| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/01/2004 11:40:33 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by basia03:
for this particular shot i must admit that photographs of a printed text almost always leave me cold, no matter what the subject is... it just doesn't go well with my feeling that each photograph should speak for itself in its own "words", without the help of text... this picture does have some additional elements, but not enough to interest me... didn't get to vote on it in this challenge, otherwise i might not or might not have mentioned it in a comment... |
That's fine. I don't particularly think those are creative either, BUT if they meet the challenge are not technically terrible, i give a 4, perhaps a 3 if they lack any appeal. However, feedback that you are givng them a 1 or 2 because , well, insert your paragraph above. At least the member would know why the low vote and perhaps stop submitting such shots, or at least consider alternatives.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 11:40:55 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by vontom:
Well, I think there are several issues at work in this image. First of all, I'm not christian, so I would not suggest that is authority. Secondly, The Artist did not actually say it was authority, but asked. So, having a subject I don't see as fitting the challenge, and then having the title ask me if it was in the challenge, it didn't meet the challenge for me.
|
This makes no sense to me...the question in the title shows the subjectivity, thus negating the beginning of your first point (which would also apply to our prize-winning blue photo)... |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 11:43:39 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
It's not a glee-o-meter...it's a vote whether the photo is 'good' or 'bad'... |
Right 'good' or 'bad' - that's all the comment there is - so it could perfectly reasonably be used as a glee-o-meter, or a 'like-o-meter' or a 'technical-difficulty-o-meter' or any other parameters you'd like to base it on. All of the hundreds of 'why don't people vote the way I vote' threads seem to struggle to get this point - nobody has to vote the way you vote.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 11:45:04 AM · #29 |
Dear Russ, dear sweet .. sweet Russ. Of COURSE you don't think it deserves a 1...you took it..you liked it..you entered it!
You're saying it doesn't deserve 1's and 2's and the people who scored it 1 and 2 are saying "what the-? that awful shot got 9's and 10's?!" best to let it go....mooooooove on.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 11:45:19 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by vontom:
Well, I think there are several issues at work in this image. First of all, I'm not christian, so I would not suggest that is authority. Secondly, The Artist did not actually say it was authority, but asked. So, having a subject I don't see as fitting the challenge, and then having the title ask me if it was in the challenge, it didn't meet the challenge for me.
|
Do you have to agree with the position of the photographer to like or fairly judge a photograph? From what you state, this does not meet the challenge. Why? Because YOU don't recognize the christian god as an authority of any kind? Does it have to be YOUR specific authority to meet the challenge? Assuming you are in the US, a picture of say the Canadian Prime Minister or the Pope would 'not meet the challenge'? Absurd.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 11:47:26 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
Absurd. |
I concur. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 11:47:49 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
It's not a glee-o-meter...it's a vote whether the photo is 'good' or 'bad'... |
Right 'good' or 'bad' - that's all the comment there is - so it could perfectly reasonably be used as a glee-o-meter, or a 'like-o-meter' or a 'technical-difficulty-o-meter' or any other parameters you'd like to base it on. All of the hundreds of 'why don't people vote the way I vote' threads seem to struggle to get this point - nobody has to vote the way you vote. |
...but I thought we could at least agree on what it is that I'm casting my vote for. In my case (and hopefully most others), it's for the photograph. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:12:21 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
Originally posted by vontom:
Well, I think there are several issues at work in this image. First of all, I'm not christian, so I would not suggest that is authority. Secondly, The Artist did not actually say it was authority, but asked. So, having a subject I don't see as fitting the challenge, and then having the title ask me if it was in the challenge, it didn't meet the challenge for me.
|
Do you have to agree with the position of the photographer to like or fairly judge a photograph? From what you state, this does not meet the challenge. Why? Because YOU don't recognize the christian god as an authority of any kind? Does it have to be YOUR specific authority to meet the challenge? Assuming you are in the US, a picture of say the Canadian Prime Minister or the Pope would 'not meet the challenge'? Absurd. |
An interesting assertion, absurdity. Postulating a hypothetical, suppose the challenge were "Normalcy" and someone entered a picture depicting child molestation in a "loose" and rules-allowed fashion. Since you don't find this normal, you would say it does not fit the challenge. That person, and many cultures throughout history, would find that normal, and say it fits.
The difference here, is that I would say the Canadian Prime Minister exists, and has authority. The pope exists, and has authority (though I may well disagree with it). A book, itself, does not have authority. The postulated existence of a third party referent was insufficient to really say "authority" to me. However, the artist did not state that it was authority, but asked. I responded, "no, it isn't." Because I do not see it as such. Ergo, it does not fit the challenge.
Most entrants showed demonstrable authority in their work. The entry in 41st place, I enjoyed. That photo suggested what authority was, to some. While, I felt that was incredibly culturally sensitive, it also satisfied the requirement. The ephemeral nature of a supernatural authority was taken as a given, not questioned.
The entire point I'm trying to make here is this: the photo asked my opinion, and I disagreed with what it wanted to say. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:23:42 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by vontom:
...the photo asked my opinion, and I disagreed with what it wanted to say. |
Fair enough, except that the title didn't question itself as representing authority (as you suggest). It merely merely asked if this was the HIGHEST authority. You don't have to believe in something in order for it to be symbolic. Would a werewolf not be a good representation of a monster? Absurd indeed. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:31:46 PM · #35 |
| Whereas I don't believe this photo rates a 1 I also don't believe it comes close to rating a 10, you got some of each. The photo plays to people believes and culture, you benefited from this as well as it working against you. We are a diverse group of people and I hate to be the one to tell you this but christians are not universally loved. This should not be a surprise to anyone right now, and if it does surprise you I would suggest you might want to keep up with world events a bit more. I donĂ¢€™t think people should vote based on their believes but I am also not at all surprised that you got some strong negative reactions for the photo. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:34:35 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
It's not a glee-o-meter...it's a vote whether the photo is 'good' or 'bad'... |
Right 'good' or 'bad' - that's all the comment there is - so it could perfectly reasonably be used as a glee-o-meter, or a 'like-o-meter' or a 'technical-difficulty-o-meter' or any other parameters you'd like to base it on. All of the hundreds of 'why don't people vote the way I vote' threads seem to struggle to get this point - nobody has to vote the way you vote. |
I can't speak for thatcloudthere, and I don't think he intended to imply that anyone should vote as he does. Perhaps, he just feels that by sharing his views he can contribute to a culture of doing things in some small way. If we only play without offering our motives and/or convictions up for debate or, at least, consideration, well, then we are delivered by and to our own glee-o-meters, as he put it.
I think the term glee-o-meter was quite light and humorous compared to terms I have chosen to describe just this symptom before.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:37:36 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
It's not a glee-o-meter...it's a vote whether the photo is 'good' or 'bad'... |
Right 'good' or 'bad' - that's all the comment there is - so it could perfectly reasonably be used as a glee-o-meter, or a 'like-o-meter' or a 'technical-difficulty-o-meter' or any other parameters you'd like to base it on. All of the hundreds of 'why don't people vote the way I vote' threads seem to struggle to get this point - nobody has to vote the way you vote. |
...but I thought we could at least agree on what it is that I'm casting my vote for. In my case (and hopefully most others), it's for the photograph. |
As a definition 'voting for the photograph' doesn't really explain or clarify anything. I look at images and like or dislike them, based on a mass of cultural, social and personal factors. I tend to bring those same interpretations and personal views on aesthetics and taste to bear when I vote here too. There is no 'standard' to judge decent images on.
There probably is a standard to judge lifeless, non-communicative stock images with, but even within that, I'm bringing my own personal biases against that bland style of photography to the issue.
I don't much like iconography for example. It has no real emotional value or connection for me. On an intellectual level I can recognise that some other people might care - but then they can vote for it as they see fit.
I don't see the point of voting an image high because other people might like it or value it. That's why everyone gets to vote.
Message edited by author 2004-12-01 12:37:59.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:41:16 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by vontom:
...the photo asked my opinion, and I disagreed with what it wanted to say. |
Fair enough, except that the title didn't question itself as representing authority (as you suggest). It merely merely asked if this was the HIGHEST authority. You don't have to believe in something in order for it to be symbolic. Would a werewolf not be a good representation of a monster? Absurd indeed. |
And that is an interpretive choice you made. The entire title "The Highest Authority?" is followed by a question mark. Which leaves every possible meaning to that phrase open for questioning. "The Highest (?) Authority." while not grammatically correct, would be sufficiently understandable in contemporary netspeak, to only question the one term. I chose to interpret the title differently than you did, but well within the acceptable confines of language.
Speaking of symbolism, that enters a whole new realm of interpretation. A werewolf would not be a good "symbol" for a monster to someone who has never heard of werewolves. Symbols are inherently subjective and unreliable, as they suggest, not state. This symbolism, one of the most questioned, is fairly weak to those not following it. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:46:28 PM · #39 |
This month's photolife has an interesting article in this respect,
//www.photolife.com/2004-11/por1_body.php?Page=por1
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:50:01 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by vontom:
The entire title "The Highest Authority?" is followed by a question mark. Which leaves every possible meaning to that phrase open for questioning. |
You are just as free to mangle the English language as you are to vote according to mere whim. ;-) |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 12:53:10 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
As a definition 'voting for the photograph' doesn't really explain or clarify anything. |
I'm not sure why you've introduced 'stock photography' to the discussion...When I say I'm voting for the photograph, rest assured I'm not speaking of technical excellence only (I have every bit as much desire for emotion to be conveyed in photographs as you do).
What I am saying is that voting down a photo because the emotions it evokes are 'negative' (sadness, horror, loneliness) or because you disagree with the statement it makes ("The bible is the highest authority (?)") seems wrong to me.
Sure, everyone can vote however they wish...they can give a 1 to any photo which has a title that begins with a vowel...but that seems wrong to me as well. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 01:00:26 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
What I am saying is that voting down a photo because the emotions it evokes are 'negative' (sadness, horror, loneliness) or because you disagree with the statement it makes ("The bible is the highest authority (?)") seems wrong to me.
|
How about voting down a photo that has no real meaning for you ? Largely I find religious photographs and art outwith my area of interest or concern. They don't evoke negative or positive feelings as such. They just do nothing much for me at all. There have been a couple that have stunned me, but much like American flag pictures, they don't do much for me. I didn't vote on this image, but I doubt I'd have voted it high at all - because it is largely meaningless in the context of this challenge - for me. I realise other people might care a lot either way -but as I said - I'm not voting for how I think you'll feel about it.
US flag pictures are the same - people in the US are are conditioned to think about their national pride when they see a US flag - they pledge allegience to the 'flag' as a short hand for their country, flag burning is a huge issue mainly because of this and so on. Most other countries don't tie their identity up so tightly in a scrap of cloth, but Americans do. In the UK we bundle most of that up in the iconography if the queen for example. Some folk bring their hatred of the US and tie that in to pictures of the US flag. For me, it is just some striped material - so US flag pictures unless actually interesting for some other reason have no actual impact at all for me - I tend to vote low on pictures that I find devoid of interest.
I tend to agree with what you are saying - I mostly vote on an emotional scale too - bad is emotionless, good is one that stirs strong positive or negative emotions for me. Coupled with this is an underlying bias towards technically well done photography too.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 01:07:55 PM · #43 |
Gordon:
I agree with you completely!
There are several topics where the photos often seem to do nothing for me...This is often because the emotional attachment that the photographer has to the topic/subject isn't passed along in the photograph. The photographer assumes it's inherent in the photograph and thus a bland photograph results.
Such topics typically include religion, US patriotism, 'the war', kids, pets and other loved ones...
That's not to say that excellent photos of these topics can't be taken.
It's similar to when I go out and take photos while listen to mp3's with headphones on...with some songs, it seems everything would be an incredible, emotive photo. Then I get home and look at it without the music playing and instantly realize that, while it still holds the emotion for me, it won't be there for any other viewers.
That's something I need to learn...to capture the emotion/mood/story within the boundaries of the photograph.
That's where 'making' the photograph (rather than 'taking' it) is essential...
Message edited by author 2004-12-01 13:09:16. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 01:18:06 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
It's not a glee-o-meter...it's a vote whether the photo is 'good' or 'bad'... |
Right 'good' or 'bad' - that's all the comment there is - so it could perfectly reasonably be used as a glee-o-meter, or a 'like-o-meter' or a 'technical-difficulty-o-meter' or any other parameters you'd like to base it on. All of the hundreds of 'why don't people vote the way I vote' threads seem to struggle to get this point - nobody has to vote the way you vote. |
...but I thought we could at least agree on what it is that I'm casting my vote for. In my case (and hopefully most others), it's for the photograph. |
As a definition 'voting for the photograph' doesn't really explain or clarify anything. I look at images and like or dislike them, based on a mass of cultural, social and personal factors. I tend to bring those same interpretations and personal views on aesthetics and taste to bear when I vote here too. There is no 'standard' to judge decent images on.
There probably is a standard to judge lifeless, non-communicative stock images with, but even within that, I'm bringing my own personal biases against that bland style of photography to the issue.
I don't much like iconography for example. It has no real emotional value or connection for me. On an intellectual level I can recognise that some other people might care - but then they can vote for it as they see fit.
I don't see the point of voting an image high because other people might like it or value it. That's why everyone gets to vote. |
I may decide to vote in favour of an image that I consider to be of value (to other people and/or myself), quite regardless of my very personal aesthetic sense. Whether or not other people see any comparable value in such an image, I cannot know, and it concerns me not.
Some people consider an alleged message. Some look for intent on part of the photographer. Others have an appetite for something they already know or for what, easily, pleases them. Few try to look at the facts of the photo first.
There is, to me, a marked difference between attempting a fair and considerate evaluation of a work and rewarding points for a picture which might match my couch.
Message edited by author 2004-12-01 13:22:07.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 01:39:16 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Russ:
This was my entry for Authority, entitled "The highest Authority" I was hoping for a 6 as I felt this was my best entry so far. This isn't a moan about my overall total, but can somebody please explain how this photo scored seven 10's and ten 9's as well as seven 1's and seven 2's. Like it or loathe it, I don't think this photo is a 1. (Sorry, end of winge) |
Look at the scores distribution. It is a classic bell curve. That is what you expect to see on your images.
Some people are going to like your image better than others. It is all opinion. The scores on the wings, both good and bad, are normal.
You might argue that you got maybe one or two "1"s more than you should have based on the curve, but if you removed those and recalculated your score you would find that it would make little difference in your final score.
Technical quality is what determined it's score. Lighting perspective is great. The setup is OK and the crucifix with its shadow is good. It is unclear to me (So probably others) why the cup-like object at the top is included. The image seems to be a tad bit on the "digital" side, maybe just slightly oversharpened. That is most apparent on the book curve edge up by the crucifix where the eye is drawn.
I did not vote this challenge but the final score looks about right.
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 01:49:26 PM · #46 |
The explanations for the ones and twos is a subject which has been brought up ad infinum. Some people defend it and some chastise it. The reasons run from punative to artistically repellent efforts and the image in question could be first rate. The truth is that voting is power and while some accept it as a dutiful responsibility to enhance the efforts of others, another faction takes advantage of the power to express their bias. This is what we live with. Look at some of the ribbon winners and you will find these trollers everywhere.
You must also understand that there is a movement to end religion in any form, not only from the political arena but anywhere where people come together. These people want the supreme power transfered to the state. The state is the god and let there be no gods before it.There is also antipathy to political statements, though some members have managed to display such images. It then follows that religion and politics do not do well.
So some 1's and 2's come from people in the competition who feel that clobbing a good image helps their chances. (Not really, especially, when the votes approach 300.) Others do it because of a strong emphathic love hate syndrome inherent in their personality. Then you have the anti-religion block and then the anti-politic block. It all seems to balance itself. Like I said, voting is power and you also have the power freaks. At the end not many images get penalized, depending on the current collective group.
Outside of your image another one with the bible finished much higher. So that is two images with religion content that have fared good. Again, DPC is not perfect, but regardless, a good image makes it and the very few that suffer do so but not on a regular basis.
While there are many that defend their trolling, their arguments are not very effective becaise it is more self indulgence than helping out your fellow photographer. Instead of giving out a 1 or 2, why not give a 4 and explain hoe the image can be improved. No matter how you phrase it, a 1 is a crippling vote that creates havoc with a score. They know the havoc they cause as they sling the arrow. |
|
|
|
12/01/2004 01:56:26 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
...
You must also understand that there is a movement to end religion in any form, not only from the political arena but anywhere where people come together. These people want the supreme power transfered to the state. The state is the god and let there be no gods before it.There is also antipathy to political statements, though some members have managed to display such images. It then follows that religion and politics do not do well.
... |
Hmmm, Daniel... While off topic, it would be interesting to know who "these" people are who are members of this "movement". While I generally admire and profit from your advice, this statement is a tad on the bizzare/paranoid side. lol
|
|
|
|
12/01/2004 02:10:26 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
...
You must also understand that there is a movement to end religion in any form, not only from the political arena but anywhere where people come together. These people want the supreme power transfered to the state. The state is the god and let there be no gods before it.There is also antipathy to political statements, though some members have managed to display such images. It then follows that religion and politics do not do well.
... |
Hmmm, Daniel... While off topic, it would be interesting to know who "these" people are who are members of this "movement". While I generally admire and profit from your advice, this statement is a tad on the bizzare/paranoid side. lol |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Fitst of all, I pride myself for allowing ideas on any subject. I feel quite prepared to deal with them all. So no, i am not at all paranoid.
Are you denying that threads do not exist in this site with this very topic and that there are no mevements to remove all reference from God in our very money and even in our constitution? These people are everywhere as well as those opposing it. You must remember that once a movement catches fire its adherents detest display of what they deem "not right". But then, this strains belongs in the rant forum where we wackos go to express our competent or incompetent views. lol
Message edited by author 2004-12-01 14:18:56. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 01:47:07 AM · #49 |
I am way behind catching up on this thread so you may never see it, but graphicfunk, you are one balanced soul. Any chance of you running for president? Nah, you are too reasonable and not nearly self-seving enough. Thanks for renewing my belief that some people are truly good. Your character lifts the spirit. Carry on, Good Man.
KDO |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 06:25:23 AM · #50 |
| although i resent the 1's and 2's i must admit this forum discussion has added some perspective to me personally. i now know, if i take pictures that appeal to me, and is being done my way,i must accept what comes my way. if i take pictures that has mass appeal, are technically good or bad and fits in the little box of most members' subjective opinions, then i must take what comes my way in any case. great. now i finally saw the light. thanks for this discussion. ;-))))))) |
|
