| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/28/2004 06:05:54 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Yes others' opinions are really useful to me too.
When I vote I prefer to vote 100% of entries not just 20% and also to comment as many as I can too. And I do learn a lot myself from commenting on other peoples' images though usually more so when there are elements I do like in the image as well as things I don't like. If it's an image I just don't like anything about I find it hard to comment or to learn much from doing so. But that's just me.
I can understand those who are calling for people to vote anyway but I guess I'm just not altruistic enough!
Best of luck! |
I understand. I always vote either on 100% of images or don't vote on the challenge at all, when I don't have the time to allot.
Best of luck to you too Kavey :-) |
|
|
|
08/28/2004 06:07:49 PM · #27 |
Thank you!
[shameless plug]
I'm not entered into any challenges at the moment so I think I'll apply your wishes of luck to my current project of raising money from sales of prints for a wildlife conservation charity! Click on my prints link below to have a look, if you are interested.
[/shameless plug]
|
|
|
|
08/28/2004 06:14:44 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Thank you!
[shameless plug]
I'm not entered into any challenges at the moment so I think I'll apply your wishes of luck to my current project of raising money from sales of prints for a wildlife conservation charity! Click on my prints link below to have a look, if you are interested.
[/shameless plug] |
Yes, indeed. Best of luck! There are some lovely photos on the link and I remember when you were asking for ideas for the title of one of them recently. Again - best of luck! :-) |
|
|
|
08/28/2004 06:27:13 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by DianaB:
Originally posted by Kavey:
Thank you!
[shameless plug]
I'm not entered into any challenges at the moment so I think I'll apply your wishes of luck to my current project of raising money from sales of prints for a wildlife conservation charity! Click on my prints link below to have a look, if you are interested.
[/shameless plug] |
Yes, indeed. Best of luck! There are some lovely photos on the link and I remember when you were asking for ideas for the title of one of them recently. Again - best of luck! :-) |
I'm still adding new ones and still struggling with titles! I just added one more to my portfolio and it took me half an hour just looking at the thing in Photoshop to come up with a title - it's the hardest bit of the process for me...
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 10:52:17 AM · #30 |
When you consider that people can go off topic on such specific topics as "shallow depth of field" or "vanishing points" (with a specific reference to perspective) it is hardly surprising that the interpretation of an abstract idea like "hope" is going vary widely. Many people will interpret this idea in ways that few others would agree are on topic. Perhaps the challenge should stick to photo technique or physical object topics. If we must work with abstracts, then we should expect and accept photos that appear to be completely off topic.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 10:56:06 AM · #31 |
I haven't really read thru the thread, but I must agree with the original post, It seems that many entries just found a way to insert "hope" in the title to justify their entry.
This is about photography, not catchy titles, right?
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 11:10:30 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by Gil P:
I haven't really read thru the thread, but I must agree with the original post, It seems that many entries just found a way to insert "hope" in the title to justify their entry.
This is about photography, not catchy titles, right? |
Also, it seems to me that the point of the challenges (since they're not really for prizes) is to adapt to the challenge and push yourself to do something interesting. Not rehash old things that you've already done and try to make it fit within the guidelines of the challenge |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 11:45:16 AM · #33 |
There's also the question of "Thinking outside the box". Is it fair to penalize people for having original ideas, even though they don't classically fit within your particular concept? Hope is a very personal thing. My picture "A Break In the Clouds" was not the greatest photo, but Anyone who has weathered a storm, or sailed, should understand a break in the clouds meaning hope that the storm is abating. I still got a comment about it not being on topic.
Because some of these concepts are abstract, part of the voting process is to stop and think, "Does this meet the challenge in any way?" Then make your judgement of the quality after that.
As for titles, No, I don't think that the title alone can justify meeting the challenge criteria, but a title is part of an artwork, just as much as grain, or focus, or the subject. The Thinker wouldn't be the same sculpture in people's minds if it were called "Man on the Can" or something like that. So, if someone takes a picture of a spoon, held by the hand of a homeless person, and titles it "Hoping for Soup", that meets the criteria in my opinion, because I've worked in a soup kitchen, and in a Food Pantry, and have a general amount of compassion for the homeless, so I can empathize with such a hope. An emotional Challenge calls for you to try to understand the emotion within the image, and the title helps you understand what the picture is trying to convey, in case you don't see it right off the bat.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 11:49:02 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by computerking:
There's also the question of "Thinking outside the box". Is it fair to penalize people for having original ideas, even though they don't classically fit within your particular concept? Hope is a very personal thing. My picture "A Break In the Clouds" was not the greatest photo, but Anyone who has weathered a storm, or sailed, should understand a break in the clouds meaning hope that the storm is abating. I still got a comment about it not being on topic.
Because some of these concepts are abstract, part of the voting process is to stop and think, "Does this meet the challenge in any way?" Then make your judgement of the quality after that.
As for titles, No, I don't think that the title alone can justify meeting the challenge criteria, but a title is part of an artwork, just as much as grain, or focus, or the subject. The Thinker wouldn't be the same sculpture in people's minds if it were called "Man on the Can" or something like that. So, if someone takes a picture of a spoon, held by the hand of a homeless person, and titles it "Hoping for Soup", that meets the criteria in my opinion, because I've worked in a soup kitchen, and in a Food Pantry, and have a general amount of compassion for the homeless, so I can empathize with such a hope. An emotional Challenge calls for you to try to understand the emotion within the image, and the title helps you understand what the picture is trying to convey, in case you don't see it right off the bat. |
Well, I certainly wouldn't agree with a title being as important as basic skills. Most of my pictures I don't title at all. I think that a title is manipulative (and not necessarily in a bad way). it's just one extra thing the artist can do to convey his/her intentions. Necessary? I should hope not. I don't believe that any visual art should be constrained by something as mundane as language
Message edited by author 2004-09-02 11:50:22. |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 11:55:17 AM · #35 |
| My photo may not be technically wonderful, I'll be the first to admit. But I am certain that the voters thought I'd submitted just 'any old thing' with a title of 'hope'! Anyway, my interpretation was that hope was the one emotion that kept people's heads above water in difficult situations. I tried to represent that by the single pink water lily floating on the surface. Deep thinker that I am! Didn't work though. Oh well - on to the next challenge, live and learn etc. :-)) |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:00:21 PM · #36 |
| Blah,blah,Blah,blah,Blah,blah,Blah,blah,Blah,blah, |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:01:28 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by DianaB:
My photo may not be technically wonderful, I'll be the first to admit. But I am certain that the voters thought I'd submitted just 'any old thing' with a title of 'hope'! Anyway, my interpretation was that hope was the one emotion that kept people's heads above water in difficult situations. I tried to represent that by the single pink water lily floating on the surface. Deep thinker that I am! Didn't work though. Oh well - on to the next challenge, live and learn etc. :-)) |
Just a thought...if you had been able to drag two or three other lilies under the water and just have one above the water this picture would have been amazing, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:05:39 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by DianaB:
My photo may not be technically wonderful, I'll be the first to admit. But I am certain that the voters thought I'd submitted just 'any old thing' with a title of 'hope'! Anyway, my interpretation was that hope was the one emotion that kept people's heads above water in difficult situations. I tried to represent that by the single pink water lily floating on the surface. Deep thinker that I am! Didn't work though. Oh well - on to the next challenge, live and learn etc. :-)) |
Just a thought...if you had been able to drag two or three other lilies under the water and just have one above the water this picture would have been amazing, in my opinion. |
Nice idea - was a good day for a paddle in the canal aswell :-) |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:20:03 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Racaryu:
The "Hope" Challenge entries are very diasappointing. There are however many good entries. But the majority of entries are pictures of flowers, macros, and other unrelated subjects. Why do we continue to do this? Putting a picture of a flower and calling it "Symbolising Hope" is so rediculous, that it makes me laugh. Don't get me wrong, they are good flower pictures, but it shows jack about Hope. Sorry to all who tried little flower Macros, but I rate those very low. |
How big is " hope"?
What color is "hope"?
Describe the object "hhope" to us !
What kind of "hope" representation will make you happy?
Do you have any favorite photos?
Out of 100,000 here on the site none deserve your attention!
===== Same old whiners over and over again=====
WHINE
1 a : to utter a high-pitched plaintive or distressed cry b : to make a sound similar to such a cry
2 : to complain with or as if with a whine
3 : to move or proceed with the sound of a whine
transitive senses : to utter or express with or as if with a whine
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:24:08 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by Racaryu:
The "Hope" Challenge entries are very diasappointing. There are however many good entries. But the majority of entries are pictures of flowers, macros, and other unrelated subjects. Why do we continue to do this? Putting a picture of a flower and calling it "Symbolising Hope" is so rediculous, that it makes me laugh. Don't get me wrong, they are good flower pictures, but it shows jack about Hope. Sorry to all who tried little flower Macros, but I rate those very low. |
How big is " hope"?
What color is "hope"?
Describe the object "hhope" to us !
What kind of "hope" representation will make you happy?
Do you have any favorite photos?
Out of 100,000 here on the site none deserve your attention!
===== Same old whiners over and over again=====
WHINE
1 a : to utter a high-pitched plaintive or distressed cry b : to make a sound similar to such a cry
2 : to complain with or as if with a whine
3 : to move or proceed with the sound of a whine
transitive senses : to utter or express with or as if with a whine |
I think the complaint (or 'whining') is about the fact that a lot of people didn't seem to ask the questions you asked in your post above (what is hope, etc.).
It's almost as if some people walked around with a camera and said "Hey, I could make that work" and submitted it, using the title as the link to the challenge. |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:24:49 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
How big is " hope"?
What color is "hope"?
Describe the object "hhope" to us !
What kind of "hope" representation will make you happy?
Do you have any favorite photos?
Out of 100,000 here on the site none deserve your attention!
|
That's basically my point, pitsaman. Hope is a lot of different things to a lot of different people. I, for one, took it on faith that EVERY picture in the Hope challenge met the criteria, since I can't mandate MY definition and vision of Hope to be the only one. From there, the rest was Technique and personal preference.
Message edited by author 2004-09-02 12:25:35.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:26:32 PM · #42 |
well I've been voting on the framing challenge...and I mean, c'mon...
I totally respect "thinking outside the box"...by all means! but something are better left in the box....
I'll consider any image, as long as it was technically well done but if it is technically weak and artistically beyong "my" understanding...well too bad. |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:35:06 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Gil P:
well I've been voting on the framing challenge...and I mean, c'mon...
I totally respect "thinking outside the box"...by all means! but something are better left in the box....
I'll consider any image, as long as it was technically well done but if it is technically weak and artistically beyong "my" understanding...well too bad. |
I'm not saying that there aren't any submissions that are so out of the box as to not meet the challenge in most people's eyes, I'm just singling out the Hope challenge with my comments, or any challenge that deals with emotion rather than substance or technique.
Framing is another story. We've had 2 or 3 topics to clear up the meaning of the challenge, and now that I have it clear in my mind, there are many submissions that don't fit that particular challenge. But the problem comes in when the discussion that defines the Challenge isn't finished until after the challenge submission period is over. I mean, Most of the ill-fitting submissions were probably done by people who had one interpretation of the rules in mind, and there was no official statement defining the challenge as something other than the interpretation they had.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:41:05 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by hanlomba:
...Well, I certainly wouldn't agree with a title being as important as basic skills. Most of my pictures I don't title at all. I think that a title is manipulative (and not necessarily in a bad way). it's just one extra thing the artist can do to convey his/her intentions. Necessary? I should hope not. I don't believe that any visual art should be constrained by something as mundane as language |
Mundane is hardly the adjective to describe the one medium at our disposition to communicate. When language is employed with care, it can be, I'm sure you'll agree, equally enjoyed as an art.
When a particular use of language constrains, fault should not be found with the medium but with its author.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 12:50:30 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Mundane is hardly the adjective to describe the one medium at our disposition to communicate. When language is employed with care, it can be, I'm sure you'll agree, equally enjoyed as an art.
When a particular use of language constrains, fault should not be found with the medium but with its author. |
You sure do talk purdy... Um, I mean very eloquent, ZZ. And a very good point.
|
|
|
|
09/02/2004 01:11:01 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by hanlomba:
...Well, I certainly wouldn't agree with a title being as important as basic skills. Most of my pictures I don't title at all. I think that a title is manipulative (and not necessarily in a bad way). it's just one extra thing the artist can do to convey his/her intentions. Necessary? I should hope not. I don't believe that any visual art should be constrained by something as mundane as language |
Mundane is hardly the adjective to describe the one medium at our disposition to communicate. When language is employed with care, it can be, I'm sure you'll agree, equally enjoyed as an art.
When a particular use of language constrains, fault should not be found with the medium but with its author. |
However, language is also very subjective and not global. It constrains. I'm definitely not saying that language is not important. that would be a bit ... well, dumb. However, i think language when applied to a visual art can be a bit ham-fisted. Why? Well, wouldn't you agree that anyone from anywhere should be able to appreciate visual art? Well if I put a title on a picture or whatever in English, does it translate into every other language the same? i think not. My point is that language carries a lot of weight and the moment you attach words to a piece you immediately manipulate. And the effect that you as a titler have may not be what you intended. All I'm saying is that care should be taken. The piece SHOULD (as visual art) be able to stand on its own. |
|
|
|
09/02/2004 09:54:30 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by hanlomba:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by hanlomba:
...Well, I certainly wouldn't agree with a title being as important as basic skills. Most of my pictures I don't title at all. I think that a title is manipulative (and not necessarily in a bad way). it's just one extra thing the artist can do to convey his/her intentions. Necessary? I should hope not. I don't believe that any visual art should be constrained by something as mundane as language |
Mundane is hardly the adjective to describe the one medium at our disposition to communicate. When language is employed with care, it can be, I'm sure you'll agree, equally enjoyed as an art.
When a particular use of language constrains, fault should not be found with the medium but with its author. |
However, language is also very subjective and not global. It constrains. I'm definitely not saying that language is not important. that would be a bit ... well, dumb. However, i think language when applied to a visual art can be a bit ham-fisted. Why? Well, wouldn't you agree that anyone from anywhere should be able to appreciate visual art? Well if I put a title on a picture or whatever in English, does it translate into every other language the same? i think not. My point is that language carries a lot of weight and the moment you attach words to a piece you immediately manipulate. And the effect that you as a titler have may not be what you intended. All I'm saying is that care should be taken. The piece SHOULD (as visual art) be able to stand on its own. |
Yes, on two counts: care is a good thing, as is the integrity of a piece. Reservation: if we apply the same care to a title as we extend to a photograph, a plastic or a piece of music, manipulation should not enter into the process.
I believe much good work comes to us, through us or via us. If this is true, the work itself should dictate or suggest a title. Apt titles, IMO, are often part of a creation as opposed to being the result of some self-conscious effort.
If we choose to see a photograph, a sculpture or, for that matter, even a chair as an object of nature, does it not follow that we are ourselves objects of nature? A little humilitas in the face of creation, IMO, is an appropiate sentiment, a disproportionate ego (capable of manipulation) is not.
Poetry uses a device by which it borrows words or phrases from a foreign language, not to manipulate meaning but to intensify it. The idea is to divert the reader or an audience away from ratio into an experience of pure sound, sound not entirely devoid of meaning either.
You are, indeed, right in pointing cultural differences which are difficult to bridge without a common language. Idioms, especially, are a challenge to translate. When clarity cannot be achieved by translation, I say speak in your own charming native language and call your image O nu com óculos or something. ;-)
Message edited by author 2004-09-02 21:58:51.
|
|
