| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/25/2004 01:31:03 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by JackCruise:
Just wanted to know if anyone else thought that I was underrated, or was it my poor attempt at creativity. Here is a comment by Jesuispeure on it after the voting, "Robbed. Utterly, utterly robbed. I expected this to do sooo much better! It's well shot, it's got a great story, every detail accounted for down to the spit. Good job!" Guess I wanted to see if she is the only one...and by me doing this I am in no saying this should have been in the same scoring as the ones at the top of this thread. The chair is a grabbing photo, love it, should have definitely been higher.
 |
Honestly? I wasn't nuts about this photo. I can't recall if I voted on it but I probably would have given it a 5.
I didn't vote on all the entries in this challenge. I do remember seeing it and not loving it.The drooling guy and the watch just aren't that compelling as art and the shot looks set-up. As a rule (and with all rules there are exceptions) I don't like set-up 'story' shots. They always look fake to me. Pardon me if I'm incorrect in this assumption. I don't mean any offense, I just want to be straight with you.
I don't think you got robbed in this case. I made a point on a different thread that I've received votes as high as 9 and 10 but I didn't even think my photos deserved that high a score. Trying to be as unbiased as possible, I would have given the photos that I received these scores on a 7, or 8 tops. Some people are just really enthusiastic and generous with their comments.
I regretted my Centered entry and the comments proved me correct. I got sick of looking at it all week longm yet one person gave a very high compliment. Go figure.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 01:32:56 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by Sonifo:
I guess I just didn't understand this challenge from looking at the winners. And from the looks of it, I didn't understand the challenges that are being voted on right now. |
Interesting,me too ! |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 01:56:49 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
I think you're offside on a few counts here. First of all, this is a photography challenge, not an art challenge. The best photographs should, and often do win. While I completely agree that some of the more artistic shots ('Scrap' is a wonderful example) tend to get overlooked by some less experienced eyes. Perhaps people who think they are critiquing the integrity of the photograph, when really they're showing their lack of understanding of the artist's intent ("hm, that's too blurry, grainy, overexposed, underexposed...2").
But to call the top shots 'childish' is uncalled for. technically, they are extremely competent photographs, which to emphasize is the point of the competition. As a side note, I don't understand how a flying motorcycle is cliche, given that i've never seen one, but maybe that's just me.
P-ness. |
Hold on there...to my thinking, good photography is an art. To deny the importance of artistry in photography you are illustrating the point that is being made that any chump with an average IQ, given a certain amount of technical instruction and expensive equipment can take a great photo.
If this is the way the average voter is viewing photography, it's no wonder I'm disillusioned with this site already.
I believe by childish, he meant 'cutesy'. I'm not attempting to insult the blue ribbon winner but while I'll agree the shot has great technical merit, it's a photo that has limited appeal over the long haul. I can imagine seeing this image on a greeting card at the grocery store, smiling maybe, and moving on. Good commercial photography, to be sure, just not to my taste. I can't argue with the skill and patience it took to create but skill and cleverness alone tend to leave me cold. I'm just stating my opinion so please nobody reply with a comment like, "I'd like to see you do better..." I don't question the blue ribbon photo took skill and know-how but I am also aware of just how simple it is to light a scene like this once you have the basic knowledge and a decent lighting kit. A good eye helps also. I have the knowledge but not the kit....or the money for the kit.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 03:24:14 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by melismatica:
A lot of digital photography buffs seem to favor photos like those wretched duotone images. I think that's the term for the desaturated images with one area of color left in--- cheesy no matter how skillfully it is done. |
Well said, and I agree. I think that selective desaturation and grayscale conversion are overused and overrated techniques. In my opinion, a lot of it is due to amateurs thinking that it will magically turn their boring, lackluster photo into a work of art. Don’t get me wrong, there are many black and white photographs that I would consider great works of art, but I also believe that many of those same photos would have been just as good, if not better, had they been in color. Many of those great works are black and white simply because that was all there was at the time.
I also think that desaturation or grayscale conversion can sometimes make a bad photo somewhat better by removing unfortunate color rendition problems. I recently edited a photo that I think looks somewhat better without color. It was a first for me. However, it was a bad photo to start with. It still is a bad photo; it’s just not quite as bad as the color version. :)
BTW, I hope that you decide to stick around for a while.
--Mick
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 03:31:05 AM · #55 |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 04:28:05 AM · #56 |
| The difference between funny little photography and art photography is the same as the difference between let's say a Tarkovsky movie or a Quentin Tarantino or any movie that made movie history, and a good Benny Hill, Eddie Murphy or Jackie Chan comedy. Or if you want is the difference betwenn Tarkovsky's original solaris, and the recent hollywood solaris the one with George Clooney which is tehnicaly perfect as any other Hollywood production but that's all there is to it while Tarkovsky's solaris is a masterpiece. Photography is supose to be eyther a form of art, or family album, greeting cards, wedding or such photography. I'm sorry if any criticism that doesn't say "your shot is cute haha" is offensive to you people, for one I personaly prefere stuff like I said here today will be more often said to me. One other thing, if you people are so oversensitive to take some criticism, than it is probably art you should fear most. Because cristicism exists since art exists. And once any of you will be recognized as an artist, critics will only get worse. That's the way these things go. Without that this is no different than another flirt chat only with funny little pictures and verry less about "real photography". I'm not going to go into specific details asking how many of you studied light shadows, colors, and such things. To set up a good studio light is no knowledge it is money. The knowledge you get in 1 hour after reading the brochoure that come with the light kit you purchase. I'm sorry about my honesty but that's really all there is to it, and art is about something completely different. Photography is a visual art and as any visual art is supose to communicate. I'm sorry if by saying that I don't get the message from the winning shots you all had the feeling I'm insulting or attacking you, I don't know any of you, and I asure you again I did not have any bad intention with this. If you people think all there is to a shot to be good that it wins a ribbon, fine. I personaly don't. Again my most garbage shot submitted is the only one ribbon I got, if anyone whants it they can have it, I don't need ribbons. I had the ideea took and submited that shot in under 10 minutes. What I need is to become a better photographer and for that I need criticism. When I look through the verry few comments I made, I noticed a funny thing. People are marking all my "I like this" comments as helpful but most of the time when I say I don't like something in a shot that's immediately unhelpful. Why are you people so self sufficient? I thought we are suppose to discuss and critique photography here, with likes or dislikes, but from what I see now here this is no more than another flirt chat only with pictures. Again I'm sorry and I promisse from now on all you will get from me will be positive comments for as long as I stay here, but keep in mind what Melissa said above, I also refuse to see most of the winning shots here anywhere near an art gallery, the place for them is as funny little greeting cards in a grochery store. If that is the way you all whant to go that's also fine and I'm in the wrong place. That's all I whanted to say, weather you take it as a personal insult or you take it as a constructive criticism that is your problem and yours alone. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 05:00:14 AM · #57 |
It goes to show the beauty of this site. The beautiful mainstream photography and artistic photography can be showcased side by side without prejudice.
BTW I like frogs, Benny Hill and Chairs.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 05:04:47 AM · #58 |
| "Side by side" how? maninstream photography how you call it always seems to win here and art always seems to end in the middle of the pack. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 05:16:08 AM · #59 |
You guys are funny, this is just a fun site just enjoy it! Don't worry I am not offended, say what you like! By the way the armchair photo is fantastic, I love it!
P.S. Look out for the new range of frog and bee pictures on the Hallmark greeting card range in your local shop!
Message edited by author 2004-05-25 05:23:30. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 06:23:46 AM · #60 |
Can anyone tell me why photo receieved 9 - 1 votes, I didnt expect a ribbon, but why all the low scores?
 |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 06:30:22 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
Can anyone tell me why photo receieved 9 - 1 votes, I didnt expect a ribbon, but why all the low scores?
|
I gave this shot an 8. Nice work. I don't understand why you got that many 1's though.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 06:46:44 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
Can anyone tell me why photo receieved 9 - 1 votes, I didnt expect a ribbon, but why all the low scores?
|
I didn't vote on this challenge, but I'd have probably given it a 5 or 6. To me it's an average shot, nothing spectacular. It doesn't have that "wow factor" that people toss around here alot.
To your question why so many ones - it could be a political statement, even though in my opinion that's not a reason to give it such low marks. My advice, if you want better scores, avoid subject matter that is controversial, even those that are so by extension.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 07:25:46 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
Can anyone tell me why photo receieved 9 - 1 votes, I didnt expect a ribbon, but why all the low scores?
|
It's a good shot I gave it 8... Like orussell said the US flag, like the crucifix can be offensive to some people. This is a world-wide site. I don't have this opinion so please don't shoot the messenger.
Message edited by author 2004-05-25 07:27:43.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 07:33:20 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
Can anyone tell me why photo receieved 9 - 1 votes, I didnt expect a ribbon, but why all the low scores?
|
There are a lot of people in this world who will vote down anything that has an American flag in it, regardless of its merits, sad but true.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 08:20:29 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
Can anyone tell me why photo receieved 9 - 1 votes, I didnt expect a ribbon, but why all the low scores?
|
My question to you: If you had seen this same picture but with..., let's say a Vietnamese flag - what would you have rated it? Your answer should be the answer to how many points your shot is worth.
I voted this a 6 - slightly above average. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 09:01:25 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Whats the difference in pointing a camera at a frog and pointing a camera at a chair? I would say the chair was easier to do. |
That's not the question in my opinion. What's harder? Making a great shot out of a frog or a chair? I would say the frog is easier to do.
It all depends on the way you look at it... Making something as boring as a chair look good is so hard IMO and the shot posted above is brilliant in it's approach. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 09:21:01 AM · #67 |
Quote - That's not the question in my opinion. What's harder? Making a great shot out of a frog or a chair? I would say the frog is easier to do.
Try and take a photo of a frog that wants to jump, I must have taken about 150 photos of him and only that one was nice as he appeared to be smiling. By the way I didn't want to chill him out in the fridge to make him less mobile.
Message edited by author 2004-05-25 09:23:56. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 09:39:54 AM · #68 |
I'm reading alot here about what seems to be simply personal preferences. I actually was amazed by the centered contest. I got through the first couple of pages and noticed they all were great in their own way, I then jumped to the last just to see how they compared. Even the last page had photos with great merit or ideas. I really feel like the heat has been turned up on me to produce better work, but work that I like; not just to please the masses. imho the chair sppeals to me more that the frog as the chair talks to me more about humanity, and that is what i really would like to see more of and experience from different viewpoints. The frog is an excellent study in itself but to me from a technical standpoint. My tastes are a little crazy as enjoyed watching "Independence Day", "Saving Nemo", and also "In America" (on dvd recently). In America though, spoke to me in ways Saving Nemo couldn't, both are artistic but I prefered the more deeper vein of humanity involved with the former.
This site is wonderful in that you can see what the general public does want; which is useful in it's own right. Unfortunately I really think that people get frustrated when they recieve a 4 or 3, but those still are GREAT scores for a site like this, when especially if you want specialized critique you can find it amoungst other like-minded people that you can ask for their advice. Maybe it would help if permanent forums could be made for different genres?
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 09:40:11 AM · #69 |
I agree which one is harder to make is no way a criteria to judge a photo. As I said before visual arts is about communication. Some people like more easy to understand pop in the face message like the frog shot, other likes the meta message the hidden beautiful story of a completely different type of photography like Screap. I understand now what kind of photography is going on here, and it is not the one I personaly like.
@Jean I hope you understand that I really am not picking on you or trying to attack or insult you or something like that, nor even refereing to your picture in particular, I am refereing to a kind of photography in general. I like the setup you did there it is really professional I'm just for different subject matters. I'm kind of getting tired of seeing the "haha cute shot" story winning here all the time, while deeper and more profound stories always being thrown away. But that's just me. This is all I tried to discuss and see how others feel about it, not trying to insult anyone. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 09:48:59 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by melismatica:
A lot of digital photography buffs seem to favor photos like those wretched duotone images. I think that's the term for the desaturated images with one area of color left in--- cheesy no matter how skillfully it is done. I know I'll get some flak for so blatently revealing this bias but I feel strongly about it. Those shots remind me of the SNL sketch with Alec Baldwin where he plays a talentless photographer whose nephew (with the aid of Photoshop of course) will place the the subject, be it baby, car, rose, or kitten inside a brandy snifter. "... even a brandy snifter inside a brandy snifter. Wrap your head around that." |
 Duotones are photos made up of a combination of two specific colors, and are a holdover from both chemical photography, when "toners" would be used after development to add a tint to the paper of a black & white photo, and also from lithographic printing, where two inks are combined in varying amounts across the tone range to produce smoother tones and a greater sense of "depth" than the B&W alone would give, and save money in printing asnd pre-press materials and time.
What you describe above is usually called "selective desaturation" and is a fine, but overused (here), technique.
I find it sad, though, that with new photographers coming on board all the time, we go out of our way to discourage them from using (for the first time) techniques which have served some of us so well, but have become tiresome to some of us. It's kind of like teaching someone to cook but telling them they're not allowed to make a salad because it's been done so artistically too many times ....
And I think nested brandy snifters would be superb and plan to do it "soon" .... |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 10:28:58 AM · #71 |
I totally agree with you on this one coolhar! One of the best technical shots of a dandilion I've seen. Just gorgeous to look at. Well done!
Originally posted by coolhar:
I think ellamay's Just Dandy is underrated, it's far better than scrap.
She's my choice for Dandy Queen! |
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 10:46:01 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:
I agree which one is harder to make is no way a criteria to judge a photo. As I said before visual arts is about communication. Some people like more easy to understand pop in the face message like the frog shot, other likes the meta message the hidden beautiful story of a completely different type of photography like Screap. I understand now what kind of photography is going on here, and it is not the one I personaly like.
@Jean I hope you understand that I really am not picking on you or trying to attack or insult you or something like that, nor even refereing to your picture in particular, I am refereing to a kind of photography in general. I like the setup you did there it is really professional I'm just for different subject matters. I'm kind of getting tired of seeing the "haha cute shot" story winning here all the time, while deeper and more profound stories always being thrown away. But that's just me. This is all I tried to discuss and see how others feel about it, not trying to insult anyone. |
I must admit I did a haha cute shot on purpose to see how it would do. I would love to submit a chair one, but was sure it wouldn't do as well. Nevertheless I had lots of fun doing it and had lots of laughs at the frog, he was a funny character! |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 10:49:00 AM · #73 |
Funny, Jean won the Duotones challenge too :)
I think the point that frumoaznicul and Melismatica are missing, is that not it's not every photograph's Dharma to become 'Fine Art'. Photography comes in many flavours: Photojournalism, Portraiture, Nature, Stock(advertisements), Fine Art, etc. Each has an equally valuable place in the realm of photography, and each comes in it's own unique and credible form.
I prefer the more creative submissions as well, and frankly wish I was better at finding them in my own camera. My only objection was (and still is) that there are other types of photography, and other photographers that deserve your respect for their capable work in whatever form them choose.
@Melismatica: never once in my post did I 'deny the importance of artistry' in photography. Of course it's an art. if it weren't, we'd all read the Rules Of Photography and consequently tie for first place since they'd all be 10s. What I said was, your perception of this art is not absolute. Other people are entitled to an opinion on the subject, and it doesn't have to agree with yours. I think those people deserve respect given that they are very accomplished in achieving their chosen goal. As a community we vote, and appealing to the masses is what wins ribbons.
Michelangelo sculpted the 'perfect human form' in David...in The Woman with the Green Hat, Picasso couldn't even get both of her eyes on her face.
Who's the better artist?
edit: and frumoaznicul don't go playing the martyr and say you're only leaving comments that are happy now - people appreciate honesty, fairness, and respect. you've got the honesty part down (keep that) and work on the fairness and respect. say what you think and defend it; you'll help yourself and others grow as a photographer and an artist. Just don't get mad if someone disagrees with you ;)
Message edited by author 2004-05-25 10:54:30. |
|
|
|
05/25/2004 11:07:08 AM · #74 |
Originally posted by bobdaveant:
Can anyone tell me why photo receieved 9 - 1 votes, I didnt expect a ribbon, but why all the low scores?
|
Because it's an american flag. Sad, but true.
|
|
|
|
05/25/2004 11:09:07 AM · #75 |
Originally posted by Davenit:
Originally posted by Konador:
Whats the difference in pointing a camera at a frog and pointing a camera at a chair? I would say the chair was easier to do. |
That's not the question in my opinion. What's harder? Making a great shot out of a frog or a chair? I would say the frog is easier to do.
It all depends on the way you look at it... Making something as boring as a chair look good is so hard IMO and the shot posted above is brilliant in it's approach. |
Hmm...love that explanation.
|
|
