photographers, how often do you just take snapshots?

Question

just wondering how often professional photographers just take ordinary snapshots, not really trying to create a work of art or anything

just having fun with your camera

Answer 1

I record my family history, which is no great work of art. I once went on a vacation and took only images for photographic competition. When I got home I had some lovely, artistic photos but realized I had no pictures of my husband or the place where we stayed, nothing that would record our vacation! I never made that mistake again! I will always take snapshots, as well!

Answer 2

Three responses so far and a considerable lack of balance in each, although some humor. The lady with the vacation snaps doesn't want to be professional and the uptight professional doesn't seem to ever relax.

I would consider a balance to be when a photographer knows the difference between recording an event, framing an image, and capturing a moment and is able to switch between them. Digital photography makes this a lot easier/cheaper than with film. This page http://mikegigi.com/firthm/trip2vic.htm and the two linked from it record a trip to Victoria BC from Seattle. If you look at the image numbers you will see many in sequence have been skipped The first image is a moderately well composed snapshot of a location and activity. Later on are some very, very nice "art" quality shots of places visited, more snapshots and some informal portraits grabbed without posing the people.

As the lady said - if you go for perfection, you miss the content of the trip or don't make a record of it at least.

Answer 3

These days, never. There is a quote which I heard, attributed to more than one person, and it says something to the effect that "we do not take pictures, we are taken by pictures" (or, alternatively, "we don't take the photograph; it takes us"). I no longer raise the camera to eye level unless something has caught my eye first, and then the aim is to decide on the composition in as quick a time as possible (if there are elements moving in it) or not (if it's static). In other words, a process happens. It can happen very quickly or relatively slowly, but it happens.



To me a "snapshot" is a photo with no process and thus no real reason to be taken - no point to it. I don't want to take pictures with no point to them.



Everything I shoot, I shoot for a reason. It might be the colour, or the shapes, or the content (narrative), or the bokeh, or something (or all of the above) - but there is always a reason, and to me that's what makes a photograph as opposed to a snapshot.

Answer 4

For a "snapshot", I find that I tend to use full auto more, but I also find it impossible to separate "snapshots" from serious photography. The taste and sensibilities from one creep into the other. So even my snapshots get the best composition, focus, and exposure that I can provide. That doesn't mean they aren't snapshots, but it does mean they are also the best I could do under the situation.



Snapshots are often called "happysnaps" and good photography makes me happy.

Answer 5

I agree with Mark on most things, but not in this instance. I know we come on here and figuratively kick people in the teeth for taking snapshots, ... but that is only because they seem to have no knowledge of the difference between actually creating a good photograph and just snapping away in auto with no rhyme or reason. There is nothing wrong with snapshots in and of themselves. They will often have a lot more meaning to you than all the "serious" photos you take. I take hundreds and hundreds of snapshots on my little pocket point and shoot. Shots of my wife trying on shoes, shots of us picking out bread in the store, a shot the other day of a girl putting a streak of color in her hair. In years to come, such photos may very likely have far more meaning and importance to me than all the "art" stuff I have done over the years. I have two fully separate websites, one for my "serious" work, and the other for pure fun snapshots that other people would look at and probably say.... WTF is this crap!



A great singer does not only sing when on stage during a massive, grand performance. He / she also sings in the shower or while cleaning out the cat littler box!



Things don't always have to be perfect and serious, and that is how I approach my photography. I KNOW how to create good photos, and when the "muse" hits me to do it, I do, but that does not mean I MUST be forcing myself to create the next world shaking masterpiece every time I touch a camera, .... while missing a snapshot of something that may actually prove to be much more valuable to me personally in years to come.



Now at 60 years of age, I have lots of regrets for all the "snapshots" I did not take of things and people in my past. One good thing about the small digital camera is that it allows you to do that much more easily than in the past with bulky film cameras and the cost of film / processing. The sad part, however, is that so many people are not preserving these photos. They do not make prints and just dump the photos into sites such as Facebook, soon to never be seen again.



There is a saying around now that is very true. It goes something like, "This is the most photographed generation to have ever existed, and in 50 years they will not have a single photo remaining." I say probably in a lot less time than that.



Take snapshots, but get PRINTS and put in real albums.



steve

Answer 6

Everything starts with a snapshot to me. If I find it good material, I stop and take more serious shots with carefully thought settings and at different angles of view.

Answer 7

Every time I take a photo that did not turn out exactly the way I wanted, then it was a snapshot.