Judgement Day:Visual Impact, Artistic Merit...

[Ed K.]

Surely we all know what "visual impact" is when it hits us, or some aspects of "artistic merit", no? With so much energy spent on the pursuit of technical quality as measured against statistical norms and benchmarks, it seems that a few good benchmarks for the photograph would be helpful. Times change, so I wonder if anyone has some definitions and benchmarks for:

1. Visual Impact
2. Artistic Merit
3. Growth / Progress
4. Quality of Expression
5. Innovation in Craft/Execution
6. Expression of Ideas/Concept
7. Originality

As they relate to photography? It would be inspiring to hear how, or if, you evaluate your own work, before and after you make it; and if any of the above have some clear guidelines in your mind. How have these areas changed recently, with the flood of visual information we get each day?

Just curious, please put some light on it for me.

[Gordon Moat]

1. You have 2.5 seconds to get someone's attention . . .
2. Formal aspects of the composition . . .
3. Attracting a wider audience, or the desired target audience . . .
4. Creative Vision; in a commercial environment that production look . . .
5. Presentation . . .
6. Controlling a scene . . .
7. Incomparible

It really is a continual editing process for me. They are all relevant, though not equally, and I don't really consider these in the manner you expressed them. Perhaps that is a little vague, though I don't think it is so simple to dissect images.

Recently I am working more on getting that production look to my images. This is more recent, and comes from a few seminars. I was achieving this in the past, but I failed to recognize that is what it was in my images; and only some really fit into that concept. Unfortunately, this is another not easy to define aspect.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Martin Miller]

Gordon, please make a stab at explaining what you mean by "production look".

[Brian C. Miller]

For God was angered, and He took up lightning in His hand to smite the wicked ....

And then the MOMA director said, "Hey, that's been done before. But I like this piece of rope nailed to a wall."

[Martin Miller]

Brian, I don't think you are going to make it as a museum curator, but it looks like you know one when you see one.

[Gordon Moat]

Hello Martin,

I wish I could write a simple description/definition of Production Look. Unfortunately, in a few meetings with some other pros I know locally, we have discovered it is difficult to convey the concept. All of us could spot that production look, but none of us really described it well in words. The danger here is that if I give examples, some people will think it means manipulated, others will think it means post processing, and some will consider it as staged scenes . . . none of those are really wrong, but they miss the point. I suppose if it was simple, everyone would be doing it . . . or maybe I would have figured this out before now. Much like Brian knows a curator when he sees one, I am now getting to know the production look when I see it.

I know . . . not too helpful. I see you are a fine art photographer, so understanding this concept is probably not going to change your work, nor your approach. If you know anything about storyboarding, or advertising briefs, you might get a good start on the path to getting a production look. However, I don't think it really applies to fine art photography, though maybe it could? Would examples help at all? I am curious why you are curious.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Brian C. Miller]

Gordon, could "production look" also mean "dramatic gloss?"

[Bruce Watson]

I wish I could write a simple description/definition of Production Look. Unfortunately, in a few meetings with some other pros I know locally, we have discovered it is difficult to convey the concept. All of us could spot that production look, but none of us really described it well in words. The danger here is that if I give examples, some people will think it means manipulated, others will think it means post processing, and some will consider it as staged scenes . . . none of those are really wrong, but they miss the point. I suppose if it was simple, everyone would be doing it . . . or maybe I would have figured this out before now. Much like Brian knows a curator when he sees one, I am now getting to know the production look when I see it.

Let me try. Could it mean "clean, bright, and glossy?" Even artificially so?

[Marko]

What I understand Gordon meant is that any creative piece, not just a photograph, will exude certain competence level when done by a professional, who does that for a living and does it every day. I hate to say "produces", but that's what it ultimately comes down to - a professional creative actually produces the final look to the piece he has just created.

If you have a trained eye, you can easily spot professionally done photograph, painting, sculpture, book or magazine layout, even a web site. There is always that unmistakable confidence and pride of a true pro at a job well done.

Gordon, please correct me if I am wrong.

[Gordon Moat]

Nope, nothing to do with gloss. This is something I need to be able to put into words, because it can be helpful when speaking to advertising executives. Part of how I am trying to approach writing is the the concept of a photographer controlling all aspects of a scene. If one looks through the latest Lürzer's Archive 200 Best Ad Photographers, you will not see much gloss, you will see some manipulation and post processing, there will be a few clean images, there will be several straight shots that seem quite simple in execution, and some shots that miss the production look entirely . . . none of these things really speak of (nor define) production look, though that is how these images would be considered/viewed. There is something beyond the first look appearance of the images, that aspect of the hand and planning of a photographer and crew, not obvious alteration of a scene, and not manipulation. This is what is kicking my ass currently, putting this concept into words; if I define it too simply, then the basis and concept are completely missed and not understood.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio