Robert Lynch wrote:
While you are mentioning the limitations of your location equipment, you aren't allowing for the fact that another photographer with more experience and a better developed vision could potentially use the same camera as you, the same speed light and the same model at the same location and still create a superior image.  While it is true that some tasks can only be accomplished with certain tools, in the end, it's usually the limitations of the person using the tools that is the biggest factor.  When the other person made the observation about lighting, did you look at it as a possible learning experience?  Did you explain what resources you had available at the time and ask for input about how you might have approached the task differently?  People have done excellent work on location with just a few speedlights.  David Hobby and Joe McNally come to mind.

Everything is a learning opportunity, though some are better than others.  I'm not discounting the idea that anyone else in the same location with the same equipment and same subject can create a superior image.  What I am discounting is who decides what is a superior image.  How is their image superior?  What's the criteria to decide what is superior and what is inferior?  Is this the same criteria to decide what is a snapshot and what is a photograph?

  I'll also readily admit that I'm not the world's most experienced photographer.  I'm not the best equipped, either.  I do, though, the best job I know how to do and am constantly trying new things.  A lot of people on this thread agreed that the difference between a photograph and a snapshot is "what they thought" vs "what they saw".  How does anyone know what they thought outside of the resulting image?

  It may be my opinion alone, but I believe that everyone believes they shoot the best possible images given time, talent, equipment and subjects.  If they don't believe they've done the best job they can, they should decide if photography is or still is the thing for them to do.  Even if it's a hobby, one always wants to do their best.  If they don't want to do their best, why do it at all?

  Then you come along and mention 2 people who are "snapshot photographers".  So for some, snapshot is a way to describe their images.  For others, it's a way to put the work of others down and/or make their own seem better.  So ... is "snapshot" a description or a putdown?  It's both ... all depending on who is saying it and why.  In the same way, a snapshot and a photograph are the same thing, depending on who is looking at it and how.

Lovely Day Media wrote:
...I'll also readily admit that I'm not the world's most experienced photographer.  I'm not the best equipped, either...

I think you're sort of missing Robert's point. It is not about the equipment, it is how you use it. I have very little equipment and what I have is pretty cheap but I improvise a lot.

This was shot with a speedlight and a Sto-Fen diffuser mounted on a light stand.

Jeff Fiore wrote:
I think you're sort of missing Robert's point. It is not about the equipment, it is how you use it. I have very little equipment and what I have is pretty cheap but I improvise a lot.

This was shot with a speedlight and a Sto-Fen diffuser mounted on a light stand.

How would you feel if someone came along and said "this is a snapshot, not a photograph."?  (this is not a critique of the image)

Lovely Day Media wrote:
I'll also readily admit that I'm not the world's most experienced photographer.  I'm not the best equipped, either.  I do, though, the best job I know how to do and am constantly trying new things.  A lot of people on this thread agreed that the difference between a photograph and a snapshot is "what they thought" vs "what they saw".  How does anyone know what they thought outside of the resulting image?

That's the whole point.  All anyone knows about what the photographer thought is from the resulting image.  The photographer either successfully conveys that to the viewer or not.  If the viewer can't perceive any attempt on the part of the photographer to convey an interesting, meaningful thought, then they can be expected to assume that the photographer didn't have one when creating the image, other than some common, generic idea.  Around here, that's generally going to be assumed to be "Hey look, a pretty girl".  In other forums, it'll be "Hey look, a pretty flower" or "Hey look, a cool car".   

Lovely Day Media wrote:
Then you come along and mention 2 people who are "snapshot photographers".

I have no idea how you can label Joe McNally and David Hobby as "snapshot photographers".  They are both accomplished professional photographers.  David Hobby's Strobist blog is all about doing more than just snapshots with just speedlights for lighting.

Robert Lynch wrote:
That's the whole point.  All anyone knows about what the photographer thought is from the resulting image.  The photographer either successfully conveys that to the viewer or not.  If the viewer can't perceive any attempt on the part of the photographer to convey an interesting, meaningful thought, then they can be expected to assume that the photographer didn't have one when creating the image, other than some common, generic idea.  Around here, that's generally going to be assumed to be "Hey look, a pretty girl".  In other forums, it'll be "Hey look, a pretty flower" or "Hey look, a cool car".

So if the viewer can't perceive it, it's not there?  Assumptions are okay because the viewer is or claims to be a photographer so they know how they like things.  If things aren't up to their expectations, it *must* be a "snapshot"?

Moon Pix Photography wrote:
Call it whatever you want.. some "snapshots" are the best photographs.

I couldn't agree more.  I realize we are "photographers" so why tend to put more value on carefully thought out "photographs".  But trust me, millions of people treasure the "snapshots" of their life, family and loved ones far more than they do many well, thought out photographs. 

Personally I feel snapshots are more real than what many on here define as a "photograph".

Lovely Day Media wrote:
So if the viewer can't perceive it, it's not there?  Assumptions are okay because the viewer is or claims to be a photographer so they know how they like things.  If things aren't up to their expectations, it *must* be a "snapshot"?

If the viewer can't perceive it, then it really doesn't matter if it's there, does it?  Do you expect the viewer to just imagine and guess?  Of course, this doesn't really matter if you don't care if a particular viewer gets it.  It only matters if your goal is to communicate with the viewer.  If most get it, but some don't, you're doing OK.  If most viewers don't perceive it, you need to start thinking about whether you need to express yourself better or perhaps find a more appropriate audience. 

You seem to be a little sensitive to the opinions of other photographers.  Photographers are producers of imagery, not consumers.  Unless you're worried about marketing to them, don't worry about it.  The exception to this of course is as producers of imagery, there are going to be photographers that you can learn from.  The ones that can successfully communicate to their viewers might very well be able to help you better communicate to yours.  Of course, if you really only shoot for yourself, then no one else's opinions would matter.  If that were the case, I doubt you would have started this thread.

Moon Pix Photography wrote:
Call it whatever you want.. some "snapshots" are the best photographs.

Mike Collins wrote:
I couldn't agree more.  I realize we are "photographers" so why tend to put more value on carefully thought out "photographs".  But trust me, millions of people treasure the "snapshots" of their life, family and loved ones far more than they do many well, thought out photographs. 

Personally I feel snapshots are more real than what many on here define as a "photograph".

+1

David Parsons wrote:

Snapshots are photographs.  False dichotomy.

X1,000

Matt Forma wrote:
Brilliant!

um not really by that definition this would be a snapshot...along with hundreds of other historic photographs....

Lovely Day Media wrote:
How would you feel if someone came along and said "this is a snapshot, not a photograph."?  (this is not a critique of the image)

I wouldn't care because it came out EXACTLY the way I wanted it to, that is all that is important to me - I don't shoot to please other people and not everyone is going to like my work

Robert Lynch wrote:

Moon Pix Photography wrote:
Call it whatever you want.. some "snapshots" are the best photographs.

+1

+1