Educating people to see.

[GoodOldNorm]

Recently I showed a friend some of my B&W prints, some where just snapshots others were prints I had put a lot of work into. He could not see the difference in quality between them. I found it difficult to explain what makes a good photograph. Your thoughts please.

[Gareth]

I don't have any print knowledge at all (yet) so I would presume to the uneducated eye the differences are not so noticeable to those who can't see the hard work that you have put into it.

It may be worth having the same image printed twice once with minimal work and the second with the whole works for showing the differences between good and bad prints.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[vincent]

Non photographers only see the content and it either appeals to them or not. This to my mind is a fair judgement of your work. Fellow photographers are a different kettle of fish because they print their own photos and know how much work is required to produce a 'fine print'.

[GoodOldNorm]

Originally Posted by vincent

Non photographers only see the content and it either appeals to them or not. This to my mind is a fair judgement of your work. Fellow photographers are a different kettle of fish because they print their own photos and know how much work is required to produce a 'fine print'.

Good point Vincent, the content of a photograph is what I look at first and then I judge the technical quality.

[marty]

Aah, Norm... I thought it was just myself. Sometimes I found really frustrating when prints I have put into all my best effort are treated just like the mere snapshots. Thinking better to it I come to same realization of Vincent, for non photographers is just like you push a button and the print comes out perfect and beautiful of pure magic. Though I found a couple of persons who seemed to be interested in what's going on behind the scenes, asked a few questions and actually listened my dissertations. This was somewhat comforting...

Cheers, M.

[alexmuir]

I suppose the conclusion must be that the subject and composition are of primary importance. Skilful printing can further enhance the final product, but there's no point wasting time and energy on an image with poor composition, or a subject that lacks interest.
The problem I have, as a photographer and printer, is the sub-conscious urge to dissect other people's work. I tend to see the techniques, rather than the final image. It amazes me sometimes how crudely manipulated some famous images are, and yet they retain their impact due to strong composition and arresting subject matter. I try to keep to a minimum the amount of dodging, burning,etc that I do, trying only to correct the overall 'balance' of the image where necessary. My regular critics at home have made it clear that they prefer things not to be 'overworked'. Alex


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

[Richard Gould]

Like Alex I tend to keep the dodging and burning to a minimum, just doing enough to show the finished as I saw it in my mind when I pressed the shutter, I think that the final image is more important than the darkroom method, and if I can achieve what I want with little or no darkroom skills, just a straight print then so be it,not often but it does happen, or if I need a bith more darkroom skill to achieve my aim then again, so be it. I have seen to many prints where darkroom skills appear to have been used for the sake of using them, and it can become very obvious,
Richard

[MarcAeonDELETED]

Having done a little acting I've noticed that you can't guess what a crowd will do because, they are all individuals. Obvious but to see it en-masse is quite a lesson. I've sat at the back of BAFTA and Pinewoods Theatre 7 while being projected on screen doing my bit which is to me is a little like handing a print to someone. You can never win, completely, that is. But it kind of sorts it's self out in the wash. Half of the audience will think it is the most amazing thing they have ever seen and the other half simply won't get it or like it at all. At first it's nerve wrecking, but then I found myself just letting go. Moving pictures or still images have to connect at a deeper level to engage emotion and if the person looking at it has no internal or external reference that is triggered by what they are looking at ( and taking onboard their current state of mind ) you have no chance of getting a WOW from them. But then, show that same person the photograph after a few shots of brandy and it will be another story again. So, if you like your prints then that's enough to begin with. I think prints, like cult films take time to find their audience. Show the same print to at least 100 people before you question it's quality.

[big paul]

norm even if you could have made him understand ,he probably would not agree with you ,and have his own opinion on the subject ,,,,,,,,,,
I take , and print for myself I know that I am not that good at it ,but I use my photography to record things ,like a diary to look back on and remember ,a photograph is a great trigger for the mind ,like a smell it instantly takes you back (a photograph is a time machine for the mind)as for fine art I don't even try ...as a lot of us old gits I have been doing this for a long time and print a photo up to a standard that I like .
when you dev and print in the darkroom with that red or orange light on, you now the magic that happens to produce that print ,the atmosphere the smell of the chemicals that image forming on that blank piece of paper as you rock it back and forward in the dev ,this is what we know that they don't the magic of chemicals and light..




www.essexcockney.com

[cliveh]

Originally Posted by GoodOldNorm

Recently I showed a friend some of my B&W prints, some where just snapshots others were prints I had put a lot of work into. He could not see the difference in quality between them. I found it difficult to explain what makes a good photograph. Your thoughts please.

Unless you are producing your work for a private club of chemical photographic printers, the amount of work you have put into making the print makes not an iota of difference. What makes a good photograph for the general public is not your perception about your hand crafted print, but whether they appreciate it as an image/print or not.