| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/08/2010 05:38:43 AM · #1801 |
Originally posted by Jac:
Originally posted by alexzen:
I have submitted six photos to 1x, with 4 rejects and 2 published. The second was just published today. Six days of screening. Not a bad way to start the week.
From the Heart
Ironically I submitted this to the Family challenge as well and got DQ'd. I understand why, now. |
Why isn't it in your profile? |
Still in voting.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/08/2010 07:37:14 AM · #1802 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
The Wild Side made it through...
eta: breakin da rulz!! |
Fantastic shot Steve!
Another reject for me... 
Might try my FS portrait with them this week. |
|
|
|
06/08/2010 10:41:36 AM · #1803 |
This thread is hosting a great discussion on photography, rules and all sorts of good stuff...
Most of us could learn more or as much by what's being said there as by looking at images themselves. It's long but even the clips are pretty potent. I highly encourage, at least a quick jump around the post and I guarantee you'll be enthralled. |
|
|
|
06/08/2010 07:11:31 PM · #1804 |
Thanks for the link Steve. I've dipped in and it looks fascinating and extremely helpful. It'll take a while to work my way through though and digest. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:11:40 PM · #1805 |
Steve, I waded through some of these posts, and I'm curious to know if you had one (or several) that you connected with and held you wide-eyed and "enthralled"? Also, did you post? I didn't see your name and I'd love to read your own thoughts. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:26:34 PM · #1806 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Steve, I waded through some of these posts, and I'm curious to know if you had one (or several) that you connected with and held you wide-eyed and "enthralled"? Also, did you post? I didn't see your name and I'd love to read your own thoughts. |
"Angela Bacon-Kidwell wrote (click for original post):
There are no rules. If you try and follow preceived rules you will fail and your work will be just like your neighbors."
"Anna Golitsyna wrote (click for original post):
I already listed a number of rules that are out there, both in books and minds. Not every book, not every mind, but mostly everyone here heard of them and they are believed in and used by a statistically significant number of photographers.
...excuse me while I put on my statistician's hat.
Anna, there is no such thing as a "statistically significant number of photographers."
Perhaps you meant something else. For instance (and not suggesting that this is true), perhaps you meant: Based on a sample of 1X.com contributors, there is a statistically significant difference between the percentage of photographers who use rules and the percentage who do not."
"Anna Golitsyna replied: No, King, I did not mean that. I should've just said "many serious photographers". By the way, I noticed that you center your ballet pictures. Simple, classic as ballet you shot, and effective :-)"
"MANY SERIOUS PHOTOGRPGERS"? Now, that one killed me...
You may or may not like my work but I don't follow rules for a variety of reason BUT does that make me a not serious photographer???
Anyway there are pearls throughout the thread, here's another little one...
"jacques philippe: Fair enough Anna, but what are those "rules" ? Who decides them ? What makes them valid ? And if so under which circumstance ? For which time-frame ? For which cultural context ? ..."
There are many comments that support ones license as an artists to present things in a new, unique, unconventional way and many that distinguish the difference between a craftsman and an artist. In general...general terms great artists don't have rules...wedding, event, product and commercial photographers do, and what they do is more craft than art...in most cases. And then there's Julia Bailey (grigrigirl)an artists...
Message edited by author 2010-06-11 14:43:21. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:35:44 PM · #1807 |
| That thread reminds me of the Harold and Maude quote, "Zoos are full, prisons are overflowing... oh my, how the world still dearly loves a cage". |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:39:02 PM · #1808 |
| I made a first submission to 1x, and I think it was rejected, but I'm not sure. Does 1x explicitly tell you that submissions are rejected, or does the submission to screening just quietly go away? |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:44:34 PM · #1809 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
general terms great artists don't have rules... |
In my opinion there is just one rule and it applies to every single artist and that is to follow your own vision. But first you must find it, which can be hard to do if you've been living a life unexplored and just following the herd. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:45:37 PM · #1810 |
Originally posted by yanko:
In my opinion there is just one rule and it applies to every single artist and that is to follow your own vision. But first you must find it, which can be hard to do if you've been living a life unexplored and just following the herd. |
Loved the bold part! |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:49:15 PM · #1811 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
general terms great artists don't have rules... |
In my opinion there is just one rule and it applies to every single artist and that is to follow your own vision. But first you must find it, which can be hard to do if you've been living a life unexplored and just following the herd. |
David Orias wrote (click for original post):
"artists tend to follow certain conventions of composition and color theory to create an impactful image."
jacques philippe: "The best of them just follow their instinct and vision. But sure they have a background. They worked hard, they did mistake and they have grown. Now that you are talking about "rules and convention" can you tell me which "rules and convention" are fueling Egglestone work, or that of Friedlander, or that of Arbus (to name a few) ?"
yanko's point was made in the thread many times and in many different ways.
Lee Friedlander if you're not familiar with the work...
Message edited by author 2010-06-11 14:54:23. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 02:51:46 PM · #1812 |
Originally posted by mycelium:
I made a first submission to 1x, and I think it was rejected, but I'm not sure. Does 1x explicitly tell you that submissions are rejected, or does the submission to screening just quietly go away? |
Once you login to your account, click on 'account', then 'submitted', you will see the four classifications: 'waiting for screening', 'in screening', 'published', and 'not published'.
All my entries sit in the last category;-)
ETA: Oh and just to ruin your day, you can also submit the images (while they are in screening) for general critique. Good luck. I hope you see some in the third category (published)!
Message edited by author 2010-06-11 14:53:21.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2010 03:03:40 PM · #1813 |
| King Douglas' post # 167 is also interesting. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 03:32:58 PM · #1814 |
Hmmmmm...I'm thinking about this. Would it be possible that we all define our own "cage" not by a set of rules (or even ONE rule) but rather by a set of experiences. Perhaps, after a while, a standard set of common experience becomes formalized into a set of "rules." In other words, why re-invent the wheel? I'm not saying we shouldn't...I'm just presenting the question. Perhaps, these "rules" may be used as shared knowledge to build our own experience which eventually may become building blocks to others one day of another generation...just as we look back to past generations. So, the experience is passed on like a flame to a flame and shared within a common collection...but internalized through individual styles of expression.
I should probably just stop thinking about it...;-)
|
|
|
|
06/11/2010 03:35:32 PM · #1815 |
Originally posted by yanko:
In my opinion there is just one rule and it applies to every single artist and that is to follow your own vision. But first you must find it, which can be hard to do if you've been living a life unexplored and just following the herd. |
Ah Ha! I knew I saw you in this video...Herding Cats |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 03:45:50 PM · #1816 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
King Douglas' post # 167 is also interesting. |
I'm posting here so everyone won't have to scroll...King Douglas' response:
"Anna Golitsyna wrote (click for original post):
By the way, I noticed that you center your ballet pictures. Simple, classic as ballet you shot, and effective :-)
I don't know where photographers get the notion that the subject should be off center. I researched this a year or two ago when challenged to look at a list of high-end magazines to notice how the off-center "rule" is followed or applied when people are the subject. I did so...it took some hours...and found that except in *rare* cases, the subject was centered in every editorial photograph and ad. The exceptions came almost exclusively in cases where type was set in a space to the right or left of the subject.
When it comes to dance photos shot in studio, keep in mind that even though the dancer is centered, in many cases he or she is occupying most of the available background...seamless paper in 9 foot or 12 foot widths. I can think of few reasons to make the dancer's image smaller in order to add space to the right or the left.
But if you will look consider my dance images carefully, I think you will agree that they fill the frame in a dynamic way--and not just because they are dancing. I pose the dancers myself (we collaborate, actually) in order to make an image that meets their needs, shows them to great advantage, and works well photographically at the same time (i.e., they fill the frame in a dynamic fashion...not static or stuck in the middle).
I think that some cropping devices are simply gimmicks and add nothing to the photograph. Putting the subject off center to reveal so-called "negative space" to one side is too often a gimmick and a misunderstanding of negative space. Cropping through someone's face rather than showing the whole face is too often a gimmick and usually does not improve a portrait.
What the )@&**(^ is the "rule of thirds?" Just compose the scene and make decisions about what looks best. Improve with practice.
One of the great advantages of learning photography by using the view camera is that when you look through the ground glass the image is upside down (not upside down *and* backwards). When the scene is upside down and the camera is in a fixed position, one is almost forced to consider composition before anything else. If you want to see the expression on a person's face, close the shutter, load the film, put your thumb on the cable release and look directly at your model. The scene is already composed. Composition works the same right side up or upside down." |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 03:52:02 PM · #1817 |
It strikes me that there's some confusion, in that discussion, as to the meaning of "rule".
There are proscriptive/prescriptive rules, handed down by authority; the the "thou shalt"s and the "thou shalt not"s, the laws as drawn up by an authority, be it God or man.
And there are DEscriptive rules, the kind that basically say "as a rule" this-that-or-the-other-thing prevails.
The "rule of thirds" and other compositional "rules" are intended to be descriptive, not prescriptive, although generations of teachers have muddied the waters by expressing them as holy writ. Regardless, the ROT, for example, is a description of something that many, many excellent pieces of art have in common; that's how it became a "rule". It's not like back in 1273 or somewhen, some presumptuous individual decided to make a rule and enforce it, not at all. Instead, the principle expressed itself so often he became accepted as a descriptive rule.
Look at it this way, and a lot of angst can be flushed down the tubes :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2010 05:15:54 PM · #1818 |
Well, I guess the fascinating and more entertaining parts of the thread show in the writings of how each photographer defines their own work through the use/non-use of the "rules" to blossom from craftsman into artists.
I always love your explanations, Bear...;-) |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 05:26:37 PM · #1819 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
It strikes me that there's some confusion, in that discussion, as to the meaning of "rule".
Look at it this way, and a lot of angst can be flushed down the tubes :-)
R. |
I think that confusion carries over everywhere...more so here at DPC, for that matter. People learn "the rules" and they continually apply them to every single image they see. Every Challenge I've entered I've always received at least one or two comments telling me that my image would be "better" if I'd followed a rule. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 05:27:25 PM · #1820 |
I just posted this in another thread, and, it appears to me, now if fits here:
The lesson not yet fully grasped is that if we have indeed something to say, it will find its form.
Bauhaus had this as function is form.
Some Edward Dahlberg had it as form follows content.
The Buddhist say form is emptiness, emptiness form.
What the Buddhists mean, the way I see it is, that
a) before something can enter the mind, that mind needs to have room to accommodate it; and
b) that only an empty mind can realize its full capacity |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 05:32:21 PM · #1821 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
I just posted this in another thread, and, it appears to me, now if fits here:
The lesson not yet fully grasped is that if we have indeed something to say, it will find its form.
Bauhaus had this as function is form.
Some Edward Dahlberg had it as form follows content.
The Buddhist say form is emptiness, emptiness form.
What the Buddhists mean, the way I see it is, that
a) before something can enter the mind, that mind needs to have room to accommodate it; and
b) that only an empty mind can realize its full capacity |
And a local Bear once finished a poem of his as follows:
The wise man studies what he must forget.
The happy man remembers not to learn.
The way of each is water over stones:
We travel in pain. We die.
There is no other road.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2010 05:56:59 PM · #1822 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Hmmmmm...I'm thinking about this. Would it be possible that we all define our own "cage" not by a set of rules (or even ONE rule) but rather by a set of experiences. |
I think I might have been yanko'ed
|
|
|
|
06/11/2010 06:28:18 PM · #1823 |
Did everyone see  Yanko's...
Family Portrait
Oh wait...this thread is supposed to be for the rejects...;-P
(Did you already post it? I didn't see it here.)
Message edited by author 2010-06-11 18:50:58. |
|
|
|
06/11/2010 10:27:22 PM · #1824 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
...And a local Bear once finished a poem of his as follows:
The wise man studies what he must forget.
The happy man remembers not to learn.
The way of each is water over stones:
We travel in pain. We die.
There is no other road.
... |
R,
would you mind sending me the whole thang?
I'd love to hear it. |
|
|
|
06/14/2010 08:25:22 PM · #1825 |
I was screaming and moaning publicly and privately about the stupid "balloon" challenge after it was announced, but then I bit the bullet and shot it anyway (for my beloved ViewFinders)
...and now, lo and behold, it made it into 1x ...go figure :). |
|
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: 07/18/2025 04:10:07 PM EDT.
