| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/27/2003 07:40:05 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by train:
My opinion for what it is worth is:
When we vote on a image we do not know who the photogragher is Therefore it wins totally on merit. |
It takes a lil more than not knowing something to warrant 'merit', I think. |
|
|
|
11/27/2003 08:00:44 PM · #27 |
I agree with Ursula's frustration and I feel the same frustration sometimes. I tend to like the images that I consider 'artistic' much moreso than the 'stock' images that she describes here. Since Kiwi is my friend and he will understand, I will use his 'can of worms' image as an example.
It's a technically excellent image. There is nothing wrong with it in that aspect at all. It also meets the challenge very well. There is no doubt that 'can of worms' is a very common 'cliche' and kiwi executed his 'literalism' very well. It was widely accepted by the majority of the voters on this site and got a blue ribbon.
Do I like the image? Yes. Do I consider it to be 'art'? No. Would I hang it on my wall? No. Does it 'speak' to me in any way other than meeting the challenge? No. Was it a clever idea? Yes.
I don't remember where he said it, but kiwi mentioned the fact that he doesn't particularly like most of the shots he does for the challenges because he doesn't consider them to be 'artistic' in the way we think of art. He does it because it is what it takes to win challenges here. There is nothing wrong with that concept. DPC is a contest. If you enter it, why not go for a high score and a possible win?
I am looking at the six photos on the main page of the site at the moment. I'm not 'artistically' motivated by any of those images. Why do they win ribbons?
Well, IMO, stock photography is what a majority of the people on this planet are used to seeing. A majority of the people on this third stone have never been inside an art museum. They have never studied art. They don't have an individual interpretation of 'art'. This being the case, I would assume that a majority of these people would judge what they see based on what they are used to seeing. What else would they have to compare it with?
A lot of Ursula's photographs impress me on an artistic level. I can see 'intent' in a lot of her images. I could possibly understand her 'vision' and thoughts on some of them.
An 'artist' may look for more from a photograph than just a visual representation of some random subject. An artist may spend some time thinking about what a photo means rather than what it shows. To me, a work of photographic 'art' will stimulate me in some way other than visually. If it stimulates me visually as well, that is always a plus too.
Will 'art' ever win on DPC? Yes. I think it has in the past and will continue to in the future. Will it become a dominant winner? No. I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 08:19:13 PM · #28 |
I shall add my voice to this protest too. One point perhaps not mentioned is that there are a number of people participating here who are of a similar opinion, and that the place will be the poorer without them: so please don't pack it in, Ursula.
Also the effective analysis of your target audience, and the technical facility to make images to please them, is a skill not be under-rated. The winning photos may not be the great photos (and there are some great photos around this site), but the achievement should not be lessened. Self-control is a major part of that.
My concern is that the prevalence of what Ursula calls 'stock', and I call 'nice shiny bright pictures', will turn into a self-perpetuating thing. But there is a comfort: I don't believe a really good photographer will be happy just to produce such pictures.
Ed
edit: and I wish I had the ability to produce such images to order, a la Kiwi.
Message edited by author 2003-11-27 20:20:15.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 08:19:54 PM · #29 |
... But the galleries allow the expression of the artform. Just look at the site favourites for instance - they're full of artistic shots.
It's the 'Update Stats' button that many people are here for but their favourites list show their true tastes. ; ) |
|
|
|
11/27/2003 08:32:52 PM · #30 |
Thx John.
This is "exactly" what I was wanting to say. But when I tried to put it into words it all got so confusing that I just gave up.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I agree with Ursula's frustration and I feel the same frustration sometimes. I tend to like the images that I consider 'artistic' much moreso than the 'stock' images that she describes here. Since Kiwi is my friend and he will understand, I will use his 'can of worms' image as an example.
It's a technically excellent image. There is nothing wrong with it in that aspect at all. It also meets the challenge very well. There is no doubt that 'can of worms' is a very common 'cliche' and kiwi executed his 'literalism' very well. It was widely accepted by the majority of the voters on this site and got a blue ribbon.
Do I like the image? Yes. Do I consider it to be 'art'? No. Would I hang it on my wall? No. Does it 'speak' to me in any way other than meeting the challenge? No. Was it a clever idea? Yes.
I don't remember where he said it, but kiwi mentioned the fact that he doesn't particularly like most of the shots he does for the challenges because he doesn't consider them to be 'artistic' in the way we think of art. He does it because it is what it takes to win challenges here. There is nothing wrong with that concept. DPC is a contest. If you enter it, why not go for a high score and a possible win?
I am looking at the six photos on the main page of the site at the moment. I'm not 'artistically' motivated by any of those images. Why do they win ribbons?
Well, IMO, stock photography is what a majority of the people on this planet are used to seeing. A majority of the people on this third stone have never been inside an art museum. They have never studied art. They don't have an individual interpretation of 'art'. This being the case, I would assume that a majority of these people would judge what they see based on what they are used to seeing. What else would they have to compare it with?
A lot of Ursula's photographs impress me on an artistic level. I can see 'intent' in a lot of her images. I could possibly understand her 'vision' and thoughts on some of them.
An 'artist' may look for more from a photograph than just a visual representation of some random subject. An artist may spend some time thinking about what a photo means rather than what it shows. To me, a work of photographic 'art' will stimulate me in some way other than visually. If it stimulates me visually as well, that is always a plus too.
Will 'art' ever win on DPC? Yes. I think it has in the past and will continue to in the future. Will it become a dominant winner? No. I doubt it. |
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 09:41:11 PM · #31 |
Talent and its strengh has many forms, to understand it is the challenge we as the viewer must extract.
How well would Diane Arbus do here? or someone like stephen Dalton? both quite capable photographers...both Artist, but does one have more general appeal?.
we as photographers must be willing to, if not embrace, at least understand, what art form we aspire to. We through this as well as other sites, have before us, the greatest gallerys of work, mankind has ever been given the oppourtunity to see at the touch of a button.
take it all in. understand what it is you are looking at before you cast judgements. spend a moment more to get the feel of what the author might be trying to say.
I have been fortunate to have experianced very little negative comment here at DPChallenge. where I have, I've accepted and made choice with how best to take what has been said. regardless, I have learned a little something about each person that has taken the time to stop, take in, then say something about my work. Be it "art" to some or "stock photography" to others, I am happy to be able to put my "thousand words" in front of an international audience, and even for a moment have them pause and take notice...
Gary (kiwiness) has dailed in what it takes to be a consistant winner here, With this I agree with John, but let us not forget the talent of Jean (jjbeguin)...both Talents...both Artists and most certainly not the only ones:) is it always "stockphotography"? I dont think so. does one have more general appeal?:)
We all must remember that we are both student and teacher on this site. We all learn from one another. This is the challenge we have chosen by being a part of this community. the top photographers have themselves taken comments from teachers and students...and are better for it. dont let the occasional student with the "does not fit the challenge" comment take you down.
Richard
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 10:05:37 PM · #32 |
I concur with many of the statements here. I wonder how long Gary will be willing to take photos just for DPC. I used to do that and frame my whole week around getting just the right shot, but it exhausted me pretty quickly. I had a resurgence recently, and won 2 ribbons, but now I just want to take photos that please me and move me forward as a photographer; if a challenge does this, I'll probably try harder to get another ribbon.
I suspect that Kiwi will tire of devoting his photos to DPC and go to shooting what he enjoys shooting more often. He'll still win ribbons here, just as JJBeguin wins ribbons consistently. JJ, it seems to me, cares more about good photography and doing quality work than winning ribbons (I certainly don't mean to say that Gary doesn't!).
DPC is a great place to get inspired to take photos often, and the challenges offer opportunities to learn new techniques and new skills and new ways of communicating. About Ursula's first posting, I agree with her. If I see a photo that doesn't fit the challenge, I usually figure that I'm the dense one. thelsel's photo is a great example. I just didn't get it. I figured I was stupid when I voted on it. I was right. It's an excellent photo, and I was just too stupid to understand it.
Keep having fun--that's the key!
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 10:54:01 PM · #33 |
I would like to very publicly say that I in no way meant to say something about kiwis pictures when I mentioned "stock" photography. I like Kiwis pictures very much, and his attitude even much better - he is a positive person, and yet he's quite competitive; he's got a great talent for knowing what will work, but he also takes very good pictures. All this is rare. And I wish to be his (and Anastasia's) friend.
I also would like to say that I feel pretty stupid for my initial rant, but good in a funny sort of way - at least I got it off my chest :)) I still think that most entries are in some way an intent to meet the challenge, and that if someone says, "It doesn't meet the challenge," that is that someone's OPINION, not reality. It wasn't my intent to "whine", even though it was a whine I guess :( And I have checked out other sites, e.g. Betterphoto and Digital Photo Contest, and I'm not doing too bad so far, although it's gotta get a lot better.
I think probably for myself it's best to take a break. Unless, of course, my soft-focus idea comes out real good :)))
And, Gary, I LOVE YOUR PICTURES!!! I love the little girl in the red dancing dress :)))
Ursula
Addition: BTW, I just got a laptop. Man, do pictures look different on it! It's like a different world.
Message edited by author 2003-11-27 22:56:00.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 10:55:21 PM · #34 |
Well well well... this is a very thought provoking thread....
I agree and disagree with many statments made here.... first off.... what's the difference between "stock" photos and "art" photos? I thought photography as a whole was art.... hmmmm.....
I have also experienced many ups and downs on this site until the day I realised that photography is self expression and that I do it for myself and not somebody else. If I'm happy with a shot I took, if it represents me at that point and time in my passion, excitement and enjoyment, I'll post it to share. Sometimes it might look more "stocky" and sometimes more "artsy" but to me it's all art. Art is self expression and that's what I do.... express myself.
What I like about photography is the subjectiveness of it. That's why it is art!
But we have to remember that on DPC we have to cater to people that take an average of 5 seconds or less to get a feeling of a shot (including myself!!!). The brain can only take in so much in that time so the message has to be clear. If I have more "artsy" or complex photos that I want feedback from I'll post them in a thread and I'm always rewared by good feedback. This is a great resource and this is what I like about this site. As Richard stated, I'm both a student and a teacher here and my evolution has permitted me to be both, as many many others are on DPC.
I'm now at a stage where I can pretty much determine my approx score before voting starts... but when I'm way off track.... I rethink and re-evaluate my photo and try to understand why it's doing better/worse than I thought. This is also a good learning experience for me.
Ok nuf said..... thanks for reading.
Yanik
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 10:55:30 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by uabresch:
... or "digital stock photography challenge". I am totally tired of hearing how this picture or that picture doesn't "meet the challenge". Doesn't meet the challenge in someone's opinion. Opinion, that's all it is. I would think that voters would go with the assumption that if a photographer submits a certain photo to a challenge, in his/her mind it FITS the challenge, even if it's not an "in your face" fit. |
I used to think the same as you, until I started voting challenges after challenges and I see that some photographers would shoot subjects that are (IMHO) unrelated to the challenge's topic. Of course, some would debate that everyone see things differently, but come on, we have to admit the fact that some photographers are mis-using the "intepretation" flexibility of each challenge. It is up to us voters to ensure that submitted photos are at according to each week's challenge, and not someone trying to submit whatever he/she has shot that week and looks nice. That's the whole idea about DPC, a topic challenge each week.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 11:03:37 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by shadow:
Originally posted by uabresch:
... or "digital stock photography challenge". I am totally tired of hearing how this picture or that picture doesn't "meet the challenge". Doesn't meet the challenge in someone's opinion. Opinion, that's all it is. I would think that voters would go with the assumption that if a photographer submits a certain photo to a challenge, in his/her mind it FITS the challenge, even if it's not an "in your face" fit. |
I used to think the same as you, until I started voting challenges after challenges and I see that some photographers would shoot subjects that are (IMHO) unrelated to the challenge's topic. Of course, some would debate that everyone see things differently, but come on, we have to admit the fact that some photographers are mis-using the "intepretation" flexibility of each challenge. It is up to us voters to ensure that submitted photos are at according to each week's challenge, and not someone trying to submit whatever he/she has shot that week and looks nice. That's the whole idea about DPC, a topic challenge each week. |
Hehehe.. it's funny that you say this cuz when I did my ribbon winner "To spike a drink" shot it wasn't even for the challenge! But I loved the shot so much that I racked my brain for days trying to think of a great saying to match the image... and it worked! HAHAHA!!! ;-)
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 11:09:29 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by kosmikkreeper:
Originally posted by shadow:
Originally posted by uabresch:
... or "digital stock photography challenge". I am totally tired of hearing how this picture or that picture doesn't "meet the challenge". Doesn't meet the challenge in someone's opinion. Opinion, that's all it is. I would think that voters would go with the assumption that if a photographer submits a certain photo to a challenge, in his/her mind it FITS the challenge, even if it's not an "in your face" fit. |
I used to think the same as you, until I started voting challenges after challenges and I see that some photographers would shoot subjects that are (IMHO) unrelated to the challenge's topic. Of course, some would debate that everyone see things differently, but come on, we have to admit the fact that some photographers are mis-using the "intepretation" flexibility of each challenge. It is up to us voters to ensure that submitted photos are at according to each week's challenge, and not someone trying to submit whatever he/she has shot that week and looks nice. That's the whole idea about DPC, a topic challenge each week. |
Hehehe.. it's funny that you say this cuz when I did my ribbon winner "To spike a drink" shot it wasn't even for the challenge! But I loved the shot so much that I racked my brain for days trying to think of a great saying to match the image... and it worked! HAHAHA!!! ;-) |
Oh, no, Yanik, now I'm crushed!!! I thought you'd spent days and days thinking about just the right setup for the challenge. I am soooo disappointed :))
BTW - your website is beautiful!
Message edited by author 2003-11-27 23:10:19.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 11:26:30 PM · #38 |
Ursula, I agree with everything you've said. I've had the same frustrations. It REALLY peeves me when someone flat out says, "This doesn't fit the challenge". What you mean is, "This doesn't fit MY interpretation of the challenge". Of course this site is about challenges, but PLEASE let us interpret them in our own way, artistically or stock or whatever. I doubt anything will ever change here though and very clear interpretations will continue to win, that's the game. But I would hope that more of us recognize that we all see things differently; appreciate a unique take on the challenge instead of rashly giving it a 1 because you don't understand it at first glance.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2003 11:46:23 PM · #39 |
I can honestly say that I have left comments about photos not meeting challenges. However I do try to word them something like "I can't see how this fits the topic of ....."
And on that note, I can say that if the photographer contacts me and explains what he/she was trying to accomplish I do go back an re-evaluate the shot and my vote.
We do need to try to keep an open mind of the fact that this is an international community and that just because I sit here in good ole central Illinois what someone from halfway around the world has interpreted for a topic may not be 100% right on for them.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2003 12:52:05 AM · #40 |
I've had a standing offer open, along the lines of "send me a list of 10 photos for which you don't see the connection to the challenge, and I'll find one for at least 7." It's easier if you include some of my shots, since I already know the connection for those.
Shouldn't a non-standard (but valid) interpretation deserve extra points for originality? Instead, the more "straight-on" photos are consistently rewarded, and anyone with an oblique approach is punished by comparison.
The issue is whether we (as a site) choose to consider as the "best" photos those which could likely be used for a magazine product shot (e.g. "Can of Worms"), or whether we want to encourage artistic innovation and individual communication. Right now the product shots seem to be selling the best. |
|
|
|
11/28/2003 03:30:09 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by uabresch:
I am quitting for a while (or, "throwing a fit" here). |
I sure hope it was the throwing a fit part Ursula, I'd sure hate to see you quitting here.
An interesting point to mention is that if you look in jjbejuin's portfolio you'll find that a) he doesn't take stock photography (even in the "Stock Photography" challenge he took an artistic shot, and
b) he has the most ribbons of anyone here.
That is a good example that artistic photography still stands firm at DPC. Maybe somewhat in the background a lot of the time, but I'm hoping it'll push through one day soon. And for that I will be grateful.
|
|
|
|
11/28/2003 04:27:04 AM · #42 |
I never understood (and still don't) what is meant with the term "stock photography".
Can someone explain ?
If I look in the challenge archive I see so many different types of images that I don't understand how this can be covered by one classification of "stock photography". Is see for example nature, landscapes, people, still life. All stock ?
Or is it a common term for images that have a general appeal to a large group of people ? Which apparently the challenge winners do. |
|
|
|
11/28/2003 05:03:07 AM · #43 |
Hi Willem, let me give you the "quick and dirty" definition of "stock photography."
Just to set the scene, understand that there a number of photographers who make a living out of producing stock photos, so it's not necessarily a bad thing.
A "stock" photo is one taken for the purpose of selling it to someone else. For instance, lets say I'm a stock photograper working in Hawaii. I may work with an agency and supply them with thousands of technically competent images about any and all aspects of island life... Beaches, hotels, volcanoes, surfing, snorkling, etc.... Now, when I take my photos I'm hoping they will meet a need for a buyer that I may not even be aware of yet. Nobody (except maybe the stock agency) has told me what kind of photos to shoot, I just take good photos of "things" and hope they will one day work to fill the needs of a prospective buyer.
Contrast this with the "assignment" photographer. Assignment photographers are paid to take a specific photos of things. Lets say a travel agency is looking for a shot of Hawaiian beaches to place in a magazine ad. They could either pay an assignment photographer to go out and get them a beach shot, or they could look through several stock agencies portfolios to try and find an appropriate shot that has already been taken by the stock photographer. |
|
|
|
11/28/2003 05:21:49 AM · #44 |
To further expand upon what mcmurma said. The photos tend to be bright, clear, easy to understand photos without deep subtext or contradictory messages. Visit the website of any stock photo agency and you'll see plenty of examples.
Comstock Images for example. On the main page I've linked to you'll see broad categories of photos covering, as mcmurma said, all aspects of life from literal to concept and everything in between. |
|
|
|
11/28/2003 05:57:58 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by uabresch:
I am quitting for a while (or, "throwing a fit" here). |
I sure hope it was the throwing a fit part Ursula, I'd sure hate to see you quitting here.
An interesting point to mention is that if you look in jjbejuin's portfolio you'll find that a) he doesn't take stock photography (even in the "Stock Photography" challenge he took an artistic shot, and
b) he has the most ribbons of anyone here.
That is a good example that artistic photography still stands firm at DPC. Maybe somewhat in the background a lot of the time, but I'm hoping it'll push through one day soon. And for that I will be grateful. |
But, rather ominously, JJ has not submitted for the last two challenges - and I don't remember his missing any others ever
Ed
|
|
|
|
11/28/2003 07:30:52 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by shadow:
I used to think the same as you, until I started voting challenges after challenges and I see that some photographers would shoot subjects that are (IMHO) unrelated to the challenge's topic. Of course, some would debate that everyone see things differently, but come on, we have to admit the fact that some photographers are mis-using the "intepretation" flexibility of each challenge. It is up to us voters to ensure that submitted photos are at according to each week's challenge, and not someone trying to submit whatever he/she has shot that week and looks nice. That's the whole idea about DPC, a topic challenge each week. |
As a "victim" of the Doesn't Fit the Challenge syndrome in surprise, I am actually finding it kind of amusing that folks who say "I don't see surprise," are actually then stating exactly the surprise part of the photo in their critiques :). (thanks for all the comments btw).
Ursula, you are a wonderful photographer. Kiwi, you're great and you know it. :) I can understand the frustration. Luckily I am not suffering it this time as I don't really care what my Surpise score is. It's a great shot and I was more than pleased with it.
I suppose the best we can do is hope the voters will take into account that if they can come up with some possibilities for how a photo fits the challenge, maybe they hit the one the photographer was going for.
Shari
|
|
|
|
11/28/2003 08:25:07 AM · #47 |
With that explanation of what stock photography is (see mcmurma's reply) one would expect in general that an assignment picture better meets the challenge topic then a stock picture.
And dpchallenge is about assignment photography, i.e. meet the brief, go out and take a picture to meet the topic. Don't dish one up from your past images.
So the complaint that started this thread is about the fact that an assignment picture is not seen as fitting the challenge by others.
To me that means it is a picture which does not take into account the audience. It only meets the brief in the eyes of the photographer, not in the eyes of the voters/audience. (Still might be a good artistic picture though).
That is like complaining your wedding photograph was not liked by the bride and groom, but it was so good .....
Or the advertisement photograph was not understood by the prospective customers.....
I would say dpc is very much about meeting the challenge theme and at the same time making an image which has mass appeal. So, indeed, if you say the more extreme pictures, although meeting the theme, are not appreciated then you are right. But in that case you should not aim for ribbons, you should aim for getting votes in the extreme ends and very diverse comments. Set your own goals.
Message edited by author 2003-11-28 08:30:04. |
|
|
|
11/28/2003 08:54:05 AM · #48 |
I never really understand these threads.
Of course "stock" photographs are going to best, because good stock photos carry a clear message (or theme, or whatever you want to call it) to the largest possible audience. That's the whole POINT of stock photographs, and as the thing is a popular vote such a picture is bound to do better than a more obscure, 'arty' interpretation.
As for people bemoaning the fact that voters want the photos to fit the challenge, well why bother having the challenge? Damn right I'm gonna vote down a picture of a puppy in a challenge entitled "Kettles" no matter how cute the puppy or amazing the image.
IF a picture is voted down because a significant proportion of the voters don't feel it's met the challenge, then the picture HASN'T met the challenge. The challenge is to take a picture that represents the topic TO THE VOTERS, not to you, or to somebody you've carefully explained the picture to.
/rant off |
|
|
|
11/28/2003 09:27:01 AM · #49 |
Ganders and Willem - spot on.
If the challenge brief counts for nothing and we all vote for submitted shots as standalone artworks then this site may as well be renamed DPGallery.com |
|
|
|
11/28/2003 09:39:14 AM · #50 |
Well said.
And if you don't like it being a lot of stock images, well then, goodbye, adios seeya later
|
|
