|
Forums >
General Industry >
Quality or content?
On another thread I just mentioned how my main concerns now are the quality and content of my photographs. In thinking about that I realized that for me the content trumps quality, and that I'll use a less than perfect negative if what's happening in the picture is worthwhile and it can be sensibly cropped. Do you see a conflict between quality and content? Which is more important to you? Why? -D Nov 25 06 04:51 pm Link I think you'd know my answer. ;-) Content over "quality" every time, where quality is extraneous to the theme or message and serves primarily as packaging, and where the quality is at least "sufficient" for its purpose. I suppose it'll be easy to read that as "he just wants good enough" and nothing could be further from the truth. But where I must make trade-offs, then the content (subject portrayal, mood, theme, etc.) will trump. Nov 25 06 05:04 pm Link For me, Quality is Content. If an image says what you want it to, has the impact on the viewer you wish it to, then mere technical concerns are secondary. You riff on what you have to work with. Nov 25 06 05:05 pm Link Quality is what I hope to add to an image.. Content is what makes me choose to edit one in the first place.. I know I'm coming at it from a different angle, but my $.02. Nov 25 06 05:15 pm Link Content vs. Quality. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. Both are potentially elements of a good photo. It is certainly possible to have a good photo with great content but poor quality. It seems less likely, but probably also possible to have a very high quality photo that doesn't have much content. I'd agree that content is probably the more important of the two elements. However, if you had two photos of identical content, one that was high quality, and one that was poorer quality, the high quality one would almost certainly be considered better. And I have certainly seen photos of interesting subject where the technical quality of the photo was so far off that it couldn't be saved. So I don't think quality should be dismissed as unimportant. I'd say that content is the dominant element. Nevertheless, poor quality can be a detractor, can take away part of the enjoyment of an otherwise interesting photo. One thing that may be driving this is that many of us have probably seen technically perfect photos of completely vapid subjects. Where the photographer demonstrates excellent technical skills, but no artistic vision. There are lots of photographers who use equipment and technical skills as a crutch to prop up a lack of vision. Who's photos obviously promote quality over content. I would say that photographers like that are missing the point of photography. Nov 25 06 06:56 pm Link Content over Quality anyday. But that said I still use the best I can to never think back and say I wish I was using a Better Back for that. Of course I do say that everytime I get a new higher MP back. Stephen Eastwood http://www.PhotographersPortfolio.com Nov 25 06 07:02 pm Link Oh crap your going to make me think about this arn't you? I'll have answer in a day or two... Nov 25 06 07:05 pm Link D. Brian Nelson wrote: Cropped? You crop your images??? Nov 25 06 10:57 pm Link Hand over you quality or your content! Oh, *&%$ you're keeping both! I demand both. What I learned early: If you constantly work on quality for a long, long time - it becomes automatic. It's so bad that you don't even think about it anymore after... oh, say bout 20, 30 years. Then you just concentrate on the content. Well, you do if your brains are still working at that age. You're eyes and brain cells get trained after a while if you're picky enough and keep working on it. Quality conveys the content clearly. Bad quality messes up the reading of the message. Nov 26 06 12:11 am Link Looking at photos, content deffinately gets my vote. I usually notice it first and remember it longest. Of course it's best to have both. But I probably won't remember a really well done straight on, normally cropped portrait, in comparison to something with content that stands out. Nov 26 06 12:16 am Link Great question. I myself see both as important as one another in a way. But both are subjective. Sometimes quality can override bad content, vice versa good content can override bad quality. Nov 26 06 12:17 am Link Robert Warren wrote: Jeez, did I let that slip? I was enamored of full frame printing in photo school and when I nailed one after school I'd use it as well, showing the sprocket hole edges just for snobbery. Nov 26 06 12:26 am Link how was latest shoot???  Nov 26 06 12:30 am Link D. BrianN wrote: old saying: 'never show less than your best work' ------ Nov 26 06 12:39 am Link |
