What does being 'good' at photography mean for you?

[EricBowles]

I was thinking along the same lines as Dan's comment. Knowing what photo should not be made - or when another plan is needed is an important skill. Everyone can get a great shot with a great subject and perfect light. But knowing that head position is wrong, there is the wrong wind direction or lighting, or similar ideas that prevent a first rate image is also important. But it's also important not to give up and overlook seeing a good opportunity because it's not what you pre-visualized.

The issue for a professional or top amateur is knowing what to do for Plan B and C. What do you do when it's hazy and the light is really soft? Choosing to shoot backlit subjects for an entire session because the light and wind are from opposite directions. I had to photograph an important awards ceremony at a PGA event a few years ago and they staged it so we were shooting directly into the setting sun. The shooting opportunity was immediate with little time to figure out the settings or take many test shots. It required flash. If you could pull it off, it made a fantastic photo.

Steve ran into this just recently when he had a chance to use the new 800mm PF. The weather and subject matter were not very good - but it was his one chance to try the pre-production version of the lens. Going home or trying another day was not possible.

 

[jeffnles1]

Believe me I love coming back with images I like but no matter what always enjoy being out.

I hear you my friend!

 

[Marcus Slade]

Great question, Stephen. My instinctual response is to say, "if I had to explain, you wouldn't understand". That's probably a bit trite but it's a complicated topic. I'll wager that every single person who's on this forum has friends, family and/or clients that regard them as being good at photography or a good photographer. However, I would equally wager that isn't sufficient for any of us. We all have individual objectives, motivations and influences, some of which have already been brilliantly identified in preceding responses. We all want to be better according to our personal criteria.

A simplified summary of my thought process is "photograph a worthwhile subject or make a photograph worthwhile looking at". Overwhelmingly, I lean to the second part of that sentence. As wildlife photographers, we all know that thrill of first photographing a species we've never seen before, and it's instantly worthwhile for us, but once we've got said critter in our viewfinders and on our memory cards, we start getting more discriminating about the quality of image we expect to create...and that's probably exactly as it should be. It's certainly why i go out, repeatedly to photograph the same species. For instance, it was only two years ago that I first photographed a Great Grey Owl and getting those initial images of the GGO made me feel so good. The images were "okay" but when I went back last year I actually got images that became wall-hangers. Similarly, I have thousands of images of Barred Owls (very close to my home) but am so much more intent now on trying to make future Barred Owl images more compelling and less repetitive.

For me, the idea of creating an image worth looking at provides endless motivation and inspiration. Acknowledging that I've never taken a single image in my life that I didn't think could've been improved upon, provides a balance of inspiration and guidance to enjoy the journey.

 

[EricBowles]

Who was it - Ansel Adams? - who said a good year was 10 great photographs.

We're in the world of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other social media sites where 1-3 images per day is expected. That's a lot of images being shared that are not the best. There are a lot of people that are posting underwhelming images, and that lulls you into a lower standard. There are also a lot of images being posted that are interesting ideas even if the execution is lacking and those are ideas worth discussing and sharing.

Certainly every social media post does not need to be a great image, but there is something to be said about sharing only your best work even if it's with clients or on social media.

 

[Marcus Slade]

Certainly every social media post does not need to be a great image, but there is something to be said about sharing only your best work even if it's with clients or on social media.

Well said, and this is such a difficult discipline to maintain, made more difficult sometimes when people praise you for an image you think is merely OK vs one that you personally feel has merit.

 

[Tibor Hrnko]

A lot of precise descriptions above, so I am repeating some of them:

• Knowing the shooting techniques to a degree that they are automatic and natural
• Seeing that something is wrong with the picture even if it is not analytical
• Ability to analyze what is wrong or problematic when one checks one's work during postprocess
• Ability to see elements which will be detrimental to the composition
• All above is needed to be good. But to be a master one has to have a gift to see world in a way that can be special for a viewer.

Even without the last quality, one can be a happy and good amateur IMO.

 

[Viathelens]

I think a lot of people think that being good at photography means they have expensive gear or that they have been a photographer for many years. While both can be helpful I think being a "good photographer" is a lot more. When I started out 12 years ago trying to be a "fine art" photographer I naively thought that anyone who had been a photographer for 10 years or so must be good at it. It was almost a shock to find out that was not the case. My take on being a "good photographer" is that, since I do shoot digital in the year 2022, I know my photography software as well as my gear and I know what both can do. Additionally, I realize what is unique, different, special, or interesting about what I shoot and I am clear on what my subject is and on why I photograph it and I try to emphasize what it was that appealed to me. I am cognizant of how images are viewed by human brains and eyes (and this is where composition comes in) and I try to take that into account and fit that into my intent and purpose with each photograph. Sometimes I can look at a subject and I know exactly how I want it to turn out and what I can do with it in camera and in software and that works well for me as I shoot. In the end, my goal is to create a pleasing image of my chosen subject to the best of my skill, my camera's ability, and the ability of the software of my choice. While I don't always meet my goal I continue to try to do so. P.S. Note that this subject, being good at what we have chosen to do and how "good" might be defined, only got to two pages whereas subjects about gear can go on and on...just an observation.

 

[BLev65]

This may be one of the hardest questions to answer because it so personal.
I think a "good photographer," is someone who can produce images that evoke an emotional response or connections with the photo. While it may appear that some photographers do this more often than others, I think it has more to do with the selection process.
Some very good photographers are selective with what they choose to share, carefully process/print their work, and strive to show only the best work. As such, these photographers seem to produce images that strongly resonate with the viewer.

bruce

 

[Stephen Berger]

I was thinking along the same lines as Dan's comment. Knowing what photo should not be made - or when another plan is needed is an important skill. Everyone can get a great shot with a great subject and perfect light. But knowing that head position is wrong, there is the wrong wind direction or lighting, or similar ideas that prevent a first rate image is also important. But it's also important not to give up and overlook seeing a good opportunity because it's not what you pre-visualized.

The issue for a professional or top amateur is knowing what to do for Plan B and C. What do you do when it's hazy and the light is really soft? Choosing to shoot backlit subjects for an entire session because the light and wind are from opposite directions. I had to photograph an important awards ceremony at a PGA event a few years ago and they staged it so we were shooting directly into the setting sun. The shooting opportunity was immediate with little time to figure out the settings or take many test shots. It required flash. If you could pull it off, it made a fantastic photo.

Steve ran into this just recently when he had a chance to use the new 800mm PF. The weather and subject matter were not very good - but it was his one chance to try the pre-production version of the lens. Going home or trying another day was not possible.

Yes... this makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Stephen Berger]

Great question, Stephen. My instinctual response is to say, "if I had to explain, you wouldn't understand". That's probably a bit trite but it's a complicated topic. I'll wager that every single person who's on this forum has friends, family and/or clients that regard them as being good at photography or a good photographer. However, I would equally wager that isn't sufficient for any of us. We all have individual objectives, motivations and influences, some of which have already been brilliantly identified in preceding responses. We all want to be better according to our personal criteria.

A simplified summary of my thought process is "photograph a worthwhile subject or make a photograph worthwhile looking at". Overwhelmingly, I lean to the second part of that sentence. As wildlife photographers, we all know that thrill of first photographing a species we've never seen before, and it's instantly worthwhile for us, but once we've got said critter in our viewfinders and on our memory cards, we start getting more discriminating about the quality of image we expect to create...and that's probably exactly as it should be. It's certainly why i go out, repeatedly to photograph the same species. For instance, it was only two years ago that I first photographed a Great Grey Owl and getting those initial images of the GGO made me feel so good. The images were "okay" but when I went back last year I actually got images that became wall-hangers. Similarly, I have thousands of images of Barred Owls (very close to my home) but am so much more intent now on trying to make future Barred Owl images more compelling and less repetitive.

For me, the idea of creating an image worth looking at provides endless motivation and inspiration. Acknowledging that I've never taken a single image in my life that I didn't think could've been improved upon, provides a balance of inspiration and guidance to enjoy the journey.

I completely relate to this. The part about what we thing is a good picture of something when we first encounter that something vs when we know it better and have practice with it. And also your last line. There is no point of arrival. It's all journey, with - hopefully - some plateaus along the way.

 

[Stephen Berger]

Who was it - Ansel Adams? - who said a good year was 10 great photographs.

We're in the world of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other social media sites where 1-3 images per day is expected. That's a lot of images being shared that are not the best. There are a lot of people that are posting underwhelming images, and that lulls you into a lower standard. There are also a lot of images being posted that are interesting ideas even if the execution is lacking and those are ideas worth discussing and sharing.

Certainly every social media post does not need to be a great image, but there is something to be said about sharing only your best work even if it's with clients or on social media.

Yes!

 

[Stephen Berger]

A lot of precise descriptions above, so I am repeating some of them:

• Knowing the shooting techniques to a degree that they are automatic and natural
• Seeing that something is wrong with the picture even if it is not analytical
• Ability to analyze what is wrong or problematic when one checks one's work during postprocess
• Ability to see elements which will be detrimental to the composition
• All above is needed to be good. But to be a master one has to have a gift to see world in a way that can be special for a viewer.

Even without the last quality, one can be a happy and good amateur IMO.

Yes that last quality can't be taught. I have a very successful photographer friend who's throw away snapshots have more artistic content than my most thoughtful shots ever will.

 

[Stephen Berger]

I think a lot of people think that being good at photography means they have expensive gear or that they have been a photographer for many years. While both can be helpful I think being a "good photographer" is a lot more. When I started out 12 years ago trying to be a "fine art" photographer I naively thought that anyone who had been a photographer for 10 years or so must be good at it. It was almost a shock to find out that was not the case. My take on being a "good photographer" is that, since I do shoot digital in the year 2022, I know my photography software as well as my gear and I know what both can do. Additionally, I realize what is unique, different, special, or interesting about what I shoot and I am clear on what my subject is and on why I photograph it and I try to emphasize what it was that appealed to me. I am cognizant of how images are viewed by human brains and eyes (and this is where composition comes in) and I try to take that into account and fit that into my intent and purpose with each photograph. Sometimes I can look at a subject and I know exactly how I want it to turn out and what I can do with it in camera and in software and that works well for me as I shoot. In the end, my goal is to create a pleasing image of my chosen subject to the best of my skill, my camera's ability, and the ability of the software of my choice. While I don't always meet my goal I continue to try to do so. P.S. Note that this subject, being good at what we have chosen to do and how "good" might be defined, only got to two pages whereas subjects about gear can go on and on...just an observation.

That all makes perfect sense and yes those gear threads get long but they do also often sidetrack into other things (and then often multiple other things).

 

[Stephen Berger]

This may be one of the hardest questions to answer because it so personal.
I think a "good photographer," is someone who can produce images that evoke an emotional response or connections with the photo. While it may appear that some photographers do this more often than others, I think it has more to do with the selection process.
Some very good photographers are selective with what they choose to share, carefully process/print their work, and strive to show only the best work. As such, these photographers seem to produce images that strongly resonate with the viewer.

bruce

I get this. I edit film/video for a living so my job is to cut away things that aren't essential. It's for sure much easier for me to do with some directors footage than it is with my own photo's but I am learning to apply it to myself. A quote I often think of when editing also applies to choosing the best images... "It is not hard to compose but it is wonderfully hard to let the superfluous notes fall under the table." - Johaness Brahms

 

[JAS]

A very interesting discussion. For my two cents, I shoot for pure personal enjoyment. I lack the fine motor skills to draw, paint, build furniture and many other such crafts. A camera, a few lenses and good software allow me to create in my own space. That others like some of what I do is a bonus, but not a requirement. I do not sell my work, I print only a few large prints a year. When I complie my work it is often in a 12x12 photobook and online here and a couple of other places.

I love seeing other people's work and reading how they got the shots. This helps me to add to my toolbox. I seldom ask for critiques because it is not always easy to describe what I wanted the shot to be. If I seek help, it is to achieve my vision rather than make a photo look like someone else's idea of what should be. For that reason, I am also hesitant to provide critique/commentary because I do not know what another shooter intended so how can I tell them how to get there beyond the very basics of gear, mechanics and the supposedly "standard" rules of composition.

Above all, photography is an amazingly relaxing, enjoyable pasttime that allows me to meet and converse with many very nice people, visit many stunning locations and view amazing events. So, being good at photography is to share our work and, hopefully, improve our skills to meet our own expectations. This site, for example, has helped me tremendously, though the pocketbook hit has also been a thing to behold. So all is "good" for me.

 

[BLev65]

I get this. I edit film/video for a living so my job is to cut away things that aren't essential. It's for sure much easier for me to do with some directors footage than it is with my own photo's but I am learning to apply it to myself. A quote I often think of when editing also applies to choosing the best images... "It is not hard to compose but it is wonderfully hard to let the superfluous notes fall under the table." - Johaness Brahms

Thanks for sharing the quote... I love it!
I am currently immersed in a project that has me culling my photo library that extends back to 1990. Other than sentimentally valuable photos, my best work began around 1990 and continues through today. This work includes extensive travel to exclusively produce landscape and wildlife images, is filled with Hasselblad and Pentax 645 pics as well as a lifetime with 35mm format film. With well over 200,000 files across many hard drives, I am striving to find my best of the best. In this pursuit, I have everything from wrong notes to the superfluous ones to delete and exclude.
With this project in mind, I continue to ask myself... "Why would someone other than me take more than 5 seconds to look at this image?"

 

[flyguy]

I am happy to get one or two or three wall hangers from any Nikon Holiday I go on. I used to just shoot away in the past; not any longer; I pick my shots or wait for the better to best lighting which usually means the blue hour around sunrise on the Left Coast or the golden hour at any location. I like my photos to tell me the story of my holiday or day trip; where I went, what I most want to remember about that trip. I have also shifted to doing a lot more video on my trips; those videos also have audio so I can relive those moments. I am very critical of my own shots, always wanting to improve, trying to plan ahead even better. After that trip is over, plan for the next one and what I can improve upon. Photography is a personal experience for me and my primary way to decompress which includes going places that bring some peace and quiet into my hectic world. I also look at overcast days in a different light now so to speak; overcast days are MOOD days, and sometimes I go out just because of how those days feel to me and capture that mood with my Nikon of choice.

 

[Calson]

I differentiate between good at technique and good at composition. Steve's videos are very useful with the latter. A friend from Taiwan visited me and while we were out and about in Monterey he started picking backgrounds first and then the subjects and I knew he had gone up a level.

 

[vandy]

Ah.....your kind words are much appreciated! I only pick up a camera about 3-4 times a YEAR! Before each outing, I always feel like I am starting over. And yet, I can see that images I've taken recently are better than my earlier ones taken years ago. So at least I am making progress even with such limited shooting.

Well all I can say is I am in awe of your work! Bravo!!

 

[MYount]

Technical knowledge of your equipment and understanding exposure is vital as a photographer .
I think a good photographer captures an image that inspires a story, even if it's not the same one, in every person that views it. It doesn't matter what genre it is. Create something fresh and modern. Make people think. Give them something new.
Am I that photographer. In a lot of ways yes. In others it's a work in progress. I'm dedicated to it though. If I live long enough I'll get there eventually.

 

[vandy]

Technical knowledge of your equipment and understanding exposure is vital as a photographer .
I think a good photographer captures an image that inspires a story, even if it's not the same one, in every person that views it. It doesn't matter what genre it is. Create something fresh and modern. Make people think. Give them something new.
Am I that photographer. In a lot of ways yes. In others it's a work in progress. I'm dedicated to it though. If I live long enough I'll get there eventually.

I like that answer, when I used film cameras I had a pretty good handle on the technical aspects of the gear but I must admit that the digital technology has been a little difficult for me to get a firm handle on. I keep trying but I still keep messing up on a regular basis, it just doesn't seem natural to me the way it did 25 years ago which could mean I am showing my age, and I am certainly a work in progress with this. Sometimes I am not sure I will live long enough to get there but I hope so.

 

[flyguy]

Being a work in progress means you get to keep on doing it until...??? Some day trips for me, I mount an old Nikkor manual focus prime from film days on a Nikon DSLR and go hunting for photo ops. I have seen the Columbia River Gorge half a dozen times and been to Mount St Helens and Mount Rainier at least three times each; every time back I try different approaches and/or find trails I have yet to hike like the Hummock Trail a couple of years ago where we encountered elk in the timber, the elk were cows communicating vocally, almost spooky in a way. Locally I have my favorites I revisit at different seasons and weather conditions; I have learned to make the best out of certain overcast conditions as those offer some really cool mood shots; and let's not even start in with fog or hoarfrost. YES!

I learned more about my D7100 after I got my D850. It's a journey with no finish line for me especially now that I have branched out into video.

 

[MYount]

I like that answer, when I used film cameras I had a pretty good handle on the technical aspects of the gear but I must admit that the digital technology has been a little difficult for me to get a firm handle on. I keep trying but I still keep messing up on a regular basis, it just doesn't seem natural to me the way it did 25 years ago which could mean I am showing my age, and I am certainly a work in progress with this. Sometimes I am not sure I will live long enough to get there but I hope so.

That's why most of the time I use manual with auto ISO. I picked up my first camera in 1975 when I was 15 and I got used to a set film speed and the rest was up to me. I didn't shoot a digital camera until July 2020 and I got the d500. I've learned it very well. I have approximately 35,000 photos on it. I'm a dedicated enthusiast. Lol.

 

[vandy]

That's why most of the time I use manual with auto ISO. I picked up my first camera in 1975 when I was 15 and I got used to a set film speed and the rest was up to me. I didn't shoot a digital camera until July 2020 and I got the d500. I've learned it very well. I have approximately 35,000 photos on it. I'm a dedicated enthusiast. Lol.

That was about the same time I got my first camera, a rangefinder Fuji then I moved up to a 35mm SLR and I was hooked.

 

[Whiskeyman]

These days being at the local park with my gear, in the back yard or selective road trips are more than enough to keep me happy! I was a winner in the birds division of The Wildlife Photographer of the Year, had my photo in the Smithsonian and several others etc, been there done that but give me a good cup of coffee, a comfy chair in my back yard with some hummingbirds or whatever is at the feeders and I'm just as happy as ever!!

I'm with you on this, George, except for the coffee. I always have to avoid caffeine for about twelve hours before I go out with my camera, else I can't control my hands shaking enough to hand-hold the camera while I'm using it.