Comments - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III

05/16/2005 12:33:39 PM · #1

COMMENTS

Not everything needs to be the same. ART and that is what photography is, can be interoperated in many ways. A portrait needs not be shot in a studio, with a background, or even show the face. Landscapes need not have trees, mountains, rivers, or sky. WHY do most people think that because an image is not what THEY think a certain type of image should be that is was done wrong? GET A LIFE, some of us think out of the box. If we all stuck to the same way of thinking this world would suck. If to be creative is going to make my images score low I hope I am last in every challenge.

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

05/16/2005 12:38:27 PM · #2

Just think, if everyone was the same, we'd all go to the toilet at the same time and there would be one flush heard 'round the world.

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

05/16/2005 12:41:15 PM · #3

As receivers of comments you must realize the same thing. Just because someone doesn't agree with your approach or is making suggestions on how to do something differently doesn't make it wrong. If you've already thought of the commenters approach and discarded it, fine but they don't know that. Who knows you might discover something to try.

sofap

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III

05/16/2005 12:47:01 PM · #4

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Then why do images that go beyond the norm get scored low, not just mine but I see a lot of real creative images end up at the bottom. Canâ��t we look past the STANDATD and still see the ART in an IMAGE. And score an image in how good the image is.

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

05/16/2005 12:50:00 PM · #5

Originally posted by sofap:

Originally posted by cpanaioti:
As receivers of comments you must realize the same thing. Just because someone doesn't agree with your approach or is making suggestions on how to do something differently doesn't make it wrong. If you've already thought of the commenters approach and discarded it, fine but they don't know that. Who knows you might discover something to try.

Then why do images that go beyond the norm get scored low, not just mine but I see a lot of real creative images end up at the bottom. Canâ��t we look past the STANDATD and still see the ART in an IMAGE. And score an image in how good the image is.

Art is subjective. What you see as art someone else may not. It's the nature of the beast. Vive la difference.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

05/16/2005 12:56:43 PM · #6

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Art is subjective. What you see as art someone else may not. It's the nature of the beast. Vive la difference.

HOO RAH for subjective, thank you

Message edited by author 2005-05-16 12:58:42.

pawdrix

Nikon D700

05/16/2005 01:01:58 PM · #7

I just posted a thread about intentional blurring etc. and a similar issue.

I'm guessing that straightforward photographic skill sets are the first and formost thing that people can judge with some degree of certainty.
So an image that is a little out there, slightly blurred, oddly cropped, colored or whatever can easily slip into the category of "this person didn't know what he/she was doing".

I'm curious if people would agree that DPC is a slightly more skills oriented site, than it is a creative site(relating to challenges at least)....and I don't mean that in any way, as a negative?

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

05/16/2005 01:02:14 PM · #8

Originally posted by sofap:

Without denigrating winners in ANY way, as they are nearly always absolutely wonderful images, they rank higher because something about them (the content, the approach, the style, the composition) appeals to most voters. Kind of like the lowest common denominator, but in a positive sense, not negative.

If you take 10 people and show them 100 images there are bound to be those that achieve popular appeal better than others. It's only natural given the complexity of human tastes and preferences.

Other images, perhaps those you class as artistic or outside the box, may still be just as appealing to some voters but their appeal touches a smaller segment of the voting population. To those who happen to appreciate that specific content, approach, style, composition, they are every bit as wonderful as those ribbon winners. For others they hold no appeal.

It doesn't mean they aren't as "good" in general, just that they aren't as good at appealing to the masses and THAT is the competition here at DPC.

It's not just about creating a great image, it's about creating a great image that appeals to as wide a segment of the voting population as possible.

Message edited by author 2005-05-16 13:03:26.

GoldBerry

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

05/16/2005 01:11:30 PM · #9

Originally posted by Kavey:

Other images, perhaps those you class as artistic or outside the box, may still be just as appealing to some voters but their appeal touches a smaller segment of the voting population.

OR it could be a good idea but a not-so-good execution. I.E. it's technically vastly inferior. It happens - I know, I was shocked too when I first heard about it.

(yeah that's sarcasm, but it's Monday so I figure it's legit)

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Canon

05/16/2005 01:22:45 PM · #10

Originally posted by GoldBerry:

Originally posted by Kavey:
Other images, perhaps those you class as artistic or outside the box, may still be just as appealing to some voters but their appeal touches a smaller segment of the voting population.

OR it could be a good idea but a not-so-good execution. I.E. it's technically vastly inferior. It happens - I know, I was shocked too when I first heard about it.

(yeah that's sarcasm, but it's Monday so I figure it's legit)

Yeah, a lot of the time it's that too! I was being polite but, it's certainly true to say, a lot of the times when people are lamenting their score and saying it's a result of people "not getting their superior artistic vision" I just want to scream at the top of my voice that we get the vision, thank you very much, but we could shove a kilo of artistic right up it's you-know-where and the photo would still be a big, steaming pile of unappealing shite!

EDIT: I am NOT referring to any specific image or photographer.

Message edited by author 2005-05-16 13:23:12.

jenesis

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

05/16/2005 01:26:47 PM · #11

Originally posted by sofapez:

Just think, if everyone was the same, we'd all go to the toilet at the same time and there would be one flush heard 'round the world.

LOL!!! I think I've found my new quote!!! :-D

ElGordo

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

05/16/2005 01:31:17 PM · #12

Originally posted by sofap:

Probably because those images are not appealing to majority of voters. If you wish to score well in this venue, make your image conform. Otherwise, do what you want, take what you get, and stop griping about it. My images are a bit unconventional on occasion and the results in voting reflect that. Make your images to please yourself, not the voters. The voters are a fair representation of our cultures and, in that regard, their voting is infallible.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

05/16/2005 01:40:47 PM · #13

Edited for stupid comment

Message edited by author 2005-05-16 14:15:09.

05/16/2005 02:32:57 PM · #14

Originally posted by jenesis:

Originally posted by sofapez:
Just think, if everyone was the same, we'd all go to the toilet at the same time and there would be one flush heard 'round the world.

LOL!!! I think I've found my new quote!!! :-D

Your welcome to it. Something I've used for many many years.
Thank God (or your choice) for our differences.

Chez

Nikon D100

05/16/2005 02:38:58 PM · #15

There is such a thing as generic appeal, that is when an object or piece of art, or even a car has a broad appeal to most people. This is often conceived as commercialism, but has it's merit. Sometimes people like something because it is by someone, not purely for what they can see in it. If you like what you create then that's great, if you don't keep experimenting. Most of us will push ourselves to try different approaches to photography, whether it be in our composition, subject, post editing etc. etc. I like what I like and yes, sometimes I do become frustrated by others not liking it as much, but hey, if that's what you want, best go be a chicken and lay some eggs, everyone eat's eggs for breakfast right?

Message edited by author 2005-05-16 14:45:49.

05/16/2005 02:50:44 PM · #16

Originally posted by Chez:

There is such a thing as generic appeal, that is when an object or piece of art, or even a car has a broad appeal to most people. This is often conceived as commercialism, but has it's merit. Sometimes people like something because it is by someone, not purely for what they can see in it. If you like what you do then that's great, if you don't keep experimenting. Most of us will push ourselves to try different approaches to photography, whether it be in our composition, subject, post editing etc. etc. I like what I like and yes, sometimes I do become frustrated by others not liking it as much, but hey, if you want that go be a chicken and lay some eggs, everyone eat's eggs for breakfast right?

No.

Some people don't eat breakfast at all, some eat cereal, some eat fruit.

I hate generalizations, steriotypes and stiff catagorization. They show limited depth of field (which has it place in photography).

Chez

Nikon D100

05/16/2005 02:54:17 PM · #17

Were you referring to what I said about breakfast? The point is surely that if you want people to like what you want then we would all be eating eggs for breakfast, which we are not and therefore, and this is the point will not have the same opinions as you all of the time.