The difference between a photo and a snapshot?

[Solarflare]

Snapshot in this context would refer to a photograph taken without thinking.

If you just come across something pretty, instantly make a photo, and right after move on, thats a snapshot.

Its possible that a snapshot is a great photograph, but most of them wont be great photographs, and very likely even if its a great photograph the photographer probably will miss it because its among a ton of bad photographs.

 

[table1349]

Snapshot in this context would refer to a photograph taken without thinking.

If you just come across something pretty, instantly make a photo, and right after move on, thats a snapshot.

Its possible that a snapshot is a great photograph, but most of them wont be great photographs, and very likely even if its a great photograph the photographer probably will miss it because its among a ton of bad photographs.

Just another snapshot.

 

[KenC]

I don't know about any of this. All I know is I bang my head against the wall a lot.

I know, it feels good when you stop. The same could be said about trying to place things in one of two categories (photo vs snapshot, art vs not art, etc.). Everyone has a different opinion, there will always be a "gray area" and it won't change what any of us do anyway.

 

[robbins.photo]

Snapshot in this context would refer to a photograph taken without thinking.

If you just come across something pretty, instantly make a photo, and right after move on, thats a snapshot.

Its possible that a snapshot is a great photograph, but most of them wont be great photographs, and very likely even if its a great photograph the photographer probably will miss it because its among a ton of bad photographs.

Just another snapshot.

Actually no, that is a photograph taken of the second flag raised on Mount Suribachi. It was a planned photo event and the photo was taken by Joe Rosenthal. Their are some snapshots of the raising of the first flag, taken by a Staff Sgt Lowry or possibly Lowery - can't remember the exact spelling.

 

[waday]

I would rather see a snapshot of Jesus Christ

Pastor says he took pictures of Heaven — but lost them when his phone was stolen

 

[Achaicus]

Just another snapshot.

Actually no, that is a photograph taken of the second flag raised on Mount Suribachi. It was a planned photo event and the photo was taken by Joe Rosenthal. Their are some snapshots of the raising of the first flag, taken by a Staff Sgt Lowry or possibly Lowery - can't remember the exact spelling.

Rosenthal wrote about taking that snap. "Out of the corner of my eye, I had seen the men start the flag up. I swung my camera and shot the scene. That is how the picture was taken, and when you take a picture like that, you don't come away saying you got a great shot. You don't know."

 

[480sparky]

Snapshot in this context would refer to a photograph taken without thinking.

If you just come across something pretty, instantly make a photo, and right after move on, thats a snapshot.

Its possible that a snapshot is a great photograph, but most of them wont be great photographs, and very likely even if its a great photograph the photographer probably will miss it because its among a ton of bad photographs.

Just another snapshot.

Actually no, that is a photograph taken of the second flag raised on Mount Suribachi. It was a planned photo event and the photo was taken by Joe Rosenthal. Their are some snapshots of the raising of the first flag, taken by a Staff Sgt Lowry or possibly Lowery - can't remember the exact spelling.

It's still a snapshot.

THIS:

is the 'posed' photo. And plainly so.

The confusion arises because well after Rosenthal took the images (remember, he sent his film off to be developed and printed), he was asked about the photo he took. He thought this was the image he was being asked about, and said it was posed.

Hence, everyone thinks the 'famous' shot was posed. It was not. Staged and planned, yes. But not posed.

 

[jcdeboever]

These type of threads always confuse me.

 

[robbins.photo]

Rosenthal wrote about taking that snap. "Out of the corner of my eye, I had seen the men start the flag up. I swung my camera and shot the scene. That is how the picture was taken, and when you take a picture like that, you don't come away saying you got a great shot. You don't know."

The flag he took a picture of wasn't the first flag raised, it was the second. They were raising a 2nd larger flag to replace the first. I guess you could argue it was still a photo of "opportunity", but I think it's a pretty big stretch to call it a snapshot.

 

[Gary A.]

Just another snapshot.

Actually no, that is a photograph taken of the second flag raised on Mount Suribachi. It was a planned photo event and the photo was taken by Joe Rosenthal. Their are some snapshots of the raising of the first flag, taken by a Staff Sgt Lowry or possibly Lowery - can't remember the exact spelling.

Rosenthal wrote about taking that snap. "Out of the corner of my eye, I had seen the men start the flag up. I swung my camera and shot the scene. That is how the picture was taken, and when you take a picture like that, you don't come away saying you got a great shot. You don't know."

Hence the posing of the Marines in the later photo as the 'guarantee shot' that he got an image which recorded the beginning of the end of one of the bloodiest battles of WWII. Rosenthal knew the battle was historic, perhaps at the time he didn't know how historic, but he knew it was important. Not knowing, if the corner of his eye shot was any good, he posed a shot with the second and larger US flag as the 'guarantee shot'. I believe any photojournalist would have done the same.

FYI- on a per-foot basis, Iwo Jima may be one of the bloodiest of all time. The Japanese started with 22,000 men of which only 216 were taken prisoners (survived), the Marines suffered more than 26,000 casualties. Iwo Jima only emcompasses eight square miles.

 

[Achaicus]

It is with awareness of irony that I made that claim. Rosenthal said he didn't put much thought into the shot, which according to some in this thread makes it a snapshot not a photograph. I don't think anyone would call the result only a snapshot, unless you are trying to conform to some bourgeois idea that photographer's intent and attention makes a photograph, and if that is lacking it is a snapshot.

What is missing from this discussion is the connotation attached to the term snapshot that implies amateur. Snapshot or photograph is more about the perceived worth of the photographer than it is about the quality of the photograph. Oh you are well known so whatever you produce is photography. Who are you? All you take are snapshots.

 

[robbins.photo]

It is with awareness of irony that I made that claim. Rosenthal said he didn't put much thought into the shot, which according to some in this thread makes it a snapshot not a photograph. I don't think anyone would call the result only a snapshot, unless you are trying to conform to some bourgeois idea that photographer's intent and attention makes a photograph, and if that is lacking it is a snapshot.

What is missing from this discussion is the connotation attached to the term snapshot that implies amateur. Snapshot or photograph is more about the perceived worth of the photographer than it is about the quality of the photograph. Oh you are well known so whatever you produce is photography. Who are you? All you take are snapshots.

Guess it all depends on your definition of the word "snapshot". When I look at a photograph and it's well composed to me that's a photograph. It may not be a really great photograph, but if the composition is there, that's a photograph.

If I look at one that is poorly composed, that's a snapshot.

The photographer may have spent a lot of time setting up the shot before hand or may have just grabbed a picture of opportunity and then spent time post processing it to get a well composed photo without a lot of distracting elements, etc. But when they actually took the time or how much time they took to compose it is irrelevant to me, if it's well composed, it's a photograph.

For me at least I could care less who took the picture.

Other folks view the term differently I guess, but not much point in debating that I suppose. Ask 10 people that same question and you'll probably get 15 different answers.

 

[vintagesnaps]

I think of a snapshot as the result of someone getting a subject or scene more or less in the viewfinder and taking a picture. A photograph involves a certain amount of thought and know-how in framing and composing images.

That can be done quickly; having done sports/events I learned how to frame shots in a fraction of a second while something's happening. It feels like less conscious thought to me, but I think what happens is with practice it becomes a more automatic procedure; I know what to do so don't have to think it about it so much.

But it's experience and expertise that I think enables a photographer to compose a photo even when done quickly. Someone could I suppose take some time to get a snapshot if waiting for the relatives to all get in the picture, having to move back to get them all in... (Or mostly in, people not having feet seems to be common enough in snapshots. lol) I think it's skill that makes a difference.

 

[Braineack]

These type of threads always confuse me.

A photo can be a snapshot, but a snapshot can be a photo.

 

[TheLibrarian]

My working definition is snapshots are informal happenstance things but doing street photography it is informal and happenstance so I don't like that definition. I think of a photo as some attempt at intentionally setting up a moment to remember or share which is much more difficult than being with friends or catching natural candids of your loved ones. Some people may not know/ see the difference between the two like a Tommy Hilfiger ad but that goes to show how successfully the photographer created a moment.