How would you describe/define a good photo?

???????????????

 

: ???????????????

Good composition, technically correct, subject matter of interest to the
viewer. Beyond that it becomes a troll's question, and most of the regulars in
this group will ignore it or react with derision. If you have something ro say
about photographic merit, say it; and if you've said something useful or
thought-provoking, people may engage you in a discussion. Otherwise, go away
or lurk here until someone opens a discussion to which you're prepared to
contribute.

Bob

 

I'd use words. Probably.

 

One that I like.

 

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! )

 

I disagree completely. It's more like

¿?¡!¿?¡!¿¡!

You have no sense of composition.

Also, my version is cropped effectively.

 

How is this ?!%8x10$$!! for #@%* composition and effective #@%* cropping?

 

Thank you for your quick and informative reply.

Would you mind providing examples of photos you consider to display
the qualities you mentioned?

Thank you.

 

I suggest that if you want to see examples of photographs which meet
what many here would describe, or define as good, you might let us know
what it is you are trying to achieve, and what type of photography
meets your interest.
Consider, that many of the folks in these photo groups have
photographic interests ranging from landscapes, wildlife, portraits,
action sports, street/candid, macro photography, some engage in
artistic interpretations. Many of the pros specialize in studio work
and wedding photography. Each of those have different criteria within
the basic guidelines for composition and subject matter as to what
constitutes excellent work.

So, name your poison, you might have noticed we have a gross inability
to read your mind.

 

Exactly...
Sure , there are all kinds of rules and opinions...
but if you think it's a good photo, then it's a good photo.

 

People want to look at it again and again, possibly getting
very close to see fine details.

-Wolfgang

 

WOW!