| Author |
Message |
|
|
# Posted: 6 Jul 12 15:01 - Edited by: Jan Hemels
Reply
Of late more and more I find the word Snapshot in the comments on our site.
To me this word always carries a predominantly negative element in it.
Like you happened to be there and all of a sudden a photo opportunity came around that you used without taking care of composition, light, camera adjustments and so on.
The Dutch equivalent of such a shot is the word "kiekje" a common name for a shot even my mother in law or my grandchild of 6 years could take.
If one uses this name and the author has been looking for such an opportunity for hours and pre arranged the camera settings to get the best result such this does not seem very appropriate.. If he has carried his heavy telegear around for kilometers or has taken dozens of shots to get the result he publicizes such a comment might even hurt, does it not ????
I do not want to criticize anyone using this word. Maybe I am seeing things too negatively or B&W but I am very interested in how other Woophy members think and feel about this phenomenon.
|
|
|
# Posted: 6 Jul 12 18:06
Reply
Yes, that kind of comments also caught my attention in the past.
For me a snapshot is a shot taken with auto mode. And to be honest I always wondered; how on earth one can call a certain shot a snapshot when it evident that a shot was well thought of.
I also think that sudden photo opportunities are in fact the "golden eggs" of photography and I would not relate them with snapshots, especially cos it takes a skillful photographer to bring out the best out of the not expected opportunity. I would even dare to claim that you have to be much more experienced to make a good shot when you were not expected something to happen.
All in all, for me personaly a snapshot is a shot taken in auto mode, with no or almost no knowladge about art of photography , so yes, that kind of comment does have a negative connotation, although I do belive that some people do not even realize that maybe they are a bit insulting with that kind of comments.
|
|
|
# Posted: 6 Jul 12 18:25
Reply
Not bothering with composition or anything technical. Just shooting 
|
|
|
# Posted: 7 Jul 12 16:25
Reply
Hi
Thanks Jan for this topic.
I'm interested in it, because I have often the feeling to do mainly snapshots.
please, can you be kind enough to look at this picture :
Sky was amazing, but something was missing. I spent about 10 minutes waiting for a bird in this sky , so, some preparation. Then when the bird rises in the sky, have to shot very quickly : snapshot?.
Not easy......
|
|
|
# Posted: 7 Jul 12 23:10 - Edited by: Jan Hemels
Reply
Thanks Lali, Cloudbuster and Bernadette for your contribution, I will come back to it later.
Let me first show what Wikipedia gives on this subject.
I had not read this article before but it comes very close to what I felt when I posted this topic::
Snapshot (photography)
Snapshots render memorable moments in imperfect images. Here, glare exposes the photographer and implies his family relationship to the subject.
A snapshot is popularly defined as a photograph that is "shot" spontaneously and quickly, most often without artistic or journalistic intent. Snapshots are commonly considered to be technically "imperfect" or amateurish", out of focus or poorly framed or composed. Common snapshot subjects include the events of everyday life, such as birthday parties and other celebrations; sunsets; children playing; group photos; pets; tourist attractions and the like.
The snapshot concept was introduced to the public on a large scale by Eastman Kodak, which introduced the Brownie box camera in 1900. Kodak encouraged families to use the Brownie to capture moments in time and to shoot photos without being concerned with producing perfect images. Kodak advertising urged consumers to "celebrate the moments of your life" and find a "Kodak moment."
The "snapshot camera" tradition continues with inexpensive point-and-shoot digital cameras and camera phones that fully automate flash, ISO, focus, shutter speed, and other functions, making the shooting of a good-quality image simple. Expert photographers, who are better able to control the focus point, may use shallow depth of field may achieve more pleasing images by blurring the background and making the subject stand out. Other photographers consider these cameras the purest form of photographic instrument in providing images with the characteristics that distinguish photography from other visual media - its ubiquity, instantaneity, multiplicity and verisimilitude.[1]
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
|
# Posted: 7 Jul 12 23:58 - Edited by: A.Miguel Oliveira
Reply
Jan, as far as I think to myself, I guess those who write here, at woophy comments, "good snapshot" don't use it as a derogatory qualification. Some don't know english enough to go further with comments, others use it as the most common dictionary term. Snapshot as informal. Informal as taken with no significant effort to choose for exposure or compose the shot prior to releasing the shutter button; unposed, happenstance. But this doesn't mean a snapshot has to be a bad picture or something less interesting or with no value, weak, with no merit. Take by example maybe the most known snapshot: Ansel Adams's famous "Moonrise, Hernandez NM". Taken on the spur of the moment, when he saw a perfect scene out his car window, it wasn't set up as formally as usual. Does that meant a weak picture with no relevance? No... this one, on the contrary!
http://www.sfmoma.org/explore/collection/artwork/1 0089#
So, my idea is that a snapshot may statistically be nearer of being "weak" or not much interesting, compared to "normal" (formal) photographs, but other times they are really great pictures with much more power and being more interesting than many of the latter. It's just a question of probabilities of success!
The most complete and interesting article on the theme I guess you can find it here:
URL.
Finally, almost as the same doubt as Bernadette, I wonder if this photo of mine would be correctly named a snapshot (it was made with no eye on the camera, it being held by my right knee, almost with only a 3 seconds stopping walking) or not (it was well predicted, thought, even about how to compose - vertically, for instance - with which angle and focal distance). One or another name for it, it's one of my own favourite
[I have just seen you already wrote back, but i'll post this anyway before reading your new "arguments"]
PS: After reading you, I realized you only add, by now, the wikipedia article about it. As you and all of us know, wikipedia isn't a true encyclopedia; anyone may write and not always the most correctly. Here, again, I think this article is too "short" about the subject and don't particularly like when I read things like "Snapshots are commonly considered to be technically "imperfect" or amateurish", out of focus or poorly framed or composed. " Commonly! What's that? To write about what is common or not, isn't really something very wise or adding much to the subject For me, we can forget wikipedia here. I think the thoughts of you, Lali, Vidar, Bernadette and myself are more useful to come to some "conclusion", or near...
|
|
|
# Posted: 8 Jul 12 10:39
Reply
Mr. Hemels,
It means all the time I have been taking snapshots?  As I have the most inexpensive point-and-shoot digital camera.
|
|
|
# Posted: 8 Jul 12 10:54 - Edited by: Jan Hemels
Reply
Thanks again folks for your reactions:
Lali:
I go along with your ideas for the greater part. On the other hand I doubt whether the mode is decisive to identify a snapshot. That would mean that people using a compact camera with limited possibilities of setting could only make this type of shots.
To me the unintentional aspect of a snapshot seems to be as important. Are not all the modes of a DSLR camera in one way or another automatic??
Cloudbuster:
A short statement but effective. Like you say just shooting.
But aren't we all sometimes in a mood of " just shooting " and sometimes producing an unexpectedly great result ??
Bernadette:
As I said you were there intentionally to try and catch a bird. That you ended up with another result does not mean you produced a snapshot. I did the same with my oystercatcher. I heard them first, as they had two youngsters walking around invisible in the grass. I tried to get closer and climbed a fence, walked a 100 meters and I expected the parents to fly up as they usually do when they see a threat and so I had everything prepared for a good catch. I made around 20 shots in flight as it is very difficult to get a good result with such a small and fast flyer as an oystercatcher, a heron or goose is much easier.
BTW: Having seen your shooting in Faro I cannot believe you are always just shooting.......
Miguel:
I fully agree with your interpretation of the Wikipedia article but I found it quite readable and contributing to the discussion. Besides I found the essence not that different from the other articles I read on the web with more pretentions.
As you say some of the best photographs were shot unexpectedly ( and maybe unintentionally ) no doubt about that. However if you are a bit of a photographer you cannot help taking into consideration things like light, settings and composition do not you ??
My point is how can somebodey else who was not there, who does not know the conditions and probably did not even read the EXIF information (only a few people do) conclude it was a snapshot ????
As far as I know I did not make many snapshots, the one that comes directly into my mind is the following one I shot while crossing a pedestrian crossing right in front of the Central Station in Amsterdam.
Although I must admit that I had already activated the camera and placed the settings that are most appropriate for street shooting. Besides as I saw that young man standing and waiting on the other side of the street for the light to turn green I placed myself as far as possible to the left the be prepared for the meeting. I held the camera waist high and pulled the trigger.
Is that still a snapshot ??????
I hope more Whoopians will show us a snapshot ( in their own opinion) from their portfolio in this topic.
|
|
|
# Posted: 8 Jul 12 13:26
Reply
Jan, as I wrote, there are great snapshots and there are many of them which are really bad (statiscally I'm convinced of these gneral results). Being so, if someone writes a comment "good snapshot", it one among three possible things in mind:
- he/she doesn't know what snapshot means (I support the meaning of being informal, no compo and light measurement care, not well thought of the final result,...) but finds it "more or less" interesting (here, at Woophy, "good" has a far interrogative possible meaning...... but that's another theme);
- he/she knows the meaning of snapshot, he/she's convinced the photo is really a snap (as you say, "convinced" but maybe without even having watched it enlarged, exif, etc) and somehow enjoys it;
- he/she is really not fond of the picture and so calls it a snapshot (with or without a deep reason for it) and makes the "equilibrium" in the statement with the adjectivation "good".
Anyway most of the times it's not possible to know if the photo is a snap or not, as you say (sometimes it may be a strong and "valuable" picture and it's a snap, other times it's a "useless" picture and it was formally and intentionally taken), mainly when not enlarged and not reading the exif. And again and again I go on saying "most of" meaning "statistically".
[oh, about the wikipedia, I do think you did the right thing showing what it states; "my problem" is the wiki statement itself, mainly with the "commonly" word]
Finally, your above picture is "almost" a snaphot (we must try to find another in-between word) considering what you tell us, but... I do like it and find it very interesting in multiple ways
Enjoy your sunday (I'll try, but not sure, to photograph a bit of the Extreme Sailing in Douro River today. Maybe too crowded to get there)!
|
|
|
# Posted: 8 Jul 12 13:51 - Edited by: Jan Hemels
Reply
NGC: Thant is not what I wrote and you will never hear me telling that a picture is a snapshot. The reason for this: How can I know for sure ? I would not dare .........
Miguel: Count your blessings here it has been raining all day up to now. I am currently studying the article you recommended, I never read much on screen and in print this is more like a booklet (44 pages) That is why I always look first on Wiki 
|
|
|
# Posted: 9 Jul 12 09:57 - Edited by: Martin de Rijk
Reply
To me the definition of a snapshot is broader. I prefer the dutch word "momentopname", wich means taken instantly at the moment. In my opinion lots of the streetphotography is snapshots, you want to capture the moment with no time to adjust a camera. Just catch what you see. The result can be either good or bad and I agree with Miguel, most of the time they aren't that good, often because of the haste they are taken in (I just speak for serious photographers).
To illustrate my words I'll show you my favorite snapshot. I was still holding my suitcase while seeing this scene. Fortunately my camera was in my other hand. I just had to shoot that instant otherwise they would have passed the billboard. Fine result but the ultimate snapshot for me
|
|
|
# Posted: 10 Jul 12 00:24
Reply
Yes, Martin, even if it's a snapshot revealed by yourself, it's the case of an excellent snap
|
|
|
# Posted: 10 Jul 12 23:44 - Edited by: Jan Hemels
Reply
Martin
The term momentopname is more appropriate to the snapshot used in IT, i.c. a representation of the actual situation in a certain moment on the screen, the disc or whatever.
Mit einem Snapshot werden Momentaufnahmen bezeichnet. Das wesentliche Merkmal von Snapshots ist der Zeitpunkt der Auslösung. Snapshots werden in vielen technischen Anwendungen zum Festhalten und zur Dokumentation eines zeitbezogenen Zustandes benutzt. Bekannt ist die Bezeichnung Schnappschuss aus der Fotografie. Weitere Beispiele sind der Screenshot einer Bildschirmdarstellung, bei dem der dargestellte Bildschirminhalt gespeichert wird, das Frame-Grabbing von Videosequenzen oder die Momentaufnahme eines Prozesses mit dem der Zustand des Prozesses zu einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt rekonstruiert werden kann. Ebenso die zeitpunktbezogene Speicherung von Multithread-Aktivitäten eines Servers.
Miguel:The link you provided is dealing with the revaluation of the old snapshot as an object of art for collecors as shown in major museums in the USA.
I have been looking all over the web for definitions on snapshots:
Here are three of them:
OXFORD DICTIONARIES: an informal photograph taken quickly, typically with a small handheld camera: a collection of family snapshots
LONGMAN Dictionary of Contemporary English: a photograph taken quickly and often not very skilfully [= snap]
MACMILLAN DICTIONARY:
A photograph taken without professional equipment
So it is pretty clear that among serious photographers the word snapshot carries a predominantly negative message.
|
|
|
# Posted: 11 Jul 12 16:06
Reply
To be a snapshot or not to be: that is not the question, in my oppinion.
The question is the result.
Some photographs may take hours or days of preparation and the result can be a very bad picture.
On the other hand, there are photographs taken in that precise instant (no more nor less) and without any preparation and the result can be a picture that becomes a piece of History or with a great story beyond the graphic appearance of the picture.
An example of a piece of History, is V-J Day in Times Square, from photographer Alfred Eisenstaedt, portraying an american sailor spontaneously kissing a nurse in Times Square, celebrating the end of World War 2.
Another example of a great snapshot, this one with a great story, can be found in Woophy. I love this Santa Klaus, from geert geenen:
Same reflections apply to Music, Painting, Sculpture and to all forms of Art. It is not the preparation or the size of the piece it takes, it the result that matters.
|
|
|
# Posted: 11 Jul 12 17:00
Reply
Dear doctor, "To be a snapshot or not to be: that is not the question, in my oppinion.", nor Jan's, as far as I understood, nor mine. The question for Jan is that commenting "good snapshot" looks derogatory (and then, Jan asks what a snapshot would be so that he can make his own judgement of justice for such comments), and for me the question (shorter) was what is a snapshot. As a postface, I wrote something similar to your "question": there are excellent snaps (though statistically less), there are bad formal photographs!
Ok. Now, taking advantage of your chosen pics (about Geert's I agree: it's a very very interesting snap (as he himself reported it to be, if I well remember)), I go on questioning if Eisenstaedt's is a snap or not (no question about its superb merit). lol! I love this forum thread as it's truly challenging!
Indeed, Eisenstaedt wrote: "I was walking through the crowds on V-J Day, looking for pictures. I noticed a sailor coming my way. He was grabbing every female he could find and kissing them all â€" young girls and old ladies alike. Then I noticed the nurse, standing in that enormous crowd. I focused on her, and just as I'd hoped, the sailor came along, grabbed the nurse, and bent down to kiss her. Now if this girl hadn't been a nurse, if she'd been dressed dark clothes, I wouldn't have had a picture. The contrast between her white dress and the sailor's dark uniform gives the photograph its extra impact."
Well, for me THAT wasn't a snapshot! [and I repeat I'm not questioning if it was a good or bad picture; for me it was a fantastic one, but it's not the question for the adjectivation of being or not a snap]
I know Eisenstaedt wrote somewhere else "Then suddenly, in a flash, I saw something white being grabbed. I turned around and clicked the moment the sailor kissed the nurse." This could be the reason for calling it a snapshot. We could even doubt about his memory. But even in that other book where these words were stated, he wrote the same beginning and ending of the first above paragraph, and so I go on concluding THAT picture wasn't s snapshot.
[sorry for a portuguese joke now between me and AbÃlio, related with present portuguese politics: Achas que depois destas nossas dissertações que comprovam experiências adquiridas na área, nos podem conduzir ao grau de licenciatura em História da Fotografia, pela Lusófona? lol! Abraço e boas Azibadas]
|
Online now: Guests 22, Members 1
