May 22, 2018, 12:48:55 AM

### Author Topic: What makes a photo great?  (Read 31193 times)

#### gbchriste

• EOS M5
• Posts: 245
##### Re: What makes a photo great?
« Reply #60 on: December 23, 2013, 02:20:32 PM »
If we construct a Cartesian graph with X and Y axes, with X representing the technical merits of the photograph, and Y representing the artistic/social merits of the photograph, then answering the question "What makes a photo great" becomes an exercise in mathematics.  We assign a numerical score to both a photo's technical execution as well as the importance of it's artistic/social content. We then plot those values on the appropriate axis of the graph. If a photograph excels in the technical merit - i.e. is well lit, thoughtful composition, in focus, etc etc, but depicts nothing of social/artistic importance, it's plot will fall in the lower right quadrant of the graph.  If the subject matter is of significant artistic/social importance, but poorly executed from a technical standpoint, its plot will fall in the upper left quadrant of the graph.  In both cases, the photo has failed to achieve an measure of "greatness".  Only a photo whose plot falls in the upper right quadrant - one that is of a worthy artistic/social subject but also technically well executed - will be considered a "great" photograph.

Of course, all that is a load of s**t - nothing more than a tongue and cheek nod to same simplistic analysis ridiculed by Robin Williams' character as the literature teach in "Dead Poets' Society".  But I just couldn't help myself.  When I read the question, that scene was the first thing to pop in to my head

#### canon rumors FORUM

##### Re: What makes a photo great?
« Reply #60 on: December 23, 2013, 02:20:32 PM »

#### dryanparker

• EOS Rebel T7i
• Posts: 121
• Art photographer based in Miami.
##### Re: What makes a photo great?
« Reply #61 on: December 24, 2013, 04:31:09 PM »
If we construct a Cartesian graph with X and Y axes, with X representing the technical merits of the photograph, and Y representing the artistic/social merits of the photograph, then answering the question "What makes a photo great" becomes an exercise in mathematics.  We assign a numerical score to both a photo's technical execution as well as the importance of it's artistic/social content. We then plot those values on the appropriate axis of the graph. If a photograph excels in the technical merit - i.e. is well lit, thoughtful composition, in focus, etc etc, but depicts nothing of social/artistic importance, it's plot will fall in the lower right quadrant of the graph.  If the subject matter is of significant artistic/social importance, but poorly executed from a technical standpoint, its plot will fall in the upper left quadrant of the graph.  In both cases, the photo has failed to achieve an measure of "greatness".  Only a photo whose plot falls in the upper right quadrant - one that is of a worthy artistic/social subject but also technically well executed - will be considered a "great" photograph.

Of course, all that is a load of s**t - nothing more than a tongue and cheek nod to same simplistic analysis ridiculed by Robin Williams' character as the literature teach in "Dead Poets' Society".  But I just couldn't help myself.  When I read the question, that scene was the first thing to pop in to my head

Extraordinarily well played.

+1
5D3, 24-70L II, TS-E 24L II, Zeiss ZE 15 T* // X100S
www.dryanparker.com

#### canon rumors FORUM

##### Re: What makes a photo great?
« Reply #61 on: December 24, 2013, 04:31:09 PM »