|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/16/2010 08:19:27 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by tnun:
What the zeus said here and elsewhere: the challenge topic is not an assignment; it is a suggestion, a place to take off from. You are SUPPOSED to let yourself go. .......... |
BAH! Again, I say those are called freestudies. Otherwise we wouldn't have challenge topics or descriptions! |
Cory it's just a different approach. I typically look at the challenge topic as a suggestion, not to be taken too literally, and stretch it if I can, depending on available subjects, weather, inspiration, etc.
FS are the same thing, except you get to pick the suggestion. ;) |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 08:21:04 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by tnun:
What the zeus said here and elsewhere: the challenge topic is not an assignment; it is a suggestion, a place to take off from. You are SUPPOSED to let yourself go. .......... |
BAH! Again, I say those are called freestudies. Otherwise we wouldn't have challenge topics or descriptions! |
Oh my. I personally think of the free studies as Whatever. The others take off from Somewhere. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 08:34:01 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
BAH! Again, I say those are called freestudies. Otherwise we wouldn't have challenge topics or descriptions! |
I use the challenge topic as inspiration to pick up my camera. It reminds me another week has passed...
|
|
|
|
12/16/2010 08:38:37 PM · #54 |
| Personally, I find pictures of topics to be quite boring. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 08:40:18 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Their brilliance, here of course, is that they understand what works here and supply that for the masses, but the work they usually have here is almost absolutely devoid of anything meaningful. Unfortunately, the more it works here, the more people try to supply that kind of photography themselves, and the cycle goes on and on and on.
So for me, when I vote and judge, I vote and judge SOLELY on how the photograph makes me FEEL. |
First, I'll say that I understand and agree. But I also disagree. Does a photograph always have to have a deeper meaning? Sometimes an interesting or attractive image is all it is and all that it needs to be. |
Another follow-up: Is a picture with perfect technicals always devoid of deeper meaning? K10 is apt to say some provocative stuff, but to declare that Manny and De Sousa are "almost absolutely devoid of anything meaningful" comes across as a bit arrogant. It stokes the "poke you in the eye" stereotype of the "artyst" (so fancy it's with a 'y')... |
You and Yo_Spiff seem to be misunderstanding K10DGuy's post. He's talking about FEEL and you're focused on MEANING. The two are not the same. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 08:46:02 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Their brilliance, here of course, is that they understand what works here and supply that for the masses, but the work they usually have here is almost absolutely devoid of anything meaningful. Unfortunately, the more it works here, the more people try to supply that kind of photography themselves, and the cycle goes on and on and on.
So for me, when I vote and judge, I vote and judge SOLELY on how the photograph makes me FEEL. |
First, I'll say that I understand and agree. But I also disagree. Does a photograph always have to have a deeper meaning? Sometimes an interesting or attractive image is all it is and all that it needs to be. |
Another follow-up: Is a picture with perfect technicals always devoid of deeper meaning? K10 is apt to say some provocative stuff, but to declare that Manny and De Sousa are "almost absolutely devoid of anything meaningful" comes across as a bit arrogant. It stokes the "poke you in the eye" stereotype of the "artyst" (so fancy it's with a 'y')... |
You and Yo_Spiff seem to be misunderstanding K10DGuy's post. He's talking about FEEL and you're focused on MEANING. The two are not the same. |
Can you explain what you mean by that? He did say "devoid of anything meaningful". That's pretty easy to misinterpret, I guess... |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 09:08:44 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Their brilliance, here of course, is that they understand what works here and supply that for the masses, but the work they usually have here is almost absolutely devoid of anything meaningful. Unfortunately, the more it works here, the more people try to supply that kind of photography themselves, and the cycle goes on and on and on.
So for me, when I vote and judge, I vote and judge SOLELY on how the photograph makes me FEEL. |
First, I'll say that I understand and agree. But I also disagree. Does a photograph always have to have a deeper meaning? Sometimes an interesting or attractive image is all it is and all that it needs to be. |
Another follow-up: Is a picture with perfect technicals always devoid of deeper meaning? K10 is apt to say some provocative stuff, but to declare that Manny and De Sousa are "almost absolutely devoid of anything meaningful" comes across as a bit arrogant. It stokes the "poke you in the eye" stereotype of the "artyst" (so fancy it's with a 'y')... |
You and Yo_Spiff seem to be misunderstanding K10DGuy's post. He's talking about FEEL and you're focused on MEANING. The two are not the same. |
Can you explain what you mean by that? He did say "devoid of anything meaningful". That's pretty easy to misinterpret, I guess... |
You're right. He did say that but the two are different, IMO. One implies emotion (i.e. feel) and the other thought (i.e. meaning). |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 09:27:31 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
But are they "devoid of anything meaningful"? |
I was wondering the same thing concerning landscapes. If a deeper meaning is vital, then most landscapes should gain automatic low votes from certain members. Maybe I'm missing something about the concept. |
Voters generally don't look for meaning. They do a quick check to see if the photo relates to the topic and then rate the craftmanship. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 09:33:32 PM · #59 |
Doc,
I don't get the first one. It just looks like showing off to me. What's the story? Why should I care?
Oh, but the second one. What a beautiful shot. High score from me, if not a ribbon. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 09:57:46 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Doc,
I don't get the first one. It just looks like showing off to me. What's the story? Why should I care?
Oh, but the second one. What a beautiful shot. High score from me, if not a ribbon. |
I know you are talking to the other doc...but...that first image is more documentary. Not nearly the same energy and charisma as the second image. There is definitely a role for that first image, I see a group of friends enjoying the beauty of nature. Good for them for leaving the concrete jungle. However, I wouldn't go back to that image, I've seen it, and that's it, thus your question why should I care. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 10:24:44 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Doc,
I don't get the first one. It just looks like showing off to me. What's the story? Why should I care?
Oh, but the second one. What a beautiful shot. High score from me, if not a ribbon. |
I'm not sure what you mean by "showing off". The first one draw me in with it's layers. First you have the foreground which envelops the lake and volcano like arms. That layer has people. What are they doing? (obviously some are taking pictures, but are they all together? Are they tourists? How hard was it to get to their location?) The people are naturally separated from nature like spectators which reflects the universal idea that we cannot control nature. I'm also intrigued that the panorama gives us the unique perspective of a sunset and moonrise at the same time. In addition, the pink tinged clouds reveal a volcano-induced delicacy. Gossamer silk out of nature's fury.
(man, I can BS with the best of them... ;))
I like the second one probably more, but let me ask you to answer "what is the story? Why should I care?" about the B&W? You seem quite taken by it, but why and does it have anything to do with the answers to those two questions?
Message edited by author 2010-12-16 22:25:21. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 10:26:02 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
...I figure if I failed to make the connection obvious enough to be perceived, then I deserved to get a lesser score than I would have deserved if the connection was strong.. |
Not all images are obvious in your sense. Some are subtle. Yet others may relate a sense meant for the few as opposed to the many. Why use an exclamation mark, when a question mark would be more useful? |
Largely we are trying to capture the interest and corresponding high vote of viewers.. While some of the more subtle images are really wonderful treats, they are rarely well received, and especially if the connection is so obscure as to require research to understand it..
While I'd never say you shouldn't enter something that is wonderfully obscure (I enjoy those images quite a bit, and often score them high, as the connection becomes obvious when I actually do the research), I would say that when voting, the responsibility is upon the submitter to make the connection to the topic clear, not the voter, so if you completely fail to see a connection, why would you vote it high?
Now, be very clear on this point, a question mark doesn't work for most people, but despite that, it is a very wonderful treat for those whom it does work..
In effect, if it is meant for "the few" as you put it, then you should well expect a few very high votes from your target audience, while suffering many more low scores from the masses. It is not up to me, as the voter, to work myself into the "few" category, my only responsibility is an honest and fair appraisal and vote. |
Another late response thus the large quote.
Cory, referencing the bold: you can if you choose to make it your responsibility. You have already mentioned, either here, or in another thread, that you are starting to score the less obvious images higher than earlier this year. So I would say that you are already making the transition to a more open mind regarding challenge topics. Begin with the construct that the presented image is on topic regardless of what you first see. You are right, when straying from the mass interpretation of the topic, you can expect a low score. |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 11:23:19 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
...And I believe, if we paid more attention to the work than to doling out wanton votes based on challenge descriptions addressing the entering participants, we'd all be better off for it. |
I truly am intrigued by this viewpoint. Are you suggesting that we get rid of descriptions and run Free Study challenges only?
Ray |
|
|
|
12/16/2010 11:31:29 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
...And I believe, if we paid more attention to the work than to doling out wanton votes based on challenge descriptions addressing the entering participants, we'd all be better off for it. |
I truly am intrigued by this viewpoint. Are you suggesting that we get rid of descriptions and run Free Study challenges only?
Ray |
He's saying the descriptions are for the photographer's benefit not the voter's.
|
|
|
|
12/16/2010 11:44:25 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I like the second one probably more, but let me ask you to answer "what is the story? Why should I care?" about the B&W? You seem quite taken by it, but why and does it have anything to do with the answers to those two questions? |
The story: Well, there's the witch who lost her hat, there's the snowball's chance in hell, and many more, and all these stories are about a veil opening and all these stories end just before you see what's behind it.
Why you should care: because there are veils around you, and what's behind them can bring life or death. |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 12:12:50 AM · #66 |
The two images are like comparing fantasy with science fiction. Both serve a purpose, and each appeals to a different group of people. For me, the color image is pure fantasy (an enhanced reality where lighting, colors and other qualities are dreamlike and perfect). The second is sci-fi at its best - enough reality to make it plausible, and enough mystery to fire our imagination.
The each appeal to a different part of me and for different reasons. If I had to choose one, I always prefer to use my imagination because it can continue to make up stuff long after I've stopped looking at the picture. |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 12:50:07 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
...I figure if I failed to make the connection obvious enough to be perceived, then I deserved to get a lesser score than I would have deserved if the connection was strong.. |
Not all images are obvious in your sense. Some are subtle. Yet others may relate a sense meant for the few as opposed to the many. Why use an exclamation mark, when a question mark would be more useful? |
Largely we are trying to capture the interest and corresponding high vote of viewers.. While some of the more subtle images are really wonderful treats, they are rarely well received, and especially if the connection is so obscure as to require research to understand it..
While I'd never say you shouldn't enter something that is wonderfully obscure (I enjoy those images quite a bit, and often score them high, as the connection becomes obvious when I actually do the research), I would say that when voting, the responsibility is upon the submitter to make the connection to the topic clear, not the voter, so if you completely fail to see a connection, why would you vote it high?
Now, be very clear on this point, a question mark doesn't work for most people, but despite that, it is a very wonderful treat for those whom it does work..
In effect, if it is meant for "the few" as you put it, then you should well expect a few very high votes from your target audience, while suffering many more low scores from the masses. It is not up to me, as the voter, to work myself into the "few" category, my only responsibility is an honest and fair appraisal and vote. |
Another late response thus the large quote.
Cory, referencing the bold: you can if you choose to make it your responsibility. You have already mentioned, either here, or in another thread, that you are starting to score the less obvious images higher than earlier this year. So I would say that you are already making the transition to a more open mind regarding challenge topics. Begin with the construct that the presented image is on topic regardless of what you first see. You are right, when straying from the mass interpretation of the topic, you can expect a low score. |
LOL, I said I enjoyed them... I never said a thing about giving them high scores ;)...
Seriously though, I'm not working myself into the position, it's just happening naturally, and I always do try to understand the connection, but if after trying very hard, I still come up with nothing, I'm pretty darn sure they either didn't bother with trying to meet the challenge (shoehorn), or that they just did a piss poor job of it, as I should have been able to make the connection.. Yeah, I know that might make me seem a little arrogant, and perhaps, in my voting, I am a bit, but it's really more about being fair, sure they might pay a price, but I'm not going to detract from the effort it takes to really shoot for a topic, there's a significant challenge in trying to really meet a topic well, and it's something I reward.
Now after all of that, again, I remind you that I rarely hand out 1's 2's, 3's or 4's, but I do hand them out, and usually a DNMC is a part of one of those low scores... Although, I could very will still give a DNMC a 6 or 7, provided the technical merits and impact were sufficient. |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 12:51:37 AM · #68 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I like the second one probably more, but let me ask you to answer "what is the story? Why should I care?" about the B&W? You seem quite taken by it, but why and does it have anything to do with the answers to those two questions? |
The story: Well, there's the witch who lost her hat, there's the snowball's chance in hell, and many more, and all these stories are about a veil opening and all these stories end just before you see what's behind it.
Why you should care: because there are veils around you, and what's behind them can bring life or death. |
Really Don? How much LSD do you drop a week??
ETA: ;) :)
Message edited by author 2010-12-17 00:52:00. |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 02:30:49 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
...
Seriously though, I'm not working myself into the position, it's just happening naturally, and I always do try to understand the connection, but if after trying very hard, I still come up with nothing, I'm pretty darn sure they either didn't bother with trying to meet the challenge (shoehorn), or that they just did a piss poor job of it, as I should have been able to make the connection.. Yeah, I know that might make me seem a little arrogant, and perhaps, in my voting, I am a bit, but it's really more about being fair, sure they might pay a price, but I'm not going to detract from the effort it takes to really shoot for a topic, there's a significant challenge in trying to really meet a topic well, and it's something I reward.
... |
Arrogant and fair are not quite the words. |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 03:35:01 AM · #70 |
The real problem here is that a few people are trying to take the way I vote and see and feel and find meaning, and apply it to themselves. You're not going to vote the way I vote. It's impossible. I'm an individual. I do things my way.
As far as "Devoid of anything meaningful", well, something that is incredibly meaningful to ME isn't going to be meaningful to someone else, or few people. Why? Because I've had different life experiences. All I was trying to do was explain further WHY I don't vote on technicals, and that is all. I wasn't asking anyone to vote my way. I wasn't telling anyone that my way was 'better'. I wasn't pushing an agenda. Just an explanation.
Message edited by author 2010-12-17 03:36:19.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2010 05:06:43 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I like the second one probably more, but let me ask you to answer "what is the story? Why should I care?" about the B&W? You seem quite taken by it, but why and does it have anything to do with the answers to those two questions? |
The story: Well, there's the witch who lost her hat, there's the snowball's chance in hell, and many more, and all these stories are about a veil opening and all these stories end just before you see what's behind it.
Why you should care: because there are veils around you, and what's behind them can bring life or death. |
Really Don? How much LSD do you drop a week??
ETA: ;) :) |
This is kind of like those people who say, '(insert name of band/author/artist here) must have been be on drugs to create (insert name of music/book/art here)' as if imagination is something that is dull and almost non existent. As if Lewis Carroll had to be on drugs. Whether he was was or not i'd say he was fully capable of imagining Wonderland without them. I'm like Don and Johanna in that i like images that, as well as affecting me on a gut level, also serve as a springboard for my own imagination. That don't stop when they hit my eyes. Two more examples that were brought up in another thread (and apologies to the photographers for digging them up again)...
 - The classic technically great wine glass ribbon winner doesn't spark any ongoing interest for me beyond appreciation of set-up. My imagination isn't stirred and there is certainly no 'feeling' either intended (i guess) or received.
 - Even apart from the impact from its originality, for me, there is far more to grasp onto here and more of an emotional punch. There is a Brave New World aspect, of genetics and cloning- quite sinister. I imagine these going on for miles and miles until reaching one black sheep, one broken container or full container. Whatever. I don't particularly want to know that it's the side of a building etc.
Of the two landscapes that Jason posted i also far prefer the second. It really is a wonderful image and sparks for more imagination and interest than the first which doesn't do a whole lot for me. Sure, i guess you can derive some interest from who the people are, how they got there, what they have in their lunchboxes etc but that's quite dull to me. They are quite obviously tourists and if i want to get immersed in an image, an image of potentially mythical landscape, i don't want to see some guy's day-glo camera bag plonked down in the middle of it. The people there spoil it for me but that is not to say that any people there would. A solitary figure walking along the ridge, or sat on a rock, a couple arguing etc would be a great 'in' but as it is not so much.
Message edited by author 2010-12-17 05:09:03. |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 06:16:16 AM · #72 |
| i use 10 of those glass birds with the liquid in them....whichever key gets hit first is the vote they get. saves wear and tear on my finger tips... |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 08:07:54 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Two more examples that were brought up in another thread (and apologies to the photographers for digging them up again)... |
No apologies necessary. I'm flattered. But you should know that I was high on caffeine when I took that shot. |
|
|
|
12/17/2010 08:45:34 AM · #74 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
As far as "Devoid of anything meaningful", well, something that is incredibly meaningful to ME isn't going to be meaningful to someone else, or few people. Why? Because I've had different life experiences. All I was trying to do was explain further WHY I don't vote on technicals, and that is all. I wasn't asking anyone to vote my way. I wasn't telling anyone that my way was 'better'. I wasn't pushing an agenda. Just an explanation. |
That makes a lot more sense now in that context.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2010 10:18:24 AM · #75 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I would wet my pants if I captured either of those |
...then you may have a problem unrelated to photography, to paraphrase Larry Sanders.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
The B&W feels more "artistic"... abstract...leaves landscape photography out. |
I think the second photograph feels more "artistic" because it is indeed abstract, not necessarily because it's black and white. Landscapes can certainly be abstract, and this one's a good example.
As for meaning, I think people are able to ascribe meaning, story, etc. more easily to photos like this because they are so open to interpretation. There is nothing that appeals to the most reptilian layer of the brain more than an abstract image stripped of colour and overt imagery, and that needs to be interpreted by connections not immediately present in the photo. Everyone does this. I think some are more open to the process (Don, yanko), more experienced with it, while others are more reticent to let go of traditional ways of seeing things.
Message edited by author 2010-12-17 10:19:57. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 04:15:56 PM  |
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: 08/03/2025 04:15:56 PM EDT.
|
