Ok, stop it already! "Content" of photos and quality.

I’m getting really sick of people using the line “all those pet dog, pets and baby photos” as an indicator of the “rubbish” on RB.

The content is irrelevant. There are some damn good “pet” portraits on RB (and yes, some really bad ones)

I’m actually quite sick of a photo being considered good because of the content. Taking a photo of an exotic looking person doesn’t make you a genius photographer by default. It just means the person isn’t from your country and so is ‘interesting’. Good for you.

It can be much harder to get a GREAT photo of a common subject. You have to work to make it stand out.

Blurring the water in a photo doesn’t mean it’s a great photo, having a pretty sunset doesn’t make it a great photo, photographing someone who has a character lined face doesn’t make it a great photo, being naked in it doesn’t make a great photo, taking a photo of an exotic animal doesn’t make it a great photo….on and on I can go.

So really, enough with the idea that pets = bad photos. Nothing is great or bad by default, it’s how you take it, YOU make it a great photo, if you can.

Journal Comments

  • Torfinn
  • Mark German
  • Sorin  Reck
  • PhotoBloke
  • Sharon Hammond
  • ECGardner
  • Darren Stones
  • Natalie Manuel
  • Faizan Qureshi
  • Bailey Designs