DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Thinking outside the box vs. outside of reality
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 14 of 14, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/30/2002 04:46:35 PM · #1
I am as open minded as the next guy, but I really think some people are getting carried away with their interpretation of the challenge. Personally I think it's a superiority thing where we're not supposed to understand its meaning. I look at some photos submitted and it's like... what are you thinking?

e.g.
Challenge: Take a picture of an apple.

We would certainly see a photo of a fig leaf... since it was what Adam and Eve wore after they sinned and took a bite out of an apple. Then I vote it low and I'm the idiot for not making the correlation. Or was it the fact that it is not a photo of an APPLE!

/puts on flame-proof jacket and prepares for replies that my interpretation of 'portrait' and 'travel' are as valid as the next guy's.


12/30/2002 05:56:06 PM · #2
or maybe theyre specifically targetting people such as yourself who get worked up over this
12/30/2002 06:10:29 PM · #3
I'd vote it low because Adam and Eve is a sexist story. So there. lol

Hey, if I don't get it, maybe because I'm not aware of the subject, or not inclined to look for grand meaning in everyhting I look at, I'm not going to give a highs score because I don't get it.

If the picture sucks, it sucks. I've voted 8 or 9s when I really didn't see any relevance to the challenge. Some people take offense by comments like "what is it?" when they get low scores. Let's face it, sometimes the picture sucks on top of being a "what is it" shot.




12/30/2002 06:12:56 PM · #4
bamaster what are you reffering to, i would like some frame of reference
12/30/2002 06:26:45 PM · #5
Originally posted by achiral:

bamaster what are you reffering to, i would like some frame of reference


A direct image is not really needed, now is it?

There isn't a particular image that brought this about. I post this in a general sense. I've seen it in every challenge. Some people just seem to LOOK for a way to photo their pet/child/wife/etc., regardless of the validity of its reference.

Of course this is all subjective interpretation.

If I don't understand the photo, I will ask for clarification. I've never received a reply to any of those.
12/30/2002 07:15:54 PM · #6
I'm not sure that it is our job to "get it". The photographer has two methods for communication. The picture, the ideal medium, and the title, which could be used for clarification or guidance.

This is a people's choice forum. We are not all blessed with ultra high IQ's, masters degrees in art interpretation, or mind reading capabilities. If somebody wants to go for hidden meanings, then they shouldn't be upset if not everybody finds it. Or, finds meanings the photographer never put there.

If I see one I don't get, I will sit there for a bit trying to grasp what the poster intended. However, about 5 minutes is my limit on a good day with an interesting picture, and about 30 seconds on a bad day, and about 5 on bad day with an uninteresting picture.

And no... I never feel guilty one little bit.

That's my 1 cent worth.... www.cheapopinions.com where our bad advice is half the price.
12/30/2002 07:19:34 PM · #7
I completely understand you, Tony, and I don't think it is necessary to use someone's photo as an example and hurt their feelings. I don't really care if it is someone's intention to get us talking about this subject. If they get satisfaction from it and feel like they are controlling things in some way then more power to them. I don't strain my brain to figure out a deep meaning in a photo. Either it makes sense to me or it doesn't. I figure I am one voter being asked to give an opinion on a photo and I simply give it. I am in know way obligated to understand it. The responsibility lies with the photographer if they want me to get it or not. Now with that being said, I usually lean to the side of giving the photographer the benefit of the doubt and I really appreciate creativity. I just don't appreciate the photos that are strange just to be strange. There needs to be a good reason for it. Just to get people talking about a photo is a pretty lame reason to me. I consider that kind of mentality to be very juvenile. But, that's just me : )

T
12/30/2002 07:28:59 PM · #8
Originally posted by ambaker:

I'm not sure that it is our job to "get it"...If I see one I don't get, I will sit there for a bit trying to grasp what the poster intended. However, about 5 minutes is my limit on a good day with an interesting picture, and about 30 seconds on a bad day, and about 5 on bad day with an uninteresting picture.

And no... I never feel guilty one little bit.


That sounds like a sound strategy, although I'd wish you a lot of good days!
We're in a bind, because we get slammed for being too cliche or predictable, and likewise for being "too creative" with our interpretation. I don't mind you're voting down a picture of mine you "don't get," but wonder if you ever go back and look at those you couldn't figure out at first, and see whether the photographer's notes and other members' comments make things more clear?
12/30/2002 07:37:08 PM · #9
Originally posted by GeneralE:

That sounds like a sound strategy, although I'd wish you a lot of good days!
We're in a bind, because we get slammed for being too cliche or predictable, and likewise for being "too creative" with our interpretation. I don't mind you're voting down a picture of mine you "don't get," but wonder if you ever go back and look at those you couldn't figure out at first, and see whether the photographer's notes and other members' comments make things more clear?


Oh I do. I'll use my latest submission as an example, Four Tickets to Paradise. I knew I was going to get slammed with low scores, so I tried really hard to get it perfectly focused with bright, vibrant color. That was the reason for a thread I started about Subtle Symbolism. Most didn't get it... and it was my fault.

However I feel it met the challenge without a doubt. There were four pills. I know I received eleven 1's because they didn't approve of the message they saw.

Or maybe it really was a terrible photo? No, I don't like that answer. hehe
12/30/2002 07:52:25 PM · #10
I got your point fine; only deducted a little for the negativity (somewhat balanced by some bonus for chutzpah).
I was actually confused by what I now understand to be a line of powder cocaine in the background. It wasn't in-focus enough for me to recognize it. Since I thought you had the "drugs" aspect covered fine with the capsules, I didn't associate it with the capules' contents. Maybe you could have had one of the capsules opened-up.

Some of the earliest pharmaceuticals of abuse (besides Heroin®, that is) were the barbiturate-class of sedative hypnotics. Specifically, phenobarbital capsules were sold on the streets as "reds"

Message edited by author 2002-12-31 01:42:34.
12/30/2002 08:08:10 PM · #11
Right on. I thought the powder stuff was the giveaway. I played around with fstops and camera angle to get the composition balanced. I wanted the back pills to be blurred but all the pills to be in front of the powder, since the four pills are the focus whereas the powder has a supporting role. I've heard of 'reds' but never made that link.

I struggle to stir emotion in a all-pleasing way, which is a goal of mine for this site. I don't take photography that seriously, but I'm so competitive that I'm driven to find a balance between capturing an image that is as much me (a little in your face) as it is the general voting public (soft and coochie coo).
12/30/2002 08:20:51 PM · #12
Originally posted by bamaster:

...I struggle to stir emotion in a all-pleasing way, which is a goal of mine for this site. I don't take photography that seriously, but I'm so competitive that I'm driven to find a balance between capturing an image that is as much me (a little in your face) as it is the general voting public (soft and coochie coo).

I'm now trying to alternate those qualities instead of combining them so much, with the result that I've finally reached a 6 once, but am also visiting the land of the 3's on occasion...
12/30/2002 09:30:10 PM · #13
it's a fine line between too subtle, and the voter not thinking enough.

if you don't immediately get it, think about it for a while, describe it to yourself outloud, research it on the internet abit...

here's an example. my friend's picture, which placed dead last in the blue challenge. it was called lovesong, the colors were warm, and it was a photo of a rumpled bed. (even if you didn't see the record in the picture) now, say it outloud with me. warm. bed. rumpled sheets. lovesong.

most of the comments were "i don't see how this is blue"
12/31/2002 01:33:53 AM · #14
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by ambaker:

I'm not sure that it is our job to "get it"...If I see one I don't get, I will sit there for a bit trying to grasp what the poster intended. However, about 5 minutes is my limit on a good day with an interesting picture, and about 30 seconds on a bad day, and about 5 on bad day with an uninteresting picture.

And no... I never feel guilty one little bit.


That sounds like a sound strategy, although I'd wish you a lot of good days!
We're in a bind, because we get slammed for being too cliche or predictable, and likewise for being "too creative" with our interpretation. I don't mind you're voting down a picture of mine you "don't get," but wonder if you ever go back and look at those you couldn't figure out at first, and see whether the photographer's notes and other members' comments make things more clear?


Generally I do have good days. I usually make at least two passes through on voting. After the first pass, I wait a couple of days, and then go back and look to see if the high scores held up, if I missed a jewel in the rough, and to see if I still hate the ones I scored low. Personally I start with a 5 and go from there. I rarely give out 1's. So if it was a picture of average content, and a message I didn't get it would likely be a 4 or a 5. (Hopefully that wouldn't kill anyone's scores.)

I don't believe that DPC lends itself to subtlety. In a gallery or museum, you can spend litterally hours looking at a piece. Here, the clock is ticking till the challenge is over. When there are 300+ pictures and only 7 days, you don't have the luxury of looking till you finally get it.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 08:23:15 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 03/29/2024 08:23:15 AM EDT.