What's interesting to see vs. what's interesting to photograph

[monkeykoder]

Or perhaps is is a disconnect between technical skill and vision.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

A work around you mean?
Of course, the equivalent situation for someone who is technically good but lacks imagination is to become a photo technician.
I remember a printer in the late 80's to early 90's (I forget his name) who came to fame because a lot of well known photographers used him to print their pictures.
He published a book and did seminars on how to print.
I think all that matters at the end of the day is to know your limitations and to be the best you can within them.
But I guess you never can find your limits unless you shoot for the moon to begin with.

 

[Crosby]

...but I've shot a lot of photographs since last February. One epiphany was slow in coming, i.e., that many things that are intriguing to look at, and even beautiful in some way, do not make interesting subjects for a photograph.

(I'd like to take a whack at this dead horse.)

I have noticed this also, but I think the trick is to take the shot in a way that would make it interesting. I am a believer that anything photographed could be interesting. Maybe not to a large mass of people, but for the sake of argument, anything could be interesting.

Here is an example: if we were to ask everyone here to take a picture of an ordinary glass of water, we'd get all kinds of pictures, some interesting most probably not.

The interesting photos of the glass of water might include props and special lighting techniques.

Some pictures in general catch my eye with colors, others by seeing something I've seen before but in a different way. Pictures that catch my eye just about everytime are sunset/sunrise with all the colors. After a few back to back sunset pictures I get the yawns until something changes enough that makes me stop. I think this is a good place to stop...

 

[skieur]

Originally Posted by skieur
What is interesting or of value to you is somewhat irrelevant...

skieur

I in general agree with your thought except this one line.
Saying that "What is interesting or of value to you is somewhat irrelevant..." just doesn't work. In order for someone to be a "great" photographer there has to be dedication or a strong personal feeling towards the content of their photos.
For example, do you think that world famous wildlife photographers just don't really give a crap about wildlife? Are true professional sports photographers fans? Of course they are. That's what makes their photos so great. They have a connection with the game...they know the game, the players,what envokes emotion in the fans as well as themselves. By having that interest or value, that you have disregarded, is how they are able to tell the story of the game in their photos.

The converse of that is a photographer who says that he took the bland, boring snapshot of flowers because he was interested in flowers. What I am saying is that your interest matters much less (or maybe not at all). What is important is whether you have used your talent and photographic skill to convey that interest to the viewer.

To parphrase your terms: Giving a crap about wildlife is meaningless, unless it is conveyed through your photography and that relates to how you use your talent and skills.

skieur

 

[ksmattfish]

"In my mind's eye, I visualize how a particular . . . sight and feeling will appear on a print. If it excites me, there is a good chance it will make a good photograph. It is an intuitive sense, an ability that comes from a lot of practice." -Ansel Adams

I think the problem is often that images out of the camera tend to be seated more in reality than they are in our mind and eyes. We filter out a lot of visual info, and add other stuff.

Drawing 101 class helped me retrain my eyes and mind to see what was actually in front of me, rather than what I thought was in front of me. I highly recommend beginning art classes such as basic drawing and design to my photo friends. Those classes aren't as much about drawing as they are about seeing.

http://www.ronbigelow.com/articles/previsualization/previsualization.htm