I admit – I find quality incredibly difficult to write about. Why? Because quality is a very subjective thing. What I personally consider to be a high quality photograph, you may think is lousy.
To a very high degree, quality is about personal taste and preferences. Not that alone, but largely so.
I have already discussed the technical part of photography, and how/why we can ascern quality from that.
But photography is so much more than technique.
Let me put it this way;
What I personally consider a high quality photograph is when the photographer has a trained eye that understands what works and what does not work within the frame, how to distribute whatever the motif is within said frame, how to compose, how to handle angle and light.
I also find quality in how aware said photographer is about why she makes the choices she does, how each choice effects the end result, why she’s drawn to what she photographs, et cetera.
So, in short – what I find most important is the act of seeing, and the ability to choose how to frame it.
Another thing I find important is – experience.
There’s a difference between a beginner photographer, and an experienced one. Both can produce quality, but if put next to each other there will always be a difference.
This should not be mistaken for the more experienced photographer to be a better person. This has nothing to do with how we are as people. This has to do with experience in the photographic field specifically.
And let’s face it; we’re all beginners at some point – in everything from photography to driving a car to walking a pack of dogs to writing an essay at university to.. it’s a neverending story on situations where we at some point are beginners.
As a person with experience of creating photographs and looking at photographs, I can tell you there’s an entire chain of active choices that are made in order to produce high quality. Not every photographer is able to do that.
There’s nothing wrong with that.
I can’t build a house, or even change tires on a car. I don’t consider myself a bad person because of my lack of practical skills.
What is interesting with the concept of quality in photography is that it varies – a lot. Partly because of personal preferences, partly because of varying skills in photographers.
What each and everyone finds to be high quality probably varies. I know what I personally find important. This probably is true for many people who are accustomed to look at photographs. Especially if said people also photograph themselves.
Another point worth making is; high quality photography can be what can be bought as art posters at IKEA, and a rare analogue print of Eugène Atget bought at an auction house somewhere. In these cases, quality can be sought in the purpose of the photograph, what audience it is directed to and how said audience responds to it.
Add to that, the fact that different types of photography requires different technique, approach, choices. A wedding portrait is something different than a street photograph, or a photograph of racing horses. Different technique, different choices, quality must thus be ascerned differently.
In short;
Quality is a complicated matter, reguiring a trained eye, technical skills, the ability to organize reality within a frame, keeping track of light, events, shape and form, tonality, and so much more, within the fraction of a second (less, most often).
Qualities in the photographer worth honouring; awareness, decisiveness, visual organization skills, technical skills, know-how, timing, and many, many more.
/Malinka
