“GOOD” Street Photography?!
The ‘Good’ Photographs of American Photography by: Michiel van Mens (Amsterdam/Netherlands)
As a photographer trying to grow, I often ask myself: What makes a photo good? And more specifically: Is there a logic—a ratio—behind a good photo? In other words, what gives a photograph its strength, and can that knowledge be reproduced? It’s a broad question, much like asking, ‘What makes a painting good?’ But however broad, it’s a valid question. Asking it is already a step toward answering it. In this article, I offer an initial exploration—based on data analysis.
Now, it’s not as though people haven’t tried to define what a “good photo” is. Plenty of essays and articles tackle this very subject. There are countless books—especially photography textbooks—that focus on technique, composition, and light. These writings often offer valuable insights into the craft of photography.
But here’s the twist: In the real world, we constantly come across examples that seem to break all those rules. I’ve seen iconic, world-famous photographs that are completely out of focus, have no formal composition, feature tilted horizons, or awkwardly cropped subjects. And yet—somehow—they work.
So, what is a useful way to identify a “good” photograph? One of the few photographers who makes a clear statement about this is Nan Goldin. Her definition is disarmingly simple: “A good photo is one you remember.”
“Photographing as a Necessity”, Nan Goldin, page 31 of “The Loving Camera, Ed van der Elsken”, catalogue published on the occasion of the exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam, 2017.
What’s great about that definition is that it offers a degree of objectivity—and it’s testable. Go to a photo exhibition, take your time looking at every image, then the next day write down which ones you still remember. Now imagine all other visitors did the same. If you gather all those memories, you’d start to see a pattern. According to Goldin’s logic, the photos most often remembered are the good ones. The rest? Maybe not so good.
American Photography
To answer my question ‘what makes a photo good?’, I’ve received unexpected help from the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam (Netherlands). Earlier this year, the museum hosted the exhibition ‘American Photography’ (February 7 to June 9, 2025). The show featured over 200 prints, images, and publications, offering a sweeping visual history of American photography and image culture. Visitors were presented with everything from news and advertising photos to family snapshots, posters, photobooks, album covers, and iconic magazine spreads.
But it wasn’t the exhibition itself that pushed my thinking forward—it was the visitor survey at the end. One of the first questions asked was: “Which photo do you still remember?” That question struck me. It aligns almost perfectly with Nan Goldin’s description of a good photograph: “A good photo is one you remember.”
Some might argue that this survey can’t really tell us which photos are “better”—after all, the exhibition included a wide range of genres, from documentary and fashion to commercial work and vintage printing techniques. How do you compare those apples and oranges?
But is that a fair critique? Genre itself is an organizing tool, not a natural law. And who’s to say that photos from different genres should be interpreted differently? Why wouldn’t a photo of a red mountain in Monument Valley, captioned “This is not a commercial, this is my homeland” by Hulleah Tsinhahjinnie, leave just as strong an impression as Will Counts’ iconic photo of Elizabeth Eckford walking alone toward Little Rock Central High School? And don’t the provocative fashion shoots by Oliviero Toscani (not featured in this show) live just as vividly in our cultural memory as many World Press Photo winners?
Perhaps we should stop trying to decide what’s “good” based on genre, fame, or tradition—and instead, let the hard data speak for itself.
The Dataset
The Rijksmuseum provided a dataset of 900 visitors who completed the exhibition survey. By analyzing their responses, I was able to identify the top 10 most frequently remembered photographs—essentially, the “good” ones, if we follow Nan Goldin’s logic. From there, it becomes possible to compare those standout images and look for patterns they might share.
The dataset itself consists of a single column containing open-ended responses to the question: “Which photo do you still remember?” Participants were free to answer however they liked—no restrictions on language, length, or word choice. There’s no demographic data linked to the responses—we don’t know the respondents’ ages, genders, countries of origin, education levels, or their general interest in photography.
To analyze the data meaningfully, I had to process it further. I added extra columns to the dataset, tagging each response with identifiable characteristics pulled from the original free text.
The difficulty of interpreting the photographer or image from the responses varied widely. A clear description like “Marriage photo of a war veteran (Iraq War)” could be immediately linked to Nina Berman. But something more vague, like “Photo of a woman on a pincushion, and the surrounding images” was far harder to pinpoint. Some responses didn’t mention a photo at all—comments like “More the overall setup of the exhibition,” or “Quite frankly, nothing.” These were categorized under the label “General.”
Others mentioned more than one image, for example: “The dark photo of the Underground Railroad and the old photo of an Indigenous person.” These were tagged with the label “Multiple.” Despite the interpretive challenges, this kind of open-ended data offers a fascinating window into how people engage with photography—what lingers in memory, and why.
Top 10 “Good” Photos
The most frequently remembered photo in the survey was by Nina Berman: “Marine Wedding” – the wedding day of U.S. Marine Tyler Ziegel and Renee Kline in Metamora, Illinois, October 7, 2006.
Out of the 771 respondents who mentioned a specific photo or photographer, this image was recalled 122 times—about 16% of the total. That’s a striking lead. The second- and third-most remembered images were mentioned only 51 and 41 times, respectively—a significant drop-off, and a strong indicator of just how deeply Berman’s photo resonated with viewers.
Below are The List of The Top 10 ‘good’ photos from the exhibition The American:
Surprising Results?
Half of the top 10 most-remembered images are portraits—including the “wedding portrait” by Nina Berman, which I count as a portrait even though it’s part of a larger documentary series. What’s especially striking is that ‘three of these portraits weren’t taken by household names’. Photographers like Bryan Schutmaat, Jocelyn Lee, and Andres Serrano made it into the top 10, even though their names rarely appear alongside giants like Nan Goldin, Robert Frank, William Klein, or Richard Avedon—all of whom were also featured in the exhibition.
Another notable pattern: many of the most-remembered photographs were located early in the exhibition, mostly in rooms three and four. Could viewer fatigue—or visual overload—have impacted memory? If so, there’s something even more surprising to consider.
In room two, there’s a wall on the right displaying eight photographs by Robert Frank—images widely regarded by experts as the most iconic from his legendary book ‘The Americans’. The book itself is displayed in a glass case at the center of the room, almost like a sacred artifact.
If memory was purely a matter of image strength, or even sequence, you might expect Frank’s work to rank higher. But his highest-ranked image only reached spot number 16 in the recall data.
Other big names also didn’t break into the top 10. Nan Goldin, prominently featured with four photographs in room four, was mentioned by only 13 respondents. Robert Mapplethorpe, whose two portraits also hang in room four, was remembered by just 12.
So while fame, placement, and prestige may shape expectations, they don’t necessarily shape memory.
ChatGPT’s Take
So what kind of top 10 do you get when you ask the same question to ChatGPT?
Prompt: The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam was hosting the exhibition “American Photography” (Feb 7 – June 9, 2025). The show featured over 200 photographs. Give me the top 10 best photos from this exhibition.
ChatGPT’s answer is based on publicly available sources—including materials from the Rijksmuseum, the Financial Times, NRC (Newspaper) Foto-agenda, Foto-expositie, Amyzine, Royal Collection, and Argusvlinder. These sources reflect the views of curators, journalists, and PR professionals.
When I compare ChatGPT’s list with the list based on actual visitor responses, only two photographs appear on both lists. This strongly suggests that what experts consider “the best” often differs significantly from what sticks with the public.
Prior Knowledge
Does prior knowledge play a role? How is it that a small number of respondents were able to recall very specific—and often hard-to-remember—names of photographers? Were these visitors especially knowledgeable or passionate about photography? Or perhaps they were from the U.S., and more familiar with the images on display?
The dataset doesn’t give us any clues about that. But one photo does stand out: Ming Smith’s “America Seen Through Stars and Stripes, New York” (ranked #12).
This image was featured on the cover of the exhibition catalogue, on the official poster, and on a large banner outside the museum. Several respondents mentioned “the poster” in their descriptions, suggesting that this kind of pre- and post-visit exposure may have helped embed the image in their memory.
In short, familiarity matters. Knowing a photo beforehand—or being repeatedly exposed to it—can shape what people remember. And that, in turn, can influence the final rankings.
Common Features
Previously, I conducted research into the stylistic traits of famous street photographers (“The Photographic Signature of the Street Photographer in Six Stylistic Characteristics”). By systematically analyzing monographs, I attempted to break down their bodies of work into defining features. This qualitative research led to the identification of six key stylistic elements. One of those is visual contrast. Visual contrast is a technique widely used by renowned street photographers. But is it also a defining feature of a ‘good’ photograph?
Copyright ⓒ Nina Berman
A contrast can be thematic (e.g., social or cultural tension), a color contrast, a temporal contrast, a contrast in action, or the contrast between ‘the curious self and the other’ (the unfamiliar versus the everyday).
In the description of Nina Berman’s photo, the word “wedding” appears 84 times. Other frequently used words include disfigured, war, Iraq, and soldier. The photographer’s name, as well as the names of the people in the photo (Tyler Ziegel and Nina Berman), are mentioned multiple times. Strikingly, the words “I” and “me” appear often, suggesting that respondents are reflecting on the photo from a personal perspective. “Young bride with a groom disfigured by war. She looks so sad, anxious, and uncertain. Neither of them radiates happiness.
Daguerreotype
You wonder why the wedding even took place. You feel sorry for the man, but I wouldn’t have married him myself. He looks monstrous. These two young lives have been destroyed by war. The failure of their marriage is not their fault.”
The second most frequently mentioned ‘good’ photo is the Daguerreotype series in Room 3. Common words include: photo, daguerreotype, native, chief, very, old, and early. Some responses describe it as: “The glass negatives of Native Americans.” “That very old photo of a native chief. Shoshone? You wonder what happened to his people after that photo.”
The third ‘good’ photo is of Elizabeth Eckford, cited by 5% of respondents who named a specific photo or photographer. This photo depicts the racial divide in 1960s America. Frequently mentioned words include: white, school, Black, young, and woman. The name Elizabeth Eckford is mentioned 12 times—more often than Nina Berman, who is mentioned only 4 times as the photographer of her image. Some respondent descriptions: “An angry crowd shouting at a young Black girl going to a ‘white’ school for the first time. Seeing those faces, you can’t understand how people could treat one another like that, with so much hatred.” “The photo where a Black girl is allowed to go to a white school for the first time. I already knew the image, but it’s still deeply moving. The hatred on the faces around her always leaves a strong impression on me. Horrible that it existed—and still exists. (I’m a white man.)”
Other portraits —by Jocelyn Lee, Diane Arbus, and Andres Serrano — also show visual contrasts. Jocelyn Lee’s ‘Julia in Greenery (2005)’ features a woman of color in a green dress against a green background. “Photo of a Black woman, green shirt, green background. Mostly striking due to the use of color.” “Julia gazes expressionlessly, directly into the eyes of the viewer—creating a silent tension.”
Copyright ⓒ Jocelyn Lee (Julia in Greenery, 2005)
The well-known photo by Diane Arbus (A Young Man in Curlers at Home on West 20th Street, 1966) is a clear example of the “curious self-other” contrast. The subject defies traditional gender norms: “Man in curlers. Wanting to be 100% yourself in that era. Beautiful! I love this person. Life can’t have been easy for them.”
Andres Serrano’s portrait (Payne, from the Nomads series, 1990) shows a homeless person in New York, photographed in a makeshift studio set up in a subway station: “A large color photo; a dark-skinned woman in a white coat. Background is blue-gray. Beautiful contrasts and a powerful image.” This photo presents several contrasts: in color, in theme (dignity/humanity vs. homelessness/poverty), and also the “curious self-other” contrast again.
Copyright ⓒ Amanda Lopez
Among lower-ranked photos, contrasts are less immediately visible. This includes Robert Frank’s black-and-white images, Ming Smith’s campaign image for the exhibition, portraits by Robert Mapplethorpe, and Nan Goldin’s color photographs. These works are less explicitly characterized by clear visual or thematic contrasts.
Conclusion
This data analysis gives us a frequency count, and—using Nan Goldin’s definition—it offers an objective ranking of what makes a photo “good.”
Looking closely at the top 10 most-remembered images, one thing stands out: almost all contain a strong visual contrast. This contrast is far less noticeable—or completely absent—in the photos that didn’t stick with viewers.
Based on this, I conclude that a good photo often features a clear, recognizable contrast—whether in theme (especially social themes), use of color, time period, or a challenge to conventional ideas of what is socially acceptable.
Of course, this isn’t a scientific law—at least not yet.
It would be fascinating to repeat this kind of analysis in other exhibitions and see whether the top 10 “good” images share similar traits. If another researcher comes to the same conclusion, we might finally have a meaningful answer to the question: What is the logic—or ratio—behind a good photograph?
And if that turns out to be a consistent pattern, then photographers could use that insight to deliberately create stronger, more memorable images.
For now, this observation gives me plenty to work with moving forward.
About Michiel van Mens
During my military service, I trained as a photographer and corporate journalist. I had the unique opportunity to work alongside a professional photographer, traveling across Europe, writing reports, creating photo essays, and spending countless hours in the darkroom. At the end of each month, we produced a beautiful magazine. After my service, I embarked on photo journeys to Poland, the Baltic States, and Ukraine. I traveled through Crimea, visited Odessa, and explored the newly opened KGB prison in Vilnius. Inspired by Ed van der Elsken, I began a long-term photo series in 1993 documenting Amsterdam Oud-West, which led to several exhibitions. During this time, I also attended the Photo Academy in Amsterdam.
See More & Follow Michiel Van Mens visit his Street Photography & follow him on Instagram
As a street photographer
I’ve been closely involved in research on street photography. Earlier, I published the article “The Photographic Signature of the Street Photographer in Six Stylistic Characteristics.” That piece was a condensed summary of my upcoming book, which is set to be released in the fall of 2025. This book is based on my personal research into the visual style of well-known street photographers.
The key finding of my research is that a photographer’s signature style can be broken down into six stylistic traits that are commonly found in street photography. I explored this idea in the previously mentioned article, and my latest piece — “The Good Photographs of American Photography” — is a natural follow-up. It turns out that one of the six traits is also a key element in photos that people tend to remember.
With Our Gratitude:
See More of Amanda Lopez
See More of Jocelyn Lee
See More of Nina Berman
Comment
To me, a “good” picture is a picture showing more than what I see. This is why everyone has a different appreciation of the same picture as everyone comes with a different background. From there, I would not dare make a general statement on what is “good” and what is “bad” after visiting an exhibition.