| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/28/2005 02:08:29 PM · #1 |
This is the most disapointing score I ever had :-(
I don't mean to whine. (well maybe just a little bit). It's not so bad, and I had worse.
The thing is I really thought this was such a self-explanatory image. But now I have a feeling that many did not catch the idea and voted me down for not meeting the challenge...
I would really love to get some constructive criticism. Especially from all those who gave it 2s 3s and 4s.
I would really like to hear what is so wrong in the photo. Don't fear to be harsh.
Thank you!!
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:12:36 PM · #2 |
can't help much adi. i gave it a 7 because i thought it could use just a bit more transition from light to dark. most excellent take on the challenge, way under-appreciated.
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 14:12:55. |
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:14:31 PM · #3 |
I wouldn't be too upset. It has been my experience that many in the arts fiels are not religious and many take offense to the idea. I like what you did. One does have to understand and think though..
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:14:49 PM · #4 |
| Not everyone is schooled in Judeo/Christian literature. |
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:15:53 PM · #5 |
| Firstly, I gave you a 5. There is some over-sensitivity to political / religious / social themes. Either some love it and give decent scores or when they hate it, they slam you to the ground. Secondly, the picture of a page / book is really becoming very boring. It is destined to be treated the same way "Woody" has been. In my eyes, those two things were the most evident weak spots . Then again, I still play with my LEGO set. |
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:16:31 PM · #6 |
Couldn't vote on it obviously, and my screen may be just a little dark, but you probably would have gotten the point across if we were able to read a little more of the phrase "and God divided the light from the darkness" in my opinion anyways. But I still really like the picture. Especially how the word light repeats itself in the visible part of the page.
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 14:17:48. |
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:18:33 PM · #7 |
Sorry,I know you didn't ask me (as I gave you a 6),but this is a meaningful image.hope you feel a bit better :)
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 15:26:48. |
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:25:45 PM · #8 |
It's a great image but lacking in explanation .. you knew what you were shooting, but when I just looked at it - I had no idea what the text was saying. And I'm a Christian. I can imagine that people from other backgrounds would be totally lost.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:26:15 PM · #9 |
I'm sorry, but voting someone down simply because their photo has a religious theme smacks of the worst kind of closed-mindedness.
No one said you have to agree with them....or even that you have to like the picture....but all the guy is saying is, "this is what some people believe."
Vote based on the technical merits of the image, not because you're pissed off at all religious people for daring to believe something you find silly.
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 14:29:17.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:27:20 PM · #10 |
First - thank you so much for the comments! I appreciate it very much.
Originally posted by Ivo:
There is some over-sensitivity to political / religious / social themes. |
I thought about it, but I really thought my photo had another layer of understanding.
Personally, I am not a believer at all. So I expected people to either not recognize the phrase or feel weird about it being too religious.
But didn't anyone notice the fact that I just had a separation between light and darkness in the photo? I mean, where the light is where you can see the word "light" (while the rest of the sentence is not really that important) and the darkness is.. well, where you can't see.
Oh well, I guess I should learn from that, that all issues on debate are a no no...
If anyone has any other comment re improving this one, I'd love to hear. It's a personal favorite of mine, and I would love to know what can make it better.
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 14:30:48.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:42:05 PM · #11 |
I frankly don't think that people voted this image down because of the reason that some here have speculated on, its religious theme.
First of all, the image is not religiously inflammatory nor in one's face in any way, so I don't see any support for the speculation that this is why people would've voted it down. In fact, I would say that people that offer such an explanation are not judging the image on its merits themselves. To be frank, looking at the image, I think it scored right about where one should've expected it to. The voting curve is pretty even and consistent; so, again, I don't see any evidence that anyone voted it down erratically for any reason -- including religion. As to the image, while it may be technically well done, it lacks that WOW factor -- I mean, aside from the lighting, there's nothing else going on... it's just an image of text... very static... in many senses of the word static.
Now, I don't mean to be too critical, it's just that I find the "it was voted down for religious reasons" explanation too easy and misleading.
By the way, Jinjit, everyone has images that do worse than what one expected, so don't feel too bad. Now, you clearly have a great eye, as your portfolio illustrates; so, again, there's no reason to feel bad.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:50:37 PM · #12 |
I did not vote in this challenge. If I had voted, I would have awarded this image a three.
The photograph, IMHO, although it, technically, contains sensory stimuli, fails to emote these sufficiently to arrive at any more than an intellectual transport. Instead of affecting a complex human feeling or state inclusively, it appears to, predominantly, appeal to an intellectual ratio by quoting text from a page. While the repetition of 'dark' and 'light' words is as effective as its selective illumination, the effect, well, remains just that (to me) - an effect.
As a result I remain unmoved, although I feel spoken to. To put it in a different way, the energy of this photograph strikes me as not its own, but as an artifice external to it and external to a gritty emotional experience and transport.
As the photo, technically, is superb, I cannot, in good conscience, rate it any lower.
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 14:50:54.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 02:51:18 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
It's a great image but lacking in explanation .. you knew what you were shooting, but when I just looked at it - I had no idea what the text was saying. And I'm a Christian. I can imagine that people from other backgrounds would be totally lost. |
That's funny, 'cause I'm defintely not, and I got the meaning of the text right away. : )
I gave this one of my highest scores because of the multiple layers it uses: the composition of the lighting, the words on the page, and the subtext of the words themselves. Whether or not you believe in the Judeo-Christian version of the Creation Myth has no bearing on its appropriateness as an exemplar of the concept of "separation." |
|
|
|
02/28/2005 03:12:31 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
I did not vote in this challenge. If I had voted, I would have awarded this image a three.
The photograph, IMHO, although it, technically, contains sensory stimuli, fails to emote these sufficiently to arrive at any more than an intellectual transport. Instead of affecting a complex human feeling or state inclusively, it appears to, predominantly, appeal to an intellectual ratio by quoting text from a page. While the repetition of 'dark' and 'light' words is as effective as its selective illumination, the effect, well, remains just that (to me) - an effect.
As a result I remain unmoved, although I feel spoken to. To put it in a different way, the energy of this photograph strikes me as not its own, but as an artifice external to it and external to a gritty emotional experience and transport.
As the photo, technically, is superb, I cannot, in good conscience, rate it any lower. |
Jinjit, I tend to agree with what Zeus said. I'm just not as hard-line as he is on it. On technical merit alone the picture is a 9 or a 10, but it seems divorced from any real emotional context, and I gave it a 7 in recognition of it's excellence in the one area but as a comment on its lack of passion, basically.
I'd love to have your problem, incidentally; when I'M misunderstoof I get 65 1's and a next-to-last finish, LOL.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 15:13:03.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 03:19:36 PM · #15 |
You know I love so much of your work, and in this case, I think everyone has already said it all and well. I just want to say thank you for asking honestly and taking what was said in the spirit given - to help and offer advice as asked. I wish all threads were handled with such class!!
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 03:34:14 PM · #16 |
I think most everyone posting on this thread is right, to varying degrees. The image is terrific. I'd love to be able to produce something like that myself.
I agree with radiman. Being able to read more of the sentence would have helped. As is, my eye keeps finding the word 'light' over and over.
People here absolutely do vote images down because they don't like the subject matter. Some even tell you when they are doing it.
However, there is always the other side to that coin. If you liked the subject well enough to shoot & submit it, others will like it, too, and vote it higher for that reason. The two sides tend to balance each other out.
To say that "I feel spoken to" and that the image is technically superb, then score it with a 3, doesn't add up in my mind. I'm more inclined to view things along the lines Bear Music described.
Had I voted, I would likely have given you a 6 or 7.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 03:39:08 PM · #17 |
Kylie, I am so glad you can not see me right now.
My face has a brighter color then my hair... ~LOL~
Thank you all so much for the comments (keep them going :-)
This is one of those very rare cases where reading the challenge wording immidiately drew the photo in my head and the result was exactly what I was aiming for. I guess this is why I got so disapointed.
But I was so fixed with my understanding of this photo. I am very greatful to all those who gave me other ideas to think about regarding this one.
Of course I am also so very greatful to all those who liked and understood my photo. Although it might be too arrogant of me to enjoy it as much as I do, it is so heart warming and motivating!
Thank you so!
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 04:42:52 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by KaDi:
Not everyone is schooled in Judeo/Christian literature. |
Ditto.
I figured out from the bits of text I could see that it was a passage about light and dark and I kind of liked the way you'd presented it using light and dark but the text didn't mean anything to me - I certainly had no idea what the entire story was (separating light from dark). I gave it a 6.
On a universal site like this, albeit with a Western slant, it pays not to make assumptions about the cultural and religious background of your fellow DPCers.
Message edited by author 2005-02-28 16:45:07.
|
|
|
|
02/28/2005 04:51:02 PM · #19 |
| I gave it an eight, and it is a nice image. I also agree with bear_music, on his analysis. Compared to other photos in the challenge I don't think it would have ribboned, but it could have placed higher, I agree. |
|
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: 04/16/2024 12:49:25 PM EDT.
