Cheater, cheater.... ;-) - DPChallenge Forums

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

09/15/2005 01:26:11 PM · #126

Originally posted by bear_music:

(note to those who are unclear: this exchange is satirical in nature!)

R.

Yes we figured that but it's a "fluff", and it makes it impossible for people who were discussing something to follow the thread anymore, not to mention to someone new to figure out what are we talking about. If 1 more person joins you in this it ruins it completely. This is the kind exactly what I was talking about where SC should stop this kind of things. It kills threads and discussions.

Originally posted by scalvert:

Obvious threadjacking and personal attacks are promptly removed when called our attention.

Even if it's not intentional or obvious intent to thradjack, and it's only made as a joke, as I'm sure bear_music wasn't intentionaly try to kill glad2badad's thread this qouting one another in 10 posts, I think in a thread that is about something completely different must be stopped because nobody can understand anything anymore.

Message edited by author 2005-09-15 13:31:35.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

09/15/2005 01:31:53 PM · #127

Originally posted by frumoaznicul:

Originally posted by bear_music:

(note to those who are unclear: this exchange is satirical in nature!)

R.

Yes we figured that but it's a "fluff", and it makes it impossible for people who were discussing something to follow the thread anymore, not to mention to someone new to figure out what are we talking about. If 1 more person joins you in this it ruins it completely. This is the kind exactly what I was talking about where SC should stop this kind of things. It kills threads and discussions.

I wouldn't go that far myself; it actually illustrates the point. This is exactly how these things get out of control; people shooting from the hip. I don't really think it's "fluff" in this context, but I'll stop :-)

R.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

09/15/2005 01:34:26 PM · #128

Originally posted by bear_music:

Oh ok my bad, then you illustrated it perfectly. This is exacltly what I was talking about. It happens so often that I wasn't sure you are doing it as an irony to ilustrate or it really is happening :)

Edit: forgot to reply about this, I didn't quite understand your example since I don't know what widget and fridget means but you are so right about the "gestural vacuum" on the internet and cultural differencess. Some cultures are more into "political corectness" as we tend to be here in europe and especially in eastern europe. We mostly say what's on our minds and don't measure words as much, the main ideea is what counts. But since we live the great globalization, we all should learn to live with eachother.

Message edited by author 2005-09-15 13:43:58.

Riponlady

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35

09/15/2005 01:43:05 PM · #129

Originally posted by frumoaznicul:

You are right, maybe my language is a bit unpolished, but belive me it is verry hard for me in english, I learned english in movies mostly and you know the language most of them use. Don't blame me, blame Hollywood :)) Now seriously where I live language like that is used with verry much ease, unless a verry bad curse is placed words like "idiotic", "retard" and such go unnoticed and people don't take offense so easily as I noticed most people do here. Maybe we are more straight forward or just less mannered/polished people I don't know. I think it's a cultural diference. I will try as much as possible to soften it as one has to adapt to the surrounding enviroment. :)) Thanks for the tip.

(note: I don't know the word "fluff" I'm just guessing it's meaning from your post so I might misused it)

It seems to me that it is important when reading threads to know whether someone who posts has English as their first language as their choice of words could be ill chosen at times with no ill intent meant.

Would it be possible for this to be indicated in some way under their username next to the post?
It could be a preference if there were people who did not wish this to be known so they could opt out of giving this information?

Also a list of terms such as IMO and ROFL would also be useful somewhere!

By the way, frumoaznicul, your written English is incredibly good even if I do have difficulty spelling your username!! (If it's not fluff, what does it mean?)
:)
Pauline

Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II

09/15/2005 01:52:05 PM · #130

Originally posted by Riponlady:

Actualy I think this is a wonderful ideea to have little flags under our names. It would help alot exactly in the direction to what I wrote after in my edtit to bear_music. In learning to live with our cultural differencess.

Thank you for complimenting my english, it can't be that good but thank you, my nickname, doesn't mean anything or not in a language that it is alive. It is taken out of a poem that is anonymous and is belived to be in writen in an ancient romanian, and it's a weird combination of 2 words that exist in today romanian: "frumosul" and "groaznicul". "beautiful" and "grotesque".
When I joined here I was under the spell of that poem and I couldn't find anything better to type in :)

Message edited by author 2005-09-15 13:52:48.

HornOUBet

Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f/1.7 ASPH

09/15/2005 02:54:08 PM · #131

I did not recognize his photo, it was 1 of 2 ten votes I cast on that particular challenge, because it was a GREAT photo, and unlike Bear, I am saddened by the date stamp being incorrect...

HornOUBet

Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II

Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f/1.7 ASPH

09/15/2005 02:59:03 PM · #132

Bear, Music is your LAST name, correct ??? :>)

Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II

09/15/2005 03:16:37 PM · #133

Originally posted by HornOUBet:

I did not recognize his photo, it was 1 of 2 ten votes I cast on that particular challenge, because it was a GREAT photo, and unlike Bear, I am saddened by the date stamp being incorrect...

Why is it a 'GREAT' photo?

HornOUBet

Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f/1.7 ASPH

09/15/2005 03:22:35 PM · #134

Because it is beautiful and makes me feel good to look at it...

Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by HornOUBet:
I did not recognize his photo, it was 1 of 2 ten votes I cast on that particular challenge, because it was a GREAT photo, and unlike Bear, I am saddened by the date stamp being incorrect...

Why is it a 'GREAT' photo?

09/15/2005 03:36:35 PM · #135

Originally posted by HornOUBet:

Because it is beautiful and makes me feel good to look at it...

That makes it a 'beautiful' and 'feel good' photo for you but why is it a 'GREAT' photo? Why a '10'?

09/15/2005 03:42:03 PM · #136

I am not trying to be confrontational here, just curious how a standard for photographs can be established during voting that isn't totally based on subjective influences? Good or bad.......

09/15/2005 03:44:04 PM · #137

Originally posted by azoychka:

I am not trying to be confrontational here, just curious how a standard for photographs can be established during voting that isn't totally based on subjective influences? Good or bad.......

If a non-subjective standard could be induced, no voting would be necessary. We would give the photos to the SC, they would use the objective standards to grade the photo and we would have the results in 24 hours with no opportunity for debate.

In fact, we could just take those objective standards and let each other know what our own score was without bothering to submit the photos! Of course, we could show the photos just for fun...

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

09/15/2005 03:46:55 PM · #138

Why would you want your photos judged on a basis that wasn't subjective? Take up math or something.

09/15/2005 03:47:11 PM · #139

I should think that the standards that are set by objective analysis of a photograph would more than supply a healthy and lively debate on the calibre of a piece of work......let alone the technical skills utilized...

09/15/2005 03:49:12 PM · #140

Originally posted by azoychka:

Okay, I see what you mean...you mean that saying it makes you 'feel good' and that it's 'beautiful' doesn't provide any means for objectivity. You want to know why it's beautiful...what part makes you feel good.

For example, "the warm colours and simple elements make this photo feel good and it's beauty is compounded by the wonderful leading lines..."

right?

09/15/2005 03:51:23 PM · #141

Originally posted by mk:

Why would you want your photos judged on a basis that wasn't subjective? Take up math or something.

Because 'mk' there is much much more than just subjective feeling, to works of art....otherwise there is little to learn,to understand and discuss....Mk your last remark 'Take up math or something' is insulting and dismissive. You would do better to apply your intellect to discussions rather than insults!

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

09/15/2005 03:55:53 PM · #142

It's not meant to be insulting. To me, a huge part of art IS subjectivity. I so no reason to take it out. We share our pictures to see how they make others feel and react, not for them to be judged solely on technical aspects. If we wanted something so calculated, we would be mathematicians, you see?

09/15/2005 03:56:08 PM · #143

Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

Originally posted by azoychka:
I should think that the standards that are set by objective analysis of a photograph would more than supply a healthy and lively debate on the calibre of a piece of work......let alone the technical skills utilized...

Okay, I see what you mean...you mean that saying it makes you 'feel good' and that it's 'beautiful' doesn't provide any means for objectivity. You want to know why it's beautiful...what part makes you feel good.

For example, "the warm colours and simple elements make this photo feel good and it's beauty is compounded by the wonderful leading lines..."

right?

That was very poor effort at quoting sorry.....I said..

Yes and I want more.....I want to know why it works to make you feel this way. How do we learn if we do not delve deeper into the whys?

09/15/2005 03:57:45 PM · #144

Originally posted by mk:

Of course, but your subjective reaction can be determined for you by the artist........

09/15/2005 03:59:37 PM · #145

Originally posted by azoychka:

Originally posted by mk:
It's not meant to be insulting. To me, a huge part of art IS subjectivity. I so no reason to take it out. We share our pictures to see how they make others feel and react, not for them to be judged solely on technical aspects. If we wanted something so calculated, we would be mathematicians, you see?

Of course, but your subjective reaction can be determined for you by the artist........

I do tend to agree with you here.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

09/15/2005 03:59:48 PM · #146

Originally posted by azoychka:

Of course, but your subjective reaction can be determined for you by the artist........

Not necessarily.

09/15/2005 04:02:28 PM · #147

Originally posted by mk:

Originally posted by azoychka:
Of course, but your subjective reaction can be determined for you by the artist........

Not necessarily.

He said "can be"...which is true. I think it's an underestimated part of art here in North America, where everything is supposed to be accepted and interpreted...

sestevens

09/15/2005 04:07:18 PM · #148

MK hit it on the head. Photography, like all art is subjective...subjective from the artist point of view, and well as the critiquer's point of view. And how valid the photography is, as well as the commentary of the critique...is likewise subjective from person to person. And credibility becomes determined over time, behind several layers of development and critiques.

To be 'objective' is to really deny your potential in any creative field. Instead, you should work on continually developing your own standards and way of seeing things...and stick by them.

Originally posted by mk: