I have not clue what pictures other people like....

I am no pro - but doing quite my share of candid pictures on private events (... instead of bringing a bottle of wine type of thing). Afterwards, I am going through the pictures and think: Wow, this is great - and later it turns out that nobody really cares. Or then the picture, I think 'meh...' but still good enough to put up and later everybody loves it and I get a lot of praise for that thing.... Especially pictures of women - just a disaster. I now know run all the pictures through my wife to make sure that no woman will be offended (double chin - stuff like that). Remember these are mostly candids.
At least I know, that I will not do well as a professional!

Here's an example: There is this snapshot - against the light - outside - not prepared to deal with this at all:

put a kid in a pic and people are much more likely to "like" it on social media. Once one or two people "like" it, not only will it show up in more people's feed, others will feel compelled to like it too.

what i'm saying is that it's probably a bad idea to judge your photography through the whims of social media algorithms and public likes. And seriously, the kid phenomenon is very real.

edit: i bet someone could compile statistics proving that photos of adults in kid's movie character costumes jumping around the back yard get more likes too.

One has to keep in mind that the average person has no clue as to a technically perfect photo vs. one that simply has 'appeal'. And what makes for 'appeal' can be dramatic sky, or emotional content (kids, reminiscences).

Things like off White Balance gets completely overlooked, poor composition often gets overlooked.

But how your photograph looks to other photographers, it will be judged to harsher standards. And like rectums, everyone has an opinion.

The happy solution for those of us who don't have to support ourselves with photography is to work at pleasing ourselves and, perhaps, those we care most about. That makes the praise of others a bonus and the lack of it no distraction.

If I owned the RAW of your example shot I'd likely be working it rather hard to get it up to what seems to me a pretty high potential, but that's just me, not you. My judgement is likely clouded by looking at the batch of technically fine but bordinary (should be a word!) shots I took at a golf tourney yesterday.

I do a lot of event photography and find it is not so much about the technical qualities as it is about the emotions captured. I have kept 'bad' pictures simply because the spontaneity of the shot surpassed the technically better alternative. After a while you begin to worry less about technical aspects and look for the "decisive moments", as Henri Cartier-Bresson called them. Mainly because with experience the technical becomes second nature and you're able to focus on what the subject is doing.

People like photos with people they know, period. Unless the photos are for promotional purposes, for profits or non-profits, quality may not matter. If you can do both, great.

In the Lightroomed version, I think you got a good shot of your main subject. The only problem is exposure of the background.

It isn't just that there are kids. Everyone is looking at someone else. All are facing toward the center (and how often do people arrange themselves this way in a candid?). The group on the left, many figures but just standing there, is balanced by the solo figure on the right, who is larger and is in a dramatic pose. The kids are doing something purposeful or involving instead of just hanging around.

I'm not surprised that the guests liked this one. Most people are more interested in people than in art, and the "people" part of this image turned out very well. If you were to crop out the top, cutting through the upper part of the blue mountains, you might like the image, too.

OhLook wrote in post #18116704
I'm not surprised that the guests liked this one. Most people are more interested in people than in art, and the "people" part of this image turned out very well. If you were to crop out the top, cutting through the upper part of the blue mountains, you might like the image, too.

I see your point and it is a good one. I took this shot spontaneously when I turned around and there must have been something that made me take this (single) shot of this scene. However, after your well formulated explanation of the 'composition' - I still think it is a 'meh' - or now a 'meh-plus' picture. The woman of honor of this party even took this picture as her new 'what-app' profile picture.

But as I said - it's not just about this picture. It's my general failure to anticipate what other people like - which is often not congruent what I think is really cool.

Here's another example. This time, I only got a big NO-NO from my wife (without much reasoning) and therefore was dropped from the published list of pictures (and therefore no other negative feedback). But I like the picture a lot - the melodramatic pose makes me laugh ever single time I see the picture. And I don't even know the young lady in the pic:

drmaxx wrote in post #18116777
Here's another example. This time, I only got a big NO-NO from my wife (without much reasoning) and therefore was dropped from the published list of pictures

Then you might consider taking away your wife's veto power. Have the girl's parents seen this picture?

OhLook wrote in post #18116854
Then you might consider taking away your wife's veto power. Have the girl's parents seen this picture?

This.

I post technically unflattering pics of people (especially kids) all the time on Facebook... I leave it up to them to tag themselves or not, but if people have a good sense of humor they're happy to have technically unflattering pictures of themselves or their kids, I love shots of my girlfriend making silly unflattering faces

Both pictures are very much alive and with irony.
But most of people likes predicable, neutral, cheesy crap. If you want to keep photographing for people who are looking at their photos, this is what you must do. Cheesy and neutral.

Yep. I'm just a hobbyist and social media is my only outlet for images. So many times a well composed (IMHO), technically correct image that I think everyone will just go crazy over gets no response. Then some snapshot with just a quick touch-up in Lightroom gets all kinds of attention.

It really "hurts" when you spend thou$and$ of dollar$ on gear and hundred$ on software and then a darn 'phone shot gets all the likes.

I know the following is not the point of your post...

I just shoot what I like and if other people like it, so be it.

drmaxx wrote in post #18116777
Here's another example. This time, I only got a big NO-NO from my wife (without much reasoning) and therefore was dropped from the published list of pictures (and therefore no other negative feedback). But I like the picture a lot - the melodramatic pose makes me laugh ever single time I see the picture. And I don't even know the young lady in the pic:

Hosted photo: posted by drmaxx in
./showthread.php?p=181​16777&i=i33881701
forum: General Photography Talk

This picture deserves to be seen by her family! I think it's great!