Candid VS snapshots?

[third_shift|studios]

What's the difference between "candid photos" and just general snap shots?
I was with family all this weekend for a wedding and figured I'd try my "candid skills" and i can honestly say i have a lot to learn (hat's off to you wedding photographers). I'm more of a set up/light it and shoot em kinda guy, but if i'm gonna be considered the token photographer in my family, i better hone my candid skills. Check some of the pool jumping shots-i noticed i have some focus issues and you tell me, is a blurred subject better or worse? Should I have used longer/shorter exposures? I know I've put up a lot of stuff here-so i thank anyone for their time/critique...

 

[third_shift|studios]

seriously peeps, if they're so lame and boring so as not to even generate a response-that's something i'm interested to know as well, thanks.

 

[Big Mike]

For the most part, a blurred subject isn't something that you want...so a shorter (faster) exposure would have been better.

'Candid' & 'Snap shot' and even 'Photo-Journalistic' are just terms that people throw around. Their meaning will differ from person to person.
To me, a 'snap shot' is just a shot that is take without much (or any) pre-thought by the photographer...you see something, so you quickly point & shoot. Sometimes this works because you get something that you might have missed otherwise. Often, this makes for photos that are uninteresting to viewers though. Some people shoot all their photos like this (without much thought).
On the other hand, Candid photos (to me) are shots where you are capturing real moments of people doing natural things and not interacting with the camera. Shooting two people talking to each other, would be a good candid subject. You can certainly take plenty of time to think about exposure, composition etc. and make a great photo out of it...one that will still be interesting to viewers who were not there to see it.
Journalistic photos (to me) are meant to document what is happening. You try to capture something in a photo, that would relay those happenings to someone who would be viewing the photo at a later time. They can be artistic, and/or well thought out...or taken at the spur of the moment...but they should at least try to tell a story.

 

[vannahcometrue]

Good point.

 

[LaFoto]

I do like Mike's distinction made between the expressions "snapshot", "candid photography", and in addition to these two "photojournalism", they represent my exact thoughts on the matter, too. A snapshot is a photo taken without any forethought at all, and often enough the outcome looks like it: very random, and mostly uninteresting to the viewer, unless the viewer is a) a person inside the photo, or b) the person who took the photo. That said, another thought springs to mind, i.e. that more often than not those persons who get featured by a snapshot DON'T like themselves in the photo, as they might be captured in such fraction of a second when they don't look their very best.

Candid photos are planned and composed, but the featured persons were not aware a camera was directed at them (or cleverly pretended not to be aware of the fact, ignoring the camera and continuing what they were doing as if there were no camera around).

As to your photos here: I see some candids, some "staged" (wrong expression...) photos, and some snapshots.

The two photos taken inside the car I take as candids. Sleeping person didn't know anything about being photographed ... though on second thought, and studying the position of the arm, it might be a staged self-portrait, too!?!?!?!? :scratch: But surely the driver had to focus on his driving and didn't know he was becoming the subject of your photo. While it is quite noisy and also shows wee bits of camera shake, I like the natural light used, his apparent focus on his driving, the steering he does (motion blur in his hand) and the fact that he's going at 50mph .

After these two, commenting becomes a little harder since a) the photos are no longer spaced and b) you did not number them at all, and I don't have the time to count and recount all the while...

While the positions the children in mid-jump look funny and will certainly bring a smile to their parents' faces, the fact that the background is sharp but the children are blurred by motion blur pushes them more towards the snapshot type of photos as they would have been pushed if either you had panned or chosen an even faster shutter speed to really "freeze" them mid-motion.

The third and fourth photo are the two that I'd call "staged" (in a way), since they kind of stopped and looked and "posed" and took up "communication" with the photographer (and ultimately also with us, the viewers). I like those best of the entire series, although 3 is slightly overexposed and the girl in the sun is all washed out (as is the foam), and even though limbs are being cut off in 4 (girl in blue got cropped right through her knees, girl in red lost her hand).

In the last and that one with the smiling girl with white towel around her waist, your focus slipped. The faces are out of focus, and in the case of the photo of the girl, it went to the background. Such issues in a photo push a photo clearly into the "snapshot category" in my estimation.

Do you have any more questions? Then come back and ask. I am sure we will help you. In the future, try to help US by putting spaces between your photos and by numbering them, ok?