I had some time to reflect the other day and I came across this thought which I'll leave here so we can have a discussion on the theme.
How much of "good" photography is just having something beautiful to photograph?
Knowing how to operate a camera is really easy and simple. The exposure triangle is peanuts and while good post processing demands good taste it isn't really hard to learn.
So in making or taking a photograph we're left with intent, composition and subject.
Composition is something that takes time to get right but it's achievable nonetheless. Intent can be difficult to set in a way that communicates what you want it to.
Is "good" photography mainly about having something beautiful to capture? If you look at Ansel Adams work you can see he often shot these really pleasant to look at places and while his composition is good, in some photos it's underwhelming, so what I really want to ask is just how much does your subject influence the perception of quality/actual quality your work has?