How to rate photos that are better than yours

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/28/2008 03:47:18 PM · #76

Originally posted by bmartuch:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The "popular" photographer shoots and learns what the masses declare to be "good". The "fine art" photographer shoots for himself and declares to the masses "this is good".

So you think mass appeal is the best you could hope to achieve in your photography ? It's but one goal. Not the be all and end all reason to pick up a camera. Popular just means 'popular' It doesn't say anything about good, bad, meaningful, vapid. Just popular. One of many standards to rate something on (just happens to be the one used here)

Most people hate classical music or the blues. Is it better or worse than Britney Spears or Hannah Montana?

One must recall that "classical music" has a following centuries after their composers die. So would you say that is unpopular? I doubt Britney is even going to be known 50 years from now. So yes, I'd say classical is a) more popular and b) more enduring when you look at the big picture.

My statement, of course, is a bit simplistic. Porn is quite popular but I'd hardly say it's "good". But I just scratch my head at the people who go around dismissing anything popular as "eye candy" while struggling to declare their own work as superior based on depth or meaning or whatever. Certainly there are the artists who shoot for themselves and are happy when they connect with those few people who share their vision. But the instant they start looking down their nose at people who reach a wider audience they lose me.

Hey Doc, would it be safe to say that this is not the site for anyone trying to create thought provoking images? The scores seem to imply that.

I think the scores say it is very diffucult to produce a thought provoking image that is also popular. A few have this gift.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

03/28/2008 03:50:14 PM · #77

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by scalvert:
Popular is meaningful to many. Something that's meaningful to few isn't likely go far on a public site.

To that I say 'so what' ? Does it have to go far on a public site to be good, or interesting, or worthwhile ? It's just not the goal for everyone.

It does if you want to score well at THIS site. It's pretty easy to see that's what Shannon is talking about.

If you want to enter artsy photos in challenges that are "deep" and require a lengthy look to appreciate, by all means go right ahead. However, don't complain when you end up at the bottom end of the results again.

03/28/2008 03:56:21 PM · #78

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Oh I never thought they should score well. In fact somewhere in here I think I said it was a bit nuts to think that.

The site is based around the idea of rating images by popularity. the most popular image wins each time. That's always been clear.
But I didn't start the rant saying that popular was or should be the ultimate goal.

I just got to the point were trying to produce popular images was an empty, meaningless experience for me. I'm not saying anyone else shouldn't do it. I just don't find it satisfying any more. Shannon couldn't (in his original rant) understand why anyone wouldn't want to make popular images. So to the original point 'what's the point of having an image that most people don't want to see' is that maybe a few people would really want to see it.

Message edited by author 2008-03-28 15:59:15.

03/28/2008 03:56:55 PM · #79

Originally posted by glad2badad:

...However, don't complain when you end up at the bottom end of the results again.

Well, you can complain, but it's better to let one of the local knights do your fencing.

Message edited by author 2008-03-28 17:41:54.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

03/28/2008 03:57:08 PM · #80

I don't disagree with anything Shannon has said ... or Gordon for that matter, but it does seem like no one wants to even entertain the thought that there is other POPULAR styles out there that aren't popular here. This site isn't the scale for all popular or non-popular photography ... and perhaps if more newbies saw different types more often ... the masses would be more open to "artsy" ... whatever that is.

03/28/2008 03:58:42 PM · #81

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Gordon:
What your list really describes is what would be considered great graphic design. Something perfect for a commercial client looking to buy images to sell a product. Easy to read message. Clean lines. Simple. Pleasing colour palette. Nothing complex or confusing or requiring thought. Communicates with the majority of viewers...

Yup, no surprise there. That's exactly what is required in the context of DPChallenge: a topical visual contest with voters expected the scroll through hundreds of images and pick the winners. You aren't going to change anyone's mind, provoke deep thought or cure society's ills with a photo entered here. That's not the purpose of DPC. You have a few seconds (at best) to communicate the assigned topic in an appealing way and demonstrate some photographic prowess, nothing more. Anyone looking for deep, provocative art here would also be well advised to visit a museum.

Ah, the context... Part of my job as an exploration geologist is creating visuals, made up from maps, graphs, photos, and whatever else is material. They are usually used in meetings with financing companies, and they have about thirty seconds to get their point across. If they do, we get millions of dollars and survive to explore another day. If they don't, I'm out of work, and becoming a wedding and portrait photographer. :-D

I guess I'm thinking "Eye Candy" is more like 'business' as compared to "Art". I came to DPC liking eye candy by far, but over time my appreciation for the more artistic photos has grown, and I'm even feeling the urge to take less stocky photos for my own pleasure.

Message edited by author 2008-03-28 16:35:07.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

03/28/2008 04:01:12 PM · #82

Originally posted by Gordon:

... The site is based around the idea of rating images by popularity. the most popular image wins each time. That's always been clear.
But I didn't start the rant saying that popular was or should be the ultimate goal.

Hmmm. Ok. I missed the rant part somewhere along the line of this thread (which seems a bit off tangent anyway). It sounded to me like "popular" was not to be unexpected when that's what does well in challenges here. If you're in it to compete and score well, that's what the bulk of entries are going to be.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

03/28/2008 04:02:30 PM · #83

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by Gordon:
... The site is based around the idea of rating images by popularity. the most popular image wins each time. That's always been clear.
But I didn't start the rant saying that popular was or should be the ultimate goal.

Hmmm. Ok. I missed the rant part somewhere along the line of this thread (which seems a bit off tangent anyway). It sounded to me like "popular" was not to be unexpected when that's what does well in challenges here. If you're in it to compete and score well, that's what the bulk of entries are going to be.

It's in the first post:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Hmm... I'm probably bordering on Rant right off the bat, so I might as well lob another shell: [...] I WANT to appeal to the masses because, really, what's the point of having a photo that most people aren't interested in seeing? :-/

and 'being in it to compete and score well' is just one goal of being here too - again not the only goal - from the last poll it might be inferred that only about 30% of the people entering images here are doing it for that reason as the most important one.

Message edited by author 2008-03-28 16:06:33.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

03/28/2008 04:03:26 PM · #84

Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:

... only by opening it will you be able to see the richness of an image and reveal the character of a photo (assuming richness or character are there in the first place of course).

Then again, some images are easier to see/get/interpret in the thumbnail view, as with this recent entry of mine:

But overall I agree with you ... I've suggested for a long time that the thumbnails only be viewable for photos on which you've already cast a vote, to avoid the whole preview/cherry-picking issue.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

03/28/2008 04:04:47 PM · #85

Originally posted by GeneralE:

But overall I agree with you ... I've suggested for a long time that the thumbnails only be viewable for photos on which you've already cast a vote, to avoid the whole preview/cherry-picking issue.

You can often see that in voting. If you have an entry that 'gives good thumb' the number of views vs the number of votes is really skewed in the first day or so.

Message edited by author 2008-03-28 16:06:58.

Patrick_R

Canon EOS-60D

03/28/2008 04:05:15 PM · #86

I actually wont look at how my picture is doing until after I have voted

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/28/2008 04:15:32 PM · #87

Originally posted by glad2badad:

which seems a bit off tangent anyway

Well, if you want to get back on tangent for the thread, you could probably start by defining what 'better' means. Seems like that's what the discussion has mostly been about. Shannon has his one ideal of what better or deserving means, other people have a different standard. That's the one thing this site got really right 1-bad, 10-good and nothing more than that.

Elvis_L

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/28/2008 04:17:37 PM · #88

i personally grow tired of people judging everytihng like there are no other possible options. So many people like to proclaim that "eye candy" has no emotion. this is BS as far as I am concerned. It may have no deeper meaning to you but that sure as hell doesn't mean it doesn't to the photographer or another viewer. Lets say a shot of the Sydney opera house won a ribbon and people calimed it had no real meaning. Perhaps the photogrpaher met his future wife there and then years later took her back there for a sunset 3 days before she finally died of cancer. leaving him devestated and barely able to continue with his own life with out her. He titled the night shot " as one sun fades another struggles to appear"(well something better than that but you get the idea) Who are you to say the shot is just "eye candy" because it is pretty and well done? Hell maybe the photographer lives in a dump and is surrounded but ugly crap everyday and takes the train to photograph beauty because he never gets to see any real beauty. those eye candy shots would have a ton of meaning to him.

On the other hand I have had people comment on some of my random crappy snapshots and proclaim they see this deep meaning in them. I laugh to myself at first but never say anything to them because I am glad they saw something in it. We all see different things in photos and no one style (eye candy vs deeper meaning) is better or more important than the others.

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

03/28/2008 04:19:58 PM · #89

Originally posted by scalvert:

...but anything less than a 7 on a ribbon winner will drag its score down...

Sometimes, just sometimes mind you, I really wish the search function worked better on this site...

posthumous

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/28/2008 04:21:53 PM · #90

Originally posted by scalvert:

You aren't going to change anyone's mind, provoke deep thought or cure society's ills with a photo entered here. That's not the purpose of DPC. You have a few seconds (at best) to communicate the assigned topic in an appealing way and demonstrate some photographic prowess, nothing more. Anyone looking for deep, provocative art here would also be well advised to visit a museum.

If you were able to convince me of the above, you would be rid of me once and for all.

The truth is, there is more than one way to approach the "challenge" of DP Challenge. There is your way, which is to gear your photo toward getting the highest score. But there are more experimental approaches: do your own thing and see how it scores. Try something new and see what reaction it gets. It is okay for an artist to want to appeal to many people. You can also use DPC to look for "niche markets," find a small group of people who love your photo.

Both of us are talking about a photograph/viewer interaction. The only measure you seem able to conceive of is the number of viewers, but it is possible to become a student of the interaction itself. When that happens, you become interested in what kind of interaction is occurring, beyond the mere "I like it." That's where "eyecandy" comes in. It is a mere sugar rush. The spectrum of interactions a viewer can have with a photograph is as varied as life itself. The student of interaction can create a photograph that only a few people will interact with. That's okay, because those few interactions will be rich and varied.

Remember, all appeal is finite. Your photo can appeal to 100,000 people. It can appeal to Buddhists but not Christians. It can appeal to women but not men. It can appeal a little to many or a lot to few. How can you possibly compare? Do you judge a teacher by the number of students in his class? Teacher A got 100 kids to learn that an electron orbits around a nucleus. Teacher B got one child, a single child, to care about poetry.

Which Teacher is better? Why are you comparing them?

As to snobbery, that is an attitude. It can occur on either side of any issue. It is never a good argument for one side or the other, a purely ad hominem tactic.

03/28/2008 04:34:10 PM · #91

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

...I guess I'm thinking "Eye Candy" is more like real life, and "Art" is something else.

I'd argue the reverse.

03/28/2008 04:35:35 PM · #92

Originally posted by zeuszen:

Originally posted by Strikeslip:
...I guess I'm thinking "Eye Candy" is more like real life, and "Art" is something else.

I'd argue the reverse.

Oops, I just edited that while you posted this.

03/28/2008 04:36:16 PM · #93

Here's my edit.......

I guess I'm thinking "Eye Candy" is more like 'business' as compared to "Art". I came to DPC liking eye candy by far, but over time my appreciation for the more artistic photos has grown, and I'm even feeling the urge to take less stocky photos for my own pleasure.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

03/28/2008 04:38:54 PM · #94

Originally posted by Gordon:

I just got to the point were trying to produce popular images was an empty, meaningless experience for me. I'm not saying anyone else shouldn't do it. I just don't find it satisfying any more. Shannon couldn't (in his original rant) understand why anyone wouldn't want to make popular images.

The point of [that small section of] my original post was simply to express annoyance at those who disparage photos that appeal to the masses. We can certainly all appreciate a deep, meaningful photo, but DPC is not conducive to that type of image. It's a bit like a fly fishing purist complaining about most of the big fish being caught on worms at a kids' fishing derby and railing about the lost craft of creating your own lure. If you want deep on DPC then make that the challenge topic.

The part you seem to take exception to is the idea that photos should be appealing to others. I stand by that assertion. Unless you plan to sit in a closet and look at the photo yourself, the goal of photography is to provoke a reaction in the viewers. If nobody else cares to look at the image, then it's completely pointless. You say that you only shoot for yourself, but I don't buy that. You shoot what appeals to you and post the results online in the hope that others appreciate it too. The fact is that the style you favor IS appealing to others (mostly in terms of color and form), whether that's your professed goal or not, and if other people didn't find your work visually interesting then your efforts would be wasted and I'm 100% certain you would find no joy in the pursuit.

03/28/2008 04:40:28 PM · #95

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

Objection withdrawn. :)

03/28/2008 04:40:28 PM · #96

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

I could even edit this to further clarify that by 'business', I mean the business that I have experience in. I shouldn't have even tried to label something so broad, I guess. Oh well, I suck. :-(

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

03/28/2008 04:47:34 PM · #97

Yanko'd. Except for Mark - thanks. :-)

jaysonmc

Nikon D200

Nikon MF 105mm f/2.5 AIS

03/28/2008 04:49:21 PM · #98

To truly know the person is to be the person.

03/28/2008 04:51:43 PM · #99

Originally posted by scalvert:

...If you want deep on DPC then make that the challenge topic...

I think the antonym for what we call "eye candy" here is not "deep" but something uniquely individual and out of category. If "deep" in the sense of "profound" were the challenge, what we'd see, by and large -I'll bet you a case of Heineken- would be a kind of miscarriage like "gravity". You just can't expect some odd 600 or 800 "profound" images to appear out of nothing.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III