Must I shoot artsy photos to be a good photographer?

[FrankS]

Pherdinand, I was about to respond to your first post saying that you had missed the point. The question wasn't "Should I take artistic photos of clouds and rocks, or pictures of my family?" The question was, "Do I have to take artistic pictures to be a good photographer?" And I believe the answer is yes, if artistic means that others will appreciate the pictures beyond the fact that they are simply family photos. (In your second post you come back a bit and address the point.) I went on to suggest the kinds of considerations involved in a carefully crafted photo. Someone suggested that they had taken their best photo by blind luck by releasing the shutter without thought. That may well be, but I think we're looking for helpful advice, not simply to rely on luck.

This is a very interesting topic IMO. It is a bit touchy because we are discussing family photos that obviously the photographer has great emotional attachment to, so it's difficult to offer criticism, even though it was asked for.

 

[raid]

Frank:

I posted this thread as coming from my experience and applying to my case, but I meant it at the back of my mind as a general thread topic that is applicable to all of us.

I have not seen any photos by you, Frank, and it is my fault for not looking in the Gallery for them. The same applies to many of the individuals who were kind enough to post a commenting this thread. I wish I knew more about everyone's photography output.

I did not want to be agressive in challenging each of us. I am fully aware that "my cute children" in my photos could very well be boring snapshots to others. In fact, it was quite a challenge to post family photos in the RFF that are taken in a regular daily routine and not as studio work of children.

Needless to say that some of you have posted very useful and applicable suggestions and comments. This is what made this thread interesting.


Raid

 

[FrankS]

Some of the people in this folder are family:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=5089

 

[back alley]

isn't the question here, 'what is art?'

artsy to me means 'like art' or 'close to art' but not really art.

one of the most boring things TO ME is looking at snapshots of other people's family events. there rarely is anything in the photo that draws me in and makes me wonder about those people. there is no connection.
yet i can look at photos made during the american depression and droughts and look into the eyes of a migrant mother and wonder about that person. somehow the photographer created an emotional connection that i could latch on to.

is it art?
i've not been able to figure that one out yet.

joe

 

[FrankS]

I've been posting all along going on the assumption that Raid meant artsy to be something good, like a powerful image, not something contrived and gimmicky. If I've been wrong on this issue, then please disregard all my posts.

 

[raid]

Some of the people in this folder are family:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=5089

Frank,
Your folder is full of excellent photos.I find the portraits of your father remarkable photos. Thanks for providing us the link.

Raid

 

[raid]

I've been posting all along going on the assumption that Raid meant artsy to be something good, like a powerful image, not something contrived and gimmicky. If I've been wrong on this issue, then please disregard all my posts.

Frank: I should have been more clear about what I meant by "artsy".
Of course, good art photography is something to aim at and hope to attain once in a while. I meant more the type of photos that are somewhat artificial and contrived (as you put it). Still, what you suggested is not wrong at all.

Regards,
Raid

 

[FrankS]

Thank you for the kind words Raid, and sorry for my misunderstanding of your question.

The answer to your question then is simple: no.

 

[back alley]

you are right about bud's pics frank. some very good shots there.

bud, i just love 'muscle'!!

joe

 

[BudGreen]

Thanks Joe! 🙂

 

[RayPA]

isn't the question here, 'what is art?'

artsy to me means 'like art' or 'close to art' but not really art.

one of the most boring things TO ME is looking at snapshots of other people's family events. there rarely is anything in the photo that draws me in and makes me wonder about those people. there is no connection.
yet i can look at photos made during the american depression and droughts and look into the eyes of a migrant mother and wonder about that person. somehow the photographer created an emotional connection that i could latch on to.

is it art?
i've not been able to figure that one out yet.

joe

Joe, you should check out Robert U. Akeret's two books. One is called Photolanguage (How Photos Revel the Fascinating Stories of Oour Lives and Relationships), and the other one is called something like "Photo Analysis." Both books, but especially the latter one, deal with reading snapshots and discerning relationships of the individuals in the pictures. It's really psychoanalysis by evaluating the spatial relationships, gestures, and body language of the individuals in family snapshots. You'll never look at a family snapshot the same again. 🙂

.

 

[raid]

isn't the question here, 'what is art?'

artsy to me means 'like art' or 'close to art' but not really art.

one of the most boring things TO ME is looking at snapshots of other people's family events. there rarely is anything in the photo that draws me in and makes me wonder about those people. there is no connection.
yet i can look at photos made during the american depression and droughts and look into the eyes of a migrant mother and wonder about that person. somehow the photographer created an emotional connection that i could latch on to.

is it art?
i've not been able to figure that one out yet.

joe

Joe,

I usually test a lens when posting photos of my family. My daughter will simply be my model during the tests. I don't intend to bore people since the goal of a lens test does not much have to do with the art.

Regards,
Raid

 

[back alley]

raid, don't take it personally. i just don't care for family snaps.
has more to do with my family than yours, believe me.

i know you're sensitive about this issue as you have been given a hard time at p.et over it but that is not my intent here.

ray, i think i have that book, the second one. someone gave it me years ago but then she divorced me and i don't think i ever read it.
i should track it down.

jjoe

 

[jan normandale]

Raid, don't confuse yourself
"Must I shoot artsy photos to be a good photographer?"
Art photos are art photos. Good photography is good photography. Two different things. Hope this clarifies it for you and now you can rest at ease knowing this mental torment is resolved.

 

[Pherdinand]

"artsy" sounded to me a bit negative. I see it also was intended so. Therefore i stand behind my above comment.
I also take artsy shots sometimes. Even artsy-fartsy once in a while. I'm always blinded by some personal connection to the subject in those cases,; sometimes later i figure how boring the shot was, for a stranger.

 

[robin a]

7-10 Raid,shoot what you want.

 

[J. Borger]

I do not agree with the view that family pictures are boring or uninteresting. It all depends on the picture.

What's the difference between a beautifull posed and lighted portrait of somebodys wife vs a similar portrait of an unknown model?
For me as the outsider there is no difference. Or do we ask ourselfs all the time if the model is the photographers wife or perhaps girlfriend😉 if we look at a portrait (formal, environmental, casual or whatever?)

What's the difference between a candid of a child of your own vs. a candid of a child of stranger (the latter often refered to as streetphotograpy?)

So it all depends on the pictures.
There are outstanding and "artsy" familie pictures.
The same time there are tons of boring modelshoots and perhaps even more pictures with streetphotography as a label that are snapshots at best.


Just my 2 cents of course

 

[VinceC]

There are mighty few photographs without people in them that are interesting. Pictures of buildings without people look like they were hit by a neutron bomb.

Everyone has their preferences, and people are very different from one another. But the family is universal and children are universal. People who don't like pictures of children and families are, frankly, often the kinds of folks I don't want to spend too much time with. There is nothing wrong with them or their preferences. It's just that we haven't got that much in common. I grew up in a family that was a disaster, and my current family has plenty of flaws, as most do. So I don't really think that's a deciding factor.

Again, everyone has their own preferences. I find pictures of people in bars or jazz clubs tedious, whereas others really love that kind of photography. I find street photography is often disjointed and, if it gets too intimate with people unaware they're being photographed, downright creepy.

From the very beginning, photography has been used to capture images of people and families. The ability to capture people was a primary motivator for getting the exposure times shortened from hours to minutes to seconds.

Many of the most well-known photographers took some of their best images of their own families. Other classic photographers may not have taken pictures of their own families but still left us with enduring images of children. One of my very favorite pictures remains Henri Cartier-Bresson's picture of the proud-looking little boy carrying home a bottle of wine. David Seymour ("Chim") spent much of his energy photographing children, often under less than ideal circumstances.

Just my opinion on the matter. Others will have differing opinions.

 

[Jonathan_100]

This is one of the better strings I've come across in a long time.

I've always shot family and friends. Now that my friends and I have children, the kids seem to make up the bulk of my photos.

To answer Raid's question... no. You don't have to be artsy, just honest. There have been many examples cited in this string that cover a variety of approaches. The ones that speak to me are the ones that capture personality and mood regardless of how they are executed (studio or candid). Tell me a good story in a single frame, and I'm happy.

Jonathan

 

[raid]

I hesitated before posting this personal thread here, but I expected it to generate useful and constructive comments and suggestions, which it certainly already has done. Being "honest" with yourself in your photography and also being happy and content seem to be some of the major factors that play a role here.

Raid