Here are the struggles I face with certain photographs.
I'm not talking about technical issues, but more about their conceptual approach.
Here's the situation: I go to an event - a festival, concert, or sporting match - and take a ton of photos. But when I review them later at home, I feel like they're more documentary or reportage-style shots. However, I don't want to shoot documentaries or reports. I want to focus primarily on artistic photography. And I sense that, especially in these cases, my photos are often more descriptive than artistic. And that's what I want to change.
The photos in this article are a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I don't think they're bad. They're good photos for a newspaper article about the event, or for a poster advertising next year's festival. They quite effectively describe the event, its progression, its atmosphere. But they're not something I'd want to hang on my wall. Not because of technical quality, but because the descriptive aspect overwhelms the artistic one. Some minor improvements can be made through cropping and post-processing on the computer, but in most cases, the character of the images is determined by how they were shot - and there's not much you can do about that.
Dissatisfaction is a powerful driver of human action. So I searched online, gathered literature, and collected some good advice on how to avoid over-description and enhance the artistic dimension of photos. There would be a whole range of tips:
And so on, and so forth...
Each tip needs to be tested in practice. By coincidence, I have several events in my calendar in the coming days that I want to attend, where I plan to shoot and perhaps discover what works and what doesn't. And you'll be able to compare what I've succeeded at and what I haven't.
I'm not saying one type of photography is better than another. Descriptive photos can be totally useful and find their perfect place in a challenge like
