I am seriously interested in knowing what separates a Candid from a snapshot. Guidebooks, reference manuals and dictionaries can be of some use, but on a Forum it is the membership that decides the definition, like Wikipedia. I know that most of the photography on this forum aspires to control as many parameters as possible in producing a quality image, but I would have thought that Candid photography by it's nature takes some of that control out of the hands of the photographer. With that as a departing point I would like to know what the Forum thinks are the minimum requirements for a photograph to be considered a candid rather than a snapshot. Thanks for your indulgence.
Steve Wan wrote:
Candid is a snapshot for which someone is willing to pay.
I take 100's of candids but have never sold one so I would disagree.
A candid is usually seen as a shot of a person when they are unaware that a shot is been taken.
A snap shot can be anything and does not even have to have people in it. I think that the question may requrie rephrasing as it is currently comparing apples and oranges to some extent.
John
Doesn't really matter what the def. is between the two for me that is. I don't get caught up in all that.
I would think there is a difference and its important that we take more "snapshots" as they are part of the collective memory of our planet.
As a photographer I take shots as requested by paying clients or what I want for my personal work. What I don't do enough of is take snaps of family and friends which just record a moment in time.
Just an other take on the place of the snap shot in our world.
John
mlenny wrote:
I am seriously interested in knowing what separates a Candid from a snapshot. Guidebooks, reference manuals and dictionaries can be of some use, but on a Forum it is the membership that decides the definition, like Wikipedia. I know that most of the photography on this forum aspires to control as many parameters as possible in producing a quality image, but I would have thought that Candid photography by it's nature takes some of that control out of the hands of the photographer. With that as a departing point I would like to know what the Forum thinks are the minimum requirements for a photograph to be considered a candid rather than a snapshot. Thanks for your indulgence....Show more →
I don't think it's one or the other. I think a snapshot can be a candid.
I think the point that's more worth discussing is what makes a photo considered a "snapshot". To me, a snapshot is a picture that looks as though the photographer didn't spend much time composing or worrying about their camera's parameters. Such parameters are typically unimportant for personal photos, but become important when a picture is up for exhibition.
Thats a very interesting idea John.
I have begun to find it odd that virtually every one of my friends who doesn't shoot professionally has literally thousands of images documenting and capturing the various moments of their lives.
I am lucky if I have a handful.
The tales and stories that their images tell live many years past them. I was reminded of this recently by a few deaths of people I knew. Two separate and distinct twenty something girls I hung out with. At their memorials, and online were gathered a massive collection of visual reminders of who they were, their vibrance and life.
It really stopped me dead in my tracks when it struck me that if I would so tragically end, how little of who I was could be shared beyond the sequestered groups of friends I maintain.
At those memorial services, I relived happy memories, as well as developed some new ones from images where I had not been a participant. I left the memorial knowing that they were incredibly diverse and wonderful people who impacted so many people's lives in so many positive ways.
So I fully agree with your notion of improving the collective memory of the planet.
A candid is a professional quality looking snapshot.
Snapshots are poor quality shots taken by amateurs (we hope), poor light, blown out, blurry, not sharpened properly, crooked, messy busy in focus backgrounds.
A snapshot has a style all of its own. Snapshots are typically impulse captures. Snapshots have no regard for cluttered backgrounds, focus, or straight horizons. A snapshot are not influenced by a professional's eye for detail. The result can be a more revealing image as the images includes details that might have been omitted.
Candid photography simply implies that the images are taken without direction by the photographer. It's not accurate to say that snapshots are completely different from candids because there can be a candid element. It just depends on the situation.
Snapshots are really about a careless method of shooting. A trained photographer might find that it's something difficult to reproduce unless you really study a lot of snapshots to see what the tell-tell things are. It might be that you have to put a finger in front of your lens like my great grandmother used to do.
Some stock photo libraries do a really good job of including images that are taken in the snapshot style.
All your photos are candids. They don't qualify as snapshots because they all have straight horizons. Snapshots will tend to have crooked horizons. Also, using shorter lenses such as a 35 or 50mm lens will help provide the look of a snapshot.
forrest5000 wrote:
I take 100's of candids but have never sold one so I would disagree.
A candid is usually seen as a shot of a person when they are unaware that a shot is been taken.
A snap shot can be anything and does not even have to have people in it. I think that the question may requrie rephrasing as it is currently comparing apples and oranges to some extent.
John
John,
I think you have defined it well, but I would add that the person could be aware they are being photographed but are not allowing that fact to change what they are doing. You've done a good job in this thread describing the difference. I'm with you on this. Other's have chosen to take a more closed-minded view.
Best Regards,
Andre
Nov 29, 2009 at 01:48 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
darrenwhitley wrote:
A snapshot has a style all of its own. Snapshots are typically impulse captures. Snapshots have no regard for cluttered backgrounds, focus, or straight horizons. A snapshot are not influenced by a professional's eye for detail. The result can be a more revealing image as the images includes details that might have been omitted.
Candid photography simply implies that the images are taken without direction by the photographer. It's not accurate to say that snapshots are completely different from candids because there can be a candid element. It just depends on the situation.
Snapshots are really about a careless method of shooting. A trained photographer might find that it's something difficult to reproduce unless you really study a lot of snapshots to see what the tell-tell things are. It might be that you have to put a finger in front of your lens like my great grandmother used to do.
Some stock photo libraries do a really good job of including images that are taken in the snapshot style. ...Show more →
well, whatever they are called, I think you've done one helluva good job with these takes. #5 is compelling, as is #3. I sure look forward to the day when I can capture as much feeling in a photo as you have in these. Damn fine work, sir.
