I find this a surprisingly difficult question to answer.
I suppose I take a good pictures every now and then. I’m certainly having fun doing so. I know I’ve captured more than a few important memories. I certainly can operate a camera proficiently.
But am I good? No idea, honestly. I often see others approaching a scene and picking out subjects I wouldn’t have dreamed of. Or take an edit into a vastly different direction. I hope they say the same thing about me.
I too often take pictures “of” subjects, instead of “about” subjects. I often prioritize being there over capturing. I often feel awkward taking pictures, and thus don’t. I can’t take pictures when I’m not in the mood.
I am not a photographer. But I like taking photos. I mostly photograph family and everyday life and sometimes this gets me pictures that warm my heart and that of others.
When I look at old photos I took when I had more time to engage in more creative and artful photography I miss doing that.
I feel the question indirectly includes a comparative (competitive?) perspective that is not helpful for me. As long as I enjoy what I do that is good to me, if it brings joy to others even better.
Looking forward to the discussion your question will spark, thanks @bastibe!
Your post (the title…) does look like a “click-bait”
My reply is the proof of that.
Just kidding, of course…
What do you mean by “a good photographer”?
Personally, I suppose it is impossible to get an answer which satisfy everyone…
For instance, for the past 20 years, at work, nearly on a daily basis, I have taken pictures, as a plant pathologist.
We have got very expensive cameras and lens. Eizo calibrated monitors and so on.
Am I a good photographer? I don’t think so because there are still plenty of things I am willing to investigate and improve.
More to the point, I am even unable to describe what being a “good photographer” means.
Absolutely not. IMO “good” involves the total package – not only the photographer but also the way he / she makes use of the subject matter and other resources at hand. And I fail miserably at that.
Hell no, on an objectively technical level I’m terrible.
I couldn’t begin to explain how to set a camera for proper exposure in any given situation, or calculate depth of field for any of my lenses.
But subjectively, I’m doing ok.
I hope to remain as enthusiastic about it later in life as I am right now.
On some kind of absolute scale, I am probably somewhat mediocre: I take some good photos occasionally, but my skill level is not nearly comparable to someone who makes a living from photography. But that’s OK, for me it is just a hobby.
At each point in time, I care about being a better photographer than, say, five years ago. That has worked out fine so far and I am satisfied. Hopefully, in another 5 years, I will be even better.
Photography is a hobby with a huge scope, a lifetime is not sufficient to learn all aspects of it, and that is OK, I will always find something interesting.
Hi,
I don’t know what my images are worth, I still don’t know how to evaluate myself, even after half a century of practice.
Sometimes, I see that some people appreciate what I do. Creating images is essential to me, and I continue to do so in all circumstances, whether they find an audience or not.
I pay only as much attention to technique as is necessary to achieve a result that suits me, without obsession or fetishism.
"I’m good in the morning, I’m good at night I’m good in the evening when the sun is shining bright I’m good, you know I’m good I’m so good, I’m so good, girl, I gotta knock on wood"
[Johnny Winter]
The truth: Oh hell no! I’m a mistake factory that occasionally kicks out a good image by mistake. I keep telling myself that I will get better when I retire and have more time to make more thoughtful photos.
No question being clearly a hobbyist / amateur as I’m not depending on a financial income through photography, I would nevertheless call myself a photographer while I’m taking and processing my shots. To me “being good” means, to be confident with the take I did and the processing I’ve applied. Being confident with the motif, the light, the perspective. Having the feeling, that I captured a scene the way I like it and how I saw it, that somehow I’m also a part of the image I took. No competition with others, just me.
When I look at my pictures, I find some of them really good - I’m even proud of some of them. Since I practice photography as part of my “self-care routine” (gosh what a description), I would like to answer this question with “yes” for myself. And of course - it’s kind of a never-ending journey… I know, that in a positive way, I will always grapple with this question and continue to question myself in a friendly manner when I look at my pictures.
Thanks again for posting this, I really love this community. Have a good time, all of you
What does “good” mean? I like to compare it to road cycling, which is also one of my hobbies. When I tell people that I cycle 100 or even 150 km at a stretch, many look at me with admiration. In a public race, I’m in the back third. There are riders of retirement age who are much faster than me. And every rider in such an everyday race is beaten by amateur riders of category C. And there are also categories B and A. And then there are the pros, where amateurs no longer stand a chance. And one in 1,000 pros has a chance of winning the Tour de France.
So, there are always better ones. When cycling or taking photos, I try to have fun and keep getting better.
I would consider myself above-average because I am from a poorer country where photography does not exist as an artform… hard to suck when you’re one of about only 1000 in existence
Depends on assignment. I have had paid jobs for portraits, product photos, music band promotional material, and have done some journalistic work. This was almost 20 years ago by now though. I think I would still produce some material that isn’t useless in these scenarios if I had to, but photography has evolved since then and I haven’t kept up.
I am pretty decent in my niche: photographing Carnatic (South-Indian Classical music) concerts, concentrating on portraits of the individual performers. It was what inspired me to move away from point&shoot and invest in some decent equipment, to take decent pics, not blurry pics. That is my current incarnation in photography terms. It began about seven or eight years ago, and I’ve taken thousands of pictures of hundreds of concerts. If I wasn’t half-decent it would really be a bit stupid! I’d say, I’m at least as good as some of the professional event photographers but nowhere near the best. There are only three or four of us doing this as amateurs or semi-professional. My friends tell me I’m good. I think they are better!
Bottom line: I enjoy what I do and my audience (my subjects) usually enjoy my results.
As a technical photographer, not so much. Automation has stepped up so enormously. I’m ok with the basics, but give me a camera locked in M mode, and without auto-focus, and be right back to getting just three or four good pics out of fifty.
Post processing I enjoy: it is where the portrait content of my pics is emphasised if there is more than one person in the frame. And this: I will not say for sure if my results are better or worse than my camera’s jpegs (which I usually like very much) but I will say that they are my art.
I can photograph cats too. And flowers also. We can all take holiday snaps without being landscape photographers.
I think all of us are probably good photographers. Some us may be more or less limited in scope. Some may have that extra imagination and skills of finding and capturing moments that makes their work really special. But that doesn’t make the rest of us less good. It’s nice to have something to aspire to.
Definitely not. But it’s also good to keep in mind or think about how good some of the greats were. You hear stories that some of them shot hundreds of rolls until some good pics came about. Sometimes it is all about scale. So if every thousand photos you can conjure a few good ones, are you any worse?
I’m going to answer this a little differently, mostly because I don’t know what the definition of “good” photographer is.
So my answer is that I’m a better photographer than I was last year. I’m a much better developer than I was last year.
When I started taking pictures again (10 years ago) my gear was OK and I didn’t have any money to get better. So to get the shots I wanted I had to get better. So, the greatest factor influencing my photography skills was being poor.
I know, that in a positive way, I will always grapple with this question and continue to question myself in a friendly manner when I look at my pictures.
