| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/15/2008 03:02:41 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
eta: I thought Gordons image was more of a thumb in the eye, to the voters or the standards that have been set. |
yeah, that's why I gave it an 8. :) |
Shit...I gave him a 10.
Gen IE - "getting to the essence of the subject" may or may not have been his intent, though I'll assume Gordon wouldn't enter something totally void of artistic content. Still...I'm going with my gut reaction to the shot knowing that he knew the images fate good and well, when he took it and clicked the submit button. I'd bet the bank it took a front seat in the entire process.
Did he convey a great "end of summer" feel? Eh...I'd say no, not really but ask, does it really matter?
All conjecture on my part but I'm sticking to it.
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 15:08:45. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 03:28:48 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
... Gordon wouldn't enter something totally void of artistic content. Still...I'm going with my gut reaction to the shot knowing that he knew the images fate good and well, when he took it and clicked the submit button. |
I agree -- I myself often enter shots I know won't score well here ... any "artistic value" they may have is usually not apparent in the typical 5-second voting view. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 03:31:17 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
... Gordon wouldn't enter something totally void of artistic content. Still...I'm going with my gut reaction to the shot knowing that he knew the images fate good and well, when he took it and clicked the submit button. |
I agree -- I myself often enter shots I know won't score well here ... any "artistic value" they may have is usually not apparent in the typical 5-second voting view. |
5 seconds? I'll bet the average view time is under 2 seconds, especially with the keyboard voting. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 03:34:57 PM · #104 |
I was trying to be generous ... ;-)
Actually, I think the ad-biz mantra is that "You have 1.3 seconds to make an impression ..." -- though it's been a while since I heard that radio ad, it might be 2.3 seconds ... |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 03:56:48 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
eta: I thought Gordons image was more of a thumb in the eye, to the voters or the standards that have been set. |
yeah, that's why I gave it an 8. :) |
Shit...I gave him a 10.
Gen IE - "getting to the essence of the subject" may or may not have been his intent, though I'll assume Gordon wouldn't enter something totally void of artistic content. Still...I'm going with my gut reaction to the shot knowing that he knew the images fate good and well, when he took it and clicked the submit button. I'd bet the bank it took a front seat in the entire process.
Did he convey a great "end of summer" feel? Eh...I'd say no, not really but ask, does it really matter?
All conjecture on my part but I'm sticking to it. |
I liked Gordon's shot but in terms of it being a thumb to the eye it is a rather lighthearted attempt at such. I thought Skip's entry was more effective and stayed the course. He used everything DPC's despises, blurriness, ugly colors, noise and a subject matter devoid of all wow factor and used a title that didn't seem to match the chosen picture. He created an ugly picture on the surface and used symbolism to convey his message and entered it on a site that demands literal and superficial presentations of beauty. If Gordon used his thumb Skip used his middle finger.
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 15:57:16.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 04:09:30 PM · #106 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I thought Skip's entry was more effective and stayed the course. He used everything DPC's despises, blurriness, ugly colors, noise and a subject matter devoid of all wow factor and used a title that didn't seem to match the chosen picture. |
Ummm, so why was it a good picture then? |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 04:11:41 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I liked Gordon's shot but in terms of it being a thumb to the eye it is a rather lighthearted attempt at such. I thought Skip's entry was more effective and stayed the course. He used everything DPC's despises, blurriness, ugly colors, noise and a subject matter devoid of all wow factor and used a title that didn't seem to match the chosen picture. He created an ugly picture on the surface and used symbolism to convey his message and entered it on a site that demands literal and superficial presentations of beauty. If Gordon used his thumb Skip used his middle finger. |
Skip Rulz!
Gave him a 10 too.
Ubique (mentioned in the title) is probably the DPC member who has had the greatest impact on me. When I started veering towards what people credit as my style he was one of the first to leave detailed comments that recognized my intent on multiple levels which really encouraged me to keep driving in that direction. I miss him dearly as well as I do, xion and boysetsfire.
Read the comment on this image (especially those of you who may not know him). Outside of how he breaks down the way he sees the subject, it's those last words about subtle communication that stick with me to this today. So many of his comments helped me keep on keepin on. I honestly owe a lot to him for that.
eta: Ummm, so why was it a good picture then?
By using pure photography he made a genuine heartfelt point. I think the entire site could do with a lot more of that and lot less Photoshop. No BS.
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 16:28:42. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 04:33:48 PM · #108 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by yanko:
I liked Gordon's shot but in terms of it being a thumb to the eye it is a rather lighthearted attempt at such. I thought Skip's entry was more effective and stayed the course. He used everything DPC's despises, blurriness, ugly colors, noise and a subject matter devoid of all wow factor and used a title that didn't seem to match the chosen picture. He created an ugly picture on the surface and used symbolism to convey his message and entered it on a site that demands literal and superficial presentations of beauty. If Gordon used his thumb Skip used his middle finger. |
Skip Rulz!
Gave him a 10 too.
Ubique (mentioned in the title) is probably the DPC member who has had the greatest impact on me. When I started veering towards what people credit as my style he was one of the first to leave detailed comments that recognized my intent on multiple levels which really encouraged me to keep driving in that direction. I miss him dearly as well as I do, xion and boysetsfire.
Read the comment on this image (especially those of you who may not know him) and outside of how he breaks down how he sees the subject, it's those last words about subtle communication that stick with me to this today.
eta: Ummm, so why was it a good picture then?
By using pure photography he made a genuine point. No BS. |
For the lazy here's his photo:
I thought the use of shuffleboard was very appropriate. The person in the shot could represent Ubique, Xion, Boysetfire and all of the others like them who were great movers, those who influenced and inspired many. Maybe the person represents DPC and they the puck being shoved out of the picture? Either way it works.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 04:54:28 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I thought the use of shuffleboard was very appropriate. The person in the shot could represent Ubique, Xion, Boysetfire and all of the others like them who were great movers, those who influenced and inspired many. Maybe the person represents DPC and they the puck being shoved out of the picture? Either way it works. |
Maybe I always react a little when I see people falling over themselves to declare how high they scored a shot like this. Playing that game is no better than the people who fall over themselves scoring eye-candy shots high. The shot has its place, but would you consider it among the best of it's genre? |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 05:31:14 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
I thought the use of shuffleboard was very appropriate. The person in the shot could represent Ubique, Xion, Boysetfire and all of the others like them who were great movers, those who influenced and inspired many. Maybe the person represents DPC and they the puck being shoved out of the picture? Either way it works. |
Maybe I always react a little when I see people falling over themselves to declare how high they scored a shot like this. Playing that game is no better than the people who fall over themselves scoring eye-candy shots high. The shot has its place, but would you consider it among the best of it's genre? |
I disagree. When I see people gushing over a high scoring shot it is almost always in regards to the technicals or being wowed by the cleverness of it all. Rarely is it based on anything of substance, the meaning or anything that makes a photo maintain lasting appeal. This is generally not true of the opposite (i.e. the underrated shots). This is just my observation (i.e. based on the comments people post).
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 17:33:04.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 05:37:23 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
I thought the use of shuffleboard was very appropriate. The person in the shot could represent Ubique, Xion, Boysetfire and all of the others like them who were great movers, those who influenced and inspired many. Maybe the person represents DPC and they the puck being shoved out of the picture? Either way it works. |
Maybe I always react a little when I see people falling over themselves to declare how high they scored a shot like this. Playing that game is no better than the people who fall over themselves scoring eye-candy shots high. The shot has its place, but would you consider it among the best of it's genre? |
I disagree. When I see people gushing over a high scoring shot it is almost always in regards to the technicals or being wowed by the cleverness of it all. Rarely is it based on anything of substance, the meaning or anything that makes a photo maintain lasting appeal. This is generally not true of the opposite (i.e. the underrated shots). This is just my observation (i.e. based on the comments people post). |
OK, I can agree with some of that. A) DPC does praise technicals. B) Photos of substance do have lasting appeal. I see lots of praise on emotional shots though. It's easiest to comment on technicals and that's probably why you see it done the most. Certainly if you are limiting your comments to 4-5 words which most are. All this being said, technically perfect shots are not automatically devoid of substance. Look at De Sousa's work. There is substance there in spades. Likewise, plenty of blurred, ugly shots have nothing to them. Even the ones that did it on purpose. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 06:23:12 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by yanko:
I thought the use of shuffleboard was very appropriate. The person in the shot could represent Ubique, Xion, Boysetfire and all of the others like them who were great movers, those who influenced and inspired many. Maybe the person represents DPC and they the puck being shoved out of the picture? Either way it works. |
Maybe I always react a little when I see people falling over themselves to declare how high they scored a shot like this. Playing that game is no better than the people who fall over themselves scoring eye-candy shots high. The shot has its place, but would you consider it among the best of it's genre? |
I disagree. When I see people gushing over a high scoring shot it is almost always in regards to the technicals or being wowed by the cleverness of it all. Rarely is it based on anything of substance, the meaning or anything that makes a photo maintain lasting appeal. This is generally not true of the opposite (i.e. the underrated shots). This is just my observation (i.e. based on the comments people post). |
OK, I can agree with some of that. A) DPC does praise technicals. B) Photos of substance do have lasting appeal. I see lots of praise on emotional shots though. It's easiest to comment on technicals and that's probably why you see it done the most. Certainly if you are limiting your comments to 4-5 words which most are. All this being said, technically perfect shots are not automatically devoid of substance. Look at De Sousa's work. There is substance there in spades. Likewise, plenty of blurred, ugly shots have nothing to them. Even the ones that did it on purpose. |
To some extent I agree. You're right in that just because something is technically perfect it doesn't automatically mean it's devoid of substance and the blurry ugly doesn't automatically mean it's full of substance, and by ugly I mean grain/noise, non-cheery colors, blown highlights, etc. However, what is technical perfection? In my opinion a blurry ugly photo can be technically perfect. Take this famous photo by Robert Capa. By DPC's standards it is a blurry ugly photo and the subject matter is too centered. Many would consider it to have poor technicals. To me this photo has perfect technicals. It expertly shows the scene in ways that can be felt and not just seen. Had this photo had the crisp clarity of what we see of the ribbon winners the flavor of the moment would be lost.
Now granted, most of the people who shoot blurry photos are not creating anything great but the sense I get from them is at least they are trying to create something worthwhile. I rarely get that feeling from those who just seek ribbons and will do anything for it including selling their artistic souls.
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 18:28:07.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 06:35:20 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Take this famous photo by Robert Capa. By DPC's standards it is a blurry ugly photo and the subject matter is too centered. Many would consider it to have poor technicals. |
I'd be truly curious as to whether Capa, if given access to modern digital equipment, would have much rather preferred to capture it differently? Were these artifacts chosen or where they a product of shooting in 1944? |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 06:37:34 PM · #114 |
 
 
 
*I put this here because I really did love the shot, quality and the composition... and it was lost*
For  Yanko's statement and question... here are some of my works. If these are wouldn't be my work, and say someone from 20 years ago, 30-40 years ago... do you think they would worth (value in both meaning) more than where they are now... no one even knew they were existed.
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 18:38:49. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 06:51:36 PM · #115 |
Jason, Richard, these past few posts have been great, when is the Yanko & Achoo vid coming out? You are both saying the same thing differently (or is it a diffrent thing in the same way?).
Now, I do hate it when an art lover tries to tell me what I should be seeing in a painting/photograph though would like to know why the artist/fotog created the image.
So, heres one for you, my MFS submission scored a 5.4 and was one of the first images shown in this thread, I'm not bitter or twisted about the score (Jason got his comment about right) but, view it again after I tell you it was taken on the 2nd Anniversary of Rose's death and I spent 4 hours at the beach walking in the gale mourning the loss of my daughter, the sun was going down and I felt nothing, my senses where numbed by the cold and all I could think of was where is my Rose now? what can she see, what is she thinking and why was she taken from me?
Now, view the image again, does it show a little of how the fotog felt?
 |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 06:53:02 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'd be truly curious as to whether Capa, if given access to modern digital equipment, would have much rather preferred to capture it differently? Were these artifacts chosen or where they a product of shooting in 1944? |
I would think they were caused by shooting, yes :)
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 18:54:59. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 07:00:52 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Take this famous photo by Robert Capa. |
I hear your point but I don't think that photo is famous because it's blurry, ugly or too centered.
Infact a grunge layer before finishing off with resizing and USM would likely get it a higher score. :)
bazz. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 07:03:40 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
For Yanko's statement and question... here are some of my works. If these are wouldn't be my work, and say someone from 20 years ago, 30-40 years ago... do you think they would worth (value in both meaning) more than where they are now... no one even knew they were existed. |
I don't know. Ask me again in 30-40 years. :)
As for the lack of comments how much exposure have you given them? None were entered in a challenge. Where any posted in other threads, side challenges, etc?
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 07:07:42 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by sir_bazz:
Originally posted by yanko:
Take this famous photo by Robert Capa. |
I hear your point but I don't think that photo is famous because it's blurry, ugly or too centered.
Infact a grunge layer before finishing off with resizing and USM would likely get it a higher score. :)
bazz. |
True. I was just commenting on how the look of the image plays an important role in conveying the essense of the moment, which happened to be a very chaotic and hellish day of war.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 07:12:12 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Jason, Richard, these past few posts have been great, when is the Yanko & Achoo vid coming out? You are both saying the same thing differently (or is it a diffrent thing in the same way?).
Now, I do hate it when an art lover tries to tell me what I should be seeing in a painting/photograph though would like to know why the artist/fotog created the image.
So, heres one for you, my MFS submission scored a 5.4 and was one of the first images shown in this thread, I'm not bitter or twisted about the score (Jason got his comment about right) but, view it again after I tell you it was taken on the 2nd Anniversary of Rose's death and I spent 4 hours at the beach walking in the gale mourning the loss of my daughter, the sun was going down and I felt nothing, my senses where numbed by the cold and all I could think of was where is my Rose now? what can she see, what is she thinking and why was she taken from me?
Now, view the image again, does it show a little of how the fotog felt?
|
Yes it does. It is a very good photo in its own right but more so given the context. I don't know if you noticed the quote I use in my sig. It is how I view photography. To me photography is like a lens, it points both ways or at least it should.
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 20:15:30.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 07:33:14 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by yanko:
...I don't know. Ask me again in 30-40 years. :) |
I don't know about the photos, but the hat should worth something by then :P |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 07:33:16 PM · #122 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
Jason, Richard, these past few posts have been great, when is the Yanko & Achoo vid coming out? You are both saying the same thing differently (or is it a diffrent thing in the same way?).
Now, I do hate it when an art lover tries to tell me what I should be seeing in a painting/photograph though would like to know why the artist/fotog created the image.
So, heres one for you, my MFS submission scored a 5.4 and was one of the first images shown in this thread, I'm not bitter or twisted about the score (Jason got his comment about right) but, view it again after I tell you it was taken on the 2nd Anniversary of Rose's death and I spent 4 hours at the beach walking in the gale mourning the loss of my daughter, the sun was going down and I felt nothing, my senses where numbed by the cold and all I could think of was where is my Rose now? what can she see, what is she thinking and why was she taken from me?
Now, view the image again, does it show a little of how the fotog felt?
|
I knew there was something that inspired this when I saw it. I was one of your 20 8s. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 07:59:23 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
By using pure photography he made a genuine heartfelt point. I think the entire site could do with a lot more of that and lot less Photoshop. No BS. |
I missed this little tidbit so I'll respond here. :) In general I agree with you. Too often photoshop is used to polish a turd. I'm probably guilty of that on more than one occassion. However, I do believe photoshop has a place and not just as a tool to correct minor things. In my opinion using photoshop to distort reality is no different than distorting reality in-camera via the use of shallow DOFs, blurry long exposures, distorted wide angles, flattened effects of long teles, etc. Besides, what is reality? Is it just what our human lens eyes show us? I prefer the reality that has been inspected, turnover and analyzed by the mind and that is what I try to bring into the equation when I do anything in photoshop (not to mention make up for equipment I don't have but would have used)
Message edited by author 2008-12-15 22:35:22.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2008 08:56:16 PM · #124 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
By using pure photography he made a genuine heartfelt point. I think the entire site could do with a lot more of that and lot less Photoshop. No BS. |
Are you saying that only candid street photography or somewhat photojournalistic photography is the only "pure photography" (I looked through a few of your images). You mentioned before that set up shots don't count and bump up against the "existing art" rule. Would that not also be true of skyline shots and portraits? The skyline is always there and portraits are setups by nature.
Surely, something other than a candid can be considered photography.
And as for the Photoshop BS, well, again, I browsed your portfolio. |
|
|
|
12/15/2008 09:04:45 PM · #125 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Ubique (mentioned in the title) is probably the DPC member who has had the greatest impact on me. When I started veering towards what people credit as my style he was one of the first to leave detailed comments that recognized my intent on multiple levels which really encouraged me to keep driving in that direction. I miss him dearly as well as I do, xion and boysetsfire.
Read the comment on this image (especially those of you who may not know him). Outside of how he breaks down the way he sees the subject, it's those last words about subtle communication that stick with me to this today. So many of his comments helped me keep on keepin on. I honestly owe a lot to him for that.
eta: Ummm, so why was it a good picture then?
By using pure photography he made a genuine heartfelt point. I think the entire site could do with a lot more of that and lot less Photoshop. No BS. |
I have to second the thing you wrote about Paul (Ubique). His comment on one of my first photos on DPC showed me that there's a communication level between the viewer and the autor that is beyond the "nice pic" kind of impact. In addition to that, take a look at the comment he left on that photo. I felt like he knows more about this scene that me who was there.
 |
|
