How to tell if your picture is a "great picture"

[Nathan deGargoyle]

Thumbnails? I dunno......

But...




You could be right!

[crazzy88ss]

A week or so ago, for my history of photography class, I watched an hour long documentary about cartier-bresson and they didn't show that picture ONCE! The "Behind the Gare St. Lazare." It's the only image of his I knew of before the video, and they didn't show it!

[Nathan deGargoyle]

Yeah but if you're an arts lecturer, because it's all subjective you can ignore shots that have been voted the best image ever and show that you are a connoisseur by finding a lot of shots that no-one else has ever seen. Thank god the sciences don't work that way. It would be like talking about Einstein without mentioning Relativity!

[sk66]

Originally Posted by Mr Guy

I'm not sure how many great pictures I've made, but I have a few pretty good pictures. I consider pretty good pictures to be pictures that I can look at three or four days later and STILL be proud of them. So many of my pictures I really like when I'm doing my first and second pass, and some even make it through clean up and I love them. Then the next week I look at them and all I can think is "Man, I wish I'd used a tripod" or "What's going on with her eye?" Even some I really like I kinda wished I'd been able to compose differently. I'm slowly gathering more, but right now I still only have a few that I can look at days and weeks later and think, I don't think I'd do anything differently in this one.

The test of time, probably the truest test.
My test helps me choose keepers and the ones to spend time PP. It also gives me a good idea of which pictures will be well received by "the public" and is less dependent on "my opinion". That's really only relevant if you are trying to "sell".

[sk66]

Originally Posted by Nathan deGargoyle

Thumbnails? I dunno......

But...




You could be right!

Not necessarily thumbnail size, but the smallest size you can clearly tell what it is. How big it has to be to be "involving" is kind of proportional to quality.

[Seltzer]

we arealways our own worst critic... honestly, i can never tell if any of my pictures are good other than in my eyes. I see some pictures that get high praise and i just don't understand why, as well as some that i agree with and some that i think should get praise and get overlooked. It's really a subjective opinion on what people like. Basically what I'm saying is, with your photography, who are you aiming to please? If you are just in this as a hobby for yourself and you enjoy taking pictures and improving your skills then really, that's all that matters. If you have a client, then their opinion matters.
Personally, I'm always shocked when people like a photo of mine but even if I don't always like them I enjoy learning and taking the pictures and improving. That, to me, is what is important.

[sk66]

I think we all do it for multiple reasons. I'm into photography again because I enjoy it, the creativity etc. I'm not trying to sell anything and I have no desire to turn it into a career. BUT, I still WANT others to like my work. I WANT to be able to share and be well received. I WANT some of that ego boost and gratification....
But I'll keep going without it.

[Seltzer]

Well, don't forget such sections of this forum as the Critique if you want to know other's honest opinions about aspects of your work or the Share Your Shots to, well, share your shots and show off what you like.
Also, if you are on flickr or some other photo sharing site (such as flickr or picasa) you can always put such information in your signature to generate a few more views on your pictures.

[Melinda]

I think a great picture is one that people can't stop talking about and then they want to have a copy of it. Each person has their own view of beauty so "great" is very subjective.

[MatthewBotos]

I do like the thumbnail test; and given how often people are presented with a field of thumbnails in a web gallery or a Flickr group, it's pretty practical to ask, "would I click on this?"