| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/21/2005 03:30:31 PM · #1 |
In response to the highly underrated photo by bear_music in the last Self-portrait challenge,
seen here:
I have to ask, have people not heard of a metaphorical self-portrait?
First off, two definitions of "self", according to dictionary.com are:
3.One's consciousness of one's own being or identity; the ego
4.One's own interests, welfare, or advantage
I think both of these definitions were captured perfectly in his photograph, and if that weren't enough for people to grasp, then read the title: "I Am My Work -- the Thorn that Weeps, & Holds the Sky Entire..."
It couldn't be more obvious. Now, if this was a metaphorical self-portrait that was poorly executed, then I would expect the low score, just as a poorly executed literal self-portrait; but this photo is technically exquisite, and if it had been entered in a macro challenge, probably would have ribboned.
So why can't we see beyond the literal? Is this site not composed of artists? I, myself, had trouble giving it a ten and settled on an 8 for my own inability to fully comprehend the abstract complexity behind this image, so I, too am guilty.
I've noticed that the most direct images, in any category, tend to gain the highest scores. In Bridges, though the voting isn't over, I'm almost willing to bet the top three will be a full-expanse of some beautiful bridge, that could be a postcard. While these types of photos definitely deserve their own praise, I think people, as a whole, should start looking at things differently, approaching a shoot differently, and voting with a more open mind.
An Artist's greatest trait is originality, is it not?
Just wanted to raise this topic for discussion.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 03:37:00 PM · #2 |
I couldn't agree more with this!
Ppl are way too literal about the pictures! I think no1 has to mention the "think ouside the box" expression anymore! Besides the point and shoot cameras, most ppl here really are artists! Not just a machine that pushes the shutter button!
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 03:39:45 PM · #3 |
The thing that makes this site so great is its diversity. Each person an individual, with individual tastes and visions. Every photo strikes a person, for better or worse, in a different way, envoking different feelings and thoughts.... you cant control them, you just have to shoot to make yourself happy... not for the masses... jmo
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 03:43:47 PM · #4 |
As a person who tries, for the most part, to be artistic in their shots, I agree with your assessment, but you (and I) have to recognize that there are many people here that aren't striving to make art--they are simply trying to learn photography, or even how to use their camera.
They are willing to vote and participate, but their judgement on the less straightforward is going to be from that bias.
As they develop, their tastes will change.
Now having said that, I confess, I had difficulty seeing Robert's picture as a self portrait. I could deal with a lot of indirect shots--but this one I just couldn't accept as a self-portrait; A work of art, yes. But there was nothing personal about a branch and thorn. Now I don't really know Robert enough to really say that this isn't perfect for him, and that's part of the point. How can we make such a leap without knowing the artists name, and even something about him. If he had taken a picture of his camera, or studio, it might have been obvious enough. Or to integrate himself somehow into the environment. But he didn't.
A picture of a dead bug, now that I might have known was a portrait of Jacko.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 03:51:15 PM · #5 |
Taking a self portrait that does not include yourself and is not a portrait is thinking pretty far outside of the box.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 03:51:16 PM · #6 |
I understand that many people are learners here. I think we all are. I know I am. I just wanted to present the idea to people, as a part of that learning experience. Sharing viewpoints on the meaning of a photo, and not just the technical aspects, I believe, has its merits, too.
Good point about judging a self-portrait when not even knowing the name, much less the person behind it. This definitely makes the metaphorical self-portrait more challenging, but I commend Robert for doing something different. And through that fortitude, I believe a true self arises.
Message edited by author 2005-02-21 15:52:33. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:04:30 PM · #7 |
I was gonna try a similar pic but I knew I was going to get hammered if I was not in the pic so I rather went with me second idea of mirrors and myself.
I commend "Robt" for going through with his idea and knowing he was going to get hammered. "Show not no fear" I now realize its not about the score but more about what you can do as a photographer. Whilst I along with 400+ others went with the norm of a picture to challenge it takes one bold, one to make a stand and say I'm different. I'm almost glad you did and and now I hope others too will learn not only that you can be different but also you can try things and not get torched by voters. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:08:10 PM · #8 |
| Ok, we're thick. Do you think it would have done better in a waterdrops challenge :) |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:10:08 PM · #9 |
Thinking concentrically outward, I assume, is the way people define the challenges parameters, begining with the literal and so on. And in the minds eye, keeping within those parameters might limit one's view on a knee-jerk reaction vote. Especially if the voter limited his or her own photograph possibilities to those parameters, he or she might also expect the same self imposed limits to apply to others.
While this photo of a tearing thorn may have taken the artist days to envision and conceptualize, the viewer likely spent less than a minute to judge and cast a vote. Perhaps, therein lies the problem?
A lack of time and the required mental energy to digest the meaning of the photo. In some cases it may have been as simple as that.
Message edited by author 2005-02-21 16:20:37. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:21:26 PM · #10 |
I go with my first reaction...and my first reaction to your submission was "he uploaded the wrong image". sorry.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:21:33 PM · #11 |
One of our members commented during the voting that he "didn't get it" and asked me to explain. Here's a copy of what I sent him. Utro is quite correct that my "self portrait" is an attempt to portray my own being or identity, my "ego".
The challenge was "Show us your best side." My best side is intellectual. I'm a poet and a photographer. The flesh is nothing to me, I do not feel "defined" in any way by my body. I define myself by my work, my images and my words.
"The thorn that weeps & holds the sky entire" is from a poem of mine. I thought about this challenge for a long time, previsualized exactly what I wanted to do (even made a sketch), then drove 20 miles on a foggy morning to make this shot. It's an attempt to define myself in relation to my environment, my world. I'm not a comfortable person, I'm more of a thorn than a rose. But, speaking metaphorically, I feel as much pain as I cause, and I weep for it all.
So I'm the thorn, and I'm both containing and contained by the sky. In the flesh I don't even exist (in this particular metaphorical worldview), and therefore my flesh is not "in" the picture, although it easily could have been technically, but only at the expense of the vision I was trying to capture.
In the photographer's comments section of the challenge entry itself are some of my thoughts and what we can deduce from the 65 1's this image received and the 45 comments posted to it before voting closed.
Please, everyone, remember that I am NOT "whining" about my poor showing; I didn't enter this image expecting it to "do well" (indeed, I don't participate in these challenges for "score" but for the pleasure of tackling a problem creatively), but I am still mildly stunned by what seem to me a grotesque number of 1's and 2's. These are scores that I, personally, reserve for images that utterly fail as images; the worst score I'd give a good image that seemed to miss the challenge is a 3 or a 4.
Slainté,
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-02-21 16:22:19.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:28:04 PM · #12 |
I gave it a 6, lovely photo and I could make a weak connection as a portrait of his “self”. In many cases you can submit a photo for your self or you can submit it to try and get a high score. Anyone who knows Robert at all knows that he submits for himself, and more power to him for it, and I think DPC is a better place for it. However I don’t believe it is serves any good purpose to scold the voters, most of which don’t read the forums anyway.
So let us cheer on those who will be true to themselves not matter what, and let us recognize that the voters have the right to vote, as they always do, for what they like best not what others tell them they should like.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:30:35 PM · #13 |
I believe to be a champion for creative expression and like Bear music I have been floored by the narrow constraints placed on challenge definitions. Some voters even prep themselves to vote certain things down at the very outset. I am a strong believer that words have a definite meaning and their usage is critical.
First, let me give you my take on Bears effort. I gave it a 5 for good presentation. On the first take it eluded me completely. On my second round I bumped it to 6 accepting it as the antithesis to the challenge. For example if a challenge is black, then white is also a possibility because it is at the opposite end. I am simplifying for brevity but what is black without white. What is filled without empty. There is a casual relationship which can be made to work. The opposite of purple is yellow. So in a purple challenge an overbearing yellow background holding a single purple petal accentuates the purple because the background negates and creates a hunger for the purple. This concept can be applied in many different ways. I call it the antithesis.
When I read, "I am my work," I took it as a riddle. I thought about it but I was unable to formulate the connection. My feeling is that I am missing something. Since I was unable to explain it, I did not leave a comment but left it at 6. I mention this, because note that I never resolved the mystery, but gave the photographer the benefit of the doubt.
Now, bear knew that this image was going to present a problem. Just how big he never knew. Consider, when has an image that has scored so low received this many comment? When an image becomes the target for it does not fit, rethink and reconsider. It may have a deeper message and a reason to fit.
Many will argue, look, this is for portraits which equal likeness which equals features. Even this definition, while intended to be applied falls apart with the voters because it is short circuited to a personal perception. By this I mean that the voter is mostly stuck on the traditional self portrait. Look back at the arena of art. Consider some of the famous self portraits and then look at the famous modern self portraits. Are the moderns to be considered not fitting the intention of the portrait?
The entry By Neil Shapiro was dismissed. However, while Bear music teased the voting crowd with a ethereal and, "ponder on this image," presentation the natural response was the selection of the low voting digits.
I aggree with utro that we must all expand out thinking and our comprehension so as to raise our percetion, otherwise we will sell our sells short on the artistic end.
Message edited by author 2005-02-21 16:38:32. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:32:43 PM · #14 |
I quiet agree with you, Scott. But at the same time, as long as it's done politely I see no reason not to attempt to introduce the "voters" to some alternative points of view. Surely it's all to the good. If work like this can get some people thinking laterally, even if only a few more of them than already do, that's progress isn't it?
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:35:22 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by scottwilson:
However I don’t believe it is serves any good purpose to scold the voters, most of which don’t read the forums anyway.
So let us cheer on those who will be true to themselves not matter what, and let us recognize that the voters have the right to vote, as they always do, for what they like best not what others tell them they should like. |
I hope no one thinks I'm scolding anyone. I may have come off the wrong way. I just felt this image needed to be better understood. God knows, I have no right to tell anyone how to vote. I'm very new here and wouldn't presume to tell anyone how it should be done.
I wonder if the description box under the photo was visible during voting, if more people could have understood robert's photo and the time and thought that went into it. Why isnt this the case, btw? |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:39:46 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
... I am still mildly stunned by what seem to me a grotesque number of 1's and 2's. These are scores that I, personally, reserve for images that utterly fail as images; the worst score I'd give a good image that seemed to miss the challenge is a 3 or a 4. |
I agree, and I don't even see that many of those here anyway.
Thanks for posting the explanation you wrote. I can "picture" it as the sidebar caption for your image in a photography book. I think it's also understandable that not too many DPC voters would be able to extract that depth of info from viewing the image alone, especially in the amount of time usually given to voting here. That doesn't mean that depth isn't there, just less-accessible to the average voter here.
Furthermore, the image is now garnering more feedback for you as well as serving as an educational example for those who read this, so all in all I'd consider that quite a "successful" photo, regardless of the score or ranking. Also, as a frequent boundary-stretcher, I appreciate that you're picking up some of the load : ) |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 04:42:50 PM · #17 |
Although there was a long title, it didn't come across to me as someone had tried to express anything in the image and I found the title irrelevent. The only question it made me ask was why did anyone upload it? Is this a mistake?
Even if there was no person in the image, I would have stopped, given it time and thought about it if I saw anything remotely interesting in the image. It just didn't appeal to me. That's the reason for my low score on the image. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 05:40:03 PM · #18 |
Sorry, I must be one of the thick people on here that doesn't recognise 'true' art. Yes, I understood the submission and whilst the rules suggested you " Find your best side, and submit a self-portrait." it didn't suggest a metaphorical self-portrait. There has also been a lot of talk about titles, 13 words in a title is far too many imho. Art it may be? but in a portrait challenge I feel it has no place.
One thing that I don't understand on dpc is that we are 'challenged' to take a picture of a specific subject, topic etc but are told not to mark an image down for not meeting the challenge - why not make every challenge a free study.
I wonder if my submission would have scored better if it was titled, "how will I be able to live with myself if my daughter dies after I just talked her into waiting 18 months for brain surgery!
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 05:46:48 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
we ... are told not to mark an image down for not meeting the challenge ... |
We are told the opposite of this in the rules. What some people want, though, is a more open and less literal restriction on what constitutes "meeting" the challenge.
Message edited by author 2005-02-21 17:49:03. |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 06:02:26 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by utro:
3.One's consciousness of one's own being or identity; the ego
4.One's own interests, welfare, or advantage
|
While that might be the definition of self, it is not the definition of self-portrait which is:
A pictorial or literary portrait of oneself, created by oneself
So while the entry might be his 'self', it is not a self-portrait.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 06:05:24 PM · #21 |
| Is it not a "literary self-portrait" formatted as a JPEG? |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 06:12:05 PM · #22 |
none-the-less the photo is not deserving of a 1 vote. it's better than probably 1/3 of the entries that contained people...
and i could quote a number of posts to this thread
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Now having said that, I confess, I had difficulty seeing Robert's picture as a self portrait. I could deal with a lot of indirect shots--but this one I just couldn't accept as a self-portrait; A work of art, yes. But there was nothing personal about a branch and thorn. Now I don't really know Robert enough to really say that this isn't perfect for him, and that's part of the point. How can we make such a leap without knowing the artists name, and even something about him. If he had taken a picture of his camera, or studio, it might have been obvious enough. Or to integrate himself somehow into the environment. But he didn't. |
Message edited by author 2005-02-21 18:13:12.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 06:21:48 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
we ... are told not to mark an image down for not meeting the challenge ... |
We are told the opposite of this in the rules. What some people want, though, is a more open and less literal restriction on what constitutes "meeting" the challenge. |
To offer a "clarification" of what General is saying; there is no "restriction", in the sense of a rule, on how we determine what meets the challenge. Some of us would liek to see more of the members be a little less strict in what they consider to be "meeting the challenge", basically. This doesn't mean giving marginal images (in your eyes) a high vote, as much as it means giving good images of less-than-obvious relevance a better-than-ridiculous vote.
Ask youself "Do I really want to go out of my way to DISCOURAGE creativity in DPC?" or "Do I really want to see DPC be a cookie-cutter site where no image that pushes the limits is given a fair shake?"
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/21/2005 06:41:00 PM · #24 |
| I positively LOVED Robert's entry and gave it a 10. My own entry's title is from a poem I wrote too (of course, I didn't do as well as Robert did in this challenge *wink*). I also am shocked to see the low scores he received. He didn't deserved that at all... I have often said that the only thing I like about myself is my mind (and my right eye LOL) Quite a lesson in this I believe... |
|
|
|
02/21/2005 07:02:53 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Sunniee:
The thing that makes this site so great is its diversity. Each person an individual, with individual tastes and visions. Every photo strikes a person, for better or worse, in a different way, envoking different feelings and thoughts.... you cant control them, you just have to shoot to make yourself happy... not for the masses... jmo |
very true.....
thats all i do thats all any1 should do here.....at least even if it was 2nd to last place Robert can have the satisfaction of knowing he made an image no one else can ever shoot in that same way......
he did what he likes and ppl. voted as to what they liked.....persionaly i think it was a fine shot and couldn't have been better suted for the challenge......
"all an ARTIST can do is there own, what they see is there's alone. Others may look but but cannot see the art that i hold within in me......."
|
|
