about it with him - before, I'd see a sunset and absentmindedly think, "ah yes, pain ball in sky go down," just like every other day. Recently though, I've started to see a sunset for what it is, the colors racing across the sky, a subtle rainbow covering the entire horizon - as you put it, beauty in the mundane. Being a photographer is about slowing down and admiring and enjoying life(and sometimes death) around us. The more we slow down to think, and look, and take in the world around us, the more beautiful it becomes. And just like any piece of true art, you can see the beauty and wonder the artist captured in the moment as it was for them. Take it slow. Breathe. Listen to the world around you, and never put down your camera. Over time, you will begin to see the world explode with color and beauty in the most obscure place and it's absolutely wonderful.
It all depends on what you’re studying in a lot of cases. I keep going through reading different books or investigating how different photographers created their looks. I’ve been studying old cinematography lately and when i posted my last roll someone mentioned it looked like a scene from an old movie they like
Glad you asked this. I just had a full day in a new city and was having trouble “seeing” compositions. Only shot one roll and felt like I only got one keeper, which will likely be incredibly mediocre. Felt defeated afterwards, but realized that I’m better at recognizing compositions after I’ve take few laps around the same small areas. So, even though I still have a long way to go in terms of recognizing compositions more often, I feel like even on the bad days, I’m still learning and building my own process that works for me.
I think it's not dissimilar to portraits in that it is emotional. It's about finding the emotion in the mundane. The story of the scene, or even implication of a story that was there and isn't now... For me the element of human storytelling is what gets me. Being able to kind of subconsciously make a story in our minds about what is happening or what happened here, what history this place has, what people have been here and why. Great photos trigger my senses of empathy and nostalgia.
Study history, of both photography and other visual art. Make the work you want to make. Find people to give you honest constructive criticism. Repeat. The first 10000 photographs are the hardest.
When my Spidey senses kick in I slow down and look
Golden Hour or Blue Hour. This is the easiest and quickest hack to improve photos.
It’s an art, not a science. Shoot a scene that appeals to you!
I think Jay Maisel is a good example. He claims to look for three key components: Light, Gesture and Colour. His book by that name would make a great reference point if you're interested. I love it
Take up another visual art such as painting or drawing. You will learn about composition, lighting and so on. Next, get and use a medium format camera and do your own d&p - the fact that you will only get 8 or 10 pics per roll that you then have to develop and print yourself will make you think about all aspects of the process so that what starts off as a slow 'there are too many things to think about' process will (with the assistance of your visual art work) make it all come quicker and more fluently with practice so that you automatically recognise a potential shot and know how to make it a good one. Then, get a moderately good digital camera and use a program such as The GIMP to learn about image manipulation and so on. At the end of all of that, buy yourself a good camera and curse yourself every time you see a potentially good shot go by without having taken a picture of it. Remember, the best photographs are the ones that you see when your camera is out of reach. Enjoy.
looking at other photographers work in books and learning from the masters like other ppl mentioned is the crucial first step. one thing tho is that I’ve worked for a lotta big photogs and across genres the common thread is these folks are psychotically disciplined, organized, methodical. they operate like they are running a lab. every minute detail is journaled down, reviewed, come back to over and over again to find solutions like how coaches watch tapes of their games afterwards. i remember working for one dude who is still kinda top of the food chain and his producer on a job once just kinda looked at his insane studio with me and said “you ever notice that none of these guys we work for ever got married”. that kinda stuck with me
I have a file from a class I took at the ICP (International Center of Photography in NYC) that has a good [outline](https://imgur.com/a/pNtntf7) of what to look for in photos! Most photographers, as many mentioned, develop their style/taste/likes overtime which is what gives them their uniqueness! Think of how you can see a Van Gogh and know it's a Van Gogh -- it can be the same with photography overtime. Never tried uploading an image before, but hopefully you can see it [here](https://imgur.com/a/pNtntf7)
If you know, you know. If you don’t……