Trying to quantify the artistic quality of a Photograph

This one is for the photogs out there.
We have a tendancy to get tied up in the performance values of our equipment and think that has an impact on the quality of the art we can produce.  Nothing is further from the truth.  Today’s point and shoot cameras can out perform top end DSLRs from 7 years ago.  Those same cameras were creating pictures we raved about and still consider works of art.
The Canon 7D Mk2 came out recently and came under some flak because DxO Mark ranked their sensor at the same level as some smaller sensor cameras and people think that’s unacceptable for a high end professional product.  But even adding in the argument that the usability and other capabilities and features of the camera play into how good it is DOES NOT MATTER!

The artistic merits of a photograph are not based on the camera that took it. It’s like saying that Van Gogh was great painter because he had the best brushes.  Some of the most highly acclaimed photographs in the world are grainy, blurry, or have awful dynamic range.


Quit trying to put a number on a picture to measure how great it is.  Art doesn’t work like that.


One thought on “Trying to quantify the artistic quality of a Photograph”

  1. Well said Justin!
    I’ve never sold a photo because it had great dynamic range, low noise, or because it was taken with a prime lens. It was because people liked it, thought it was a good photo and it was what they wanted.
    I am thankful for that!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s