How to identify good pictures?

[fs_tigre]

Hi,
I have been practicing and reading for the last three months and honestly no good results yet. When I’m reading (Understanding Exposure or The Digital Photography) a book it looks so easy to get those nice pictures shown in the books, but once I start putting this into practice, it is very hard to get a decent picture, I look at my pictures and they look OK like the ones taken with a point and shoot camera, nobody cares if I tell them that I was shooting in Manual, AV or TV and still got an ok shot.

So, my question is, what do I need to look for when taking a picture and how to identify a good or a bad photo? Or…

Is there a book that shows the things to look for when taking a picture and how to know if what you just took is a good picture or not? Something like, when to blur the background of a picture and when not to do it, identify good light and shadows etc.

Do I need a better flash and lens? Will this improve my pictures?

I know it is probably a big question but any suggestion would be highly appreciated.
Thanks,

[nicksan]

Find photos you really like and try to understand WHY it works. Try to incorporate that into your style. But don't just try to copy it. UNDERSTAND why it works.

That's what I often times do and it does help.

Getting better gear will help the image QUALITY...but not your composition, which is what really matters in the end.

[gardengirl13]

In all honesty just go out and shoot all the time. When you come home and look at the photos ask yourself what you like and what you don't like. Figure out how to fix it by going back out and shoot the same things again but with different settings.

Good light, shadows, blur, composition, colors, etc... are all in the eye of the beholder. To me some shots that people think are great I think are crap. Some shots I love other people hate. It depends on what you like. Your style. your tastes.

With tons of practice you'll get to figure out your style and tastes. Maybe take an online class or a class at a local college. It may help with technique a bit, but the "art" must come from you.

[gardengirl13]

Oh and better gear won't get you better images. One of the best shots I've taken (and have had others like- and won 3rd place in a state wide competition) was taken with a p&s. Other favorites have been taken with my 28-105 zoom which is only about $220.

[Mosca]

Hi,
I have been practicing and reading for the last three months and honestly no good results yet. When I’m reading (Understanding Exposure or The Digital Photography) a book it looks so easy to get those nice pictures shown in the books, but once I start putting this into practice, it is very hard to get a decent picture, I look at my pictures and they look OK like the ones taken with a point and shoot camera, nobody cares if I tell them that I was shooting in Manual, AV or TV and still got an ok shot.

So, my question is, what do I need to look for when taking a picture and how to identify a good or a bad photo? Or…

Is there a book that shows the things to look for when taking a picture and how to know if what you just took is a good picture or not? Something like, when to blur the background of a picture and when not to do it, identify good light and shadows etc.

Do I need a better flash and lens? Will this improve my pictures?

I know it is probably a big question but any suggestion would be highly appreciated.
Thanks,

My pictures improved markedly when I spent $100 on the online course at Proud Photography; it was worth far more than $100 worth of books.

I don't get anything from that; I'm just a satisfied customer. And it didn't make me a professional; it just got me through the common pitfalls a lot faster than I would have on my own.

YMMV, but I say, try it.

[siriusdogstar]

study composition. unfortunately there are many really bad resources, some which even say (usually at the end) "but those are just rules, break them all and discover your own." yeah. right. these are the resources that gave me the best information:

http://www.animationarchive.org/2006/11/education-fundamentals-of-composition.html

http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/2006/11/composition-for-layout-and-bg-artists.html

now at least when I look through my older photos I used to think were great and now think are pedestrian, I can say why and how I'd do them over.

[nicksan]

If you want your photos to look like every other photographer, then follow these rules to the letter.

If not, take them as "required" reading, then forget about them. They will creep into your style anyways now that you know about these rules.


study composition. unfortunately there are many really bad resources, some which even say (usually at the end) "but those are just rules, break them all and discover your own." yeah. right. these are the resources that gave me the best information:

http://www.animationarchive.org/2006/11/education-fundamentals-of-composition.html

http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/2006/11/composition-for-layout-and-bg-artists.html

now at least when I look through my older photos I used to think were great and now think are pedestrian, I can say why and how I'd do them over.

[timbop]

"better pictures" is a very broad term, which is probably the root cause of your dissatisfaction. Like any other field of study, you can't just pick up one book and magically be able to put all the concepts into practice - nor can 1 book cover all areas in depth. In other words: You can't learn it all at once, and trying to do so will lead you in so many directions you'll get frustrated and quit. Yes, an intro book can teach you about how exposure works and what settings are commonly used under certain circumstances. There are also some general principles that typically lead to more interesting and compelling pictures. However, you need to find what subjects and areas interest you, and start exploring them in more detail. "Just taking pictures" isn't really the answer; you need to be taking pictures with a purpose, and actively thinking about what you've read. You also really need to find a subject that interests you enough to make you want to dig deeper. Start with the general tips in that area, and work through them. As you start to concentrate in that area, you should look at other peoples' work and try to analyze what they did, and put it into the context of the "general principles" you've read about.

For example, if you are interested in portraiture there are some good online references that will guide you into the ideas that generally apply to most good portraits. A couple of the common themes of "interesting" portraits are things like not having the subject stand square to the camera, and have limbs arranged so that they don't form taught, straight lines. Use your knowledge about depth of field to make backgrounds out of focus and blurry to draw more attention to the subject. Watch your backgrounds to make sure they aren't distracting.

When taking pictures of ordinary objects, one way to make them more interesting is to vary your perspective. Shoot them from higher or lower than ordinary, or with your camera at an angle.

[fs_tigre]

Thank you all very much!

[yogestee]

Photography is a very personal thing.. An image that wets your whistle others might find boring.. So emotion comes into play..

The first thing I look for is impact irrespective if the image is technically not perfect..

[LBaldwin]

First of all try to "create" images, not take pictures. This take years of practice. I don't want to seem mean but it is possible that you do have developed creative abilities.

Learn the properties of light, play with it, bounce it, diffuse it, study it and how it works. Without light your camera is just a fancy box. Photography is all about the quality, color and intensity of light. I tell ALL my students to sit in front of a window and play with the light coming in. WATCH how refelcts, leaves shadows, and alters color. Use a piece of white cardboard to reflect and light onto the palm of your hand, change to red paper, orange etc. Use a piece of vellum or thin paper to see how light is diffused. Use a mirror to create spots on subjects around the room. Learn how light works to your advantage.

1. Learn the technical aspects of photography, how your camera works.
2. As already stated really learn to see other photographers work. Search each image for elements that please your eye.
3. You will learn more from bad images then successful ones, as you continue to shoot the numbers will change.

Most importantly have fun, don't be so hard on yourself. You wom't create award winning shots right away.

[SOK]

Photography is a very personal thing.. An image that wets your whistle others might find boring.. So emotion comes into play..

The first thing I look for is impact irrespective if the image is technically not perfect..

This is 100% spot on!

A great example of this is Jeff Widener's famous 'Tank Man' photo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man) from the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. It has become one of the most iconic photos of our time...and yet; if he posted on POTN, he'd probably be encouraged to clone out the light post in the foreground!!!

Maybe you have to ask yourself 'who am I trying to please?'....

[20droger]

Identifying good pictures is easy. They're the ones that sell.

[Souwalker]

Identifying good pictures is easy. They're the ones that sell.

Only if you're in it as a business ;)

[PhotosGuy]

Great Photographers on the Internet (http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/2006/06/great-photographers-on-internet.html)

[Mosca]

Photography is a very personal thing.. An image that wets your whistle others might find boring.. So emotion comes into play..

The first thing I look for is impact irrespective if the image is technically not perfect..

I don't mean to pick on this statement, but if you don't mind, I'd like to use it as a starting point for my thoughts.

On one hand, I don't feel qualified to respond to this, because many people here take more photos in a week than I've taken in my life. On the other hand, I feel eminently qualified to answer this because I've been struggling through my first year of serious photography, and have struggled with the same issues.

"Not technically perfect".... take the time as a beginner to master the tool. If it was easy, everyone would be doing it. It's hard. That's why there are people who make a living taking pictures. yogestee, I know what you are saying, but it can be misinterpreted by someone who is trying to cut corners. I can be running from a wildfire and get some high impact shots over my shoulder from my cell phone camera, but if I'm shooting a dog catching a frisbee with a 40D and a 200L I'd better have it perfect. Because a million other photographers did.

"Seeing" is different from "looking". See the image... but look for stuff, too. Specifically, look for stuff like telephone wires across landscapes... light and shadow across the faces of your subjects... tree leaves and branches in the foreground of a distant view... garbage cans in pastoral views; things that distract from what you see. Clutter can be good if you are taking pictures of clutter, but otherwise it is the same as it is around the house. Clutter.

The rules of composition... man. As a beginner, I think it is important to learn them first, and to learn how to create interesting images within them. Any artist who broke the rules learned how to master them first. That's why John Coltrane (edit: Ornette Coleman? I couldn't find the quote on the 'net and I'm not near my references) was not "a second year sax student stoned on Seconal", as one critic derisively wrote. Master the basics of composition first, or else you are just kidding yourself. Anyone can dribble paint on a canvas, but that doesn't mean they are the equal of Jackson Pollock. Rule breakers not only know what rules they are breaking, they know them inside and out. And some rules will never be successfully broken. You'll never square the circle, you'll never find the last digit of pi, you'll never find the largest prime number.

Timing. I spent many months shooting my photos mid day. I got some nice shots. But no one said WOW to anything I shot between the sevens; after 7AM, or before 7PM. Photos taken at inconvenient hours just plain look better. There's no other way to say it.

Commitment. Great photographs are taken by people concentrating on taking great photographs, not people watching the air show. Or football game, or concert, or enjoying the reception. Pick one, or the other. Work or play. But you can only immerse yourself in one at a time.


I hope this helps. And I hope it rings true with those here with more experience than I have.

[sued5320]

If I can just add to Mosca's great narrative....

See the images through your lens the same way you would look at them on a monitor or in print. I'm still a beginner and am trying to see good images. But I can't tell you how many pictures I've taken, looked at on the LCD screen and thought "hey, I like that" only to download to my computer and think "why didn't I see that clutter when I was taking this".

I understand that a certain amount of PP is required for any digital image. But I want to make good images from behind the camera not sitting in front of my computer cropping/cloning out stuff that I could have (and should have) excluded in the first place.

[Spacemunkie]

Composition, composition, composition.

Subject and technique become almost irrelevant if the image is poorly composed. The simplest way to both improve and ruin I shot I reckon.

Read up on the rule of thirds and the golden mean. There are reasons they exist! :D

[Mosca]

I work long hours, and often I have other things to do on my days off; yardwork, housework, family obligations. Same as a lot of people here, I figure. But what I do is, I think a lot about what I want to photograph. Sometimes I've thought about a shot for a month or more. Then, I go and take it, and it seems so simple and quick.

Right now, I've been thinking about an evening shot with an English bulldog and a bubble gun. I think the hard thing is going to be finding a neutral background, something like a field, and it has to be flat because I want the bubbles to sparkle a little bit, I want to see even sun. And I need a little bit longer lens because I want to keep my shadow out of the shot, but not too long to flatten the perspective. And it can't be too late, because it's going to be an action shot and I'll need a fast shutter speed.

Who knows. Maybe it will be stupid, maybe it won't work, maybe I WILL have to take it earlier in the day. But bulldogs have a way of making photos fun.

[chauncey]

But on the other hand, world changing images are made in the heat of the moment.

[Mosca]

But on the other hand, world changing images are made in the heat of the moment.

Yeah. I'm just having fun, though. I'd crap my pants in the presence of a world changing image.

[Patty Thomas]

I'll also admit that I'm probably not in a position to give any meaningful advice on photography but I think some beginners suffer from trying to shot too many subjects in one outing. They might stroll through the woods and take a picture of a lone tree, a waterfall, a close-up of a flower, a bird on a fence post, etc. That's fun but I'm not sure you can learn much from it. In the beginning just go shoot one very simple subject at a time and try to make as many interesting compositions as you can. Any of the above mentioned will work (except maybe the bird) but just focus on it and it alone. Change your exposure several times from each viewpoint to get a practical idea of how each setting changes the image. It may sound boring and it can be hard to choose just one subject and most of the shots will be total trash. However, it gives you a much better understanding of your camera. Plus, I really think it might help (or force) some people see things in ways they wouldn't normally, and showing people something they don’t normally see in a way they don’t normally see it, is pretty much what photography is all about, or at least a major part of it.

This is where I disagree slightly with the Tank Man comment, at least in this context. I don’t mean to take anything away from the photographer but that’s a remarkable photo because of what was happen in the image, not necessarily because the photographer was exceptionally skilled. He was there and he had a camera; that’s it. With absolutely no knowledge of the context, it’s a completely meaningless and unremarkable photo; just a guy standing in front of four tanks. But most of us understand the context so it became an iconic photograph that defined the times and I’m glad there are lots of folks around who make a living capturing moments like this so I can see them. However, I don’t think it’s the goal of most hobbyists. If you’re like me, you just enjoy taking great (not iconic) pictures everyday things; they don’t have to have any special “impact”. This is why I think, for most people, it’s more helpful (and fun) to learn to take great photos of everyday things rather than seeking out some impactful situation or event and just turning the dial to auto. This is where it pays to learn to be creative and understand your camera as an artist’s tool, not just a box that records images. Obviously, there is a significant grey area in the “art vs. document” discussion but I don’t think Tank Man is the best example.

One last thing…and I don’t intend to discourage. Photography is an art. Sure, there’s a technical side and some science, but at the end of the day the best photographers are artists and…well, let’s just say not everyone can paint the Sistine Chapel. We are all empowered and limited by our natural talents and it can be frustrating as often as it is enjoyable. For example, I really, REALLY wish I could make a decent sketch and play the guitar…no, not at the same time. Just at least capable at each. I’ve practiced at both again and again off and on for years but when it’s all said and done, I suck…at both; that’s just the way it is. Now I take pictures. It’s fun. I’m good at it. At least I think I’m good at it. And it partially satisfies my male urge to buy new toys. But plenty of hobbies came and went before this one. Find something you like and have fun…that’s what it’s all about.

[chauncey]

Patrick, I concur...all to often the beginners are told to go out and shoot a lot of pictures, a practice that I find counterproductive, as it implies that many different subjects should be involved.

A better technique, IMHO, would be to do as you suggest...take many shoots of the same subject in many different ways.

[yogestee]

I don't mean to pick on this statement, but if you don't mind, I'd like to use it as a starting point for my thoughts.

On one hand, I don't feel qualified to respond to this, because many people here take more photos in a week than I've taken in my life. On the other hand, I feel eminently qualified to answer this because I've been struggling through my first year of serious photography, and have struggled with the same issues.

"Not technically perfect".... take the time as a beginner to master the tool. If it was easy, everyone would be doing it. It's hard. That's why there are people who make a living taking pictures. yogestee, I know what you are saying, but it can be misinterpreted by someone who is trying to cut corners. I can be running from a wildfire and get some high impact shots over my shoulder from my cell phone camera, but if I'm shooting a dog catching a frisbee with a 40D and a 200L I'd better have it perfect. Because a million other photographers did.

"Seeing" is different from "looking". See the image... but look for stuff, too. Specifically, look for stuff like telephone wires across landscapes... light and shadow across the faces of your subjects... tree leaves and branches in the foreground of a distant view... garbage cans in pastoral views; things that distract from what you see. Clutter can be good if you are taking pictures of clutter, but otherwise it is the same as it is around the house. Clutter.

The rules of composition... man. As a beginner, I think it is important to learn them first, and to learn how to create interesting images within them. Any artist who broke the rules learned how to master them first. That's why John Coltrane (edit: Ornette Coleman? I couldn't find the quote on the 'net and I'm not near my references) was not "a second year sax student stoned on Seconal", as one critic derisively wrote. Master the basics of composition first, or else you are just kidding yourself. Anyone can dribble paint on a canvas, but that doesn't mean they are the equal of Jackson Pollock. Rule breakers not only know what rules they are breaking, they know them inside and out. And some rules will never be successfully broken. You'll never square the circle, you'll never find the last digit of pi, you'll never find the largest prime number.

Timing. I spent many months shooting my photos mid day. I got some nice shots. But no one said WOW to anything I shot between the sevens; after 7AM, or before 7PM. Photos taken at inconvenient hours just plain look better. There's no other way to say it.

Commitment. Great photographs are taken by people concentrating on taking great photographs, not people watching the air show. Or football game, or concert, or enjoying the reception. Pick one, or the other. Work or play. But you can only immerse yourself in one at a time.


I hope this helps. And I hope it rings true with those here with more experience than I have.

I hear what you are saying Mosca.. Coming from a photo-journalistic background the first thing I look for is impact,,technical qualities second.. One image that had and still has a profound effect on me is the image of Kim Phuc running down the road after her village was napalmed..Technically nowhere near perfect but has the impact of a 16lb hammer..

http://blog.core-ed.net/aliarchives/napalm%20girl.jpg check it out..

[airfrogusmc]

When you look at great photographs there are usually several things going on. First they usually work on a very basic level. And then theres usually something much deeper in them. Photography is not unlike any other visual art form and works with some of the same visual elements that all 2D artforms communicate with and understanding these can help you understand a photographs visual statement. How well you understand the visual language will help you in being able to understand the statement. There are things like line, form, color, texture, motion, implied motion and many other elements that go into communicating in a visual medium. Composition is one of the basic elements but as you see only one in helping put together a good image. The more you learn about this visual language the more it becomes part of your work and your ability to see these things in others work. Its something that can and usually does take years and is what will make you grow as a photographer and a lover of any two dimensional art form.

Heres some words for a couple of photographers that are both wiser and more articulate than I am on the subject.

"A great photograph is a full expression of what one feels about what is being photographed in the deepest sense, and is, thereby, a true expression of what one feels about life in its entirety."
Ansel Adams

"When an artist of any kind looks at his subject, he looks with everything he is. Everything he has lived, learned, observed, and experienced combines to enable him to identify himself with his subject and look with insight, perception, imagination and understanding.
Edward Steichen

So learn all you can about this language we communicate with and it will help open your eyes to both you're own work and the work of others.

[airfrogusmc]

Impact

I think to much is put into this. Yes there needs to be something that brings you in but some of the greatest photographs were about much more than impact. The Steerage (Stieglitz)
(Scroll down to Steerage about halfway down)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Stieglitz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Stieglitz)
is one that immediately come to mind. It takes some time to grasp this complex image. Most of Ralph Gibsons work is about negative space. And then theres Winogrand and Friedlander. Heres an interesting quote by Ralph Gibson.

"A good photograph, like a good painting, speaks with a loud voice and demands time and attention if it is to be fully perceived. An art lover is perfectly willing to hang a painting on a wall for years on end, but ask him to study a single photograph for ten unbroken minutes and he’ll think it’s a waste of time. Staying power is difficult to build into a photograph. Mostly, it takes content. A good photograph can penetrate the subconscious – but only if it is allowed to speak for however much time it needs to get there."
Ralph Gibson

Impact, is it important? Of course it is but some think its the end all and that can sometimes be a mistake because there can be more important things going on that might get missed if thats all your seeing or if that all you're looking for in others work. ;)

[chauncey]

Coming from a photo-journalistic background the first thing I look for is impact,,technical qualities second.. One image that had and still has a profound effect on me is the image of Kim Phuc running down the road after her village was napalmed..Technically nowhere near perfect but has the impact of a 16lb hammer..

'Twas much more than a 16lb hammer Jurgen. ;)

Marine, I enjoyed his quotes at the end of the wikipedia link and this
Staying power is difficult to build into a photograph
I find to be true, but I don't know why it is. We can gaze for hours at the Mona Lisa but Adam's Glacier Nat'l Park images earn but a few minutes.

I do find that the "spur of the moment, documentary images", IMHO, have more of an emotional impact (Jurgen's 16lb hammer example) than does a well conceived Adams print.

[airfrogusmc]

'Twas much more than a 16lb hammer Jurgen. ;)

Marine, I enjoyed his quotes at the end of the wikipedia link and this

I find to be true, but I don't know why it is. We can gaze for hours at the Mona Lisa but Adam's Glacier Nat'l Park images earn but a few minutes.

I do find that the "spur of the moment, documentary images", IMHO, have more of an emotional impact (Jurgen's 16lb hammer example) than does a well conceived Adams print.

Thats why the ones with staying power are usually the great ones.

One thing to remember in the ones that have staying power are the ones that everything in the image is supporting the visual statement. Color, line, form, texture or lack of, tension or lack of; everything. All of the visual elements support what the photogrpaher is trying to say. So that leads to the most important question that in great photographs always need to be answered by the photographer. What is the photographer trying to say and the visual language should have all the clues and the answers whether its documentary, landscape or fine art.

[ken casey]

Just a little thought,Have you thought of joining a camera club,or a website that would critque your photos and this will give you input from an external source.You don,t have to go every meeting but you can get into competitions and you will see and discuss other peoples photos.

Ken

[Mintie]

Hi,
I have been practicing and reading for the last three months and honestly no good results yet.

Do I need a better flash and lens? Will this improve my pictures?

Thanks,

Honestly, 3 months is nothing. I had admired a particular photographer's work for probably close on three years before I worked out what he was doing and how I could, in some way, emulate that. But that's what made his work great - what he was doing was breaking a lot of rules that you will read in photography books.

No, as others have said, you don't need a better lens and flash. The set up you have is perfectly good for taking brilliant photos.

I was recently shortlisted for a national photographic prize with an image taken with a $15.00 35mm camera I found at a garage sale.

(Sorry to toot my own horn just a bit there!!)

[fs_tigre]

Thank all for your comments!

[oaktree]

One thing that helped me identify "good" photos is that I forced myself to rate my thousands of photos in Lightroom: no rating = store and forget; 1 = might PP it later; 2= OK snapshots; 3 = good shot; 4 = very good shot!; 5 = can't do any better.

When I first did this my criteria were mainly interesting subject, composition, lighting, color, sharpness. Ended up with about a dozen 5's. But, I had this uneasy feeling that something was missing.

One day I found a copy of Andreas Feininger's "The Creative Photographer" at an art museum book sale ($1.50). On pages 37-53, he wrote about " the qualities which, in my opinion, make a photograph good": Stopping Power; Impact; Meaning; Graphic qualities.

My criteria were mainly in Feininger's "Graphic Qualities". These "graphic qualities" are not to be minimized because they are what beginners (and many pros) struggle with all the time and depend on instinctive knowledge of your equipment.

When I added some of Feininger's other qualities to rate my photos, all the 5's became 4's and 3's. I now have only one 5, which was upgraded from a lower rating because of its emotional impact. And this photo was taken by my wife with a Canon SD600 in poor light without a flash!

As many have said before: keep shooting, review your shots (what do you like, dislike?); rate your shots to start setting a basis for identifying good photos;AND go out and shoot again.

[Mosca]

I hear what you are saying Mosca.. Coming from a photo-journalistic background the first thing I look for is impact,,technical qualities second.. One image that had and still has a profound effect on me is the image of Kim Phuc running down the road after her village was napalmed..Technically nowhere near perfect but has the impact of a 16lb hammer..

http://blog.core-ed.net/aliarchives/napalm%20girl.jpg check it out..

Thanks for the dialogue, yogestee. I don't have to click to look at that photo, I first saw it when I was 14. I was thinking ahead when I was reading that, I thought you were going to say the photo of the VC prisoner getting shot in the head by the Vietnamese officer. Yes, powerful images move the world.

I'm writing and commenting as a 55 year old guy living comfortably in the suburbs, trying to figure out how this camera thing works and how to make satisfying images, with no pretensions about changing the world... with my images, anyhow.

But from this perspective, I still think it is important for anyone; middle aged hobbyist, art student, or aspiring photojournalist; to understand how to make a classic image first. Painters learn how to use the brush. Writers learn how to structure sentences and paragraphs into essays and stories. Musicians learn scales and set pieces. And photographers learn how to compose classic images.

After that, have at it! But at the beginner level, walking around looking for world-altering images is the wrong way to start.