I have been inspired by recent topics to create this topic (is that redundant?). This is a somewhat lightheartedly serious post, although I am sure that someone will be offended even though it's not my intention. Anyway... to the post!! Make sure you break out the comfy slippers and are sitting in a comfy chair, because this is going to be a long post.
So, I know that there have been numerous topics based on quality control, and other topics not based on quality control that turn into topics about quality control (WHEW!). The following post is based on my limited first-hand experience, but more on the knowledge and experience I have read and heard from long-time professionals in the field of photography. So here, again... is my rant.
First, let me show you what I consider to be an example of good photography, specifically self-portraiture, and then I will explain why: Portrait
Subject: This photo has a clear subject (the person), which is the most important thing to have when you take a photograph. Without a clear subject, you have a whole lotta nothing.
Note: landscapes can be subjects, but they need to be presented in a way that is obvious and intentional. If you are trying to catch the sailboat 5 miles away with a point-and-shoot camera, chances are you won't get a good quality shot.
Focus: This is a technical term essentially referring to the sharpness and blurriness of the photograph. This example is well-focused (note the beard bristles, the eye, etc.) on the subject's face and not on, say, the arm or out of focus completely.
Balance: This photo has a balance of content & light. The negative space (the dark area) is balanced by the positive (the subject, in this case a person).
Lighting: The lighting in the photo is intentional and well balanced; neither too light nor too dark. In general, having a blown-out or a midnight-dark photo detracts from the image's overall artistic quality and visual impact. (see the end of the post for a note on lighting)
Composition: similar to balance, this photo has an interesting composition. The image slopes down from right-to-left and has a very obvious and intentional setup. See how the photographer didn't put the subject's face directly against the left frame -- this creates space for the picture to breathe.
Cropping/Editing: One of the most important things an artist can do is edit, edit, edit! This photographer has chosen to crop out all of the distracting elements around him (set equipment, etc.). This element of photography goes hand-in-hand with composition; by cropping an image, you can drastically transform a weak or OK composition into an amazing photograph with great interest, whereas poor cropping can ruin a photo.
The Rule of Thirds: Rather than explain this, because I will make it too complicated, here are links to two great articles explaining this process. Tutorials, which also covers other areas, and Composition
These are just a few things that make up a good photograph, and are what should be considered before, during, and after you have a photography session. When deciding what to upload or enter into a contest, you should be very critical of these things as you go through your shots. Ask yourself which, if any, of your works you would hang in a gallery for people to see.
It's more than possible that you will discard every photograph from a session; this kind of self-editing is necessary, though, in developing your style and improving the quality of the images produced. Many images require some form of post-processing, likely in Photoshop or some freeware program (PM me if you would like a list of a few free editing programs). Note that the editing should be minimal (i.e. contrast, sharpness,dust removal) and should not take away from the photo, unless you are intentionally trying to create a photomanipulation.
Now let me show some examples of what would be considered snapshots:
While these may be endearing to the photographers who took them and perhaps a few onlookers, these snapshots are just that -- snapshots. Although they have a few elements of quality photographs -- focus for example -- they are neither artistic nor well-edited.
There are many other rules to follow and master - at which point (and only then) one has the right to break the rules - but I believe the above are some of the most basic to photography.
Here are some more examples of snapshots versus artistic photos:
Anyway... there are plenty of other examples, but I thought that summed up where the majority of confusion lies for most amateur photographers. (Also, I purposefully didn't choose images from Caedes because I didn't think that was fair. The images I chose above were images that were both technically and artistically sound, and I don't know any of the people who took any of the above.) There are always exceptions to any rule, but as I mentioned above, one needs to fully understand the rules in practice before deciding he doesn't want to follow them.
(June 11 edit)-- A tip for the lighting category from my 2D drawing experience:
To see if your lighting is good, an easy check is to gray-scale (black & white) your image. If you have a good tonal variety of grays (including white and black), chances are that you have well-balanced lighting. If you have extremes, like just black and white, or an all gray image, chances are the photo either needs to be re-edited or retaken.
(6/13/10) As mentioned in one of the comments below, having good lighting is as essential to the composition of the photograph as any of the aforementioned elements of photography. Although I normally wouldn't encourage people to see the world in black and white, I think it's important as a photographer of any level to view their work through a black and white lens -- even if the final result is in color. Color photographs will benefit from this check and should probably be discarded if they are blown out or flat (even if you like the particular photo).
So, I know that there have been numerous topics based on quality control, and other topics not based on quality control that turn into topics about quality control (WHEW!). The following post is based on my limited first-hand experience, but more on the knowledge and experience I have read and heard from long-time professionals in the field of photography. So here, again... is my rant.
First, let me show you what I consider to be an example of good photography, specifically self-portraiture, and then I will explain why: Portrait
Subject: This photo has a clear subject (the person), which is the most important thing to have when you take a photograph. Without a clear subject, you have a whole lotta nothing.
Note: landscapes can be subjects, but they need to be presented in a way that is obvious and intentional. If you are trying to catch the sailboat 5 miles away with a point-and-shoot camera, chances are you won't get a good quality shot.
Focus: This is a technical term essentially referring to the sharpness and blurriness of the photograph. This example is well-focused (note the beard bristles, the eye, etc.) on the subject's face and not on, say, the arm or out of focus completely.
Balance: This photo has a balance of content & light. The negative space (the dark area) is balanced by the positive (the subject, in this case a person).
Lighting: The lighting in the photo is intentional and well balanced; neither too light nor too dark. In general, having a blown-out or a midnight-dark photo detracts from the image's overall artistic quality and visual impact. (see the end of the post for a note on lighting)
Composition: similar to balance, this photo has an interesting composition. The image slopes down from right-to-left and has a very obvious and intentional setup. See how the photographer didn't put the subject's face directly against the left frame -- this creates space for the picture to breathe.
Cropping/Editing: One of the most important things an artist can do is edit, edit, edit! This photographer has chosen to crop out all of the distracting elements around him (set equipment, etc.). This element of photography goes hand-in-hand with composition; by cropping an image, you can drastically transform a weak or OK composition into an amazing photograph with great interest, whereas poor cropping can ruin a photo.
The Rule of Thirds: Rather than explain this, because I will make it too complicated, here are links to two great articles explaining this process. Tutorials, which also covers other areas, and Composition
These are just a few things that make up a good photograph, and are what should be considered before, during, and after you have a photography session. When deciding what to upload or enter into a contest, you should be very critical of these things as you go through your shots. Ask yourself which, if any, of your works you would hang in a gallery for people to see.
It's more than possible that you will discard every photograph from a session; this kind of self-editing is necessary, though, in developing your style and improving the quality of the images produced. Many images require some form of post-processing, likely in Photoshop or some freeware program (PM me if you would like a list of a few free editing programs). Note that the editing should be minimal (i.e. contrast, sharpness,dust removal) and should not take away from the photo, unless you are intentionally trying to create a photomanipulation.
Now let me show some examples of what would be considered snapshots:
Snapshot 1
Snapshot 2
While these may be endearing to the photographers who took them and perhaps a few onlookers, these snapshots are just that -- snapshots. Although they have a few elements of quality photographs -- focus for example -- they are neither artistic nor well-edited.
There are many other rules to follow and master - at which point (and only then) one has the right to break the rules - but I believe the above are some of the most basic to photography.
Here are some more examples of snapshots versus artistic photos:
Pets
- Snapshot
- Photo
Landscapes:
- Snapshot
- Photo
Family
- Snapshot
- Photo
Anyway... there are plenty of other examples, but I thought that summed up where the majority of confusion lies for most amateur photographers. (Also, I purposefully didn't choose images from Caedes because I didn't think that was fair. The images I chose above were images that were both technically and artistically sound, and I don't know any of the people who took any of the above.) There are always exceptions to any rule, but as I mentioned above, one needs to fully understand the rules in practice before deciding he doesn't want to follow them.
(June 11 edit)-- A tip for the lighting category from my 2D drawing experience:
To see if your lighting is good, an easy check is to gray-scale (black & white) your image. If you have a good tonal variety of grays (including white and black), chances are that you have well-balanced lighting. If you have extremes, like just black and white, or an all gray image, chances are the photo either needs to be re-edited or retaken.
Some examples (I love examples):
- Well balanced
This image also has great composition, quality, and editing.
- Flat grays
- Blown out
(6/13/10) As mentioned in one of the comments below, having good lighting is as essential to the composition of the photograph as any of the aforementioned elements of photography. Although I normally wouldn't encourage people to see the world in black and white, I think it's important as a photographer of any level to view their work through a black and white lens -- even if the final result is in color. Color photographs will benefit from this check and should probably be discarded if they are blown out or flat (even if you like the particular photo).
Here's a good article shown below: "It's All About Light" by Darren Rowse