| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/27/2002 12:22:21 AM · #1 |
| I think, if the details that we have to put with our entries were shown during the voting process, this would stop alot of the unfair voting. And possibly make it more clear to the voters what the photographer was or is trying to get across. Not sure if this has been suggested before, or brought up. I realize that the details would have to be within a certain guideline to keep it fair. But it would allow the photographer to at least say, yes this does look like a b&w photo, but its really a color one. Or, yes I realize the shadows look really dark here, but on the original its not as dark...JMHO, thanks. Tom |
|
|
|
08/27/2002 12:51:34 AM · #2 |
| Mr TomnTexas please forgive me, my opinion differs from yours. I believe any photo should speak a thousand words in any language without aid of an explanation. If the photo can not offer the same feeling to every one who views it. Then it has clearly missed its mark. |
|
|
|
08/27/2002 01:23:06 AM · #3 |
| You're right thats your opinion, but I think a lot of the rants, raves and hard feelings that occur on this site would be far fewer if there were a way of clarifying certain technical info about the picture. I also think it'd make it more open to the point of knowing if there were in fact disqualifying things done to the picture right off the bat. I've seen several photos that once the voting is done, and the details revealed, a photo either didn't meet the time frame, or they used techniques that are disqualifying. This as is most of my post was just a suggestion....it can be taken with a grain of salt....it can be ignored....or it can be taken into consideration. As I've stated else where in the forums, we are all indiviuals, what you Ms Mieka, think the picture is saying will be completely different than what I think its trying to say. A picture does in fact speak a thousand words, its also spoken in a thousand languages, sometimes its helpful for a translator to help someone with the meaning the photographer is trying to get across. If you see a b & w photo of a fish laying on what appears to be boards....you might think...hmmm, a dead fish....while I might think....hmmmm, supper, lets clean it. I realize this is a dumb analogy...the main thing everyone here keeps forgetting is that photography should be fun and something to enjoy. This site should be enjoyed, not only for the talented people that post here, but the many different ways we think. So far all I've seen on this site is rude, hurtful people, not all mind you, there are some really very nice and decent people here. But people don't stop and think what they are typing before they hit post. Happy voting, happy picture taking. See you on the board. Tom |
|
|
|
08/27/2002 02:16:18 AM · #4 |
check out this thread for a similar discussion ... Photograph vs Title
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 02:39:00 AM · #5 |
Tom, the danger there would be this might turn into an essay contest... Also, everyone would know who took which picture by writing style... Part of the challenge is to convey your meaning without the use of words...
I agree that lately there has been a lot more hostility in the forums... I'm not sure why or where it's coming from, but it is there... I'm hoping it's a phase... |
|
|
|
08/27/2002 03:32:14 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Mieka:
Mr TomnTexas please forgive me, my opinion differs from yours. I believe any photo should speak a thousand words in any language without aid of an explanation. If the photo can not offer the same feeling to every one who views it. Then it has clearly missed its mark.
Have to agree with Mieka on this one... just my personal opinion... |
|
|
|
08/27/2002 06:44:17 AM · #7 |
I agree as well with Mieka on this one.
No Details .... the photo has to speak for itself and ... one way to stop the rants/raves/hard feeling ... is to try not to feel them and way a few days and accept them.
An other way is ... when the challenge is done to talk about a picture. Sometimes a 'rant' is not a discussion. Sometimes to me if the rant is too strong .... I think the person is not more 'open minded' that the people they are talking about.
MHO
Lionel
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 08:25:31 AM · #8 |
What really angers me is that when the winners have no details about their photos. How it was done, what went through the person's mind when they took the photo...etc
It would be nice to know some details. For example, the Pencil challenge winner has nothing in Details. But some questions will arise from the photo. Was the whole hand drawn? How does the pencil stand up...and so forth.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 08:36:06 AM · #9 |
you're in luck, mr. phylax - the winner posted an entire thread about how he did that picture :)
do a search in the forums for balance explained. :) |
|
|
|
08/27/2002 09:55:43 AM · #10 |
TomnTexas is not unique in his frustration.
But I agree with all that has been said about protecting the anonymity of the photo and letting the picture..not the words...be up for critique.
There is just a fact in life..folks who make a piece of art whether it be a Photo, a Painting, a Sculpture, Architecture or whatever. They will ALWAYS be more passionate about it, more connected to it's meaning than the public person viewing it.
I cannot fully express my thoughts on this in the forums without boring many to tears but suffice it to say....photographers must learn to seperate themselves from the public criticisms if they are to survive in an open public critique forum. This is not easy and many, MANY photographers (even experienced ones) will not submit themselves to this kind of open critque for this very reason.
Anyway....there it is :-)
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 10:53:18 AM · #11 |
Have any of you ever been to a museum? Seen a "Picasso" or "Monet"? If you have, you will notice a description of the piece.
my .02$
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 11:01:21 AM · #12 |
Piccaso and Monet weren't working to a challenge :)
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 11:07:44 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by cq107:
Have any of you ever been to a museum? Seen a "Picasso" or "Monet"? If you have, you will notice a description of the piece.
my .02$
Well, I would take a chance and say that if "Picasso" or "Monet" NEEDED a description next to their paintings we would be asking "Picasso who?"
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 11:31:55 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by cq107:
Have any of you ever been to a museum? Seen a "Picasso" or "Monet"? If you have, you will notice a description of the piece.
my .02$
The descriptions in such cases are seldom the work of the artists themselves, they usually create their pieces to stand on their own merit. The museums often add descriptions to let us know when they were created, who donated them to the library and so on - I feel they are more educational than about explaining the piece to allow enjoyment or appreciation of it.
But that's just my two pence!
Kavey
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 12:10:03 PM · #15 |
My thoughts on this topic vary a bit. I think if this were a site for experience photographers and artists, it would be a different story. But as it stands now, we have to deal with a lot of very unexperienced opinions.
After posting on this site a while, and never really using the comments/details box, I started posting on photosig.com. I didn't put any comments on these, either, because DPC had taught me to try to make my pictures stand alone. This was one of the comments I got:
"i think we need a few comments about what we're looking at, otherwise it's meaningless to the viewer. but, good photo anyhow."
This was from somebody with a lot of experience on this site, too. So I was a little like "it's a photograph, why do you need me to explain it to you? it has pretty colors and stuff." But I realize that, in order to really speak to the most viewers, an artistic photo probably does need a bit of explanation.
I dunno. Just some thoughts which I haven't really bothered to expand on.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2002 01:07:36 PM · #16 |
Mike....the only problem I see with comments is where does it end?
I will say right now..many of my photos don't mean jacksh1t and others would take a novel to describe.
Do we start to vote people on the depth, emotion and skill with which we can write about a photo?
Suppose someone can't take a photo for crap but they are a poet with the english language? Do we give him/her a few more points for that?
Suppose a person is the next Maplethorpe but st-st-stutters when he writes. Do we mark down for that?
What you want to say about your photo on your own website or on a gallery site like photosig is entirely different than on a site where its an image contest pure and simple.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 03:10:35 AM EDT.
