I was once exploring photos from other photographers while browsing a photography forum when I came across a rather interesting post. Someone had posted a photograph and requested a critique of the shot. The post was interesting not merely because of the image but because of the conversation taking place.
While I think the photographer created a decent shot, there was one who commented that the photographer shouldn't have taken the shot in the first place since the subject wasn't interesting. This sparked a discussion of whether or not subjects have to be interesting before you photograph them.
The opposing side argued that it’s all about how the photographer presented the photo and not if the subject was interesting to begin with. This made me curious allowing me to think of my own thought process when it comes to shooting different subjects. It also made me wonder – why do we shoot what we shoot?
What Makes a Photo Interesting?
So what makes a photo interesting? What makes us choose subjects? What makes us shoot what we shoot?
Some like landscapes, wildlife, or nature, while others are interested more in people, street scenes, and architecture. There are quite a lot of genres out there but most of us don’t get to shoot them all.
Our personal preference as photographers defines the images we take. What interests us may not interest others and vice versa. The mere fact that we don't take photos of absolutely everything we see only means we are picky with our subjects. We only like to capture things we like to see – subjects that are interesting to us. But while one wildlife photographer may see one bird interesting, another might see it as a useless effort. This can be a result of many things.
Like all forms of art, photography can be subjective in the sense that something which looks interesting to one person may look uninteresting and boring for someone else. So, what makes a photograph interesting?
Here's one example. A new photographer on his first visit to Hawaii will find Pacific sunsets very fascinating compared to a local Hawaiian photographer living right across the beach who might find it nice but quite usual and common. The interest may be there for both photographers, but the level of excitement will differ and will determine whether or not the photographer will take the shot.
Photo by rich_f28
With my story, the one who commented may argue that uninteresting subjects should be avoided, but I would like to believe the photographer who shared his image for critique found something interesting in the subject and that's why he captured it. The only problem is that it didn't look interesting to some or he wasn't effective in making it stand out. This leads to another question:
How Do I Find Subjects That Are Interesting To Others Too?
Let's quickly look at five considerations:
- Light and colours
1. Is the subject common or usual?
Part of the objective of the photographer is to get as many people to appreciate what they capture. Yes, we can't please everyone but it's a good goal to look at the standard of the majority, or specific people you wish to target.
Ask yourself the question – Even if this looks interesting to me, does it look interesting to the people I want to show this to? Like the Hawaiian sunset example, if your target audience sees something they normally see, they would more likely think it’s uninteresting.
Here’s an experiment you can do. Find some travel photographs featuring your own town. Afterwards, find and compare some travel photographs of a foreign place with a totally different culture from yours. Without looking at how well the photographer took the shot, which subjects interested you more? I bet it's the foreign place. The more uncommon and unusual it is to people, the more interesting it is.
2. Is the light and colour interesting or is it poor and flat?
Even the most fascinating of subjects can be considered a waste with poor and flat lighting and colour. To make good photographs, a good understanding of light is very important.
Imagine being able to spot a beautiful rare bird but it’s hidden under the dark shade of a barn. While taking the shot would probably earn you points for spotting it, being able to showcase it for exhibit is out of the question.
Beautiful light results in beautiful colours, textures and depth in photos. Serious landscape photographers understand this concept and this is one of the keys to their success. They know that there is a big difference when it comes to time of day because of the light. One can take the same scene but with different lighting conditions and one can stand out while the other can get lost in the rubble.
Nature photographers of course cannot control the lighting when a moment happens, even if you happen to be at the right place at the right time, but if you are shooting portraits and other genre where you have the option to make use of artificial light, then use lighting knowledge and make the best out of the situation.
Photo by Melissa Wiese
3. Does the subject’s form make it obvious?
What’s the difference between taking a photo of a car from the front and taking a photo of it from the side? A subject’s form can make it interesting or uninteresting.
For example, a box is just a square when taken directly from the front. It will only look like a box with a 3-dimensional form when you choose to capture it at a certain angle. Perspectives make a difference.
Here’s a challenge. Get the most uninteresting yet accessible object you can find. Without moving the subject, take 50 shots of the same subject and find a perspective that will make it more interesting. No two angles should be alike. I bet that you’ll make that subject look interesting in one or two of the 50 images just because of the difference in form and even in lighting.
4. Is the story or the message clear?
Clarity of story is important and some of the best or greatest images in history have a story to tell. Photographers need to focus on the story of the moment rather than look for unique subjects, more like photojournalism when photographing people or events.
Some ways you can tell stories through images are, when you see something in a subject like a pretty smile, some texture in the bark of a tree, or a raging storm across the horizon, it doesn't mean that it would immediately translate into viewers being able to see what you saw. This is where the understanding and use of effective composition takes place.
While composing a photograph, the photographer chooses what goes into the photograph and what needs to be excluded. The photographer places the main subject in a part of the frame that creates more impact and then adds supporting elements to the frame that complement the main subject but at the same time does not clutter the frame and take away the attention from the subject.
Make use of the various composition techniques like rule of thirds, negative space, rule of odds, leading lines, perspective, framing, etc. to make the image/story interesting. Also, make sure you incorporate emotions into the image as humans are drawn to genuine portrayal of emotions a lot. These moments can keep the viewer’s attention for a long time.In other cases, post processing for enhancement (not for added effects) is necessary. The more you are knowledgeable about composition and the elements of design, the more you are able to make your message clear.
In other cases, post processing for enhancement (not for added effects) is necessary. The more you are knowledgeable about composition and the elements of design, the more you are able to make your message clear.
Photo by Scott Presly
5. Is it presented in an interesting way with the right background?
Choosing subjects isn’t just about main elements. Subjects will look more interesting with the right presentation. Although it seems we’re talking about composition, sometimes we have to look into the character of a subject and if the background compliments it to create a stunning presentation.
Does the subject create a certain contrast with its surroundings? Or does it blend in?
Subjects will either stand out or shrink back depending on the environment they are in. A photo may work compositionally but the right background elements can even heighten the interest of a viewer. Looking out for those background elements can help make photos more interesting.
Have you been shooting uninteresting subjects? I believe you haven't. It is a photographer's instinct to shoot only interesting subjects. Either that or they look into making uninteresting subjects look interesting. The decision is up to the photographer. The photographer creates that result.
I totally agree with every point you mention, Karlo. Those are, no doubt, some of the fundamental and most important aspects any photograph should aim for. And I firmly believe that it’s not the object itself what makes a photograph appealing or boring, rather the way it is shown/portrayed. There are no better/worse objects intrinsically, it all depends on the work done with them! When I look back at my pictures, there ate full of pretty mundane scenes and objects, yet I find them interesting for varied reasons.
Oh! And beautiful pictures, as well!
I must say, it is articles like this that make me never want to share my photos with anyone, again. Isn’t “interesting” subjective? Why would I go to Hawaii, take a beautiful sunset shot over the ocean and share it with other Hawaiians? Obviously I will share with my people back home who don’t see it on a daily basis. And, why would anyone say “the photographer shouldn’t have taken the shot in the first place since the subject is not interesting”? Interesting to whom?? THAT is a photography snob. I, personally, found it intriguing. I believe there is an audience for any good shot, but I also agree we should never stop striving for those unusual perspectives. Here’s hoping you never hear the words “you should not have taken that shot”!!
Hey T.Pitts 🙂 I agree with you 100% that interesting is subjective. It is to both shooter and viewer. The point is that every shooter shoots only what they are interested in and if you want to make others interested in it as well, then there are ways to make it happen. It really depends on the goal of the photographer and we all have our own goals. If your goal is to share it with family and friends then the thought process is much simpler. However, in my example, the photographer asked for critique so the interest level and someone who wasn’t interested expressed his opinion about it 🙂 I guess I am at fault by not pointing that out more clearly. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. 🙂
Love the article.
They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The same with interestingness (new word) . What I find pretty and interesting is different from what anyone else finds interesting. People shoot what appeals to them. Something in a scene triggered something in you, and you HAVE TO capture it. It is a compulsion . And when you find that moment, the rest falls into place 🙂
True Elize, that’s also why there are times that some people lose interest in their own shots as time goes by. Shots can become too common over time even to the person who is taking it.
I found this fascinating, more and more I read of foreign and exotic places, and am trying continually to see my back yard through someone else’s lens. Also not mentioned in this article but jumped into my mind, is that a review of my “Best” pictures always results in me culling a pic here and there, the “Interest” and “quality” factors continually moving up the scale. Muy Bueno Karlo.
I sometimes think that I should just walk along a busy street in uptown Toronto, perhaps Sheppard East, just photographing buildings and “object ‘dart” as the whim moves me. Tell a story of the street as it is. Not the history, which is another matter.
Damn it! I should have done this a quarter of a century ago or more and make it a ‘Then and Now” storyboard.
But I can tell the story of today.
You can bet that 98% of the images will not be interesting, but that’s not the point. It’s the story that they tell.