| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/08/2008 09:03:38 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by moswyn:
I hope you don't mind; I took the liberty of lightening the image up a little bit. |
Hmm, I do mind. I don't need to see what it looks like lighter, I purposely chose to make it as dark as it was. I'm glad you like the lighter version, but it's now your image and no longer mine - your interpretation, not mine. That being the point, or my point at least, of the entire discussion. It's not 'too' anything, you either like it or you don't - it simply is what it was intended to be. |
Very well, I've deleted the lighter image from my original post. What's funny about you is that you asked people what they thought and then you've completely disregarded all of the feedback you're getting. Hopefully the thread has been helpful for someone else :) |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 09:07:47 PM · #27 |
| With all due respect, I fail to understand what was said on the original post ,that indicated that you should fix his work to fit some mold that makes you happy.. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 09:25:44 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by moswyn:
What's funny about you is that you asked people what they thought and then you've completely disregarded all of the feedback you're getting. Hopefully the thread has been helpful for someone else :) |
Yeah, again I didn't ask what people thought about the image. I've enjoyed what discussion there's been, but it keeps turning into a discussion about one particular image. I can, have and will enter eye candy high scorers when I want to, and have been around long enough to know what works and what doesn't as far as that goes. I appreciate your helpful intentions though.
|
|
|
|
08/08/2008 09:33:08 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by alans_world:
With all due respect, I fail to understand what was said on the original post ,that indicated that you should fix his work to fit some mold that makes you happy.. |
Oh for heaven's sakes. Not for an instant was I trying to make the image "mine" or to "fix" it.
As long as an image conveys what the author intended it to convey, then it serves its purpose. My only point was that, in art, if you are trying to appeal to the masses, you have to make the image into something that the masses can relate to, something that they can feel or understand. In this particular instance, as we were presented with this image as a case in point, the subjectivity of the masses would seem to dictate that a slightly lighter tone would have made this particular image more appealing to a larger group of people.
So, to get back to the original post: Yes, I think there is a creativity line in the sand that an individual probably shouldn't cross if he or she still wants to appeal to the masses with any certain image. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 09:36:33 PM · #30 |
| Ok this is going nowhere. Probably in large part due to me poorly expressing the ideas I thought were worth discussing. I'm out! |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 10:57:17 PM · #31 |
| I didn't vote in this challenge or even look at all the entries (which I usually do). On my monitor I can see details just fine on the original image submitted. I personally like it. I like how the 3 jars emerge out of the darkness and show their design. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:03:33 PM · #32 |
I am so sorry it turned out this way. I don't think violinist expressed himself poorly at all. I saw it all as an attempt to loosen up our way of thinking about a picture, and urging us to expand our imagination, and ultimately our respect.
I am mightily not taken with the idea of "appealing to the masses" which to my mind is ultimately insulting to the individuals who constitute "the masses." Surely this is not the criterion by which I judge a picture, nor the wave length on which my enjoyment of a picture floats.
As for playing with someone else's picture, I do not take offense when someone does this without asking with one of mine, but I do sort of mind. I think this not unimportant. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:08:23 PM · #33 |
What is insuting to the "the Masses" is when the "artist" tells them that they are not cultured enough to "get" what the "artist" as trying to convey when "the Masses" speak out and say that they did not like what the "artist" had to offer and then huffs out of the room.
|
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:10:54 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
Ok this is going nowhere. Probably in large part due to me poorly expressing the ideas I thought were worth discussing. I'm out! |
You obviously care what "the masses" think otherwise you would not have posted the thread. What I don't get is why you are so resistant to accept what they are saying. If you didn't care you would not have asked in the first place.
|
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:17:27 PM · #35 |
Have you not learned anything yet, if you want to be on this site you had better take your photos for the masses. If not you will be at the end of the pack with the rest of us who do not shoot for the masses. If you look at my portfolio you will see that I don't shoot for the masses.
Message edited by author 2008-08-08 23:18:19. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:17:40 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
What is insuting to the "the Masses" is when the "artist" tells them that they are not cultured enough to "get" what the "artist" as trying to convey when "the Masses" speak out and say that they did not like what the "artist" had to offer and then huffs out of the room. |
No one has huffed anywhere, no one has questioned anyone's ability to understand anything. Just said the conversation had clearly run its course.
Is that "clear" enough for "you" or is it "just" another couple "of" sentences you will "misinterpret" and take offense "at"? |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:23:14 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
I'm out! |
This seemed pretty huffy to me.
|
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:28:27 PM · #38 |
| Since 10 of 12 commentors suggested that your subject was too dark (poorly lighted) and you yourself commented that your lighting skills are possibly lacking, I would take this as meaning that your shot was probably too dark... |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:30:04 PM · #39 |
I liked the image. I scored it well. It was very dark. "Too" dark can be a matter of taste, or a matter of variance in monitors, or both. If you are happy with the image, that should be sufficient in the grand scheme of things. If you are more interested in scoring well in a challenge with an image, then you might have to consider the target audience, the variance in viewing conditions, and attempt to make your contest entries more "accessible".
I, for one, would rather you present us with the image that suits your tastes: we are more likely to see something new and interesting :-)
(just an aside: I have some prints that show very well, but in certain gallery settings I have had to re-arrange the displays and the lighting quite a bit to get the proper illumination--controlled viewing conditions are difficult in general, and on the web the one thing you can count on is monitor variance. "too dark" does not necessarily confer an artistic judgement, but can just simply be a fact: "I can't see it!") |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:35:48 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
What is insuting to the "the Masses" is when the "artist" tells them that they are not cultured enough to "get" what the "artist" as trying to convey when "the Masses" speak out and say that they did not like what the "artist" had to offer and then huffs out of the room. |
I can't think of "the masses" as cultured either. I do think its quite difficult to insult them.
In my view, the "artist" isn't conveying a thing. His image might be. The idea that an artist is or should be a sage, is, I believe, the source of much confusion about what art is or could be.
Neither can I get excited about what an artist intended with a particular piece, as a means to come to terms with it.
As with so much comment, I wouldn't walk the premise for fear of falling.
Message edited by author 2008-08-08 23:36:42. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:36:28 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
..... Is this image, then, too dark, not dark enough or just right? This is a leading question. The issue, in my view, is not solely technical. A more profitable question would be any that sought to determine an overall merit, range and significance as a whole, as one complete thing among many others. Only then can we compare and arrive at a sense of value.
I would ask what I ask of any image: does it exhilarate, stimulate awareness, show me something I haven't seen before? Whether, then, the image is too dark or not, would depend on the answers to all and any of these questions.
The technical, any technical aspect of a photograph, is only worth what and how it contributes to its own inherent sense and essence (the less visible the contribution, the better). |
and yet:
for  , the comment was: "...A little dark, perhaps..." |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:39:04 PM · #42 |
| I really like the dark moody feel of this shot. I don't think its to dark, very unique. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:43:56 PM · #43 |
I didn't vote in this challenge, but I did flip through some of the images, and yours jumped out at me. I found it to be very interesting, daring, and well executed. I kind of figured it would either score really high or really low, because that's what happens with edgy images. they are either loved or hated.
Everything I could think of to say in regard to your original questions have already been said by others, and said better than i would probably say it. (monitor calibration, etc.)
What I might add, is that around this site comments are generally viewed as a place to say what you liked or disliked about any image, or how you think it could have been done better. Thus receiving many comments of "too dark," means simply that many people thought the image was too dark. (or in other words, they would have liked the image more had it been lighter.) Same would apply with too bright, too much contrast, too sharp. It simply means they would have liked the image better had it not been so "insert too here."
When I leave comments on an obviously artistic and technically solid images such as yours, I try to phrase my comments in that way as i can only assume the image was exactly what you wanted it to be. |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:45:16 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
... the comment was: "...A little dark, perhaps..." |
Yes, but my comment here had little to do with the picture it is attached too, outside of its subject. It wasn't a critique or much of anything, but a completely unprompted aside.
If I had written a critique (or a critical comment as it pertains to a whole photograph), perhaps.
Sorry, I ain't bitin. :) |
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:48:35 PM · #45 |
Whoa there, jhomrighaus, "the masses" do not really exist. All you can say is that there is some average statistic that might indicate what will sell and what will not. All very crass and trivial. What is neither trivial nor crass (I trust) is the individual opinion along with the individual artist/photographer. Whether or not one's opinion reflects the statistical norm is no indication of its merit. Else what could be of any interest in anything at DPC?
|
|
|
|
08/08/2008 11:59:41 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by tnun:
Whoa there, jhomrighaus, "the masses" do not really exist. All you can say is that there is some average statistic that might indicate what will sell and what will not. All very crass and trivial. What is neither trivial nor crass (I trust) is the individual opinion along with the individual artist/photographer. Whether or not one's opinion reflects the statistical norm is no indication of its merit. Else what could be of any interest in anything at DPC? |
And in the same vein then, all commentary carries equal weight, the artist and the viewer must reach an accord on a case by case basis, If the artist is unwilling or unable to accept the commentary of ALL viewers then he is guilty of the same infraction originally levied against the viewers(or the masses depending on your parlance). An artist seeks to convey some sort of an idea and the active involvement of the viewer is an integral and required part of the process of conveying an idea, as is the receipt of feedback on the part of the artist otherwise how can the artist know whether he has been successful in the conveyance of his/her idea.
Message edited by author 2008-08-09 00:00:02.
|
|
|
|
08/09/2008 12:06:44 AM · #47 |
|
|
|
08/09/2008 12:41:32 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by jhomrighaus:
...An artist seeks to convey some sort of an idea and the active involvement of the viewer is an integral and required part of the process of conveying an idea, as is the receipt of feedback on the part of the artist otherwise how can the artist know whether he has been successful in the conveyance of his/her idea. |
"No ideas but in things" -William Carlos Williams |
|
|
|
08/16/2008 12:30:28 PM · #49 |
|
