| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/27/2003 02:32:32 AM · #1 |
I would like a challege that allows us to depict negative, somber, and disturbing scenes. A photograph that instills emotion in the viewer is a good photograph even if the emotion it creates is negative. I have not seen any focus on that on this site at all and I think it would be interesting. Nothing too vulgar of course. Perhaps you all hate this idea. I don't want to get a bad rep or anything. I like happy pictures of puppy dogs and ice cream too, but I also like to be shocked, depressed, and appalled by things that go ignored far to often by gentle photographers. What do you all think?
I also think it might be cool to have some challenges where we are allowed, and encouraged, to add text and edit more, maybe like advertisents or public service announcements or a sample magazine page. I dont know if everyone on here is capable of that, but Im guessing that most of you are. I think it would be interesting.
I'd also like one on "crowds." |
|
|
|
01/27/2003 03:00:58 AM · #2 |
| All the challenges so far that I've seen contain enough latitude in the theme to allow for as depressing of a photo as you would like. Nobody has limited our submissions to "happy" themes. The "Crowds" theme sounds interesting. |
|
|
|
01/27/2003 03:16:59 AM · #3 |
its true that we aren't 'limited' to be happy, but if the challenge was a bit more 'dark', a 'dark' photo wouldn't get a low vote. for most challenges, adding some additional 'artistic' aspect to it doesn't lead to a better outcome.
Message edited by author 2003-01-27 03:17:34. |
|
|
|
01/27/2003 04:53:42 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by JasonPR:
.... A photograph that instills emotion in the viewer is a good photograph even if the emotion it creates is negative. ...
" |
I would rephrase that:
A good photograph that instills emotion in the viewer is a good photograph even if the emotion it creates is negative.
I emphatically do not agree with the first statement. Some people seem to think that a photo of something disgusting, revolting or shocking, that causes a viewer to react quite negatively is a "good photograph", and this simply isn't true. I believe that it is entirely possible that there can be a good photograph that portrays a negative image; however, just because a photograph creates negative emotion in a viewer does not make it a good photograph.
Message edited by author 2003-01-27 04:54:15.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 08:27:08 AM · #5 |
but linda i also think the opposite tends to happen. if there is something disturbing in the shot, people automatically decide it's a bad photo.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:04:08 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
but linda i also think the opposite tends to happen. if there is something disturbing in the shot, people automatically decide it's a bad photo. |
that's exactly right
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:32:18 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
but linda i also think the opposite tends to happen. if there is something disturbing in the shot, people automatically decide it's a bad photo. |
That is quite possibly true, however I can only speak for myself, and when viewing such photos, I make a very determined effort to momentarily dismiss the subject matter, and judge the photo objectively. In the end, BOTH the quality of the photo, AND the subject matter are going to determine my final vote.
I feel that many people who feel it is necessary to take "disturbing" photos are doing so just for the "shock value" of it, and are not particularly interested in the photo being artistically or photographically "sound".
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:39:04 AM · #8 |
We have had several challenges that lend themselves to "un-pretty" pictures (Fear, Garbage and Sin come to mind off hand), but voters still tend to vote down "disturbing" shots even in those. I doubt that would change regardless of the challenge... Sorry :)
It should also be pointed out that "disturbing" is not enough to make an image good. It has to be well done also. I've seen people rant that thier photo didn't do well because the voters only want kids handing flowers to puppies. But after looking at the photo in question, I've found more often not that thier "disturbing" photo was a technical nightmare. When my brother began his carreer as a streetsinger, he said to me "If you can't be good, be topical"... It seems that some folks feel that "If you can't be good, be disturbing"...
Message edited by author 2003-01-27 09:40:11.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:39:41 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by lhall:
I feel that many people who feel it is necessary to take "disturbing" photos are doing so just for the "shock value" of it, and are not particularly interested in the photo being artistically or photographically "sound". |
having a challenge would mean everyone is going for shock value, and they would also be making artistic representations of disturbing things. free your mind your ass will follow, unless it's a penis with a santa hat
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:47:57 AM · #10 |
My mind is probably a lot "freer" than yours; I've been around the block a few more times than you have! I just don't feel the need to try to revolt, disgust or gross out anyone in my pursuit of enjoying photography. I certainly uphold and defend your (or anyone's) right to do so if that is what they wish; and I can still exercise my right not to look at it.
Message edited by author 2003-01-27 09:50:33.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:52:18 AM · #11 |
pipe down it's monday morning, you made me cry...someone's been around the block more than me, i didn't know it was a contest
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:52:35 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by myqyl:
We have had several challenges that lend themselves to "un-pretty" pictures (Fear, Garbage and Sin come to mind off hand), but voters still tend to vote down "disturbing" shots even in those. I doubt that would change regardless of the challenge... Sorry :)
It should also be pointed out that "disturbing" is not enough to make an image good. It has to be well done also. I've seen people rant that thier photo didn't do well because the voters only want kids handing flowers to puppies. But after looking at the photo in question, I've found more often not that thier "disturbing" photo was a technical nightmare. When my brother began his carreer as a streetsinger, he said to me "If you can't be good, be topical"... It seems that some folks feel that "If you can't be good, be disturbing"... |
Well said, myqyl; your last statement is exactly what I am talking about.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 09:58:52 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by achiral:
pipe down it's monday morning, you made me cry...someone's been around the block more than me, i didn't know it was a contest |
LOL! Maybe it isn't a contest, but I'm still ahead of you, and there's no way you can catch up!
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 10:08:08 AM · #14 |
i'm glad you took that lightly, monday's just suck
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 10:18:30 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by achiral:
i'm glad you took that lightly, monday's just suck |
Can't argue that one ! Take it slow.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 02:49:39 PM · #16 |
hey, its me again. i think my post started a good discussion and you all did a fine job of articulating what I meant to say (i wrote my post in the middle of the night and was quite delirious).
I am new to the site and didn't know there were challenges such as sin and garbage, etc. I guess I should have researched more before I posted :)
I completey agree that a shocking photo is not necessarily a good photo, but I also agree that photos that display a negative emotion or scene will automatically get scored lower. If there was a challenge in which a negative mood was necessary it would at least teach the people taking bad photographs of negative things that they could learn to take them better technically. It wouldn't have to be shocking or vulgar and it could show individuals insights on issues such as war, death, crime, etc. Take a good picture of something you don't like and make sure that personal feeling is expressed in the image. I think it would also encourage more artistic uses of contrast and depth of field which I for one really like to see in photos but others generally wont vote as high because they aren't "perfect." Maybe what I'm saying is a "breaking the rules," or rather "bending the rules, well" challenge would be interesting. Maybe you already had that :) Also, I think there is a large difference between photos that are submitted by amateurs and professionals, especially in studio set up shots, that seems to rely heavily on the fact that professionals have invested in lighting rigs. Maybe there should be a natural light challenge or just make that a rule in one of the upcoming challenges.
I want to say that this site is awesome and I just entered my first challenge and I'm addicted already, even if I get all 1's!
Anyway, I'm ranting, I'll let you all go take pictures now.
Happy shooting. |
|
|
|
01/27/2003 03:48:12 PM · #17 |
Welcome to the site Jason. Like others have said already there has been plenty of room in these challenges for creating dark or shocking imagery. This site involves a very diverse group of mostly amateur photographers as well as non-photographers so their opinions are going to be just as diverse. While most people probably do not prefer dark and shocking imagery the majority of people can still pick out those types of photos that are well photographed. I believe that with the amount of people we have on this site the better photographs of whatever styles still make it to the top. Of course it is very subjective but it is the subjectivity of the voters on this site that matter if you want your photos to rank well. The opinions of the masses certainly should not be the determining factor in our own personal photography but those opinions still may be worth paying attention to depending on how you use your photography. This is especially important when it comes to selling your photos and you are trying to appeal to a certain market. What I find so interesting is those people here in the forums that automatically assume they know exactly why a particular photo didn't place well and they site the fact that the photo was not understood or some other reason. I believe it isn't usually so simple. If the photo in question was truly exceptional than I find it amazing that it escaped the majoriy of the hundreds of voters. I guess my point is that the voting simply is what it is and people can try to resist it but it won't change it. I personally enjoy trying to figure out what will do well and to try to fit my style into it. This is because I wish to one day sell my photography and this site provides a pretty good representation of the common public which will probably be my marketplace.
Anyway, this is a great site to learn from and there are many great people here. If you are careful to not take it all too seriously you should have a lot of fun with it. I think you should use it to stretch your wings and try different syles because it is a great place for that kind of experimentation. If you are enjoying your own photography and learning more everyday than that's what should matter most.
T
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 03:58:35 PM · #18 |
My AFTERMATHphoto for the 7 deadly sins challenge, which represented Wrath got a lot of "emotion" comments. It also was one of my highest placing photos, and the one I am most proud of.
I think what would happen is that we would see a lot of nasty photos with lack of artistic value. However, if done properly, I believe it could be interesting.
~Heather~
|
|
|
|
01/27/2003 04:14:21 PM · #19 |
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=5956
this is dark and emotional
Message edited by author 2003-01-27 16:14:42.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2003 12:31:40 AM · #20 |
the only disturbing pic I submitted was for superstitions... it scored really low, but had 31 commnets, the most of any photo I have submitted... interesting how that works... if you want disturbing, check it out..
my superstition entry
Message edited by author 2003-01-28 00:32:05. |
|
|
|
01/28/2003 01:00:04 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by hbunch7187:
My AFTERMATHphoto for the 7 deadly sins challenge, which represented Wrath got a lot of "emotion" comments. It also was one of my highest placing photos, and the one I am most proud of. |
I think that what Heather's photo, among many others, shows is that if you make a strong emotional connection with the voters, negative or positive, technical considerations don't matter so much. It's easy to see that Heather (as she knows, because I've seen her discuss it) positioned the camera so it focussed on the wall instead of on her. But even though "blurry" is one of the harshest criticisms a lot of voters make here, it still grabbed a lot of people emotionally and scored high.
This is the opposite to what a lot of people have said here. Time and time again I've seen photos do well here that are technically flawed but pushed incredible emotional buttons, positive or negative. However, technically perfect photos that are cold and boring don't score well at all.
There are a lot of compromises on this site. You can be emotional, but not overly disturbing. You can be sexy, but not tacky. You can be cute, but not cutesy-pie. You can be perfect or flawed, but not boring. Isn't it great? :P |
|
|
|
01/28/2003 01:45:14 AM · #22 |
Anachronite, I really like the deer photo. I agree with you, and others, about the red tones. Bet you wish we could spot edit!
I suppose I have been proven wrong about the need for a "negative" challenge. What do you all think about the "crowd" idea? Also, I think a "sequence" challenge would be good as well, where you put three photos together in one. Has anything like that been done? |
|
|
|
01/28/2003 01:53:46 AM · #23 |
As someone who has submitted both darkly themed ( //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=10239 ) and outright disturbing ( //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=6959 ) shots, I can argue for both sides of this argument. I'd say that shots which portray negative emotions can and do score quite well if their either merits warrent high scores. On the other hand, I think any shots which present genuinely disturbing material tend to produce a wide range of voting reactions. Certainly not all voters will react the same way, but if you look at the previously discussed "Aftermath" shot, you'll notice that it received 20 scores of 1 or 2 along with its 14 scores of 10. On my own disturbing shot from the same challenge I recieved 46 1s and 2s, yet somehow also recieved 11 10s. Rarely do photos get so many scores on both extremes at the same time.
The fact is, non-disturbing shots produce a milder reaction which tends to be mostly the same for most voters. Disturbing shots produce more of a reaction, and a more varied reaction. When you're trying to win a contest (like dpc) this doesn't work to your favor because it tends to draw your score closer to average. When you're trying to produce powerful photography, this can be perfect, because the reaction you got was far from average. |
|
|
|
01/28/2003 09:14:35 AM · #24 |
I would like to add that 'dark-themed' doesn't necessarily have to be shocking or disgusting. They can portray loneliness, anger, alienation, emotional pain and scars, poverty, sadness, injustice, etc.
The world isn't all happy and light. I personally would welcome some challenges based on the themes above. It would give people here more of an 'excuse' to play with shadow in their pics. Currently shadowy pics are sort of taboo (voter preference seems to not be for shadow images).
I think tim's post was also really well said.
|
|
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: 09/27/2025 01:48:45 PM EDT.
