| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/19/2002 05:01:50 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by BigSmiles:
I'd appreciate some feedback on what I could have added or done differently with my F & V image. I got MANY comments about how they loved the composition but I feel it's missing something and that it didn't really appeal to as many people as I had hoped. Any thoughts?
Nothing was wrong with your picture I gave you a ten. It was better than the winner, which I gave a five. Your picture had detail, good subject matter, real fruit and vegetables not plastic. The lemon water and rolling pin just topped off the image. A job well done BigSmiles you have came a long way in your photography.
|
|
|
|
09/19/2002 05:39:04 PM · #27 |
| BigSmiles, I rated your photo with a 7. Technically seen it was very good and there was nothing wrong about the compostion either. But in my opinion the combination of unions, apples, lemons, lemonade and rolling pin didn’t make any sense at all. It made me think you where trying to put both fruit and vegetables in the same picture just for the sake of it. |
|
|
|
09/19/2002 09:22:20 PM · #28 |
| Over half of the abstract and still life pictures don't make sense it's up to the viewer and author to determine that. This is an excellent photograph, cut and dried, you can through out the concept. Everything in the picture is in focused, color balance, and well detailed |
|
|
|
09/19/2002 10:58:51 PM · #29 |
| Bob, what do color balance and focus have to do with art? These are technical features which I generally assume any well rated photograph will have. The Galen Rowell book I mentioned earlier also has a great essey on the difference between technical excellence and art. But I'll spare you my favorite snip from that one, lest I be called "long winded" again... heh. |
|
|
|
09/19/2002 11:14:39 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by chrisab:
Bob, what do color balance and focus have to do with art? These are technical features which I generally assume any well rated photograph will have. The Galen Rowell book I mentioned earlier also has a great essey on the difference between technical excellence and art. But I'll spare you my favorite snip from that one, lest I be called "long winded" again... heh.
I would love to hear what you have to say. I think I am going to go buy the book this weekend. People aren't going to get better if they keep argueing in the forums and no one really saying which is the right or what is exceptable in each challenge. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 02:41:02 AM · #31 |
| What is the name of this website? "dpchallenge a digital photography contest" is printed at the top left corner of this web page. It doesn't say "dpchallenge a art contest"? I know what you are saying, but I am judging photography not art? Art to me is a painting, sculpture, drawing, etc. of the arts. When you are creating a picture of still life, usually it is not a true picture it represents one, so be it art as you were saying. It is still a photography to me whatever you do with a camera. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 02:45:42 AM · #32 |
So in the essay "Cameras and the Man", Galen is talking about how elusive the skill of taking a meaningful picture can be, regardless of how well honed one's technical skills may be.
He talks about Bernard Shaw, who apparently spent a great deal of time trying to become a skilled photograther (in the fine art sense, rather than the attractive snapshop sense). Despite his many other talents, and his dedication to the task, Mr. Shawn didn't make much of a dent in the art world. He was focused on making technically excellent photos that captured reality in great detail. Unfortunately, they didn't evoke much emotion.
But Shaw did finally publish "Bernard Shaw on Photography" in 1989. Galen is talking about the book and writes:
"As I thumbed the pages of 'Barnard Shaw on Photography' in a bookstore, his images took that first step toward success by creating an emotional response in me: I thought about the paper on which they were printed and how much better off it had been as part of a forest. Minutes later, however, I bought the book. My change of heart came when I realized its value as a document of the futility of trying to make photographs that exactly resemble reality. Others who have pursued photography to this extreme simply have not had their fruitless efforts published."
Virtually any moderately intelligent person can make a technically good photograph. But making art takes something else besides technical excellence... talent, practice, imagination? I haven't finished the book, so I don't know exactly what the answer is yet.... :)
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 03:01:42 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by bobgaither:
What is the name of this website? "dpchallenge a digital photography contest" is printed at the top left corner of this web page. It doesn't say "dpchallenge a art contest"? I know what you are saying, but I am judging photography not art? Art to me is a painting, sculpture, drawing, etc. of the arts. When you are creating a picture of still life, usually it is not a true picture it represents one, so be it art as you were saying. It is still a photography to me whatever you do with a camera.
Bob, I don't know what you're talking about. Of course dpchallenge is about about art. Look at the top 3 photos of any challenge and think what's special about them. Is it that they are more in focus than the others? No. It's that they create emotion in the viewer. That's what art is.
BigSmiles asked why her shots weren't scoring as well as she wanted. I think it's clear from looking at her photos and from the comments she's gotten that they are technically good. You may have given her shot a 10, but most people did not. So why is that? My opinion is that it's because they failed to strike an emotional chord with the viewers. You may think that photos should be judged purely on focus, color balance, and other technical attributes but clearly most voters are looking for more.
Want to score better? Focus on the art, not the art of focus!
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 04:37:10 AM · #34 |
I think I scored her picture a 9 because it brought back memories of summer time fun with the family. I see what you are saying, I think.
I can't wait to get the book now. There are no stores open this late. Darn!
Originally posted by chrisab:
BigSmiles asked why her shots weren't scoring as well as she wanted. I think it's clear from looking at her photos and from the comments she's gotten that they are technically good. You may have given her shot a 10, but most people did not. So why is that? My opinion is that it's because they failed to strike an emotional chord with the viewers. You may think that photos should be judged purely on focus, color balance, and other technical attributes but clearly most voters are looking for more.
Want to score better? Focus on the art, not the art of focus!
[/i]
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:44:23 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by Sonifo:
...I can't wait to get the book now. There are no stores open this late. Darn!
You can order the book directly from Galen Rowell's Mountain Light Books Online, along with a bunch of others (it's on the upper right of the page); signed prints, cards, etc. The gallery has moved from Berkeley (near me) to Bishop, near Mt. Whitney, darn!
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/20/2002 5:44:33 AM. |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:05:55 PM · #36 |
Bob, I don't know what you're talking about. Of course dpchallenge is about about art. Look at the top 3 photos of any challenge and think what's special about them. Is it that they are more in focus than the others? No. It's that they create emotion in the viewer. That's what art is.
BigSmiles asked why her shots weren't scoring as well as she wanted. I think it's clear from looking at her photos and from the comments she's gotten that they are technically good. You may have given her shot a 10, but most people did not. So why is that? My opinion is that it's because they failed to strike an emotional chord with the viewers. You may think that photos should be judged purely on focus, color balance, and other technical attributes but clearly most voters are looking for more.
Want to score better? Focus on the art, not the art of focus!
[/i]
OK, take the top image that won the contest. It did not even have a fruit or vegetable in the image. What was the contest? People need to view the image for what it is, not what they think it should be. The majority of the people must have either been wrapped up in art or just didn't care for that image did not qualify for lacking a fruit or a vegetable. There was a replica of an apple, I wonder if anyone had noticed that or cared? I did because I viewed the image for what it was and that was missing the theme.
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:08:29 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by bobgaither:
What is the name of this website? "dpchallenge a digital photography contest" is printed at the top left corner of this web page. It doesn't say "dpchallenge a art contest"? I know what you are saying, but I am judging photography not art? Art to me is a painting, sculpture, drawing, etc. of the arts. When you are creating a picture of still life, usually it is not a true picture it represents one, so be it art as you were saying. It is still a photography to me whatever you do with a camera.
Sorry you feel that way :)
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:10:13 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by bobgaither:
OK, take the top image that won the contest. It did not even have a fruit or vegetable in the image. What was the contest? People need to view the image for what it is, not what they think it should be. The majority of the people must have either been wrapped up in art or just didn't care for that image did not qualify for lacking a fruit or a vegetable. There was a replica of an apple, I wonder if anyone had noticed that or cared? I did because I viewed the image for what it was and that was missing the theme.
Wow... you are astute :) I'm impressed Bob.... you caught me ;)
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:10:58 PM · #39 |
| I'd be curious to know what you gave my FnV shot, Bob. If you don't mind sharing... |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:31:28 PM · #40 |
Put away the crack, before the crack puts you away.
Originally posted by bobgaither:
Bob, I don't know what you're talking about. Of course dpchallenge is about about art. Look at the top 3 photos of any challenge and think what's special about them. Is it that they are more in focus than the others? No. It's that they create emotion in the viewer. That's what art is.
BigSmiles asked why her shots weren't scoring as well as she wanted. I think it's clear from looking at her photos and from the comments she's gotten that they are technically good. You may have given her shot a 10, but most people did not. So why is that? My opinion is that it's because they failed to strike an emotional chord with the viewers. You may think that photos should be judged purely on focus, color balance, and other technical attributes but clearly most voters are looking for more.
Want to score better? Focus on the art, not the art of focus!
OK, take the top image that won the contest. It did not even have a fruit or vegetable in the image. What was the contest? People need to view the image for what it is, not what they think it should be. The majority of the people must have either been wrapped up in art or just didn't care for that image did not qualify for lacking a fruit or a vegetable. There was a replica of an apple, I wonder if anyone had noticed that or cared? I did because I viewed the image for what it was and that was missing the theme.
[/i]
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 05:56:02 PM · #41 |
Bob,
It is obvious that you use a very tightly constrained interpretation of the challenge. That's not necessarily wrong, it's just not popular.
I'm curious what you thought of Bananas at 2 O'clock, which showed a reflection of fruit and of Cherry Pie which showed an embroidered representation of fruit.
In my opinion, representations of fruits and vegetables are as valid are real ones. If someone held that plastic apple up in a room full of strangers and asked "What is this?" I strongly suspect that the reply would "an apple". It would be different to me, if he put something else there which was clearly NOT an apple, but meant to represent one (such as a plastic ball). I understand that our opinions are different and I'm not trying to convince you; only continuing the dialogue.
By the way, the ideas you are expressing are not new in art. You ought to check out (if you're not already familiar with) Rene Magritte's paintings. In particular, Pipe comes to mind, in which Magritte paints a pipe and then underneath it the phrase (in french,) "This is not a pipe."
These kinds of metaphysical inferences and discussions are interesting to me, but purely academic since most people will accept a plastic apple as an apple.
Cheers,
Dawn |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 06:05:34 PM · #42 |
Bob: Your entry for the Fear challenge had no fear in it. It was a picture of two man-made structures that, in YOUR mind at least, were a symbol for fear. John's symbolic apple was a lot more literal than that!
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 06:15:56 PM · #43 |
To be honest with you I haven't looked at the top three finishers until a little while ago.
You have a fake apple at 1. 2nd and 3rd are slices of lemon and kiwi, now I am really lost. For you artists out there what makes them three images art?
Fruits and Vegetables were a still life contest so why would anyone be surprised about the out come. This next contest opens it up more but there is still a clause in there, it could be you own room meaning there will be still life and probably a billiard corner pocket in one of the images. Summer is over and we been doing photo contests that were geared for inside. Lets do this still life when winter sets in. Get people off their butts and outdoors where it harder to control the lighting. Where it is harder to stuff a large image in a small picture and have detail. Make it mandatory to go at least to a park, countryside, anywhere but your own backyard or inside your house.
ok i'll look into fear i'll get back on the bananas help me out on the art end |
|
|
|
09/20/2002 06:28:37 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by just-married:
Bob,
It is obvious that you use a very tightly constrained interpretation of the challenge. That's not necessarily wrong, it's just not popular.
I'm curious what you thought of Bananas at 2 O'clock, which showed a reflection of fruit and of Cherry Pie which showed an embroidered representation of fruit.
In my opinion, representations of fruits and vegetables are as valid are real ones. If someone held that plastic apple up in a room full of strangers and asked "What is this?" I strongly suspect that the reply would "an apple". It would be different to me, if he put something else there which was clearly NOT an apple, but meant to represent one (such as a plastic ball). I understand that our opinions are different and I'm not trying to convince you; only continuing the dialogue.
By the way, the ideas you are expressing are not new in art. You ought to check out (if you're not already familiar with) Rene Magritte's paintings. In particular, Pipe comes to mind, in which Magritte paints a pipe and then underneath it the phrase (in french,) "This is not a pipe."
These kinds of metaphysical inferences and discussions are interesting to me, but purely academic since most people will accept a plastic apple as an apple.
Cheers,
Dawn
i when through the pictures a few times and could not find bananas a 2'0 clock give me a link or author --do they have a search engine for titles on this web site--whatever the cake picture help there i to go do something --35 anniversary taking the wife out
|
|
|
|
09/20/2002 06:37:14 PM · #45 |
Bananas at 2 O'Clock
Oh, and congratulations!
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/20/2002 6:36:22 PM. |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 12:03:45 PM · #46 |
"Bananas at 2 O'Clock", I gave a 9. How could I go against my buddy spiderman? I liked the image I thought maybe the face was a little over saturated but that was his effect.
Chris on your f&v shot I gave you a 5. First I don't like flashes in close up or macros. The lemon did not have detail for a close up. The most important thing is I didn't know if this was editing or not? Tell me how you did the shot, for I liked the creativity on the snail?
"Cherry Pie" I gave a 4. Sorry Drew same thing no fruit or vegetables. Her arm is pink and not natural. There is a defect from the camera or sun on her panties. Drew could have use a clone tool on that but it is not allowed. So Drew open up the editing.
|
|
|
|
09/21/2002 12:46:20 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by bobgaither:
Fruits and Vegetables were a still life contest so why would anyone be surprised about the out come. This next contest opens it up more but there is still a clause in there, it could be you own room meaning there will be still life and probably a billiard corner pocket in one of the images. Summer is over and we been doing photo contests that were geared for inside. Lets do this still life when winter sets in. Get people off their butts and outdoors where it harder to control the lighting. Where it is harder to stuff a large image in a small picture and have detail. Make it mandatory to go at least to a park, countryside, anywhere but your own backyard or inside your house.
Uh-- Bob? here is the wording of the original suggestion and Gordan expanded on the idea somewhere to include possibly doing an inside job. Go ahead and shoot your favouite landmark. I did.
Enter a picture that shows your corner of the world. It will probably
be the most cliched, postcardy view of your home town - so that we
can all get a feel for the different parts of the world the DPCers live
in. Bag-pipers from scotland, Cowboys from Texas - let's see where
you live and what it's famous for!
|
|
|
|
09/21/2002 04:20:26 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by BigSmiles:
I'd appreciate some feedback on what I could have added or done differently with my F & V image. I got MANY comments about how they loved the composition but I feel it's missing something and that it didn't really appeal to as many people as I had hoped. Any thoughts?
Looking at your picture... The colors of the fruit are maybe a bit cool. (Could be my monitor or my eye.) The one thing I noticed is that there isn't really a center of attention for your image. I tried closing my eyes and then looking to see where they first went. Over and over they went to the Jalapeno above the lower garlic. This is a dark area and maybe that is why. The picture is pretty busy and a lot of thing compete for attention. I'm not sure what could improve the flow of the picture. Over all it is a very nice picture, but yes it does seem to lack just a little something that would really make it pop. |
|
|
|
09/21/2002 11:57:12 PM · #49 |
Uh-- Bob? here is the wording of the original suggestion and Gordan expanded on the idea somewhere to include possibly doing an inside job. Go ahead and shoot your favouite landmark. I did.
Enter a picture that shows your corner of the world. It will probably
be the most cliched, postcardy view of your home town - so that we
can all get a feel for the different parts of the world the DPCers live
in. Bag-pipers from scotland, Cowboys from Texas - let's see where
you live and what it's famous for!
[/i]
I didn't do Landmarks, of the Golden Gate Bridge or Cable Cars. It was something plain and simple. I like it and it should do well. It wasn't junk like I have been doing lately. I am trying this time and if my enemies don't catch wind of it should do all right. I want to thank everyone that has help me. I mean even the ones I disagreed with. I love photography and I have a passion for it. Am I overzealous, Yes! Good luck to everyone in the contest.
Bob Gaither
|
|
|
|
09/22/2002 02:12:39 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by BigSmiles:
I'd appreciate some feedback on what I could have added or done differently with my F & V image. I got MANY comments about how they loved the composition but I feel it's missing something and that it didn't really appeal to as many people as I had hoped. Any thoughts?
First, it's not "harmony" but rather a jumbled chaotic mess. And I don't mean to be critical, but you asked.
So what I'm going to suggest is a number of things, but primarily that you stop looking at object as object and start looking at them as graphic elements (lines, shapes, colors, tones, patterns) etc. Because these are the building blocks of good photographic composition.
And start getting some more graphic repetition into
you compositional designing: show more repetition of
lines, for example, or more repetition of circles (fruits and vegetables are just loaded with circles).
Or change the darn lighting so there's much more play
of dark shapes against light background and light shapes against dark backgrounds.
And if you use color, try to have things of only one color with different hues, or a few complimentary bold colors with nothing else.
I could go on, but I don't want to write who "improve your photographs" book here.
But in the most general of terms, make the word "strong graphic design" a good part of your vocabulary (or at least your image making."
Consider this week's winning image (a fairly good one I must say): good strong graphic lines and shapes; simplicity in color; good use of light against dark. In short, an image which communicates with clarity, directness and impact.
And we each get a lot more of that when we stop looking at object as like they're objects and instead start looking at the things around us in terms of their more underlying basic graphic qualities. Those are the building blocks of good composition. And great attention to that, I have no doubt, will make you a much, much more effective image makers.
Hope that perspective is of some help,
CJ
|
|
