Is this a good photo, or a bad photo?
Discussion
Well you could get philosophical about it and question what is the meaning of good and bad, which is I assume where you're coming from. In which case the answer probably depends on what purpose you think the photo serves.
For example, is it just something pretty to hang on your wall? Or does it evoke a particular memory for the photographer? Or for someone else?
For example, is it just something pretty to hang on your wall? Or does it evoke a particular memory for the photographer? Or for someone else?
SamHH said:
Well, if I've got to say one or the other, then I'll judge it on the basis of "does it look nice?" and say bad. But you or someone else could be judging it on some other basis and then the answer may be different.
It's not about whether you're going to hurt my feelings by saying it's bad, dont worry!
(eta - and thanks for the response)
Edited by andy-xr on Monday 7th September 17:20
I'm going to go with an overall bad.
Hay-bail, nice, but it doesn't lead anywhere. The sky and the horizon are distinctly average. Also the colours are dull.
Now if you spent 20 minutes in photoshop it could turn into a semi decent photo.
I know this isn't your best work, or even your average work so are you going to share what you're up to?
Hay-bail, nice, but it doesn't lead anywhere. The sky and the horizon are distinctly average. Also the colours are dull.
Now if you spent 20 minutes in photoshop it could turn into a semi decent photo.
I know this isn't your best work, or even your average work so are you going to share what you're up to?
My rule of photography these days is that subject matter makes the photo. This fails in that respect. It does follow some of the rules for a good landscape (e.g. foreground interest) but fails on composition as it is split in two horizontally. As others have said, colour is a bit flat too.
Personally, i think bad - doesn't really do much to entertain or grab the eye.
IF i was going to preach to people no doubt cleverer than me, I'd mention the rule of thirds, the flat colours, and the fact that if the photo was taken slightly furhter to the right, keeping the bale in the shot, the furrows in the wheat would probably go nicely up and down, leading the eye deeper into the photo.
Unfortunately, thats just regurgatating what I read in photo magazines, and all the photos I take go strangely blue no matter where I put the white balance. So I'll not comment =)
IF i was going to preach to people no doubt cleverer than me, I'd mention the rule of thirds, the flat colours, and the fact that if the photo was taken slightly furhter to the right, keeping the bale in the shot, the furrows in the wheat would probably go nicely up and down, leading the eye deeper into the photo.
Unfortunately, thats just regurgatating what I read in photo magazines, and all the photos I take go strangely blue no matter where I put the white balance. So I'll not comment =)
Graham E said:
Personally, i think bad - doesn't really do much to entertain or grab the eye.
IF i was going to preach to people no doubt cleverer than me, I'd mention the rule of thirds, the flat colours, and the fact that if the photo was taken slightly furhter to the right, keeping the bale in the shot, the furrows in the wheat would probably go nicely up and down, leading the eye deeper into the photo.
Unfortunately, thats just regurgatating what I read in photo magazines, and all the photos I take go strangely blue no matter where I put the white balance. So I'll not comment =)
But you should IF i was going to preach to people no doubt cleverer than me, I'd mention the rule of thirds, the flat colours, and the fact that if the photo was taken slightly furhter to the right, keeping the bale in the shot, the furrows in the wheat would probably go nicely up and down, leading the eye deeper into the photo.
Unfortunately, thats just regurgatating what I read in photo magazines, and all the photos I take go strangely blue no matter where I put the white balance. So I'll not comment =)
It's a bad photo done deliberately (in landscape especially as I really cant shoot it!) to help me and a tutor understand why and where some of my photography is ignorant
It's great fun btw
GetCarter said:
rasputin said:
It's a good photo if you were trying to get a photo of a hay bale with some trees in the background and an overcast sky.
Can I just differ here. It's a bad photo if you were trying to get a photo of a hay bale with some trees in the background and an overcast sky.
It's not artistic! But if you needed to document that particular hay-bale, it's a good photo IMO.
All depends if the customer is a farmer or an art gallery
GetCarter said:
rasputin said:
It's a good photo if you were trying to get a photo of a hay bale with some trees in the background and an overcast sky.
Can I just differ here. It's a bad photo if you were trying to get a photo of a hay bale with some trees in the background and an overcast sky.
The challenge was 10/60 - 10 seconds to shoot a photo using whats infront of you right there and then, completely at random inc setting up the camera. 60 seconds to process it (can be done later of course)
That was my first, I hope for Gods sake my next is better!! If you havent tried it, it's worth a go
Edited by andy-xr on Monday 7th September 20:35
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff