| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/02/2006 09:15:10 PM · #1 |
Ok so I knew that this shot may stir a few people from their seats. But I was a little suprised the following "critique" of my image by e301. Thought I might put this to the masses and see if anyone else agrees/disagrees with e301 ...
"I think the properly controversial has less of a sense of deliberate provocation and more of a genuine alternative world-view than this shot has. I don't find it to be particularly enlightening - yet it has that quality of photography that shouts out that 'this has a message for you'.
It's easy as anything to have a go at the technicalitites, certainlny for this dpc community - it doesn't have the technicolour pop, the tidiness of design, the clean presentation (look at all that unneccasry dust around the edges of heart, for heaven's sake). Most other technical stuff is fine here - you know, the old DOF, focus, detail and all that.
But hell, the most distressing thing about it is that your non-dairy creamer just doesn't look the slightest bit like cocaine. More like wood shavings.
Now why is that? One, large, part of that is the granularity of that material. This stuff is just too flakey, rather than the almost impossibly small grains of the 'real thing'. It's also, as someone has observed, an impossibly white stuff, and in this photo it just doesn't have that clarity of whiteness; that's some function of levels/curves and processing - even though your white points are there, it would be possible to even out the movement towards the mid-tones - here, I think that process is too quick - thus the oddness of the highlights on that rolled paper. Also, arguably, the social perception of the drug, and the usual presentation of it, and the lifestyle associations of it, perhaps require something a touch more considered that this approach?
e
" |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:18:27 PM · #2 |
wow, I think you got a cool critique there....e really let loose. I'd be honored to have such an accomplished photog spend 100-200 words on my pic...even if he didn't like it.
And I can't comment cuz I've never seen cocaine. |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:21:00 PM · #3 |
I thought the concept behind your pic was apt .. and quite well thought out ... I think that the critique you recieved was well thought out ....
Don't use coke like the Doc so have no idea of the make up ... but I thought about the shot when I voted and now again and still think it was right on for some. |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:23:32 PM · #4 |
Pfft, why even post this?
You asked for the critique. You dont like it, well dont ask for one in the future.
|
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:26:19 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
Pfft, why even post this?
You asked for the critique. You dont like it, well dont ask for one in the future. |
I don't think this was from the critique club .. or if it was it was not introduced as a comment from them is meant to be.
Just by entering a challenge you ask for critique ... seebrown was just checking the sanity of it .. I do that lots :) |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:28:16 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
Pfft, why even post this?
You asked for the critique. You dont like it, well dont ask for one in the future. |
I must have missed the part where he said he didn't like it. I'm reading it again and I'm still missing it.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:30:03 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by kari1:
Originally posted by Riggs:
Pfft, why even post this?
You asked for the critique. You dont like it, well dont ask for one in the future. |
I don't think this was from the critique club .. or if it was it was not introduced as a comment from them is meant to be.
Just by entering a challenge you ask for critique ... seebrown was just checking the sanity of it .. I do that lots :) |
That was my assumption, since it was after the contest and quite long and in depth. I could be wrong.
It still irks me either way. |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:36:18 PM · #8 |
Well,personally I liked the shot and scored you well on it. The critique was well though out - although I thought that it should have dealt with the technicals more rather than the controversy, or the general make up of cocaine. Yeah - so you did use creamer ....it really should have been more granular as I know what the real thing looks like - not ashasmed to admit it as I dont go near the stuff anymore. But you still got the message across even if creamer wasn't the best material to use. I'm sure a lot of props used in entries here could be better - but they dont get picked apart as thy are not so controversial. The excess dust around the heart...very realisitc. I never knew a coke head that cared about a little excess dust - they usually wet their finger and wipe it up for an extra 'taste'. lol Can't be wasting the stuff ya know. I would have liked to see more reflection in the mirror is all. Other wise I thought it was a well done b/w that sent a strong message.
|
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:49:24 PM · #9 |
Agreed CJ. I think he's just looking for more comments on a picture he probably wasn't sure about himself.
As far as I'm concerned, I've no personal experience using drugs, but I've got a sister that's about as hardcore a heroin junkie as can be. Or at least she was, now she's a cracked out nut on the methadone program wandering the streets and living in parks.
At various times during her decline, she has manifested an intense love for her drug world. Even though it was a horrendously negative influence on her life (violent rapings were about the only thing that she really got bothered by, and they were a fairly frequent occurrence, partly because they knew that she would barely remember the event afterwards and certainly have no ability to do anything about it like pressing charges... all her 'friends' had a go... but she was 'bothered' by the events), she made sure that everything in her life revolved around drugs.
There is a point in the photograph that is being made that is perhaps a little outside of the vision of someone who hasn't been right there in it all, holding the bowl of bloody vomit in the insane asylum, watching a loved one stave of death with feeble swats of an emaciated 'cold turkey in Max Security rehab' hand and watched that same person repeatedly go back to rolling in the same mire.
It may have been outside of the scope of the photographer too, but I can't comment on that.
What I can say though is that just as with any picture, everyone sees something a little different.
One person may see an anti-drug message. Another might see a metaphor for a love of a very different kind. A love that indeed will never die unless the lover dies... as a result of the love itself.
I recently watched a rather disturbing movie called 28 grams and there was a pretty major sub-story was how once you have become consumed with drugs, your life can never really return to normal. It was a pretty powerful message and I'm pretty sure that most viewers didn't see it.
That same message is also present in the above picture.
Was the portrayal accurate, using coffee whitener instead of powdered sugar?
Was the photography perfect such that the lighting was perfect over all white areas?
Did it have to be?
Nyeh.
Personally, I don't like the picture, because some things just shouldn't need to be discussed, but I can see merit and value in it beyond the photographic quality.
The real question is How clear is that to the intended audience? or Is the message only clear to a small group?
Puts your voting results into perspective. |
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:50:06 PM · #10 |
I'd like to know your intention of posting this.
Are you happy you got the comment? Do you not agree with it? Are you trying to make a point? Why post this???
|
|
|
|
03/02/2006 09:57:15 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by Riggs:
Pfft, why even post this?
You asked for the critique. You dont like it, well dont ask for one in the future. |
I must have missed the part where he said he didn't like it. I'm reading it again and I'm still missing it.
~Terry |
I dont know, maybe not. I just dont see the point in critiquing crituqes. I dont think its a good idea... But I will retire fom this thread, and let it be. |
|
|
|
03/03/2006 12:19:47 AM · #12 |
Ok so here why I posted the critque:
1) I found it puzzling why the granularity of the creamer distracted from the overall "quality" of the shot. Without question it seems that the majority of the viewers understood that they were looking at "coke". I posted the critque to find out if others really did find it distracted from the overall message of the photo.
2) Secondly, the critque accusted me of posting the photo without full consideration of coke users AND that it insued "deliberate provocation". What I find interesting is that this photo would spark such views, instead I was expecting a barrage of both angry voters comments (mainly ones who think the topic too taboo) as well as praising comments, which comprised the majority to my suprise. I was, however, caught off gaurd by someone who would have taken the time to so elequently cut down my intentions in taking this photo: I am not sure if I should commend him or condem him.
I contimplated whether or not to describe here my initial intentions in taking this photo as I did (at the time) have a very clear motive in doing so, and eventually decided against the idea so to let views come to their own conclusions.
Message edited by author 2006-03-03 02:20:55. |
|
|
|
03/03/2006 09:36:56 AM · #13 |
It's really bad taste to call someone out in the forum for taking the time to comment on your photo. Someone spent a good amount of time giving you their opinion on your photo and you should be nothing but thankful. If you don't agree with it, dismiss it and move on. If you have questions about it, PM the commenter. If it's offensive, contact SC. There is no good reason to bring it up in the forums and it does nothing but discourage other people from commenting.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2006 09:56:23 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
It's really bad taste to call someone out in the forum for taking the time to comment on your photo. Someone spent a good amount of time giving you their opinion on your photo and you should be nothing but thankful. If you don't agree with it, dismiss it and move on. If you have questions about it, PM the commenter. If it's offensive, contact SC. There is no good reason to bring it up in the forums and it does nothing but discourage other people from commenting. |
Agreed, why is it that people on one hand complain about the low number of comments they receive, but are so willing to publicly call people out on comments they may not agree with. I'm not the best commenter in the world but if the majority of my comments consisted of 3 or 4 words (which maybe they do, I better check that) I would not be complaining about this very in depth comment from e. IMO it is post like this that make people think twice about commenting.
|
|
|
|
03/03/2006 10:44:30 AM · #15 |
And now I'm the controversial one, huh?
I have no problem whatsoever with my critique being posted here - in fact it's pleasant to have stirred up some reaction.
The real shame, I think, is that no-one picked up on the 'real thing' gag ;-(
e
Message edited by author 2006-03-03 11:23:42. |
|
|
|
03/03/2006 11:22:45 AM · #16 |
'I guess I"m one of the 'masses' here at DPC, and a member of the Critique Club too. Final qualification?
Ignorance.
I thought the maker was frosting a Valentine's Day cookie! Had I drawn your image to critique, I'm sure you'd have been rolling in the aisles with laughter.
On the rare occasion when e301 has critiqued an image of mine, the only reaction I had was one of thanks. The guy knows his stuff, and when he does a critique, you know what he thinks and you have been helped.
But then, it takes all kinds...
|
|
|
|
03/03/2006 11:44:16 AM · #17 |
| IT was a great comment from e 301; much more entertaining than this thread. |
|
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: 09/20/2025 03:21:06 PM EDT.
