| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/20/2004 01:07:28 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by riotspyne:
Originally posted by dartompkins:
Originally posted by riotspyne:
like i said on the other thread, i liked it but Gilp's was better imo, sorry.
although i didnt give it a bad score....4 |
4 is not a bad score?????? |
he was complaining about 1.2.3's its better than that.
i didnt say it was a good score....i said it wasnt bad, not for me anyways. |
I gave this a seven, because i don't quite like the center composition which could have been remedied with a simple crop, while getting rid of blown sky, and this really should have been zoomed in more, imo.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:08:12 AM · #27 |
Your version was much better-received than mine a few weeks ago ...
 |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:10:34 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by yurasocolov:
PS I don't care if the last two images are going to get disqualified for being mentioned here, obviously. |
Glad your not gonna renew your precious 7 day membership...
(ignoring thread now!) |
Wouldn't really say you are 39 judging by your posts... but oh well, not my problem. And btw, when people say they are ignoring a thread, that sure as hell means they are definitely coming back. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:12:07 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Your version was much better-received than mine a few weeks ago ...
|
I first thought it was a tax return on the background =) |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:13:55 AM · #30 |
| Man - you have issues that can not be resolved here. Maybe you should reconsider putting your photography on display for critique. And I'm not even a Republican (well, at least not this year). |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:16:35 AM · #31 |
| Let's quit with the personal attacks here, please. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:18:23 AM · #32 |
| Well, he's right, that was a pretty stupid thing to say. Nonetheless, the point remains... |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:19:05 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by mk:
Let's quit with the personal attacks here, please. |
Sorry mk. I did not mean this to be taken as a personal attack. Just a constructive suggestion. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:20:13 AM · #34 |
My final analysis of this photo is that when voters see it, they take it as a personal affront and not as an image displaying the rude form of communication.
You must understand that many people are just waiting to be offended. They will even tell you that your concept is inferior. Believe me, this is all due to the viewers attitude. Like who would believe that a middle finger is meant directly at any viewer?
Just because they consider the gesture crude, they dismiss it and take it more as a direct insult then the raw communications it conveys. They are saying, do not show images that we deem crude.
So while you image does show a common means of communication of the rude, I can not take its message personally. I look at it merely as another one of the human's negative traits. Just another form of primative communication, but communication all the same.
However, you will not redeem any goodwill by attacking the viewer.
PS I am a conservative and i love Pink Floyd. No, I vote strictly on the image. I think we should all raise art above politics. I do. I never do religious or political images.
Message edited by author 2004-10-20 01:31:55. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:25:51 AM · #35 |
| Your photo met the challenge, and I didn't take it personally, but it didn't impress me as being particularly creative. At least GeneralE's had some thought behind it. (And I don't remember how I rated it, probably a 3 or 4.) |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:26:26 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by yurasocolov:
i am complaining about not getting an honest treatment here. |
Actually, this is about as honest a forum for photography as there is on the web. And the market is ALWAYS right. If you don't like this "market," I'm sure you'll find another more to your liking.
Hasta Luego |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:33:49 AM · #37 |
Obviously, unlike you, graphicfunk, 64 people, such as TooCool, believe that it's meant directly at them.
And i wasn't looking for goodwill, i was looking for honesty. And when a person practices "a belief, virtue or feeling that they do not posess", that's called hipocrisy or falsness, according to dictionary.com. So i stand by my statements too. And will send $5 to each one of those 64 that can swear that they have never flipped anyone off in their lives. Can't offer more, what if i'm dealing with 64 saints here.
Frankly, i really thought that people would recognize that as a common communication, and judge the photo, not the message that i wasn't even sending. But i guess i still have ways to go as far as getting more cynical, although i thought i was way beyond cynical already. Oh well. Thanks for your input. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:41:44 AM · #38 |
| Yura - I think the point here is that with art it is "in the eye of the beholder". You can't separate the technical evaluation from how the art makes you feel. You should be proud that your "art" moved people in any way, even the way you perceive as bad. At least on this site that is the way it is. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:42:27 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by yurasocolov:
Obviously, unlike you, graphicfunk, 64 people, such as TooCool, believe that it's meant directly at them.
And i wasn't looking for goodwill, i was looking for honesty. And when a person practices "a belief, virtue or feeling that they do not posess", that's called hipocrisy or falsness, according to dictionary.com. So i stand by my statements too. And will send $5 to each one of those 64 that can swear that they have never flipped anyone off in their lives. Can't offer more, what if i'm dealing with 64 saints here.
Frankly, i really thought that people would recognize that as a common communication, and judge the photo, not the message that i wasn't even sending. But i guess i still have ways to go as far as getting more cynical, although i thought i was way beyond cynical already. Oh well. Thanks for your input. |
Honesty is what you wanted, and honesty is what you got. The voting is subjective, and people can vot your photo down for watever reason they like, frivelous or not. Someone not liking it, and giving it a low score is honesty.
And you didn't think that "people would recognize that as a common communication, and judge the photo, not the message that i wasn't even sending", that was clear by your hostility in the description.
As you've demonstrated on several occasions here, you understand neither what a hypocrite is, nor how to spell the word hypocrite. Saying you don't like something even though you've done it doesn't make you a hypocrite. I'm willing to bet you used to wet the bed, but if someone you were sharing a bed with were to piss in it, I imagine you'd have a problem with that wouldn't you? Yeah, we mature, our tastes change, and everyone is entitled to their own.
I've flipped people off, I voted your photo low, I didn't think it was particularly interesting. I found the contrast between the hand and the background too strong. On the other side, the focus is clean, and I like your placement of the subject, so I don't think you deserved as many 1's as you got. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:49:53 AM · #40 |
Uhm, if it has gotten to the point of picking at each other's spelling, i guess i'm done here. For the record, english is my second language, and i think i speak it pretty damn well. And if i happen to misspell a word or two, especially while engaged in a pretty heated debate, that doesn't mean a whole lot, does it? I wanna see you spell russian.
Good night. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 01:57:16 AM · #41 |
| Good night Yura. And your english is great! I would not even try Russian! |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 02:01:36 AM · #42 |
Fair enough, my bad on the spelling slam, bad habit. But in all fairness, you've been terribly hostile throughout this entire thread, and been tossing around a word that's misused far too often IMHO.
One of my favorite images to come from my camera (not to mention worked really hard for) is currently being torn asunder in the Night Shot II challenge. So I understand your frustration with unfortunately low scores. But making a thread immediately attacking people accomplishes nothing. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 02:13:17 AM · #43 |
So i have overreacted too... And the score wasn't even that low either. 65% is pretty good by my standards. Oh well, i already sent a cancellation request, so that's all good. At least i got to talk to some interesting people.
Sorry about your image. I'm really curious what it is though, since it's another d70 in virginia =) I guess i'll have to come back to check it out in a couple of weeks.
Thanks everyone for the attention, support and even for bashing, it never hurts, really. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 02:37:44 AM · #44 |
Hi Yura
I gave both images a 6, but I'm not at all suprised at the outcome of the votes, the advantage that Gil has with his image is the scene, it's comfortable and familiar, in essence we are watching something happen, the sepia tones and the rawness of the image makes it all believable, to be honest I regret not getting the time for a final pass of my voting as I-m sure I would have bumped this up by 1 or 2.
Your image got it's 6 for the qualilty of the image, the scene itself feels like it is directed at the viewer and is therefore offensive and uncomfortable, the addition of the border seems to add to the effect of the scene being posed rather than candid, which in turn adds to the offensive factor. For me, the deliverence of an intended emotion adds to a photography and therefore gets a higher mark, but my preference is candid, street style photography. Being honest I would not have increased your 6.
Many people on here vote with a personal bias, and factors such as religion, politics, nationalism etc play there part in the scores. This situation albeit annoying, should not be viewed in a negative way for it is a reflection of how society as a whole views our work. It has been said many times that we decide if to enter challenges for our art or the voters pleasure, this is our choice to make - sell out to fame and glory or hold on to pride and integrity, personally, like many others here, I've adopted a balance of both.
Cheers
Darren |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 08:05:33 AM · #45 |
Seems that your definition of honest voter is someone who gave your shot a high score. And your definition of hypocrite is someone who gave it a low score. I can't figure out what your definition is for Republican.
If you speak our language "pretty damn well" why don't you put titles on your entries? From now on I'm giving a 1 to any entry titled ***.
And what is a Russian with such a nasty attitude doing around our capitol? I'll bet you go around giving that sign in traffic all the time. I'm going to give Tom Ridge a call about you in the morning. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 08:13:08 AM · #46 |
i would be a hypocrit if i told you i liked the photo, and then scored it low.
not for voting it low because it didn't appeal to me... that's being honest.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2004 09:25:06 AM · #47 |
| Despite the pleadings of the photographer, I don't think the photo is very good. Technically well executed, yes, but that alone doesn't make for a good photo. I think for a photograph of this particular gesture to work well, it needs to have some sense of context. While this one was shot in a car, I just don't get the feeling that this bird was flipped in anger. It comes across just as a pose for the camera. It's not a one in my book, but more like a 3 or 4. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 09:55:27 AM · #48 |
I think when one wants to create a message from a gesture, it needs to be within a content. also, you already seemed to have decided that people here were "hypocrites"....so in the end, at least your justified in your statement!
As for the center compo...well, the arm is in the car...so it falls cleary under the spell of the "rule of thirds". or in the case of us hypocrits..the rule of "turds".
Message edited by author 2004-10-20 09:58:25.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2004 09:56:32 AM · #49 |
I didn't vote in this challenge, but if it had been a horrible picture of the "bird", I would have given you a 3 for meeting the challenge... This was not a horrible picture by any stretch... I would likely have given it a strong 6 or maybe a 7.
But I do have advice for you... Grow a thicker skin or leave... If getting trashed for a photo with meaning throws you into this much of a tizzy-fit, you'll be much happier elsewhere... I have an image in the current member challenge that is being raked over the coals. I've reread the challenge and there is no way it doesn't meet the challenge. But it's getting trashed big time... My score is currently under 4.
When you see the image I'm talking about, you will see that your end of the attitude spectrum isn't the only one that gets trashed here. The difference is that I said in my comments that I knew it would be scored way low, and I meant it. I'm perfectly happy with the 3.9 I'll likely end the week with, because I'm perfectly happy with the photo and I know it meets the challenge. It's just that some people use their vote to say more than "good photo" or "bad photo"...
So, once again, I suggest you grow a thicker skin or leave... Personally I hope you choose the thicker skin. You're good and this place could use your perspective...
|
|
|
|
10/20/2004 10:00:56 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
why don't you put titles on your entries? From now on I'm giving a 1 to any entry titled ***. |
*shrug* If a photo is good enough to speak for itself, it doesn't need a title. Actually, i think you are undermining some of your photos by giving them titles. Yes, it may be a a girl on the beach, and if you call it that, that's what it's going to be. But if you don't, people will have to think about it, and it just may associate with morning freshness, or running or good time or something else, trigger feelings.
Originally posted by coolhar:
And what is a Russian with such a nasty attitude doing around our capitol? I'll bet you go around giving that sign in traffic all the time. I'm going to give Tom Ridge a call about you in the morning. |
*laugh* Whatever. I have created five workplaces, for one. What have you done? |
|
