| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/31/2002 05:22:04 AM · #1 |
Okay, since I post a reply to someone here goes. In no way is a cross NOT INTERESTING AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT CREEPY! You can criticize my pictures but don't criticize the symbol of my Lord and Savior. I guess I am just a little too tired to take the jab right now. I have spent almost every night for the past couple of weeks involved in singing for a Passion Play for my city. I have said it before and I will say it again. If you want to leave a critique, some advice, or even a well thought out opinion I'm up for it. Please keep the insults to yourself. This is a friendly community. We are not out to make enemies here.
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/31/2002 5:40:39 AM. |
|
|
|
03/31/2002 05:44:16 AM · #2 |
I'm assuming someone said the cross image is creepy and uninteresting?
It doesn't sound like it was meant as much of an insult. If I find a photo uninteresting or creepy, am I supposed to bite my tongue? I would certainly give more information (for example, I would try to tell why I think the photo is uninteresting or creepy), but I would not hold back just because the photographer will likely disagree with me.
I don't see how it could be both uninteresting and creepy (I would find it very interesting if someone could take a creepy picture of an otherwise uninteresting subject), but I certainly can see how it could be either one. One person's Lord and Savior is another's Supreme Fascist, is another's run of the mill myth.
All that is beside the point, however, if they were talking about the photo and not the cross. It is possible to take an uninteresting photo with an interesting subject, or a creepy photo of a non-creepy subject, isn't it?
By the way, I don't know which cross image is yours, but the first thing that came to mind when I saw the image of a cross illuminated at night was "KKK". Maybe that's because religious zealotry is on the mind recently with all of the Islamic fundamentalism.
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/31/2002 6:09:29 AM.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2002 06:57:30 AM · #3 |
Hey Shortredneck. Nobody knows who's pic is who's, so I don't think they are necessarily picking on you. It's hard not to take some of these comments personally, but take them we must. Mine have also been called creepy, but then that is what I was trying to get across....
see you in the funnies!!
|
|
|
|
03/31/2002 10:01:30 AM · #4 |
You all can say what you want, but you won't change my beliefs. KKK is not the image that my picture projects. That is just in your own mind. Now if I set it on fire, that would be a KKK symbol. The original cross was two simple pieces of wood. That is all I was trying to convey. I certainly don't take it as a personal jab at me. I never said that. It is a jab at Christianity itself and that is what I take offense to. This was not an opinion of my photography. It was an opinion of the subject matter.
I emailed this person also. Now I hope he has the courage to defend what I think he was saying or explain himself more fully.
Look at it this way, if someone took a picture of a mosque or a Star of David, should anyone call those symbols names or in all fairness should they say the pictures aren't very good? I personally go with the second.
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/31/2002 10:08:22 AM. |
|
|
|
03/31/2002 11:18:43 AM · #5 |
Not having read the comment you received, it's hard to know exactly what's going on here. Just bear in mind that communicating the way we do here leaves much to be desired w/r/t clarity and the emotional cues that other means of communication provide. Again, I haven't read the comment, but is it possible that the author meant the image was uninteresting on a technical level (the lighting, say), and that the result was a creepy looking cross? 'Course, it could also have been someone wanting to pull your chain. Don't let it get you.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2002 11:30:51 AM · #6 |
When I voted on the pictures of the cross I did so on the quality of the photos themselves, not on symbolism. When I entered my picture of "The Budda" I did so because I felt it was an interesting subject for a photo (and because it was red!) I knew that some people would view it as a religous symbol and vote/comment accordingly. It is a voters' right to perceive any photo, any way he/she wants and to comment any way he/she wants. This is not the venue for "Lords and Saviors" it's about "e stops and appertures". the comment you received I believe, was an honest critque of a photo taken at night of two pieces of wood nailed together, not an affront to your religious beliefs.
Hoping you and yours have a happy and healthy Easter. |
|
|
|
03/31/2002 11:34:41 AM · #7 |
| Thanks, I won't. I appreciate all the comments, really I do. We can all be a little thoughtless at times in what we say and the way we come across. I can definately be forgiving for a comment, whether it was meant in jest or even meanness. Shoot, I can even forgive someone for calling me a bitch. I have had seen Christ (an actor) placed on the cross about 8 times in the last 2 weeks and I tend to get very worked up emotionally over it. However, if he could go through that and forgive, who am I to hold a grudge over a silly remark? |
|
|
|
03/31/2002 12:50:48 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by shortredneck:
Okay, since I post a reply to someone here goes. In no way is a cross NOT INTERESTING AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT CREEPY! You can criticize my pictures but don't criticize the symbol of my Lord and Savior. I guess I am just a little too tired to take the jab right now. I have spent almost every night for the past couple of weeks involved in singing for a Passion Play for my city. I have said it before and I will say it again. If you want to leave a critique, some advice, or even a well thought out opinion I'm up for it. Please keep the insults to yourself. This is a friendly community. We are not out to make enemies here
The comment had nothing to do with "Your Lord, or Your Savior". The comment had to do with the damn picture. That is what this web site is about is pictures. It is not a pilitical or a religious site. I simply thought the photo was creepy. It obviously is to me!
It wouldn't kill you to lighten up a little.
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/31/2002 12:53:44 PM.
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/31/2002 1:01:58 PM.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2002 12:59:54 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by mcorwin:
When I voted on the pictures of the cross I did so on the quality of the photos themselves, not on symbolism. When I entered my picture of "The Budda" I did so because I felt it was an interesting subject for a photo (and because it was red!) I knew that some people would view it as a religous symbol and vote/comment accordingly. It is a voters' right to perceive any photo, any way he/she wants and to comment any way he/she wants. This is not the venue for "Lords and Saviors" it's about "e stops and appertures". the comment you received I believe, was an honest critque of a photo taken at night of two pieces of wood nailed together, not an affront to your religious beliefs.
Hoping you and yours have a happy and healthy Easter.
Amen brotha!
|
|
|
|
03/31/2002 02:03:18 PM · #10 |
| I forgive you. Now think about what you said to me. |
|
|
|
03/31/2002 11:10:11 PM · #11 |
Sorry for drifting off topic, but that buddha picture is *BAD ASS*. I'm really surprised it didn't get higher votes!
|
|
|
|
04/01/2002 05:02:48 AM · #12 |
| Hey maybe we had better stick to something less controversial in the eyes of the world. Congratulations on the winning photo by thw way. |
|
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 07:37:17 PM EDT.
