What Makes a Great Photograph?

This forum is dedicated for discussions on making creative images of nature. Images can be attached too as part of the discussion thread.

Moderators: Pramod Viswanath, Vijay Mohan Raj, Shankar Kiragi, Shivakumar L Narayan








What Makes a Great Photograph?

Postby Ganesh H Shankar » Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:14 pm

Adithya Biloor suggested I post this short article here. So, here it goes.

What according to you makes a great photograph?

Image

Someone asked me this question last week. Couple of years back I had this very question in my mind. You know, these days Google has eliminated the need for using our brain. The next thing I did was typing "greatest photograph" in Google.

If you google for "greatest photographs" you will see several lists popping out - "Top 10 greatest photographs", "greatest, most iconic photos ever taken" etc. There are several images that get repeated in these "top N" lists compiled by different people in different parts of the world. Most of all those images portray war atrocities, human sufferings, racial discrimination, misery, poverty etc. Basically, very gloomy at best. I do agree that some of these images served a great social cause. However, aren't there any other photographs which qualify to get slots in these lists too? How many photographs in those lists have people smiling? How many of those top N lists contain other subjects in mother nature? Only images which portray human misery qualifies to be greatest photographs?

Why is this?

I think Darwin had answered this - survival. Subjects and themes around survival of (only) human species and human centric morality takes the precedence over everything that gets photographed. I am not very sure whether it is inevitable. I tend to disagree,however. Recently I heard an interesting phrase, "ethical killing"! This is in the context of an increased population of some wildlife species. When we talk about "ethical killing" I am not sure who's ethics we are talking about. Is it of that wildlife species that is getting "ethically" killed by us or our own "ethics" which the helpless wildlife is completely unaware of? This reminds me of an interesting quote by Bertrand Russell.

Organic life, we are told, has developed gradually from the protozoan to the philosopher, and this development, we are assured, is indubitably an advance. Unfortunately it is the philosopher, not the protozoon, who gives us this assurance.


Below are the words of Henry Cartier Bresson about Ansel Adams and Edward Weston, probably around World War II.


The world is going to pieces and people like Adams and [Edward] Weston are photographing rocks!


Image

If we switch the subjects in Kevin Carter's above image, "Famine in Sudan", assuming in the image the vulture is dying and a person looking at it, would it have won the Pulitzer prize? At best, it would have become yet another "conservation photograph" for the vultures and forgotten the next day.

Only in the world of bees this below image may be considered memorable. In our world, at best it is a "beautiful natural history moment"!

Image

However, this below image of langur holding its dead baby is not as "beautiful" as the above bee image. This seem to hurt. Why?

Unlike bees langurs are closer to us and the forms and postures are anthropomorphic. We may be unconsciously placing ourselves in its situation and feeling sad about it? Why does the image of the bee above appears like a mere natural history moment?

Image

Here are a couple of images which are considered greatest and are found in some those "Top N" lists. The below image by Jeff Widener has been considered as one of the most iconic image of the 20th century.

Image

Here is another Pulitzer award winning image and is also found in many lists is by Nick Ut.

Image


This page contains Pulitzer Prize winning images for "Feature Photography" for past 5 decades.
It is very clear what we consider greatest or iconic images, in general. Is that inevitable? How much we love ourselves, beyond everything else in this mother nature!


I still believe there is a real social significance in a rock - a more important significance therein than in a line of unemployed.


was Ansel Adam's reaction to Henry Cartier Bresson's criticism. I agree that there are subjects which have happy/tranquil/beautiful notes them, yet they may deeply mean something to the photographer,
more deeply than those which portray misery.

As a nature photographer, I see some hope in these profound and beautiful lines by Albert Einstein:

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom the emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand wrapped in awe, is as good as dead - his eyes are closed. The insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion. To know what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms - this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness. - Albert Einstein.


While a photograph may not answer those mysteries, ever, I think it may help portray mysteries as mysteries, beyond just miseries.

Back to the question I started this with,

What according to you makes a great photograph?

Image

Still thinking..

[All the images which are not mine are hot linked from the respective Wiki pages which are in public domain]
Ganesh H. Shankar
Wishing you best light,

Image
Personal Websites Fine Art Nature Photography | www.ArtOfLife.Gallery
Facebook Pages Ganesh H. Shankar | Fine Art Nature Photography | Art Of Life
User avatar
Ganesh H Shankar
Site Admin
 
Posts: 646
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: Bangalore, INDIA

Re: What Makes a Great Photograph?

Postby Umashankar S » Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:16 pm

Ganesh, if you remember we did discuss this earlier. I think, as humans we naturally react to emotions/situations that we can easily connect to. Our reactions to tragedies do have a pattern. Disaster caused due to war, suppressions, killing of certain ethnic groups, violence, negligence etc., that get depicted through photography naturally evokes stronger emotions as we put ourselves in that situation. We empathise a lot with those. Similarly, any natural disasters - like earthquake, tsunami, flood also evokes similar emotions. On the other hand, if persons with whom we are closely associated with dies will also evoke emotions but our mind also finds logic that it is natural that anyone born has to die! If it is an untimely death then we blame fate. However, we do not attribute the same fate to others who are victims without their fault. Hence most of our great photographs are around these tragedies. No wonder, Henri Cartier Bresson is upset with Ansel Adams for not reacting to the tragedies around him. In the eye of Bresson this situation was like- " When Rome was burning Nero was fiddling".

As you have mentioned that our emotion is around human centric. Exactly for the same reason we appreciate the photo where Langur holding dead baby and not the spider catching the bee- which our mind think is a great drama of nature.

I think, human mind naturally selects these tragedies over any mother nature related photographs, however beautiful it is.

If you ask same question on 10 greatest paintings till today the answer might not be the same!! Even convergence to the same set of paintings might not happen.

But I still believe greatest photograph is still happening and will continue to happen as long as humans on earth exist......but will the criteria to choose one will change? I doubt.
Umashankar S
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:07 pm

Re: What Makes a Great Photograph?

Postby Rajkumar » Thu Sep 21, 2017 8:55 am

Some submission
- Should there be the greatest photograph? Who wants to make this list ? Who wants to submit to this list ? Who wants to use this list ? Are these relevant only till the “I” in the Ego is relevant? If the doer and the done become one does this question become irrelevant ?
- I will show two trees can anyone tell me which is a perfect one ? Can we make a list of top ten trees that ever lived ? Would that be possible ? ------Every tree has a purpose a story and is a well lived life that is perfect ……So also every photograph..bird..spider..dolphin...bacteria.. ….?
- Lastly we are conditioned for survival therefore hard-wired to maximise chances ….I am told for example humans like the glitter of gold because we are hard-wired to look for glitter of water for survival ….Is it a coincidence that even Astrology of the world many times is of all the negative things …we react more to negative since it has more survival implications....
Art is about what is inside rather than what is outside
Rajkumar
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:17 am

Re: What Makes a Great Photograph?

Postby Rajkumar » Sun Sep 24, 2017 7:42 pm

"Ways of Seeing" is an iconic 1972 BBC 4 part series by John Berger. Dated but worth a listen I would think.









Art is about what is inside rather than what is outside
Rajkumar
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:17 am









Return to Discussions on Creative & Fine Art Nature Photography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron