What makes a good photograph?

[Norma Desmond]

<blockquote>

<p>...why can it not be both?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Good question. Duchamp helped us a see a long time ago that it can, though not always simultaneously. Interesting that I can now look at a urinal in a public men's room as art but I'm not sure I could get away with peeing in the one that's on display in the museum, though Duchamp himself would probably get a kick out of the latter.<br>

<br>

It's why snapshots can be art and art can look like shapshots.<br>

<br>

Ancient pottery is a great example of something people ate with or ground corn with and now we view it appreciatively behind glass in a museum.<br>

<br>

To some degree, art can be a way of seeing, whatever it is we're looking it. </p>

[charleswood]

<p>Third Ted Talk, 2nd on the creative process: <a href="

<p>About 15 minutes into Ms. Tan's talk about her creative process, she talks about the contributions to that process of external events that impart detailed meaning content that's co-incident with and specifically related to the details of inner events within the progress of her creative process. Tan's example: she is writing about a man stacking rocks, then goes on a walk and comes across a man stacking rocks. That man's self-observation about the 'why?' of his activity is the why of Tan's book. Since it's an event with no inner or outer cause it feels objective and what we do with that is, as Tan suggests, a balancing act.</p>

<p>A meaningful co-incidences of inner and external events, a synchronicity, is a phenomenon that doesn't reduce down to post hoc wishful thinking. The meaning is instead imposed, present in the event of co-incidence, contained in the event, not later derived, that is to say, we don't 'will' it into existence, it's objective. I don't see any reason why that phenomenon couldn't also happen when the endeavor isn't art, is instead the act of lacing one's shoe or washing one's clothing. Such events are part of the mental surround we inhabit and make their way into our art and laundering activities.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<blockquote>

<p>we don't 'will' it into existence</p>

</blockquote>

<p>While I get what you're saying and agree to a certain extent, I'm not sure Ms. Tan didn't in some sense will it into existence. And it can actually relate to Duchamp's urinal. I see Duchamp as having been saying to the world . . . "Pay attention!" How we attend to things is significant. Ms. Tan, by her inner actions (I don't love the dichotomy of inner and outer, so I'd just say her mental actions) in writing her story and creating her man stacking rocks may have affected her own sensitivity to what's around her. She may not have paid any attention to that man with the rocks at another period in her life. She may, by writing, have opened herself up to being aware of what was there. Yes, there is coincidence, confluences of events, but there is also our attunement to things, which I think we very much affect with our wills. She had to have been responsive to the significance of this man stacking rocks. It isn't just that he was there. It's that she noticed.</p>

[charleswood]

<p>Sure to all, Fred, and she says almost as much by paying homage to both the casual connecting principle of her own focus and to 'chance occurrence' by mentioning happenstance and serendipity, though her voice tends to trail off as she says such things. More objective elements of objective psyche are in the accounts of a muse, a not-me within although I have no problem with the idea that in days of old muses lived near ponds and en masse decided that they would all move in to live instead in our mental surround, the phenomenon of synchronicity even suggesting a somewhat permeable membrane existent between our inner and outer surrounds. If synchronicities contain Ms. Tan's muse, then by her muse she was made to notice, it isn't just that she noticed, she wandered into circumstances where she <em>had</em> to notice, and an inner string of circumstance made her <em>want</em> to notice insofar as she wanted to bring her book to fruition. In that sense her book grew out of her and she assisted in that, which is a lovely way to think of things.</p>

[robert100]

actually, organizations like the Professional Photographers of Canada and the Professional Photographers

of America have answered this question quite thoroughly and accurately. They in fact have specific judging

criteria which are followed by their accredited judges each year in determining awards like "photographer of

the year" etc.

[dan_south]

<p>A camera makes a good photograph.</p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>"What makes a good photograph"?</p>

<p> Who are those authorities that decide? Or, is it decided by a popular vote?</p>

<p>Or, is it about a photographer expressing their vision....and being constantly being challenged by that vision.</p>

<p>Is it not that place where truly great Artists explore.</p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p>"Vision"</p>

<p>An expression of reaching out to find an epical value.... a understanding of a mystical concept of value.</p>

[Mike D]

<p>A good photograph is not "boring" in the eye of the viewer.</p>

[confindelmundo]

<p>A good photo?: simple, the one where you wish you would have been there.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Daniel, would that include <a href="http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/10/02/article-2441235-18759B3700000578-68_964x615.jpg">THIS</a> photo by Nick Ut?</p>

[erica_scourti]

<p>Just wanted to say thanks to everyone who's responded and joined in on this thread- it's been very interesting hearing people's opinions. As I said, the piece I've written will be posted on Photoworks' site, some point next week, I'll leave a link here when it's up so you can take a look- hopefully you won't mind the artistic license I've taken in interpreting some of what you've written to make a new text out of it that reflects some of my ideas, or my approach anyway.<br>

Also, I saved some of the commenters' photos and have supplied then to go with the article, fully attributed, but I am going to contact each of you whose photo I used now, to obtain explicit permission.<br>

Thanks again!</p>

[erica_scourti]

<p>To follow up, here is a link to the article I wrote based on everyone's responses, it's on Photoworks's website: <strong> <a href="http://photoworks.org.uk/makes-good-photograph/">http://photoworks.org.uk/makes-good-photograph/</a></strong></p>

[seamus_cohen]

<p>I know I am late to this form... but I would like say for me, a good photograph asks a question, reveals a mystery and tells a story.</p>