| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/07/2006 08:08:52 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by dwterry:
For what it's worth ... I think every comment is worthwhile as long as it gives me some clue as to what the commenter was thinking. It may be a challenge (for me) to figure out what he/she meant in the context of my image, but I still think what they say is important.
Just like there are no stupid questions, there are no stupid comments. Only stupid interpretations of those comments and I'm working to overcome that challenge. :-) |
Right on. :D |
yeah, but sometimes it takes me until the end of the week to click helpful, I'm stubborn, but not totally stupid (well, most some of the time) |
Sometimes I go longer than a week before marking a comment I totally disagree with as helpful. |
|
|
|
07/07/2006 08:16:17 PM · #102 |
i agree tha most comments are helpful however there are a few that are so random and devoid of any actual meaning that they aren't helpful.
for example the infamous "do you know the face of god?" comment. In what way does that show what the viewer was thinking about the photo? What could it possibly say to the photographer in terms of things to think about and improve upon?
i received the comment "BAD BAD...what the hell are you thinking...take this person off worst ever." which isn't as random as the above comment but aside from leaving the site I can't for the life of me see what this comment says I could do to improve my image. How is that helpful? |
|
|
|
07/07/2006 08:21:55 PM · #103 |
Pretty sure I wouldn't have marked either of those as "Helpful" - and I mark EVERYTHING as "Helpful".
|
|
|
|
07/07/2006 10:24:22 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
I'd rather find a way to make a human connection through my art today, than to make and esoteric and sterile connection to someone who had no chance to know me as an artist. |
I don't think my connection to Wallace Stevens is sterile.
Originally posted by wavelength:
Who are these visionaries that were never known until after their death? Have there been any of those in the last 50 years? |
um... how would we know? you think it's like a vampire that springs up the same night he dies?
|
|
|
|
07/07/2006 10:36:18 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by Megatherian:
Originally posted by klstover:
Originally posted by annasense:
Originally posted by otisXmike:
If I find a similar site where a majority of the people are there for "art" and not just for "pretty perfect pictures" I'll go there, but for now DPC is organized and well run (from what I can tell) and there are some people here worth sticking around for. |
anyone know if a site like this already exists? if not, hey, mike, let's go create it and make lots of money? ;) |
If you do, let me know? ;-D |
Here it is: All about the "art" |
interesting... thanks... i'll have to check it out. :) [are you a member?]
|
|
|
|
07/07/2006 10:39:47 PM · #106 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I don't think my connection to Wallace Stevens is sterile. |
I feel that most of the obsessions or even likes for any artists I have had have been in reality pretty sterile, living or dead. Sure, their work moves me, but and actual human relationship with someone you can know, touch, converse with is so much more amazing that any imagined connection I have with the works of any artist, writer, poet...
Originally posted by wavelength:
um... how would we know? you think it's like a vampire that springs up the same night he dies? |
heh, yeah, I was being serious though. I guess I've heard that my whole life. "you're more famous after you're dead" But really, did andy Warhol or Margaret Bourke-White or Ansel Adams not know fame before death? I think it was because of their immediate fame that their legacy lives on today. I am probably wrong as always though.
|
|
|
|
07/07/2006 11:40:19 PM · #107 |
My opinion
You say you're an accomplished photographer that have images that appeal to your clientele. Think of DPC as another "client". The DPC voter looks for image appeal and technical clarity. Give them what they want. However, insure that you yourself are happy with what you create.
I enter challenges with this in mind. I don't enter a challenge simply for the appeal. Most of my work revolves around what I also enjoy doing. If I'm not happy with the image, no matter how much DPC appeal it has, I don't enter it.
While true to my word of trying to please my "client" I also, at times, enter a shot that is considered "DPC Underground". It is a shot that is done and entered due to personal reasons. It might be my setup or just how I feel about the image. Most times I fail and score below what I think the image is worth but it isn't a big deal. I entered these because it meant something to me.
Take these images for instance - very un-DPC but they all meant a lot to me. They all scored low but it didn't matter.
   
It took me a long time to find out the quirks of the DPC voter. To this day, I still don't understand and I still don't get it. However, I treat DPC as I would any of my clients in my profession. Give them what they want and as long as you're happy with the result, everyone is happy.
I am an architect by profession and there a lot of the so called "black cape" architects in my field. Frank Gehry (LA Disney Concert Hall), Richard Meier (San Jose City Hall), Richard Rogers (Lloyd's of London) are among a few black cape architects. They design what they want and they have a style all their own. Some love it. Some hate it. I design buildings that suit my clients. There is no style - only timeless appeal.
The bottom line is that if you wish to garner higher scores, give the voters what they are looking for. If you want to push your style, give it time and maybe someday, most will lean towards it. f you insist on doing your "art" then by all means do so. However keep in mind that art is subjective. Some might like it. Some might not. DPC is another client that needs to be satisfied.
Cheers,
Rikki
|
|
|
|
07/08/2006 12:49:44 AM · #108 |
Originally posted by annasense:
Originally posted by Megatherian:
Originally posted by klstover:
Originally posted by annasense:
Originally posted by otisXmike:
If I find a similar site where a majority of the people are there for "art" and not just for "pretty perfect pictures" I'll go there, but for now DPC is organized and well run (from what I can tell) and there are some people here worth sticking around for. |
anyone know if a site like this already exists? if not, hey, mike, let's go create it and make lots of money? ;) |
If you do, let me know? ;-D |
Here it is: All about the "art" |
interesting... thanks... i'll have to check it out. :) [are you a member?] |
No, I don't have those kinds of skills. A lot of people see worth1000 as a joke - and I admit many of the images are pretty cheesey - but some are absolutely amazing. It takes a lot of work and a lot of talent to create something like that. There's real artistry in a lot of it. |
|
|
|
07/08/2006 01:43:25 AM · #109 |
Originally posted by Philos31:
Not saying that you cant put art on DPChallenge offcourse, but I just know that it he will almost never score as good. |
Have to agree with that slightly modified quote.
 |
|
|
|
07/08/2006 02:00:14 AM · #110 |
oooh, oooh, I wanna join in ...
damn it, that naked girl with the grinder was art you morons... :-P
ok, I feel better, back to the popcorn. LOL
|
|
|
|
07/08/2006 04:28:50 AM · #111 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
oooh, oooh, I wanna join in ...
damn it, that naked girl with the grinder was art you morons... :-P
ok, I feel better, back to the popcorn. LOL |
And you think by continually repeating this will make it so .... Good luck :) |
|
|
|
07/08/2006 06:12:39 AM · #112 |
Rikki, I read your post with interest...and I think it is right on the mark.
...I also have a personal observation that occurred to me while reading your post. My scores to date are generally lower than the examples you show to illustrate your point. Sometimes I enter photos that I know are not going to do well (sometimes just to get the feedback, sometimes because the idea of a certain shot is irresistable to me). Other times I try to create a photo that I think DPC voters will like. Sometimes I am sure that my latest photo will be a "break through" photo for me in terms of DPC voter preferences. To date, I haven't had that "break through" photo...but I am learning and incorporating ideas and comments and slowly I am making some progress.
I take the view that it is a worthwhile endeavor to see if I can create a photo that the DPC "client" will appreciate for the sole purpose of developing my ability to meet a set of expectations and know that I have mastered a particular skill set in doing so. (It's analogous to figure skaters spending time on "compulsory" drills...even though their passion may be their more artistic routine with jumps, twists and all the superb moves they can put together.) DPC challenges are my "compulsory" exercises. My "break through" photo will come (no doubt, next week...it's a superb photo), but until it happens I haven't managed to develop that particular skill set...and I will keep trying. Because I love the challenge, I enjoy photography in any form or venue, and I want to satisfy myself that I can create an image that has the "image appeal and technical clarity" that you mention, Rikki. To me, "image appeal" and "technical clarity" are certainly worthy goals in and of themselves.
One of my latest entries scored pretty low, even for me. But I liked the image alot and it was beyond the "compulsory" exercise. Others who made comments liked it too, and two people selected it as "favorite". Since I only have 4 favorites to date, to get two with one photo was gratifying, notwithstanding the low score. But (and this is important) I don't think this entrant would have been as good, or would have been anyone's "favorite" if I hadn't spent time on the "compulsories" trying to achieve "image appeal" and "techical clarity".
(I've rattled on too long as it is, so I will stop here. Rikki, I think you are right.)
|
|
|
|
07/08/2006 08:04:56 AM · #113 |
I got on a bus to go and photograph the view that Edvard Munch used in his 'Scream' pictures, but I opened the book of Wallace Stevens poems that I had taken with me and got so blown out by one of them that I missed the stop. All this art shit is obviously pure hindrance.
That's a joke, by the way. In some sort of seriousness, I'd like to bring up the example of Vincent van Gogh. He never sold a painting in his life, he was generally pissed of with his contemporary environment, he went round the bend etc. etc.. Poor guy - is the usual consensus reaction to all of that, understandably enough. But, I know a lot of artists who would to varying degrees consider sacrificing just about anything if they could only be able to do what he did. It may not be a perfect parallel to what's going on here, but the satisfaction can be in what you do, without depending on others' feedback to approve it. Having said that, I love the feedback (and I am definitely not V van G).
BTW, no criticism here of Rikki's position re. architecture - I've met a couple of those Salvador Dali types and been pretty damned impressed by their vision and creativity, but buildings are usually there for a purpose and they are really bad news if they don't fulfill it. The general view of architects, especially by craftsmen in the building trade, as dilettantes, is understandable. In the broader scope of architecture, communication with all parties involved in the project is such a great talent and so incredibly important that I would put it right up there with all the other things of beauty that are normally associated. I think a useful parallel can probably be drawn with photography.
I love my antique French quarter sawn oak table that I have lovingly restored, but when you get a union card and a wedding suit for your nineteenth birthday, you need IKEA. |
|
|
|
07/11/2006 11:46:23 PM · #114 |
My advise on this matter is simple: follow your inclinations until you are satisfied. The image you take on purpose is done to satisfy your inner vision. Yes, often there is a perversity in pushing effects and techniques too far. There is also the topic of subject matter. Eventually each artist will begin to adjust according to feedback and their desire to become popular. Some simply refuse to adjust and this is alright provided you take your medicine graciously. You must bear in mind that any trail blazing brings a sudden new look that many will repudiate, but then the artist can not please everyone.
It is always wise to look at all images in archives and determine just how far you can push something. The crowd is hard to please because first they want to see an attractive image. The definition is very elusive and the artist must decide to go with or against the grain. Yes, there is a risk in presentation. But then there would not be any fun in competing. |
|
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: 04/25/2024 04:00:38 PM EDT.
