# Do people even know what a good image is??



## Evertking (Aug 28, 2018)

I see people pay money for blown out highlights, underexposed, poorly composed images. And i got to asking myself why?? 
I know that done look and say "catch light is too low" but do they know a bad image from a good one?


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 28, 2018)

Stop fretting about it.  Let others live their own lives the way they see fit.


----------



## Evertking (Aug 28, 2018)

480sparky said:


> Stop fretting about it.  Let others live their own lives the way they see fit.


I'm not fretting, it's just a question. I didn't until I wanted to learn more about photography and my images are still not where I want them but if I had never wanted to learn I wouldn't have know a good one from a bad one.


----------



## SquarePeg (Aug 28, 2018)

When it comes to portraits of loved ones, all the client sees is the smile or the eyes or the emotional connection between the subjects if there is more than one person in the photo.  Non photographers don't care about catch lights or fill flash or blown highlights.  They may like a technically correct or superior quality photo more than the same subject/pose that has these issues but they won't know why.  There is a photographer in my small city who is supremely popular for family portraits - a "natural light" photographer.  We have a lot of mutual friends on Facebook and I frequently see her work posted there by thrilled clients.  I always mentally critique the photo but I see dozens of comments on how great it is.  They don't care about lack of fill flash or trees growing out of heads, they see only little Mary with her baby brother at sunset on the beach - as long as there is some background blur, everyone is happy.  Ignorance really is bliss!


----------



## Evertking (Aug 28, 2018)

SquarePeg said:


> When it comes to portraits of loved ones, all the client sees is the smile or the eyes or the emotional connection between the subjects if there is more than one person in the photo.  Non photographers don't care about catch lights or fill flash or blown highlights.  They may like a technically correct or superior quality photo more than the same subject/pose that has these issues but they won't know why.  There is a photographer in my small city who is supremely popular for family portraits - a "natural light" photographer.  We have a lot of mutual friends on Facebook and I frequently see her work posted there by thrilled clients.  I always mentally critique the photo but I see dozens of comments on how great it is.  They don't care about lack of fill flash or trees growing out of heads, they see only little Mary with her baby brother at sunset on the beach - as long as there is some background blur, everyone is happy.  Ignorance really is bliss!


That's what I was thinking.. my mother would drag us kids to every photographer within 100 mile radius for a family photo throw down 2 or 3 times a year and looking back at them some are awful but she cherished them.. warts and all. People will also justify and make themselves feel good about a purchase. But I think photography is different, kinda... I mean.. if you don't know anything about photography it's kinda hard to say this is awful or this is good and then everyone has different taste. 
  But then there are photography contest and portraits are judged also and then a catchlight not being in the proper place and cost ya.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 29, 2018)

Expression trumps exposure.

People want to see their loved ones with emotion, with expression, etc.. technicalities are much less-important to most people than the expressions and emotions shown by the subjects in photos.


----------



## weepete (Aug 29, 2018)

in general, people who are not photograhers don't pick up on the same things we do. They don't know that blown highlights or shadow detail is even a thing. Often if you give them two shots they'll pick the one with the subject they like the best or have some kind of connection to. Mind you if you give them the same subject and one good, one bad shot, people will generally show a preference for the better quality shot though they may not know why.


----------



## stapo49 (Aug 29, 2018)

A bit like looking at art I guess.  One persons mess of colors is another persons masterpiece. 

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk


----------



## Overread (Aug 29, 2018)

A few thoughts

1) Bias. As said people rarely view anything without some level of bias going on, how much and what kind varies from person to person and the nature and even context of the photo being shown to them. This can cause wide variation in what people consider good and bad.
Photography gets an additional layer on this over some other art mediums because photography can capture moments and emotions of known people and events. Some of the worlds most influential photographs are utterly rubbish artistically speaking, but they record something important in the world. Others, as said, might have images of friend and family and pets and thus instantly head to the top of a persons popularity list. 

2) Artistic understanding. Most people are not artists nor are they connoisseurs of art nor students of art*. As a result they've a less developed eye toward artistic elements in both photography and other areas of art. This is both at a fully compositional aspect, but also a technical aspect too. Ergo they might see under and over exposure and accept it because they've no understanding that it could have been better (similarly when such elements are impossible to avoid they also cannot understand why they would be impossible to avoid - so it works both ways). 
This means that they are less judgemental in technical terms of photography and thus they fall back to their bias elements of their opinions far more readily. 

3) Lack of experience. Even though we are bombarded by artwork every day of our lives, many people look but don't study or spend time really picking over the details. It's a quick fix of look and awe and move on. So they often don't have experience really looking at a photo, so they glance at it and go with their gut feeling. The result is that they can miss lots of subtle elements - they might miss that lamp post sticking out of a head; they might miss the over and under exposure etc... So on this level its easy for them to gloss over some great and bad points very easily because they are not really "looking". 

4) Different backgrounds. Some people come from a very arty background and others don't and between the two is a huge spread of different experiences and influences upon a person. So you get variety in opinion and viewpoints based on this huge variety in life. 


*In fact art at most schools is one of the worst taught subjects in general, but that is a separate rant


----------



## petrochemist (Aug 29, 2018)

Isn't a good picture one that has a cat in it??


----------



## zombiesniper (Aug 29, 2018)

This question can be applied to a great number of things.

Most people don't understand value. They only understand cheeper.
A Casio watch at $100 is cheap but an Omega at $1000 is great value.

The general (western) population has been brainwashed that cheep is a bargain, even if the product is subpar. This is a problem with many industries. I've seen absolute hack weld jobs on the road. Scares the hell out of me every time I see some dude pulling a utility trailer from Home Depot.

Just know that these are not the clients you want. They won't pay enough to keep the lights on. Target higher and let those clients be the learning curve for up and coming photographers.


----------



## smoke665 (Aug 29, 2018)

Taking it a step further on the above comment, people assume (wrongly) that a high price is a sign of better quality. Look at the subpar clothes that people will pay high dollar for because of the name. Sadly there is also the case where people will recommend poor quality to others rather then admit they made a mistake.


----------



## Designer (Aug 29, 2018)

Evertking said:


> .. do they know a bad image from a good one?


No, most don't.


----------



## mrca (Sep 1, 2018)

I think the above posters have summed it up pretty well.  Most folks don't know what goes into a technically excellent shot.  Nor do many photographers.  They don't know what they don't know.  They do like a good expression, you know, hold up a glass and yell woo hoo.  Bambi Cantrell summed it, expression trumps perfection.  But that was corrected by Jerry Ghianis to expression plus perfection trumps expression alone.  But  don't expect it to be recognized by those that don't know it.   Enjoy the satisfacton of producing a great image and don't expect it to be appreciated when you "cast your pearls among swine."  Bambi has another great quote for pros to etch in their foreheads,  beauty is  in the eye of the checkbook holder.   You can take that one to the bank.


----------



## Jeff15 (Sep 1, 2018)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.....


----------



## dennybeall (Sep 8, 2018)

Many people trying to get in the photography business want to make "good" photos. BUT, they need to first find out what the customer wants. How does the client define "good"? If you want to make photos that match your definition of "Good" then I guess you're an artist...............


----------



## jcdeboever (Sep 10, 2018)

Recently, a good customer of mine showed me his wedding photo's that he paid around $1000 for. He knows I like photography, even asked me if I'd want to shoot his wedding. I told him I don't do weddings. He was very happy with them and that's all that counts.


----------



## Braineack (Sep 10, 2018)

Evertking said:


> ...but do they know a bad image from a good one?



nope.  I'm doing a wedding in a few weeks, and luckily it's true!


----------



## Gary A. (Sep 10, 2018)

Generally no.  Those who do are (and again generally) photographers and/or those with artistic education/skills.


----------



## Gary A. (Sep 10, 2018)

I have this thing ... capturing a great photo is hard and impressive.  But capturing a great photo which is well exposed, straight horizons, compositionally proper ... that is even harder and more impressive.  That is the bar I shoot for, not only an image with exceptional impact but also one with high technical quality.


----------



## tirediron (Sep 10, 2018)

Jeff15 said:


> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.....


This.  Exactly.

As photographers we tend to judge the "good-ness" of an image against a set of compositional and design rules that we all more-or-less understand and agree with, and there's lots of valid data to support them, BUT... at the end of the day, what a person likes is what's good.  Whenever I meet with a client for a proofing session, or send them a gallery, I always make a mental note of the "best" images of the set, and almost never are those the ones that the client chooses.


----------



## Vtec44 (Sep 10, 2018)

Evertking said:


> I see people pay money for blown out highlights, underexposed, poorly composed images. And i got to asking myself why??
> I know that done look and say "catch light is too low" but do they know a bad image from a good one?



For me a a good image should generate some sort of emotions either for the general population, a specific group of viewers, or a particular viewer.  An image should tell a story through lighting, poses, colors, composition, and expression.  So while most people can't tell what is a good technical image, they most often consider an image is good because it creates a personal connection.  Yes, a good image can be technically imperfect.

My humble opinion...


----------



## AlanKlein (Sep 10, 2018)

When you look at an image of someone you love, you fall in love all over again.


----------



## petrochemist (Sep 11, 2018)

AlanKlein said:


> When you look at an image of someone you love, you fall in love all over again.


Does that explain the trend for so many selfies then??


----------



## AlanKlein (Sep 11, 2018)

petrochemist said:


> AlanKlein said:
> 
> 
> > When you look at an image of someone you love, you fall in love all over again.
> ...



Yes probably.  Ever notice how people complain about how they look in a group shot or a shot when they are on a trip even if it's a great shot?  If there's one thing that they don;t like about themselves, the whole shot is bad.  Photos are very personal.  No one cares about the telephone pole going through their head only if they look good.  Personal pictures are not viewed with composition or other photo qualities.  On the other hand, this also goes for people you love.  If you see you kid, you're not so concerned about photo qualities either.  Should you be?


----------



## Designer (Sep 11, 2018)

AlanKlein said:


> If you see you kid, you're not so concerned about photo qualities either.  Should you be?


All the more reason to want a decent photo.  If the client was at least somewhat cognizant of what constitutes a good photograph versus a poor one, he would naturally want his child's portrait to be of the good variety.  

In my world, it's all about the education.  To appreciate music, one should be somewhat familiar with good music, so as to be able to recognize it when he hears it.  Same for photographs.  Same for fashion.  Same for his choice of housing or anything else that he thinks matters.  

If, on the other hand, one is simply not familiar with good photography, then he will be satisfied with crumby photography and never know the difference.


----------



## Grandpa Ron (Oct 2, 2018)

The majority of the folks look at a photo and like it or do not like it.

Quality, artistic license, and the opinion of others has little bearing on its appeal to others.


----------

