| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/16/2005 01:42:08 AM · #126 |
| I fully understood jonpinks constructive criticism. This kind of information is a real learning tool for me, it encourages me to try better, and to keep going. It can be easy to misread ones words on here, I know I wouldn't be sticking around if I didn't have all this to read. |
|
|
|
03/16/2005 03:14:21 AM · #127 |
Originally posted by floyd:
One thing I think we need to be careful of here is that we don't start making photographs only for photographers. The more expert we become the more we notice the faults in our own and others work. However, we need to understand the the man or woman on the street doesn't see things the same way at all.
While I'm keen to make my images absolutely as good as they can be I also keep firmly in mind that I want my images to be viewed by others. Not necessarily expert photographers. For that reason I value greatly the "everyman" approach to voting that we see here. It gives me an insight onto what appeals to other people. I combine that information with what appeals to me and I try to make images that satisfy both.
It's the equivalent of novels that rely on the reader having read the classics. Sure they're artistic and worthy but they're unlikely to be appreciated by anyone other than similarly well read academics.
I want to be a technically proficient and artistically discriminate. But not as much as I want people to enjoy my work.
John |
Very well said indeed! I really identify with this.
Message edited by author 2005-03-16 03:15:34.
|
|
|
|
03/18/2005 02:34:37 AM · #128 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Originally posted by floyd:
One thing I think we need to be careful of here is that we don't start making photographs only for photographers. The more expert we become the more we notice the faults in our own and others work. However, we need to understand the the man or woman on the street doesn't see things the same way at all.
While I'm keen to make my images absolutely as good as they can be I also keep firmly in mind that I want my images to be viewed by others. Not necessarily expert photographers. For that reason I value greatly the "everyman" approach to voting that we see here. It gives me an insight onto what appeals to other people. I combine that information with what appeals to me and I try to make images that satisfy both.
It's the equivalent of novels that rely on the reader having read the classics. Sure they're artistic and worthy but they're unlikely to be appreciated by anyone other than similarly well read academics.
I want to be a technically proficient and artistically discriminate. But not as much as I want people to enjoy my work.
John |
Very well said indeed! I really identify with this. |
I agree with the sentiment that a general audience of non-professional photographers should enjoy and appreciate the photographs that we take.
With all due respect to Floyd and Kavey I believe that anyone and everyone can appreciate great photography when they see it much like they recognize great art in the Mona Lisa though they may not be able to identify the specific technical aspects of the photograph that makes it great. The viewer need not understand these technical things, but the person taking the photograph certainly does. That is a point jonpink is trying to point out.
At DPC we rate at least two challenges a week. The results are as much the result of temporary emotional response to the images as anything else.
But there are images here that are timeless and stand on their own merit as great photography long after that week's challenge and the score they received are forgotten.
Is an image great art because it has a some cool looking clouds and a few cactus in it that people liked compared to other images they saw that specific week and scored 1st as a result? No! It will only be good and remembered if it exemplifies the characteristics that makes a photograph great art.
That is what jonpink is trying to point out in this forum posting.
|
|
|
|
03/18/2005 06:50:51 AM · #129 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by Kavey:
Originally posted by floyd:
One thing I think we need to be careful of here is that we don't start making photographs only for photographers. The more expert we become the more we notice the faults in our own and others work. However, we need to understand the the man or woman on the street doesn't see things the same way at all.
While I'm keen to make my images absolutely as good as they can be I also keep firmly in mind that I want my images to be viewed by others. Not necessarily expert photographers. For that reason I value greatly the "everyman" approach to voting that we see here. It gives me an insight onto what appeals to other people. I combine that information with what appeals to me and I try to make images that satisfy both.
It's the equivalent of novels that rely on the reader having read the classics. Sure they're artistic and worthy but they're unlikely to be appreciated by anyone other than similarly well read academics.
I want to be a technically proficient and artistically discriminate. But not as much as I want people to enjoy my work.
John |
Very well said indeed! I really identify with this. |
I agree with the sentiment that a general audience of non-professional photographers should enjoy and appreciate the photographs that we take.
With all due respect to Floyd and Kavey I believe that anyone and everyone can appreciate great photography when they see it much like they recognize great art in the Mona Lisa though they may not be able to identify the specific technical aspects of the photograph that makes it great. The viewer need not understand these technical things, but the person taking the photograph certainly does. That is a point jonpink is trying to point out.
At DPC we rate at least two challenges a week. The results are as much the result of temporary emotional response to the images as anything else.
But there are images here that are timeless and stand on their own merit as great photography long after that week's challenge and the score they received are forgotten.
Is an image great art because it has a some cool looking clouds and a few cactus in it that people liked compared to other images they saw that specific week and scored 1st as a result? No! It will only be good and remembered if it exemplifies the characteristics that makes a photograph great art.
That is what jonpink is trying to point out in this forum posting. |
Bolding mine.
The point is that those images you refer to that are remembered and enjoyed for long after the challenge is almost forgotten are also images that are broader in appeal. They too are not photographs made only for photographers.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2005 07:17:45 AM · #130 |
| I agree that jsidwell's picture was the most AA type of shot..it was fantastic, but there are a lot of people here and many opinions obviously. I didn't think any of the top three were the best, but obviously others did. |
|
|
|
03/19/2005 08:23:23 AM · #131 |
so how many DCP'ers does it take to change a lightbulb???
|
|
|
|
03/19/2005 10:22:32 AM · #132 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
Well I will probably get ripped for 'speaking out' but I for one feel pretty let down by the results in the AA challenge, the top images all seem to me to lack the one special element that AA shots had - that is detail. |
I credit jonpink for stating what a lot of photographers like myself were thinking. Very, very few of the entries, and really none of the winners were close to meeting the challenge of an Ansel Adams style photograph. I had thought about starting a thread about the same thing when I saw that the winner had used neat-image. After all Adams gave up pictoralism by the thirties, and was a very out spoken critic of any artificial softening of the photographic image.
I knew when I saw the challenge topic that this was a really bad idea, and many people think of just pretty B&W images when they think of Adams. Despite the ramblings of Adam’s techniques by such members as BearMusic before the challenge, many members just entered (like they always do) whatever the hell they wanted to. The sad thing is that a lot of the DPC community, either by ignorance or impertinence, vote without any rational consideration of the topic at hand.
Personally my first inclination was to treat it like so many other ill-advised challenge topics as of late and not participate (by either voting or entering). Instead I purposely set out to capture and process an image that would both meet the challenge and score VERY low. I think I accomplished both, but I know I did the ladder.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2005 11:00:19 AM · #133 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
Very, very few of the entries, and really none of the winners were close to meeting the challenge of an Ansel Adams style photograph. I had thought about starting a thread about the same thing when I saw that the winner had used neat-image. After all Adams gave up pictoralism by the thirties, and was a very out spoken critic of any artificial softening of the photographic image.
I knew when I saw the challenge topic that this was a really bad idea, and many people think of just pretty B&W images when they think of Adams. Despite the ramblings of Adam’s techniques by such members as BearMusic before the challenge, many members just entered (like they always do) whatever the hell they wanted to. The sad thing is that a lot of the DPC community, either by ignorance or impertinence, vote without any rational consideration of the topic at hand.
Personally my first inclination was to treat it like so many other ill-advised challenge topics as of late and not participate (by either voting or entering). Instead I purposely set out to capture and process an image that would both meet the challenge and score VERY low. I think I accomplished both, but I know I did the latter. |
1. If it were that easy to do, he wouldn't be held in such awe, would he? The key word here is "style" — while few of the images entered could ever be mistaken for an "actual Ansel", many of them were/are honest attempts to pursue his style and the challenge as a whole doesn't deserve the slam, IMO. Your dismissal of the use of Neatimage out of hand is particularly meaningless; one of the hallmark's on Ansel's work was the extreme smoothness of his tonal gradations, and one of the problems with doing "contrasty" B/W conversions of digital images is the pronounced graininess that will pop up in areas of little tonal variation. Neatimage is a viable tool for dealing with this problem, if not carried to extremes.
2. Perhaps you spoke without thinking (I hope so) but the use of "ramblings" to characterize my comments is extremely objectionable to me. We use that word to connote long-winded expositions of no real substance, and I spent a great deal of time trying to discuss Ansel and his work in a meaningful way. Of all members of this community, I am perhaps best-qualified to do this.
3. You're quite correct that you managed to produce a low-scoring image: 
Is it a good example of Ansel's "style"? I would say not. Compositionally, the image has no focal point, nothing to draw the eye, and this is something Ansel always had. Technically, while the full range of tones is arguably present in the image, the overall impression is one of muddiness, which is very anti-Ansel. To the extent that you have implied that your image better "meets the challenge" than any of the winners (and the implication is definitely there), IMO you are sadly mistaken.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-03-19 11:02:21.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2005 12:27:22 PM · #134 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
2. Perhaps you spoke without thinking (I hope so) but the use of "ramblings" to characterize my comments is extremely objectionable to me. We use that word to connote long-winded expositions of no real substance, and I spent a great deal of time trying to discuss Ansel and his work in a meaningful way. Of all members of this community, I am perhaps best-qualified to do this.
Robt. |
Robert,
I really did use the term "ramblings" intentionally. Before the challenge you really pissed me off in the way you kept at it. I actually agreed with 95% of what you were trying to convey, but it was your patronizing manner in which you did it that I found objectionable. I even devoted about 9 hours of research in both my home library and at the public one trying to find your name mentioned in anything related to Adams. Although I'm sure that he did actually have "hired hands" help him with the workload, I couldn't find a mention of you.
Even if you did actually work for him at some past time, I don't see how that makes you any more qualified than any other member of the community that has studied the techniques and teachings of Adams. Adams, was after all, gracious enough to share much of his expertise.
To be honest I was rather hoping that you would fail miserably in the challenge (I'm talking image not score) given all of the talk before hand, but yours is definitely the best image in the top 10 scorers.
I'm regret if I have been offensive to you (bearmusic) personally, but I feel the way I feel no apologies. Personally I don’t see why you care what I think anyway.
As far as my image is concerned, I agree that it is not that good of an image compositionally and the subject was less than stellar. But that was kind of my point. I even though about entering a color image. It does however have a full range of rich tones and is tack sharp which are both hallmarks of Adam’s work. I disagree with the muddiness you claim is present (although there is some compression artifacting due to the ridiculous 150k file size limit).
Finally I do think you miss the main point of my post in that a good many DPCers will just ignore the topic or even spirit of a challenge and enter what ever they think is a “good” image. Judging from many scores I’ve seen a majority of the community doesn’t penalize such disregard of spirit of the DPC’s challenge system. Don’t believe me? Try entering a photograph of an attractive woman (especially with little or no clothes on) into any challenge and see how many 9s and 10s it gets.
|
|
|
|
03/19/2005 01:36:43 PM · #135 |
Hyper,
Much, if not most of what I posted was in response to questions or in continuing discussion. Continued expressions of thanks from other members for the detailed sharing of my perspective was what motivated me to continue.
You're correct that I won't google up in connection with Ansel. There were quite a few of us that did what I did with him, over the years. It wasn't a paying job, but the experience was beyond price. As far as I know, I'm the only one of those in the DPC community, however. The fact remains, he was both friend and mentor to me, and I shared this experience as best I could.
Am I "more qualified than any other member of the community that has studied the techniques and teachings of Adams"? Possibly I am, I don't know the backgrounds of everyone here; but I actively taught Zone System both in workshops and at UCSD for a number of years, and I was trained in Zone System first by another student of Ansel's and then by Ansel himself. This is first-hand experience.
You're correct that I don't care what you think, particularly; but I care what the community as a whole thinks.
I didn't "miss the main point" of your post, I just saw no reason to comment upon it. I don't disagree with your point, actually. Eye candy is always "safe" in DPC. Still, we get a lot of really fine pictures too.
Thanks for the backhanded compliment on my entry.
Robt.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/21/2025 02:50:16 AM EDT.
