DSLRUsers.com

I hope that this will generate some interesting discussion about what you see as the differences, if indeed you see any at all, between a happy snap and a photograph.

I think that for me one of the points of difference is impact.

Oneputt wrote:I hope that this will generate some interesting discussion about what you see as the differences, if indeed you see any at all, between a happy snap and a photograph.

I think that for me one of the points of difference is impact.

Both happy snaps and photos - are photos The difference can be difficult to ascertain. For example, I might take a photo that is very important to me personally but could be viewed by others as a happy snap.

It also raises the question - do we ever see the these words used to describe paintings - that one is a painting, but this is one is a happy painting.

I wouldn't normally use the phrase, because I tend to agree with Chris, but I suppose a "happy snap" might be an image with no intrinsic value other than to the photographer - eg pix of loved ones at significant times that may not stand alone as portraits.

Of course they are both photos no debate. I guess what I was trying to say was that what I consider happy snaps are probably very personal to the photographer, but lacking interest for others, although having said that I love looking at very old happy snaps. Shucks it must all be in the perspective.

cricketfan wrote:I wouldn't normally use the phrase, because I tend to agree with Chris, but I suppose a "happy snap" might be an image with no intrinsic value other than to the photographer - eg pix of loved ones at significant times that may not stand alone as portraits.

I would refine this to say that a "happy snap" might be an image which was taken to capture a scene/moment without necessarily much thought as to creating a piece of art.
I would say that it's possible for a happy snap to be a piece of art, although many are "just" happy snaps.

Oneputt,

Maybe there needs to be a different frame of reference or comparison. Instead of Happy Snaps versus Photos it would be clearer if we considered Happy Snaps versus Studies.

In other words, photographs made with varying levels of application, intent and revelation. I guess skill comes into it also although I suspect it has less influence in the general scheme of things than some would perhaps feel happy with.

You are absolutely correct in your observation that the passage of time alters the value or perception of a photograph also. That perceived relevance is also affected greatly by external events and influences. At the risk of being denounced as vulgar let me suggest that a New York skyline post the World Trade Centre destruction lends a different importance or value to one taken prior to the destruction of the towers.

In each and every photograph the greatest proportion of content is a portrait of the photographer. Each of us chooses to commit a particualr motif to posterity and in a particular way. It is the level of infusion of the mind of the photographer that also marks part of the difference between the Happy Snaps and the Study - perhaps a Happy Snap is more an observation or record whereas a Study is a statement, an opinion or an attitude.

Sometimes this is equated as a particular photographer's Style and may at times develop to be almost a Trade Mark. It is neither a good thing, nor a bad thing. It simply IS.

Like so many other epithets, Happy Snap can be applied with varying meaning by virtue of tone or context. Amateur and Professional are also terms much abused and misunderstood. In that sense I prefer to use terms such as Recreational or Commercial and so it follows that in my own particualr case I pursue a Commercial programme in order to fund my own Recreational pursuits. And, in my recreational pursuits I am a true amateur in that I am making photographs purely for the love of it.

So it is with Happy Snaps and Studies. I posted a few pics made with my newly acquired D70s & lens. Are they Happy Snaps or Studies? I made the buggers and I don't know. Conditioned as I am by a long exposure to making pictures for a purpose I guess that as Happy Snaps they are informed by my experience and knowledge of the medium but, on their own I would not necessariuly consider them Studies unless they became elements in a larger, broader project on some specific subject such as experiences of moving into a new community or objets trouvés of Sydney's inner west - or something like that.

Where I do find that Happy Snaps get a raw deal and a bad press is where pomposity and arrogance prevent people from admitting that their works are in fact Happy Snaps and try to convince others, as they have possibly convinced themselves, that these pictures are valued works of art to any people other than themselves.

Cheers,

DaveB wrote:I would refine this to say that a "happy snap" might be an image which was taken to capture a scene/moment without necessarily much thought as to creating a piece of art.
I would say that it's possible for a happy snap to be a piece of art, although many are "just" happy snaps.

Dave B,

I think that in reference to the piece that I was scribing as you posted that there are just as many studies that never make it as 'ART' also.

Cheers,

Thanks for for that well thought out discertation Sheetshooter, in the main I agree with you.

I personally do not comment on many of the images posted for critique for a variety of reasons (not the least of which is that with some images I do not feel qualified to do so) and never on those which I consider closer to happy snaps rather than studies, simply for fear of offending someone to whom the image might have particular significance.

Oneputt,

I am with you 100% of the way. If I have nothing good to say, I say nothing.

There are rare exceptions where I may offer constructive criticism to thos who I think can take it without getting their back up (and even then I fear that some may get their back up).

Mind you, this is not to say that if I don't comment I think an offering is inferior - I am only able to do as much in a day as I can do.

Cheers,

SS, agreed. You'll notice I was only talking about what "happy snap" means to me, ignoring the definition of "everything else".

Sheetshooter wrote:Oneputt,

I am with you 100% of the way. If I have nothing good to say, I say nothing.

There are rare exceptions where I may offer constructive criticism to thos who I think can take it without getting their back up (and even then I fear that some may get their back up).

Mind you, this is not to say that if I don't comment I think an offering is inferior - I am only able to do as much in a day as I can do.

Cheers,

SS interesting comments. From my prespective I'd like to know what's good and (most importantly) what's bad about my images. It's all too easy to think that you're cranking out works of art when in fact it's dross and no one had the heart to tell you. I'd rather take my pain up front

An interesting example: in this post where you also commented (thank you) Matt K made this observation

Matt K wrote:These images are just a little too "Postcard perfect" for my liking. Excellent postcards....but they all require another element to lift them beyond the "travel magazine" image. Get yourself back there...try again...

This made me reflect again on the images. Upshot is I realised I was getting a little lazy and taking the easy shot. This weekend I went out shooting with that ringing in my ears and tried some very different images (one of which I've now entered into the Movement comp). The result is my work is the better for it.

Of course if you told me every single image I took was like something you see floating in a toilet bowl and I should go back to taking happy snaps with a P & S I might be a little peeved

I'd defintely say that 85-90% of my shots are still happy snap material it's not that I'm not trying, but old habits die hard and I have to make a conscious effort to improve me shots, composition etc..

(It's funny before I joined I thought having a postcard photo, was something to aim for, now I realise the bar is a lot higher).

Anyways, I post my images on here not to hear people stroking my ego with complements, but to hear from others how I can make them better, through it and persistant practice I may slowly improve the shots I take...I'm fairly new but I can't easily recall when anyone has had atleast a open negative repsonse to critcism. When I get no replies to a images I've posted I usually assume they must be bad, but without the comments I don't know how to fix, or improve next time..

sorry for taking this Off Topic...

Ide like to make comment by way of an anecdote.
(forgive me if its a bit long or lowbrow )

Many moons ago , a NG photog approached a old lumberjack in rural France to do a photoessay of his rapidly disappearing lifestyle.

Surprised, and bemused, the oldtimer finally agreed to allow the photog to stay in a shed on his mountainside property, and allowed the photog to follow him around for a whole week. The photog happily bunked in to his new home. For the next few days he studied the timberworker diligently, the ancient tools of trade, the old mans rough and ready garb and traditional work processes, his weathered face and hands...and slowly they became friends.

By end of the week, the photog was very exited by the images he knew he had captured. He forsaw his pics as his first COVER
With only a day left to his bargain, he rushed down off the mountain and into town to call his editor with the good news, and then to the local printlab to get some large prints of a dozen of his best negs made to show to his gracious host.

Returning the next day , the photog spread them lovingly over the roughly hewn kitchen table and rushed to find the old man .

Both looked over them together for some time, the photog showing off his skill at photography. The old man looked on, and nodded his approval, but was still quite bemused by the fuss and excitment of the photographer. Concerned, the photgrapher showed him how excellent his equipment was and how he knew how to best use it etc...

Finally the old man congratulated the photog on his fine efforts.

Relieved, the photog exhaustedly sat back, but still a little uneasy that his 'friend' had not been completely enthusiastic of his artistic masterpieces, but figured it was due to a difference of lifestyle...

The old man then turned to him and said, "Now that you have what you wanted, i want you to do something for me " ( ..the faint strum of a banjo )
"Of course, anything." replied the photog, wondering what it would be.

"I want you to take a photograph of me " replied the lumberjack.
Surprised, the photog immediately offered all of the prints as his gift, but the old man shook his head and said no , "i dont want these pictures, i want you to use your excellent camera to take a photograph for me".
The photog agreed, still unsure of what to do, but desperately wanted to show his gratitude to his elderly host.

The lumberjack excused himself and left the room, allowing the photog to quietly ready his equiment.

Soon later, the old man returned, but to the photographers surprise, his friend had transformed himself. He had quicky washed his hair, shaved his scruff, and had neatly combed his hair. Even more suprisingly, he had put on a crisp and clean fine white shirt, made all the more remarkable by his still wearing the same old stained and mudied workclothes the photog had seen the man wear all week.
The old man confessed that as he had no other pants and shoes, the photograph would have to be, he gesticulated, from the waist up !

"Now i want you take my picture, so that my grandchildren will see that their grandfather was no bum ! "

The photographer took the picture and soon afterwards they made their farewells.
Returing to the city, he indeed received the illustirous cover, and many more accolades came after. From that series, he then went on to make a great career as a photographer.

Years later, whilst editing images for his soon to be publishd book, he reflected over the images of his time with the old lumberjack,and he realised that even though his more artistic, and commercially viable picture were better pictures, that the portait he had taken for his friend, was by far his favourite photograph.


Guys - i dont know if thats a happy snap - but its a happy ending to a snap.
There are many lessons for a photographer in this story
Not to be too corny but its the journey , and not the destination ...

Thanks for reading. Now its off to sleep you go - sweet dreams

I liked the story, is it true ?

I must just add here that if I want an image to be critiqued then I post it in that section, and I expect to get and take the good with the bad. In fact I think that I always learn more from critical reviews.

If I do not think that an image is up for critique then I post it in general as it is only offered out of interest.

There are many photographers on here whom I have rapidly learnt to admire, and I am always happy when they offer some comment or praise.

Alpha_7 wrote:I liked the story, is it true ?

yep - i believe so, although i cant remember the name of the photog.
I read it years ago ...

Yes. Le Jazz Cat,

It's all down to who is paying the piper, as always.

In the cut and thrust of the commercial sphere the goals of what is called for by the client can become quite indellibly etched into the psyche - I know it has done with me. It seems it alsoi had done with the hero in your story.

Another remarkablke insight into this phenomenon is Roland Barthe's discussion - Camera LUcida in which he searches amongst the family photos for the one picture that shows his deceased mother as he really knew her. He eventually finds theww 'HER he knew in a snap taken of her a six year old in a conservatory at the turn of the 20th Century - long befoire he was born or could have known her.

During my extended period of peak activity there was way too little time, let alone residual energy, to pursue much in the way of personal ex[pression in my photographs. I was sent to all the best places and have no photos of them without some half-naked excess walking protein stuck in front.

Now that I do hjave time for personal work the most difficult part is ridding myself of the objectivity called for by most clients. Finding the poetry beneath all the prose proves and incessant and daunting task.

Is the commercial or the personal work superior .... inferior. Shit, I don't know. I tried my best wiuth all of it and, most importantly, I enjoyed myself producing ALL of it. I think if one can work at something one loves all their life it is a majar part of the battle won.

There are wonderful happy snaps and there are equally wonderful deliberately structured and formulated works that sometimes took days of pondering to produce. There is also plenty of dross amongst it. Something that scares me now because, in relocating, I have set apart a room solely for the editing, cataloguing, reproduction and dissemnination of the one and a quarter million trannies I have on file. As you have possibly guessed the circular filing cabinet will get a savage workout.

With regard to critiquing people's works the internet is a dicey place to do it because it is very difficult to discern just how far the tongue is planted into the cheek and the exact tone of one's rhetoric. Add to that that there are some extremely fragile egos around and it is just too prone to kick of a flame war. NOT between the photographer and the critic but between third-parties who must challenge, deride, ridicule or grandstand the remarks of others. I know because I have seen it happen too often and I have seen the stirrings of it in a couple of critiques I have given here. And then the task of critique by PM becomes somewhat elitist and ssecluded and comments made that could benefit the group are kept out of sight.

Cheers,

happy snap vs art.

both photographic.

typically if im posting just "happy snaps" ill say so in the first post ... something along the lines of no great critiquing required etc.

Sheetshooter wrote:
With regard to critiquing people's works the internet is a dicey place to do it because it is very difficult to discern just how far the tongue is planted into the cheek and the exact tone of one's rhetoric. Add to that that there are some extremely fragile egos around and it is just too prone to kick of a flame war. NOT between the photographer and the critic but between third-parties who must challenge, deride, ridicule or grandstand the remarks of others. I know because I have seen it happen too often and I have seen the stirrings of it in a couple of critiques I have given here. And then the task of critique by PM becomes somewhat elitist and ssecluded and comments made that could benefit the group are kept out of sight.

Cheers,

I agree that there are difficulties with communicating in this way. I think psychologists say that 80% of communication is non-verbal, ie facial expressions, gestures, body language. Maybe we should all get web-cams.

And yes, a very well-intended criticism can sometimes be accepted by the photographer and decried by others who have read the critique. Sometimes the argument can become more about people's opinions than images. But, on the whole, very seldom on this forum.

Even so, we must be careful that we don't get stuck at either end of the continuum:
- full-on criticism and flaming as seen elsewhere on the web, or
- smarmy, saccharine "nice picture" platitudes which do NOT help the photographer improve his technique or artistic ability

I confess that I do not make a lot of critical posts, and probably tend to not post if I can't find something positive to say. Often, I find a positive element in the image and then mention a deficiency if I see one. I do try to avoid posting a criticism if I don't like the image's subject matter or message because that is merely a viewpoint rather than an unbiased critique.

However, I reiterate - in my time on this forum there has been remarkably little flaming, and a lot of helpful and constructive critiques. Our admins and mods have done well in shaping the forum in this fashion.

Sheetshooter wrote:Yes. Le Jazz Cat,

It's all down to who is paying the piper, as always.

In the cut and thrust of the commercial sphere the goals of what is called for by the client can become quite indellibly etched into the psyche - I know it has done with me. It seems it alsoi had done with the hero in your story.

I think all photographers discover that the value of their images are in the end, relative to the context they are made in.
To a family, a photo of a deceased relative may well be priceless.
Often we hear of people in crisis, saving their family photos(happy snaps) as their prized possessions, but not their great works of Art... :lol:
In anothers view, these same images can appear as quite ordinary (boring) 'happy snaps' .

Studies have also show that when a group of viewers, (chosen from many different socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds) have independantly viewed a series of images , they have quite different opinions and interpretations of what theyre seeing.
So much for the one true international language!

It reminds me that we photographers should/must learn to see the world through the 'others' eyes (such as our subjects), and not just our own .
Often it shows a much more interesting view, and suspends our egos pursuit at self gratifying fame and fortune.

lejazzcat wrote:So much for the one true international language!

Actually, that would be music.

Oneputt wrote:I hope that this will generate some interesting discussion about what you see as the differences, if indeed you see any at all, between a happy snap and a photograph.

I think that for me one of the points of difference is impact.

Sorry, but I think I'll rain on your parade.

I don't see any difference at all, mainly because beauty and art and impact are in the eye of the beholder.

In many internet circles, calling a photo a snapshot is often a derogatory term, intentionally thrown. To me, they're all photos, all taken with a purpose and usually taken with the photog's best effort at the time.

It matters not whether the photog is well schooled in the "accepted" practices of the art and achieves some "standard" that is accepted by peers. It only matters if the photo achieves what the photog intended to achieve, given his level of expertise.

Most of us here are our own worst critics. But, when we produce something that we really like or that has great meaning to us, as the photographer, who has the right to stand and deride that photo as being something less than "artistic" or whatever?

I'm not saying that everyone has to like or enjoy any given photo, but a photo that does not appeal to me is not trash. It's simply a different expression by a photog with a different vision than mine.

I've seen a lot of arrogant posts by so-called "real photographers" that just leave me filled with disgust. I really don't know what the hell a "real photographer" is supposed to be. Is a real photographer a guy that shoots only medium and large format film, using a tripod and tons of associated gear and taking hours or days to set up the shot? Maybe, but maybe not. Are his shots really "different" than the shots of the kids taken by mom or dad and that turn in to family treasures for years to come? Sure, they're "different" but only in content, IMO.

I have my own standards and desires. I certainly get the warm and fuzzy "feel good" satisfaction of producing photos that others also enjoy. But, if a photo has the elements that I intended when I pressed the shutter, I really don't care if anyone else likes it. That's the attitude I take when viewing the work of others. In most cases, I assume that the photog is presenting the photo because he's at least relatively happy with the outcome. I certainly have no right to declare his photo to be trash. I only have the right to like or dislike, enjoy or not, what he has offered.

I don't pigeon-hole a photo or a photog, based on a set criteria of "artistic" standards and/or the gear he uses. Too often, many so-called "real photographers" don't look at a photo for the content, they do the pixel peeping, bokeh loving, anti-noise, best lens comparisons.

I've been taken to task for being too "soft" in my critiques of a photo. I've been told that telling someone that I like their photo, when it has clear defects, is doing the photog a disservice. BFD..... I offer an opinion or not, based on what I view and whether or not I like the photo, not as a professional art critic....

Nuff said, too much ranting and raving.

gstark wrote:

lejazzcat wrote:So much for the one true international language!

Actually, that would be music.

As a musician - i thought so too,but realised that people have very different and often quite prejudiced views of what constitutes good music.

Rap, techno, jazz, country, opera, ethno etc - there arent many that would enjoy listening to them all.
But photos, whether from Africa, or China, old Persia etc have equal appeal, if in fact not more so than our own cultures.
A man, woman and child, is the 'same' the world over.

I wonder who and when coined the phrase "Happy Snaps" Were they all photos before? What event happened for someone to make a distinction?
My guess is that in the early days photography was only for "professionals" and with the proliferation of affordable cameras, the pro's became defensive about their craft and decided to make a distinction.
But I could be wrong.

lejazzcat wrote:

gstark wrote:

lejazzcat wrote:So much for the one true international language!

Actually, that would be music.

As a musician - i thought so too,but realised that people have very different and often quite prejudiced views of what constitutes good music.

Nobody mentioned quality within the context of music. For that matter, within the context of a "language".

But IMHO, music, and in particular written music, is the "one true international language"

Kerry - i think there is a distinction between a person's private work, and their published 'public' work .

Just like we might write our personal thoughts down in a diary and value that emotional release and hold dear its privacy, we should also expect that our public thoughts, words, images and deeds will be scrutinised and ultimately criticised, as when a author publishes a novel, or manual (helloNikon)...

gstark wrote:
Nobody mentioned quality within the context of music. For that matter, within the context of a "language".

But IMHO, music, and in particular written music, is the "one true international language"

OT...
Quality is implied by the topic of this particular thread ( isnt it?)
But i understand what your saying ...
If you needed to find a place, person or thing in another country - what would you prefer - a picture of it, or to sing or play them a song about it ?

lejazzcat wrote:If you needed to find a place, person or thing in another country - what would you prefer - a picture of it, or to sing or play them a song about it ?

Silly question ...

You've clearly never heard me sing.

Then again, my photos aren't any better either.

gstark wrote:

lejazzcat wrote:If you needed to find a place, person or thing in another country - what would you prefer - a picture of it, or to sing or play them a song about it ?

Silly question ...

You've clearly never heard me sing.

Then again, my photos aren't any better either.

Touche...
im still awaiting my (on back order) antares auto-tune implant as well. Apparently the australian idol crew bought the entire australasian shipment !

lejazzcat wrote:Kerry - i think there is a distinction between a person's private work, and their published 'public' work .

Just like we might write our personal thoughts down in a diary and value that emotional release and hold dear its privacy, we should also expect that our public thoughts, words, images and deeds will be scrutinised and ultimately criticised, as when a author publishes a novel, or manual (helloNikon)...

I still don't see the distinction, at least as I understood the original post to be, as the difference between happy snaps and photos.

If I see the photo, then it's published. The number of viewers isn't really relevant.

Do we have the right to have discriminating tastes? Certainly. Do we have the right to impose our tastes on others? I think not. Do we have the right to offer critique, good or bad? Certainly, so long as we accept the fact that we are neither infallible nor omnipotent.

I don't need someone else to tell me what I should like or dislike. I'm fully capable of making my own mistakes.

One man's trash is another man's treasure. That's the way I view it.

Kerry,

In principle, i 'like' that compassionate outlook your expressing.

Also as a musician i have a profound respect for improvisation and experimentation as its often the case that some great innovation comes about from what was originally a mistake, or a breaking of the rules.
I guess that is the basis for constructive critisism - making someone aware of the rules - so that they may go out and deliberately break them ! :twisted:

Ok - as long as you dont have to pay for it .
If i have to commision a commercial photog to shoot some product , or a wedding photog - im going to be critical and want to see their past work to gauge the results i might end up with . If i dont get what was wanted/expected - i get the shits
Wouldn't you ?

Ohh what a tangled web Oneputt has started here ..
Im off to Tibet to find me a bodhi tree... or maybe a chicken laksa at the local for lunch . hmmmm

lejazzcat wrote:Kerry,

In principle, i 'like' that compassionate outlook your expressing.

Well, I'd say it's more a self serving outlook, rather than compassionate. I can't very well expect others to respect the lines that I draw, if I don't respect theirs.

Also as a musician i have a profound respect for improvisation and experimentation as its often the case that some great innovation comes about from what was originally a mistake, or a breaking of the rules.
I guess that is the basis for constructive critisism - making someone aware of the rules - so that they may go out and deliberately break them ! :twisted:

Nothing wrong with that, so long as there is agreement on the so-called rules, goals and expected results, to begin with. Without agreement, there is imposition, to which I object. I want the freedom to make my own mistakes and project that freedom to others. I do this for my enjoyment, not the enjoyment of others. I presume that most others here are the same.

Ok - as long as you dont have to pay for it .
If i have to commision a commercial photog to shoot some product , or a wedding photog - im going to be critical and want to see their past work to gauge the results i might end up with . If i dont get what was wanted/expected - i get the shits
Wouldn't you ?

This is a completely different scenario, well outside the parameters of what I thought was the original context of this thread. It is only when I am contracting for a specific product, that I have the right to impose my wishes on the contractor, within reason.

Even so, there will be no difference in the photos with regard to a distinction of happy snaps or photos. The distinction will simply be whether or not the photo appeals to my tastes. The same applies when I walk into an art gallery. I would only buy that which I find appealing. Others might find my choices distasteful. Oh well....

phillipb wrote:I wonder who and when coined the phrase "Happy Snaps" Were they all photos before? What event happened for someone to make a distinction?
My guess is that in the early days photography was only for "professionals" and with the proliferation of affordable cameras, the pro's became defensive about their craft and decided to make a distinction.
But I could be wrong.

Interesting point,
Ill play advocate then,
So then could it be said that a image that is made for anything other than a critical application, such as a commissioned photograph (film or dig) can therefore be generically classified as a "happy snap"?

And, then that the results of a wedding shoot , freebie by a amatuer (eg friend) photog with pro gear , and the results of a professional (getting paid) wedding photog deserve different critical treatment ?

Nothing wrong with that, so long as there is agreement on the so-called rules, goals and expected results, to begin with. Without agreement, there is imposition, to which I object. I want the freedom to make my own mistakes and project that freedom to others. I do this for my enjoyment, not the enjoyment of others. I presume that most others here are the same.

Thats sounds very transparent and i like that protocol.


SS- as you expressed - it does indeed appear to be a matter of who's coin it is. ( Isnt it amazing what it buys though ... ch-ching...off now to put on the "Dark Side of the moon")


Oneputt - does that happily resolve your question?
It certainly takes the pressure off

lejazzcat wrote:So then could it be said that a image that is made for anything other than a critical application, such as a commissioned photograph (film or dig) can therefore be generically classified as a "happy snap"?

Not quite. I'd prefer for the phrase "Happy Snap" not to be used at all. I see it as a derogatory term almost like calling someone a nigger. Sure that person may be black but it infers that black is inferior.

lejazzcat wrote: im still awaiting my (on back order) antares auto-tune implant as well. Apparently the australian idol crew bought the entire australasian shipment !

Doesn't seem to have helped. They're still just a bunch of self-serving, talentless moronic wannabees.

And yes, I'm being very kind.

phillipb wrote:

lejazzcat wrote:So then could it be said that a image that is made for anything other than a critical application, such as a commissioned photograph (film or dig) can therefore be generically classified as a "happy snap"?

Not quite. I'd prefer for the phrase "Happy Snap" not to be used at all. I see it as a derogatory term almost like calling someone a nigger. Sure that person may be black but it infers that black is inferior.

Seems to me that 'happy snap' refers to a image made quicky, that im then happy with the results.
Its the MO of a amateur. Especially when we have a digital camera with xGb of memory .

In comparison, the pro-fotog of old , (and new) used to have find and rent/buy the right gear, find the right location , then wait for or setup the right light, arrange for the right talent or prop, find and please(and reshoot) the right client .... it all taking alot more time and effort .

Im not offended by the term myself.

After reading 3 pages of responses, my head hurts... I just wanna take photos!

Generally, there is a distinction in each of us between what constitutes a happy snap and what's something further. The distinction we each perceive may not reflect others' ideals. Sometimes that demarcation is difficult to make, other times - I like fish.

Onyx - very well put. The difference is of course in the eye of the beholder.

This debate is what I had hoped that it would be, and I have thoroughly enjoyed all of the responses.

There is no comparison unless you are after your own perfection.

There is one exception! If you can't express yourself with your own look on subject matter, it can be a waste of time.

But i must say, photography comes with practice and your own experience, and it doesn't matter what type of photo you take. Seeing something through your own eyes is completely diffent to any individuals eyes. Look outside the norm. Try something different.

Jethro