| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/13/2007 09:47:56 AM · #1 |
This picture
launched a bit of a discussion about personal opinion in voting. I left a long comment there, but I'd like to continue the discussion here in a more general sense. The question is: Should your personal opinion on the subject portrayed influence your voting? And if so, in what respect and how far?
An excerpt from what I wrote:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
This site is about photography. When rating a picture, one should focus on technical aspects like lighting, composition, focus, etc. but also take aspects like creativity, beauty, etc. into account. However, I don't think your personal opinion about the subject portrayed should influence your vote - at least certainly not in a negative way (if you give all images depicting kids an extra point because you love kids, I still feel it misses the point of the exercise, but it doesn't really hurt anyone, so go ahead).
If you don't like playing chess, this doesn't make every picture showing a chess board a bad picture. And if you don't like violence, this doesn't make every picture depicting violence a bad picture. A picture showing violence can still be beautiful. This doesn't mean that it endorses violence. On the contrary: A good picture capturing the suffering caused by violence, for example, can be a strong voice against it and move the viewer to do something about it. Check the World Press Photos at //www.worldpressphoto.org, for example. The winners there regularly show shocking scenes, but I feel such pictures are important (and they can be beautiful, as pictures). |
I'd like to add the following: I like photos more if I find the model attractive (hey, that's just natural!). However, I try not to punish pictures if the model is not my type. I try and focus on the technical aspects as well as creativity, etc. I think it's important to separate personal opinion from objective evaluation.
I would just like to hear what you think. I would not like to discuss this particular picture any further, I'm interested in your views on voting policy in general. Thank you. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 09:53:31 AM · #2 |
| It's all personal opinion. Even most of the comments about technical aspects are founded on personal opinion combined with hearsay rather than any sort of formal educational background on the matter. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 09:55:04 AM · #3 |
A perfect example of subjects getting voted down is ducky/woody shots; we almost never see them anymore because they get hammered by the voters, mercilessly. And I think that's a shame. I used to have a lot of fun putting ducky in photos, and I've always enjoyed viewing other peoples' work using ducky/woody, but it just doesn't seem to pay off.
Exactly why they are so disliked I am not sure.
R.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:00:36 AM · #4 |
I think it's only human to have your personal feeling on a subject influence your voting.
I observed a while ago that few photographers...and perrenial winners, suffered in the voting the few times their model wasn't their prettiest. They'd entered the same shot in their exact style....crop, color, pose etc and didn't do nearly as well as they most likely would have with their top model. That in iteself should say a lot obout the general voting population.
I'll admit that I'm not a fan of woodies, duckies or suicide shots. I certainly don't vote them very high.
Regarding the image posted above, I think it's silly for anyone to have viewed or judged it as a "violence against women" shot. The subject imo was the "Smooth Criminal" coldly weilding his "power". The women (or dude with long hair) was most likely nothing more than an availiable model.
I assume most people or a very high percentage do let their feelings creep into their voting pattern, whether they know it or no...or whether they like to admit it.
Message edited by author 2007-09-13 10:26:55. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:00:58 AM · #5 |
I don't find it unreasonable to let your personal opinions of subject matter affect your voting. I will and have voted a well-executed photo with undesirable subject matter lower than I would had the subject matter been different. Not much lower, but lower nonetheless. And I've voted photos that were mediocre at best higher than I would have had the subject matter been different, simple because I loved the subject matter. Not much higher, but higher nonetheless.
It's art. It's hard to be completely objective. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:11:40 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by bdenny:
It's art. It's hard to be completely objective. |
It is. No doubt about it. I still do *try* to be objective. I evaluate the technicals, and I evaluate the impact. For me, a photograph that communicates its message effectively, and which has impact because it does so, is good. Furthermore, it is good whether I agree or disagree with the message. I don't vote based on my emotional reaction, I vote on *whether* I have an emotional reaction. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:17:22 AM · #7 |
Of *course* it's subjective! As soon as the thought "I like that shot" enters your head, it becomes subjective. And that will affect your vote.
The only person you'd expect to vote purely objectively on the technicals of the shot would be Commander Data (pre emotion chip) |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:19:46 AM · #8 |
First you ask people to vote, then you ask them not to get influenced by what they feel, what they think. Its a bit of a joke.
sure it is a photography site, but photographs needs viewers and viewers have feelings and their way of reacting to things.
There is a lot of buzz about this photo on the forums. Personally, I do not find anything in it. To me its just an ordinary photo. I am surprised it score 6+. (personal opinion). I might have given it 3 or 4. Not more than this. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:24:46 AM · #9 |
OK, I don't even get the 'woman' thing. How do you definitively know it's a woman. The long hair? That individual could be either as you want to see it.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:28:07 AM · #10 |
| While I respect the OP opinion on how he votes I do disagree. Photography is a mix of technical merit and subject matter. Sometimes, as in all art, the subject does not move a partiular person or group. If I miss the message or do not agree with the message I can still respect the technical merit that the photographer captured but I don't have to like the photo. If I don't like something that I'm voting on it's going to get less of a score than something that I do, that's human nature. There are exceptions to every rule, take war photography for example, I don't like seeing a child being carried in a blood soaked blanket by a US soldier, but that would be a photo I would vote high b/c of the emotional impact and the story it tells, I get the message. So to me, subject plays a major role in my vote. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:29:29 AM · #11 |
I'm curious about something on the photo listed by the OP. I just took a look and there was a comment left on it about 1 hr 15 minutes ago, yet when I go to the 'Photos/Browse' area of DPChallenge there's no sign of this image in the 'Recently Commented On Photographs'.
Is there some way to exclude images from this area of DPC?
Sorry about the potential sidetrack...is semi-related I hope. :-)
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:48:37 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
While I respect the OP opinion on how he votes I do disagree. Photography is a mix of technical merit and subject matter. Sometimes, as in all art, the subject does not move a partiular person or group. If I miss the message or do not agree with the message I can still respect the technical merit that the photographer captured but I don't have to like the photo. If I don't like something that I'm voting on it's going to get less of a score than something that I do, that's human nature. There are exceptions to every rule, take war photography for example, I don't like seeing a child being carried in a blood soaked blanket by a US soldier, but that would be a photo I would vote high b/c of the emotional impact and the story it tells, I get the message. So to me, subject plays a major role in my vote. |
I'm not singling you out by any means (I think the vast majority vote exactly like this) but the end result of this approach is that you basically don't have a chance of consistently scoring well in DPC unless your own tastes coincide with the collective taste of the community, OR you ignore your own tastes and pander to the voters.
This isn't a complaint, exactly, simply because it's impossible to imagine it being otherwise, but it's vaguely disheartening nevertheless.
R.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 10:59:01 AM · #13 |
I had this feminazi working with me at GSU who, when Silence of the Lambs came out, said she wouldn't see it because it was misongynistic in that the serial killer preyed upon women. Disregard the hero was a woman and that it was a well made movie when the bad guy is PUNISHED for his crimes against women. Don't confuse her with the facts.
But yes, if there is a photo of a gay-pride parade it will affect voters based on the subject matter -- no matter how good the photo. Or a pro-life rally. Or a Democrat/Republican stump speech. How you feel about the subject will NATURALLY affect how you feel about the photo.
Otherwise software could be written to analyze the technical merits alone.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:04:40 AM · #14 |
Personal opinion on the subject only influences the vote if the picture is any good.
If you could vote on the image entirely on technical merit it would to me, imply that the image is lifeless and doesn't communicate at all, other than on a dry, unsatisfactory level.
I've seen camera clubs where the voting was done by measuring with a ruler how close to rule of thirds intersection point a subject was. That's not the sort of images or voting I'd like to be involved with.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:07:22 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I'm not singling you out by any means (I think the vast majority vote exactly like this) but the end result of this approach is that you basically don't have a chance of consistently scoring well in DPC unless your own tastes coincide with the collective taste of the community, OR you ignore your own tastes and pander to the voters.
This isn't a complaint, exactly, simply because it's impossible to imagine it being otherwise, but it's vaguely disheartening nevertheless.
R. |
Why is it disheartening ? You've just described all forms of photography right there, not just dpc. Commercial success usually comes at the expense of diluting your images for mass appeal.
Personal work that isn't design to pander isn't going to do well. Work that fills your soul with joy probably will do the same for a minority of others, but will always fail to appeal to the mass market. Images that have wide popularity are unlikely to hit the same high levels of connection.
It's just the way it is. Fine art, commercial photography, DPC mirrors the rest.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:09:13 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
The question is: Should your personal opinion on the subject portrayed influence your voting? And if so, in what respect and how far? |
yes ... it's part of what makes you like or dislike an image. It's not a "technically perfect" competition, it's a "please the majority" competition. I'm part of the majority - it's your job to please me :)
For instance, I try to reward (with my vote) submissions that take risks, even if the risk failed a bit in my opinion. A water drop image takes no risk, it does well every time, so I'm harder on those during voting ... that's my choice, and everyone else's as well. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:10:42 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Why is it disheartening ? .....
It's just the way it is. Fine art, commercial photography, DPC mirrors the rest. |
Yah, I said "vaguely disheartening"; I do accept the reality of it, because there's no getting around it, but one could still wish that more subtle work received its due, and it rarely does in DPC, or in the world for that matter.
R.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:14:41 AM · #18 |
Or should you even be allowed to be individual in your voting? If not, then we could submit the same ones and watch them win every time...
Just as photographers are selective in their subject choice, so are voters...
nuff said. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:20:16 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Why is it disheartening ? .....
It's just the way it is. Fine art, commercial photography, DPC mirrors the rest. |
Yah, I said "vaguely disheartening"; I do accept the reality of it, because there's no getting around it, but one could still wish that more subtle work received its due, and it rarely does in DPC, or in the world for that matter.
R. |
I think, though, that would go against the definition.
You can really connect with a few people, have a big impact, have them love an image.
But most people won't get it, because there is something to get. It'll be memorable to a few people, stick with them, influence them, maybe change their life.
Or, you can create something that people will love, briefly, then forget about it. Everyone will like it. Nobody will care.
I don't think you can do both in the same image. I don't believe it is possible to do both. But most images fall on a continuum between those two extremes.
I find that more inspirational than disheartening. There's an opportunity out there to really connect with someone, make a difference, make them smile or just communicate.
Message edited by author 2007-09-13 11:21:33.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:22:38 AM · #20 |
Subject matter is part of the vote and when that subject matter becomes offensive to someone it will affect the vote, believe me I am no prude but I personally found an image in the why challenge to be offensive because the subject had a graffiti f-bomb as a prominent part of the image and I felt there was no real reason for it other than to use it for the shock value. I know the intent was to say why would someone do this but I really felt why give this particular word any air time when the same effect could have been achieved by showing any graffiti.
As for the image in question, I think it is well done maybe not all that appealing as far as the subject but not as over the top as a lot of shows regularly aired on TV. Would I feel like I missed something if it was never shown, not at all.
As a side note, I left a comment on the f-bomb image noted above and did not vote on it, but if I did the vote would have likely been a 4. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 11:31:36 AM · #21 |
HawkeyeLonewolf-"But yes, if there is a photo of a gay-pride parade it will affect voters based on the subject matter -- no matter how good the photo. Or a pro-life rally. Or a Democrat/Republican stump speech. How you feel about the subject will NATURALLY affect how you feel about the photo. "
That would be a Gay Pride victim...???
Message edited by author 2007-09-13 12:15:43. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 01:32:45 PM · #22 |
Q. Should your personal opinion on the subject portrayed influence your voting?
Voting by the general public tends to be a popularity contest. It’s based on emotions, i.e. Likes and Dislikes. Like the T.V. Show American Idol, the best don’t always win, but the most popular always does.
If you are submitting or voting for product or commercial reasons then this emotional voting matters greatly. I.e. increased sales or profit vs declining sales/profit.
If you are submitting or voting for more of the Fine art aspect then emotional voting is counter productive. But the emotional value is paramount. If fine art doesn’t touch the viewer, for good or bad, it would fail and it would be what I classify as an illustration or graphic art (I’m not knocking Illustrators or Graphic artists, that’s how I make money).The exception to this would be works of art that through such expert use of skill and technique can transform something ordinary or static into something that seems extraordinary or alive.
How are we voting?
On a photography site I would hope that other photographers would recognized the fact that although emotions are involved, they do not control us, and adjust their opinions, comments and scores appropriately. After all is anyone basing their choices in life solely on emotions? I hope not.
Q. What does DPC stand for?
I hope it doesn’t stand for “Da Prettiest Capture”
I’m here to learn and improve my photography skills, I’m an artist (photography is a part of that), not everyone is, for some photography is a hobby, that’s fine too. For some it’s a job, good for you! But I would like to think that we are all here to learn and grow for whatever reason. But how can anyone better their art, craft or hobby based on such a vague standard as “ it’s pretty, I like it—10” or “It’s not so pretty, I don’t like it---3” where is the merit in that kind of thinking?
I don’t think the Subject matters as much as how it is captured, in what ever medium the artist chooses. After all wasn’t Ansel Adams just a landscape photographer?
My point is giving the same equipment, the same prop and the same guidelines, some will produce incredible images while others will create only average images.
JMHO.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2007 01:48:14 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by studiog2:
... My point is giving the same equipment, the same prop and the same guidelines, some will produce incredible images while others will create only average images. ... |
Images of what? Oh, you need a subject don't you. :) That means some people will like it while others don't - regardless of technical ability.
Give the same subject to multiple photograhers with parity in equipment then you will see a difference in possibilites and results. However, how the results are perceived will vary as greatly as the individuals viewing them.
Photography, as an art form, is highly subjective and personal. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 02:37:13 PM · #24 |
Please don't get me wrong, of course your personal opinion influences your vote. This cannot be avoided and it's not at all a bad thing. Whether an image provokes an emotional reaction, whether it touches you, whether you find it appealing, etc. - take all of that into account when voting.
However, what I feel is unfair and unprofessional (and also not helpful when it comes to helping others and yourself improve our photography skills) is punishing (or rewarding) pictures based on your political/religious/etc. opinion on the subject matter portrayed.
A few examples:
- I would find it unfair if you rated a picture of George W. Bush low because you don't agree with his policies (or high because you like them). The picture is independent of his politics. A change in policy would not change the quality of the picture. (Of course there are possible exceptions to this; a picture might capture a certain attitude perfectly or be a good metaphor and therefore score higher.) I would like to emphasize again that taking a picture of George W. Bush (to continue this example) does in now way mean that you endorse his politics. And appreciating the quality of the picture and rating it accordingly also does not mean that you support the actions of the person portrayed.
- I would find it unfair if you rated a picture like this one low because you are not of Christian faith (or a bad one very high just because it features a blurry cross somewhere in the background and you're a devout Christian).
- I would find it unfair if you rated a picture of a cow or a steak low because you are a vegetarian.
I hope that these examples illustrate what I mean.
Some people seem to object to taking pictures of things they perceive as negative (suffering, pain, death, sadness, bad weather etc.). I am sure that their intentions are good and that they are honestly concerned about these issues. However, making all pictures of something negative disappear does not do anything about the problem itself. On the contrary, it might even make it worse, because it vanishes from our consciousness. Good pictures of negative things (like violence, injustice, exploitation, racism, etc.) can help raise people's awareness and prompt them to do something about it. |
|
|
|
09/13/2007 02:45:28 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
... Good pictures of negative things (like violence, injustice, exploitation, racism, etc.) can help raise people's awareness and prompt them to do something about it. |
...or glorify, promote, and desensitize people to them (depiciting violence, drug use, and suicide, are the ones that push my buttons).
I guess the context in which it's used is important. Using a photo of a suicidal kid in a campaign to reach out to the community for support and assistance of that problem is "ok". Using that same photo to promote an album/CD cover to kids isn't IMO. |
|
