| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/24/2004 01:51:33 PM · #1 |
I have to be careful how I phrase this.....
I didn't get time to vote in the recent B&W challenge but I've reviewed the entries, quite a range. Even before I saw the thread B&W Photo's I felt were underrated, I'd decided I would have to ask the question.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking anybodyĆ¢s work, I'm not passing judgment on anything, I want to understand and learn. That's what this site is about right?
OK then, what do you see in this image.
I obviously don't get it because I would not have voted it very highly. However zoomdak, nordicgirl, konador, (whose opinion I would listen to) and others did rate it.
There were other examples of this type of work, I hope, yurasocolov, you don't mind me using yours as the example.
So........enlighten me, if you can.
Edit for typo.
Message edited by author 2004-11-24 13:51:59.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 01:55:24 PM · #2 |
I didn't vote high on this one too. If it where in color it would be really nice but in B&W i don't really think is that great. But it seems like a artistic attempt. But people have there thoughts differently on this site. Sometimes i myself don't really know what to submit because people here have so many different opinions. That photo is bisexual, :) it can go two ways or it really scores high or it scores low. Thats my opinion. With no offense on the artist.
Message edited by author 2004-11-24 13:56:51.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 01:56:32 PM · #3 |
I like this photo..quite a bit......it doesn't look like accidental blur or out of focus. It's quite pretty. A tulip shadow maybe?
I just like it.
I think as a huge print with a white frame/matte it'd be great. |
|
|
|
11/24/2004 02:03:59 PM · #4 |
Thanks for the opinions, much appreciated but, what I would like is a critique from somebody who likes and thinks they "understand" the image. To help me understand and see what I'm missing at the moment.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 02:12:46 PM · #5 |
You're thinking too hard.
Being able to see objects (people, things, plants..whatever) differently and then put it to paper or film (or digital file in this case :-) is what a creative process does.
Someone saw this flower (I think it's a tulip) and then created a new dimension for it to be seen in.
There's nothing really to understand or to pick apart. It's a different view, sometimes people don't understand things that are different. This may be the case!
I, however, like the simplicity. |
|
|
|
11/24/2004 02:16:14 PM · #6 |
I gave it above average score. It was clear to me that the soft focus was intentional and it was not done by doing something wrong. I thought it was artsy and well composed photo.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 02:18:16 PM · #7 |
| If it helps, the title of the photo "Une Aquarelle" translates to "A Watercolor" (French-English) |
|
|
|
11/24/2004 02:19:54 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by KaDi:
If it helps, the title of the photo "Une Aquarelle" translates to "A Watercolor" (French-English) |
Yep, how could you misinterpret that? Sometimes when in doubt, look at the title.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 02:33:46 PM · #9 |
| I like this alot too...... I consider it a high quality minimal presentation, to me poetic and contempletive, .... composition and intentional impressionistic focus is superbe - tonality is superior. Though not expressed emphatically with sharp focus, black blacks and white whites, this treasure still has a pure true dark to light emphasis, intregated without flaw to a delightful subject intrepretation. |
|
|
|
11/24/2004 02:56:27 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by giega:
I gave it above average score. It was clear to me that the soft focus was intentional and it was not done by doing something wrong. I thought it was artsy and well composed photo. |
I did not, for one second, think the soft focus was anything but intentional.
Thanks go to goldberry, "Thinking to hard", not been accused of that very often ;-) I understand more now. I can see what they have done in that context, it just doesn't seem very interesting, in my opinion and that's all it is just an opinion, don't jump all over me for it, please.
Its not that I don't like abstract images, I've tried my humble best to create them myself from time to time.
undieyatch gives a very good, if somewhat concise, explanation of his thoughts. Thank you, much appreciated.
Perhaps its just taking the abstract process too far for my tastes, I do tend to think quite literally sometimes.
These are examples of what I think are good solid images, I could look at all day, undieyatch may recognize them....
   
Are they so different from
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 03:04:29 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Blackdog:
There were other examples of this type of work, I hope, yurasocolov, you don't mind me using yours as the example. |
Absolutely no problem. I totally agree that a lot of very good shots ended up much lower than they should have. I have counted, 3 or 4 shots that i rated 6+ ended up in the bottom 30.
I am very curious about it too. I mean, i know exactly why i like it and why i submitted it or even showed it to anyone, but it's curious to really find out what people think. Don't usually get that in the comments.
For those who wanted to see a color version, here is an unedited version of the original capture. Just resized, no color correction. The ugly magenta on the flower is what the poor thing has been infused with at the store...
I like things like this because you are not overwhelmed with details, you are basically given a hint of an image, and your mind can go ahead and complete the scene as it wishes. And my interpretation may be completely different from that of someone else, which is great.
Why do you need to see all the imperfections of the petals in sharp focus? That is good in a botany book, but to appreciate the beauty of the flower you just need a sketch. The same about the other two stems, you don't need to see the whole bouquet to imagine it, just need to see a hint.
Even the color, does it help you to find out that this was red on yellow when i shot it? Probably not, because likely you've imagined green stems and maybe yellowish flower, or something that _your_ mind likes and thinks looks good.
Just to illustrate my point, here is a shot i've done a while back, when i thought it would be cool to make photos of still life compositions of flowers:
Yes, it's good quality, yes i think it's well thought out composition, and yes those are royal colors... but it looks dead to me. It leaves absolutely no playing field for the imagination... And after i've done that once, i have no desire at all to make anything like that again. Even though 12 of such shots would probably make a sellable calendar or something.
I guess that was the general direction i was thinking in, but that doesn't matter much, because the photo is completely open to any interpretation. |
|
|
|
11/24/2004 03:26:43 PM · #12 |
Now were getting somewhere......
Thanks for the insight, yurasocolov, I for one find it very interesting.
For what its worth, I really like the colour version,, I know that's not the issue but I find that very interesting. I could imagine it on the wall in my house, but not the B&W version, why is that?
My immediate reaction is that the B&W version is just not interesting enough, the colour version speaks to me more, does that make any sense?
I like things like this because you are not overwhelmed with details, you are basically given a hint of an image, and your mind can go ahead and complete the scene as it wishes. And my interpretation may be completely different from that of someone else, which is great.
I totally agree and understand this. I've seen some work by the well known impressionists like Monet, I mean the real thing not photos of it, and I thought it was absolutely stunning and fabulous.
Thank you for the insight, I'll try to be a bit more open minded and appreciative in the future. Its good to learn new things and new ways of looking.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 03:43:31 PM · #13 |
I wanted to add a side comment to this thread; THIS is so refreshing after all the negativity that seemed rampant last week. I don't think there can ever be a final answer to Blackdog's question - we all have tastes and some can't be explained. But the exploration going on and the discussion is awesome. It opens up all of us to new thoughts and vision, the way it should be. Thanks, Blackdog, and all the posters on this thread.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 04:05:39 PM · #14 |
Thanks, Kylie, you just made my day! Seriously.
Sometimes I think I'm alone with the thoughts and questions I have.
I've been reading Yura's other thread Mass Appeal, lots of opinions I totally agree with and more eloquently put than I could have managed.
The more time I spend on this site the more I learn, I find myself being pulled further towards the type of shot I've been talking about here.
I'm not sure I like it! Its a bit scary. I can't think of anybody I know (except some people on this website), who would even give such images a second look. I know I should shoot for my own sake but the need to create is balanced by the need to be accepted by those around me.
I still like "traditional" images but they have to have what I consider a high impact factor. That's what I aim for but rarely achieve anyway.
Enough rambling...
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 04:36:33 PM · #15 |
Blackdog, we are out here, but I think we get scared off by the negativity at times. I struggle all the time with the "please myself" or "please others", too. I think the best thing for me is to try to earn enough "respect" with the challenges that I don't look like a complete idiot that needs to have their camera confiscated, but "please" myself with what I portray and how. My tastes are way off from the masses, but I also know that I need the skill and mastery that shows in the top rated work here in order to someday produce what I see in my mind that I like.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 04:47:03 PM · #16 |
Been following this post with a lot of interest. I don't think the B&W photo works at all, IMHO. The colour one is great.
Again we come down to personal interpretation, however, I think the B&W photo would have scored quite low. Most people would have thought it was just an out of focus and poor attempt. I can appreciate the artistic value of the colour one, but the B&W looks like a photo my 6 year old grandson takes.
Please don't take offence at these comments, they are just what I feel. In fact the B&W would have failed to score highly in Impressionism.
I think experimenting is good, diversity is good. Had I submitted the same shot it would have bombed, missing the Brown Ribbon and finished in the bowels of the Earth.
There is, regardless of opinions stated in this thread, a certain standard photo...one that is in focus, sharp and colourful...in the case of B&W, contrasty that wins here or scores highly.
Haven't checked how it scored, but if it scored better than mine, then I'm gonna submit blurry, B&W photos for every challenge from now on. |
|
|
|
11/24/2004 04:57:18 PM · #17 |
Like i posted earlier that i would like to see a colored photo and i agree that i like more the colored one. But with all this talking about this photo just helped me see things in different ways. I totaly agree with what yurasocolov said. And i would keep my vote on the B&W photo but the colored one i would vote higher. But i've been seeing your work and i have to say that theres a lot of creativaty there. Keep up the good job.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 04:57:50 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Formerlee:
There is, regardless of opinions stated in this thread, a certain standard photo...one that is in focus, sharp and colourful...in the case of B&W, contrasty that wins here or scores highly.
Haven't checked how it scored, but if it scored better than mine, then I'm gonna submit blurry, B&W photos for every challenge from now on. |
I agree, and that is why some have to make a choice between scoring well (or well for yourself) or attempting the please the DPC "masses". It doesn't always have to be two different things, but oftentimes, is.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 05:05:17 PM · #19 |
I've now realised that for images like this
to score high in my book, its me that needs to change not the image.
This may seem a little obvious to some people but when you actually realise this its quite profound, (at least it is to me).
I'm not saying that if I saw this image for the first time tomorrow I would score it high but, at least I would look at it differently and evaluate it from something approaching the proper perspective.
One other point I'd like to make is that we all feel the urge to give negative comments about entries we vote on. I would caution against it unless you can also provide constructive advise on how the shot could be improved.
In short, don't say anything bad unless you say how it can be made better. Its better to say nothing at all.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 05:09:57 PM · #20 |
I think there is a fine line between a bad photo and a good photo, and obviously the line has a different threshold for different people. I can't explain exactly why I liked this photo, but the simple shapes, the high-key shades, and the basic composition all worked together and formed something which I thought was very good. Other times it may look awful and amateur, but in this case I think it looked pretty high-quality... it's all about where people set the threshold. It's a tough thing to balance and I think yurasocolov did it very well, and it was a big risk submitting it. I wish I could take photos like this but when I try they always fall on the wrong side of the 'line'. I think it would look great printed on a large piece of canvas. I'm not as keen on the colour version as it looks more technically flawed with the colour cast as stuff, which takes away from the appeal of the simplicity and overall feeling of the photo.
Just my opinion of course, but usually I'm as Stock-Orientated a voter as Mr. Stock the Stock Shooter from Stock Land.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 05:10:10 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Blackdog:
I've now realised that for images like this
to score high in my book, its me that needs to change not the image.
This may seem a little obvious to some people but when you actually realise this its quite profound, (at least it is to me).
I'm not saying that if I saw this image for the first time tomorrow I would score it high but, at least I would look at it differently and evaluate it from something approaching the proper perspective.
One other point I'd like to make is that we all feel the urge to give negative comments about entries we vote on. I would caution against it unless you can also provide constructive advise on how the shot could be improved.
In short, don't say anything bad unless you say how it can be made better. Its better to say nothing at all. |
But we don't all have to like any particular image either. Or even always feel the same way ourselves about it at another time.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 05:11:13 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Kylie:
I agree, and that is why some have to make a choice between scoring well (or well for yourself) or attempting the please the DPC "masses". It doesn't always have to be two different things, but oftentimes, is. |
Agreed. I don't please the masses, I've even started screening clients for those I know will appreciate the work I'll do for them. I've found in life, much like here, people RAVE about your creative stuff as long as you don't do it anywhere near them. lol |
|
|
|
11/24/2004 05:17:30 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Kylie:
But we don't all have to like any particular image either. Or even always feel the same way ourselves about it at another time. |
Boy this is a slippery eel of a subject!
Just when you think you have a hold on it...
Message edited by author 2004-11-24 17:18:15.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 05:18:24 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Blackdog:
Originally posted by Kylie:
But we don't all have to like any particular image either. Or even always feel the same way ourselves about it at another time. |
Boy this is a slippery eel of a subject! |
That's how I felt! I almost find myself contradicting myself at times.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2004 05:24:38 PM · #25 |
OK, before this turns into a mutual admiration society, I need to try and find three B&W prints to enter in a competion.
Hey, would anybody like to look at a load of B&W prints and pick three good ones.....maybe not eh?
|
|
