| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/18/2003 08:55:41 AM · #1 |
I was just wondering how to photograph a monument without it being a literal representation. Where does everyone think the line is drawn?
|
|
|
|
08/18/2003 09:00:09 AM · #2 |
| That thought crossed my mind, too. My thought is that if the assignment is "monuments," that should pre-empt the notion of literal representation in this case. |
|
|
|
08/18/2003 09:06:24 AM · #3 |
Isn't this someone else's art?
ART
|
|
|
|
08/18/2003 09:08:56 AM · #4 |
| I can't recall any instances of statues or three dimensional artwork ever being disqualified. I could be wrong, but I don't remember it happening in the past. |
|
|
|
08/18/2003 09:09:17 AM · #5 |
I would have to go literal on this one. In my opinon, there is little room for any other interpretation of the word. That is, if you value the judgement of the voting masses, and you want them to focus their attention on the composition elements rather than solely on the subject you've chosen.
[edit: oops sorry, I misread Konador's original post]
Message edited by author 2003-08-18 09:11:24.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2003 09:09:58 AM · #6 |
My own feeling is that a monument should be treated the same as a building, and that the artwork rule applies more to paintings or other photos.
I guess most will be able to argue that they are providing an interpretation by shooting from a certain angle/including a certain background/shooting only a part of the monument anyway.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2003 11:08:42 AM · #7 |
| I think if you add an artistic element to the original, it becomes your interpretation of their artwork. |
|
|
|
08/18/2003 11:31:50 AM · #8 |
I have never taken pictures of buildings or monuments before so I am not speaking from experience, but I think that there are hundreds of ways to photograph a monument no matter how many times pictures have been taken of them before.
Just because a building stands straight doesnt mean you have to go and take it that way. Just experiement though your view finder [LCD screen] to see what you could do to a building. But I think when doing more acstract and artistic shots, you should remember to shoot in such a way that the well-known features and characteristics of the monument is kept.
I do not think that there is a line, just as long as you do not pick a postcard off the shelf and go, "That is exactly the shot I'm going to take!" |
|
|
|
08/18/2003 11:33:23 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by chalcone:
I would have to go literal on this one. In my opinon, there is little room for any other interpretation of the word. That is, if you value the judgement of the voting masses, and you want them to focus their attention on the composition elements rather than solely on the subject you've chosen.
|
But can't it be 'un-literal' and well composed? |
|
|
|
08/18/2003 12:08:30 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by bod:
My own feeling is that a monument should be treated the same as a building, and that the artwork rule applies more to paintings or other photos.
|
me too. in fact, i've always wished that that whole rule was written for 2D art only. |
|
|
|
08/18/2003 12:16:39 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by justesme:
... But can't it be 'un-literal' and well composed? |
Of course, but there's a trade-off. For instance, I might take a shot of the mountain facing my office window and call it "living monument," and that's perfectly fine. But it will definitely suffer from people who will be too fixated on the subject being off-topic (in their heads) that any technical/artistic point will be glossed over.
Ok, guys/gals... have a nice day. It's past midnight in my part of the world. Ciao!
|
|
|
|
08/18/2003 05:13:53 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I can't recall any instances of statues or three dimensional artwork ever being disqualified. I could be wrong, but I don't remember it happening in the past. |
My shot "The Oppressor?" was not called into question (well, the mods never contacted me, and it wasn't DQ'd...) It was submitted for the "From the Ground Up" challenge, and was a shot of a statue. I thought the angle combined with the statue's subject reinforced a strong emotional feeling. I'd have to look, but I don't remember anyone complaining in comments that it was a statue and therefore against the rules.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2003 06:47:19 PM · #13 |
| I shouldn't do this, but art is art. 1d, 2d, 3d, 4d I doesn't matter, it's like saying a sculpture isn't art???? IMO, Monuments should have the usual disclaimer for rules. Add something - anything - to your statue-ish item or word the challenge so "Art" is O.K. Monuments don't have to be Other People's Art, too. Isn't a mound of trash a monument to our society? |
|
|
|
08/18/2003 07:37:07 PM · #14 |
Here is what I come up with for a definition
1. large stone statue or carving: something designed and built as a lasting public tribute to a person, a group of people, or an event
2. famous place or building: a site or structure that is preserved because of its historical, cultural, or aesthetic importance
3. carved headstone: a tombstone, plaque, or ornamental stone structure placed on somebodys grave. A monument in a cemetery is usually inscribed with the name and dates of birth and death of the deceased person, and often a religious quotation or verse.
4. worthy reminder of something: something that remains as a reminder of something, especially something fine or distinguished
5. memorial tribute: a memorial to somebody in the form of a written or spoken tribute
6. boundary marker: an object such as a stone that marks a boundary
Looks like this leaves a lot of options. Of course we might not convince the voters if they have a preset idea of what a monument is.
|
|
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: 08/30/2025 11:31:27 AM EDT.
