What makes a good image?
04th July 2011
My few days in Amsterdam are over and I'm back in my studio having just unpacked.
Something happened whilst I was in Amsterdam which got me thinking. On Saturday morning the photographers were asked to submit two 'outstanding' photographs from each of the two tournaments, and these were to be shown on the big screens in the stadium between matches. At this stage I had only one day's worth of images to offer and there was a distinct lack of action images that would fire up the imagination. I found a couple of good, crisp, action shots, but that word 'outstanding' suggests the pictures should be something special. However, I did have one shot which I wondered whether I could knock into shape with Lightroom. A Dutch player had lost his stick and I caught him in an act of frustration as he found himself 'in possession' without a stick to make anything of it. The images was taken in fading light at the end of the day, and if I say that it looked like Mr Orange in Orangeland you might get the picture. I managed to improve the image a lot, but the 'organgeness' never quite disappeared. I submitted it with some trepidation and was surprised to find that it was one of the first to go up on the screen, ahead of several photographers who are better than I am, so I was quite pleased but a little surprised. I asked one of my very experienced professional friends for a candid view of the image. He made no comment about the colour (and perhaps he had experienced the same problem) but he did ask me which 'f' number I had used. I did not have to check it out because I knew. I had my x2 teleconverter on at the time, so it would have been f5.6. It was a polite comment on my depth of field, and on reflection the action did not stand out as sharply as perhaps it might. So what does that tell you? I was worried about the colour and not the depth of field, whilst my friend was worried about the depth of field and not the colour. I presume the image was chosen by someone who is not a photographer and they just chose it because, well - they liked it! Perhaps I need to worry less about technical perfection and just try to take interesting pictures.
Something happened whilst I was in Amsterdam which got me thinking. On Saturday morning the photographers were asked to submit two 'outstanding' photographs from each of the two tournaments, and these were to be shown on the big screens in the stadium between matches. At this stage I had only one day's worth of images to offer and there was a distinct lack of action images that would fire up the imagination. I found a couple of good, crisp, action shots, but that word 'outstanding' suggests the pictures should be something special. However, I did have one shot which I wondered whether I could knock into shape with Lightroom. A Dutch player had lost his stick and I caught him in an act of frustration as he found himself 'in possession' without a stick to make anything of it. The images was taken in fading light at the end of the day, and if I say that it looked like Mr Orange in Orangeland you might get the picture. I managed to improve the image a lot, but the 'organgeness' never quite disappeared. I submitted it with some trepidation and was surprised to find that it was one of the first to go up on the screen, ahead of several photographers who are better than I am, so I was quite pleased but a little surprised. I asked one of my very experienced professional friends for a candid view of the image. He made no comment about the colour (and perhaps he had experienced the same problem) but he did ask me which 'f' number I had used. I did not have to check it out because I knew. I had my x2 teleconverter on at the time, so it would have been f5.6. It was a polite comment on my depth of field, and on reflection the action did not stand out as sharply as perhaps it might. So what does that tell you? I was worried about the colour and not the depth of field, whilst my friend was worried about the depth of field and not the colour. I presume the image was chosen by someone who is not a photographer and they just chose it because, well - they liked it! Perhaps I need to worry less about technical perfection and just try to take interesting pictures.
