how do you know if you're any good?

[back alley]

how do you know if you're any good? photographically speaking...

[Vickko]

Gather the opinions of others, who have credibility and criticism that you respect?

[oftheherd]

What Vickko said, or just your own sense of what is good, no matter what others may think.

[Darren Abate]

When you show people your work, do their jaws drop at all? Compliments will go from, "That's really nice," to "Wow," and then to some level of speechlessness.

Remember that it's all relative. It can't be measured in compliments, and it can't be measured in money -- I've seen some pretty crappy shooters make a lot of money with their photos. Photography as a business is often about who you know.

No-one can "tell" you if you're good or bad; they can only have their opinions. I suggest you post your work to a forum and open your images up to constructive critique. I think having your work critiqued by experienced shooters is something that all photographers -- young and old -- should do.

Cheers,

[Leighgion]

You never will.

The approval of the masses, your peers and even wealth resulting from your work doesn't mean you're any good. All you have is your will to existentially confirm yourself through the action of continuing to take photographs until your life is over.

[Leighgion]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

Or not...

You can always take up hairdressing.

That's merely the exchange of one form of existential ennui for another. Photographic angst is displaced by the ambivalence of barbary.

[colyn]

Good is subjective..

One person may say you are good while another may say your photos suck.

[dcsang]

. . .I get called for a second "date" and she tells me to pack an overnight bag.... oh wait..... hold on.. I should really read the WHOLE post before responding huh..

Smirking,
Dave

[kshapero]

I'm good first if I feel good about a particular photo. Being good is ever changing. You have to keep shooting. HCB WAS good. Also I like it when others enjoy the photos I like.

[bmattock]

How do you know if you're not any good?

[usagisakana]

Originally Posted by bmattock

How do you know if you're not any good?

by being continually displeased with your work.

[NB23]

Originally Posted by nikonhswebmaster

No - that is not always good measure, some of the greatest artists have been constantly displeased, and worse.

Yeah but do not forget that the greatest artists we're displeased because they knew they could do better and they knew they we're good.
Usually, when you're good, you know it.

[mackigator]

Are you happy? Good makes me happy first.

[Joe]

"you're no good, you're no good, you're no good, baby, you're no good"--Linda Rondstadt
Have you ever heard this song and thought she was singing to you? Could be a sign.

[RFOBD]

What is this "good" you speak of?

[anoldsock]

...even if you are good, you should never settle for it. And this is my opinion only, but you should always strive to better than you are because once you get complacent you're no longer as good as you were

[Ben Blacket]

Generally, peoples direct comments will only be positive. If you have an exhibition & all you get is silence or whispers behind your back, or the "comments" section of your flickr photos is left blank, then you know you're pretty bad! No one will comment "this photo stinks", in fear of receiving similar feedback about their own work!

[back alley]

Originally Posted by Ben Blacket

Generally, peoples direct comments will only be positive. If you have an exhibition & all you get is silence or whispers behind your back, or the "comments" section of your flickr photos is left blank, then you know you're pretty bad! No one will comment "this photo stinks", in fear of receiving similar feedback about their own work!

it's all those blanks in the comment section that got me wondering...

[migtex]

Originally Posted by back alley

it's all those blanks in the comment section that got me wondering...

ok! now you make me worried! Seriously!

I didn't need that today!

But that is nor your fault... is mine!

[back alley]

Originally Posted by migtex

ok! now you make me worried! Seriously!

I didn't need that today!

But that is nor your fault... is mine!

sorry, my friend!
i did not want anyone to fret, my goal was to see how other amateurs determine if they are any good and how they do that.

i have sold photos. i have worked as a wedding photographer. i had a small studio where i did family portraits and nudes. i have a (very small) following locally that like my street stuff.
yet, i still wonder...

[migtex]

Originally Posted by back alley

sorry, my friend!
i did not want anyone to fret, my goal was to see how other amateurs determine if they are any good and how they do that.

i have sold photos. i have worked as a wedding photographer. i had a small studio where i did family portraits and nudes. i have a (very small) following locally that like my street stuff.
yet, i still wonder...

No harm done my friend!
It is a very deep question and I like you did it.

Born in a family of professional photographers (both parents) I learn that unless you are good enough for the market (not the critics ok) you don't get food on the table.
I have work professionally for almost two decades, so I'm used to critics. I may have some worth then.. that does mean I'm good or that I have any value today... I don't and I keep trying but I'm not in the market either, fortunately!

Is just the size of the blanks that gives the reality! got to live with it and... keep on trying not to get worst !

[oscroft]

I think it depends on how well you please your intended audience, and I am my own audience - although I'm happy to show my photos to others and I'm pleased when people like them, I really only shoot for myself. And so far, I'd rate myself as good enough to please myself with a sufficient proportion of my shots to make it enjoyable for me to continue.

But I also compare my stuff with other people's, and there are many people out there whose work pleases me more than mine does, so by my measure they're better than I am (and likewise there are people whose work pleases me less than my own does), and that gives me inspiration to try to get better.

[jky]

Originally Posted by oscroft

I think it depends on how well you please your intended audience, and I am my own audience - although I'm happy to show my photos to others and I'm pleased when people like them, I really only shoot for myself. And so far, I'd rate myself as good enough to please myself with a sufficient proportion of my shots to make it enjoyable for me to continue.

But I also compare my stuff with other people's, and there are many people out there whose work pleases me more than mine does, so by my measure they're better than I am (and likewise there are people whose work pleases me less than my own does), and that gives me inspiration to try to get better.

Ditto... only shoot for myself, but of course it's nice when others admire/appreciate the photos.
btw ... I don't think I'm good enough... (not being self deprecating here). What keeps me shooting though are those rare times when you just "get it". Few and far between, but the one or two photos where I feel I "got it" makes the experience well worth it...

[TheHub]

Originally Posted by Ben Blacket

... or the "comments" section of your flickr photos is left blank, then you know you're pretty bad! No one will comment "this photo stinks", in fear of receiving similar feedback about their own work!

I find popularity on Flickr not to be a good judge of who's good and who's not. I find that when people make lots of friends/contacts, their photos start building up comments regardless of how good they are. There seems to be a sheep mentality where people all follow the crowd. I have come across many photos I find very ordinary or worse, not even really good, that have pages and pages of trite comments and annoying awards. On the flip side I have found many wonderful photos with no comments at all that leave me scratching my head. Riddle me that, Batman.

I can think of one person in particular on Flickr (a very good and popular photographer) who's every photo gets lathered in gushing comments like "you are the master" to the point where I don't bother looking anymore because it makes me nauseous.

I have met a few people online who have commented on my work which makes me happy. I'd rather have a few people say nice, honest things than half of Flickr posting stupid "DIAMOND AWARD" animated gifs all over my comments.

As others have said, I shoot for myself. If others like my photos then that's great. If they don't, well, that's life. I'm not pro, I'm not selling my work, I'm not trying to prove myself to anyone. I motivate myself, and I strive to better myself.

[FrankS]

Great question. Possibly the best so far on RFF, IMO.

On the one hand, one can't know what one doesn't know. On the other hand, "good" is pretty subjective. It's also too easy to get complements here on RFF because most folks are so damn nice. I've read too many glowing complements for mediocre work on internet photo forums. It all depends on the the evaluation scale that is used to judge photography. One should be more positive with a beginner photographer. People willing to part with their money for your photographic work is a pretty good indicator. It's the free market idea.