| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/29/2006 12:47:56 AM · #1 |
My entry on the recently concluded Hands challenge:
Messiah Complex
As the title indicates, the photo is my interpretation of a not uncommon psychological condition (see definitions of Messiah Complex), not a blatant profanation of the concerned religion and its denominations.
I know I'm no Heida or Librodo but I think people should place a photo's technical merits (or lack of it) before their own prejudices when voting and, especially, when commenting.
I understand (and also came to expect) that some people found it offensive and deliberately lowered their votes, deeming the image sacrilegeous. I've come to this realization early on in the challenge.
What ticks me off, however, is when people comment negatively on something they do not yet understand. I think people who give out unpremeditated opinions should shove their morals up theirs.
I'm not sourgraping nor am I bitter about my score. I just want people to be constructive when commenting. It's hard enough for us newbies to better ourselves at our craft as is without people shoving their prejudices up our faces.
SC, please don't place this in rants, although I wouldn't mind (that much) if you did.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 12:53:20 AM · #2 |
One person said they found it in bad taste. No offense, but take it easy. I used to be a very regular poster on a coffee forum, and someone sent me an email once telling me that my entire raison d'etre was totally wrong because of my choice of a coffee shop.
Realize that what shocks you and what shocks other people are totally different, and realize that if you want to have people grade you on technical merit, make it something that won't evoke an immediate repulsion toward the picture. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 12:59:32 AM · #3 |
| I think the problem is it's a last minute entry, which everybody always seems to regret. Perhaps if you had a bit more time to think, you would have thought that this might not go down too well with some voters. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 01:01:34 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by bluenova:
I think the problem is it's a last minute entry, which everybody always seems to regret. Perhaps if you had a bit more time to think, you would have thought that this might not go down too well with some voters. |
Or worked on the technical merits that you wish others would comment on...
Message edited by author 2006-03-29 01:02:16. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 01:05:25 AM · #5 |
| Don't really expect people to be rational when it comes to religion. I appreciate your coolheaded rebuttal, but I'm sure you knew you were playing with fire when you took the shot. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 01:35:19 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by LedZeppelin588:
One person said they found it in bad taste. No offense, but take it easy. I used to be a very regular poster on a coffee forum, and someone sent me an email once telling me that my entire raison d'etre was totally wrong because of my choice of a coffee shop.
Realize that what shocks you and what shocks other people are totally different, and realize that if you want to have people grade you on technical merit, make it something that won't evoke an immediate repulsion toward the picture. |
But that's not the point...
Granted that there was an "immediate repulsion", the comment still was unwarranted and would not have been brought about had the commenter thought about (and I mean reeeally thought about) what was being portrayed in the photo rather than act upon this impulsive reaction.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 01:44:02 AM · #7 |
| This is my opinion: Photos of this type are done for the purpose of evoking a reaction. Positive or negative. To think any thing else, I believe, would be naive or maybe extreme short sitedness. So how can one be upset at all when that reaction in invoked??? If anything, the more and/or stronger the reactions, then the more that the photo is a success. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 02:09:46 AM · #8 |
Interesting photo.
Your photo was put up to recieve votes and comments. Please do not be upset that people expressed their opinion. That is the objective!
Very few comments are "unwarranted".
The "misunderstood artist" arguement suggests that others do not have a right to express their opinion, even though that is stated objective of the challenge competition. Take the good you can from it, learn, and move on. If you can't learn anything from it, move on anyhow:)
I will be interested to see your future entries. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 02:11:09 AM · #9 |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 02:26:52 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by bluenova:
I think the problem is it's a last minute entry, which everybody always seems to regret. Perhaps if you had a bit more time to think, you would have thought that this might not go down too well with some voters. |
I KNEW it wouldn't go down too well with some voters. That I was ready for (although I must admit, the scores WERE depressing).
As I have been stating previously, it was with the comments (or in this case, comment) that I have problems with.
Originally posted by TooCool:
Or worked on the technical merits that you wish others would comment on... |
Or lack of it, as was also stated. I KNOW it wasn't a great photo, and I wanted people to point out what was wrong, or lacking, with it.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 03:59:37 AM · #11 |
Hoookay, hold up. My fault, Dan, Bud, and Gene, for not making my point clear. So to clarify things:
I'm not raising hell or anything remotely similar to that here. I wasn't upset at the comment but at the thought behind it.
DPC is an international community made up of people from different background, cultures, and ethnicities. I just think that, for the benefit and betterment of everybody in the community, we, as voters and commenters, should encourage growth and improvement within and among each of us.
I just wish people would avoid comments or opinions that, however looked at whichever angle, doesn't have anything but unedifying thoughts and sentiments. C'mon, what could anyone possibly glean from "Bad taste."?
Yes, I may have intentionally created a photo that just asks for a reaction but I would've liked a constructive (however negative) reaction. As I have said in the "Hands" thread, I wouldn't mind, heck I'd even love it, if my photo was raped, lambasted, even murdered, as long as it were in a constructive manner.
A little open-mindedness, please. For all the future entries, not just mine.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 04:20:19 AM · #12 |
Quick question, since I am such a newbie at Photoshop: How did you get the colors to come out so brilliantly in a Black & White photo?
Just hoping to learn new tricks because the PS "How to" book is bigger than my phone book.
Thanks in advance for your help....you can PM me if its easier. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 04:31:25 AM · #13 |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 04:45:58 AM · #14 |
Thanks OJ!! That was a very imformative tutorial and it seems like an easy process.
Now to play around with some of my photos to see what i have learned! :-) |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 05:09:46 AM · #15 |
Your photo got 7 1's, 12 2's and 27 3's. Now that is outrageous. It is not a bad picture and 1's-3's is what you give bad pictures. The voters are going for content, not the photograph and I am afraid there is nothing to be done about it. Your photograph deserved a higher score.
At the other end you see photos that often do better than they deserve. A halfnaked woman or Stars & Stripes for instance, that seems to help get a score upwards.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 05:30:54 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by taterbug:
This is my opinion: Photos of this type are done for the purpose of evoking a reaction. Positive or negative. To think any thing else, I believe, would be naive or maybe extreme short sitedness. So how can one be upset at all when that reaction in invoked??? If anything, the more and/or stronger the reactions, then the more that the photo is a success. |
I agree with taterbug.
You can be assured the person who commented 'bad taste' gave it a one or a two. Mission accomplished.
If it was my shot, I'd be disappointed that it didn't get *more* 1's ! |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 05:57:57 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by blackenedwhite:
My entry on the recently concluded Hands challenge:
Messiah Complex
As the title indicates, the photo is my interpretation of a not uncommon psychological condition (see definitions of Messiah Complex), not a blatant profanation of the concerned religion and its denominations.
|
For the Son of God, you'd think he'd actually know where the nails are supposed to go, or is He trying to mislead us ... |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 06:49:34 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by m:
Originally posted by blackenedwhite:
My entry on the recently concluded Hands challenge:
Messiah Complex
As the title indicates, the photo is my interpretation of a not uncommon psychological condition (see definitions of Messiah Complex), not a blatant profanation of the concerned religion and its denominations.
|
For the Son of God, you'd think he'd actually know where the nails are supposed to go, or is He trying to mislead us ... |
er, yeah...
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 07:25:25 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by GuGi:
Your photo got 7 1's, 12 2's and 27 3's. Now that is outrageous. It is not a bad picture and 1's-3's is what you give bad pictures. The voters are going for content, not the photograph and I am afraid there is nothing to be done about it. Your photograph deserved a higher score. |
Photography is as much if not more about content over the technicals. I can never understand how someone can say a shot doesn't deserve a certain score because of that content. If I can't stand turds and you do a technically perfect photo of a turd, I'm still gonna give it a low score because, well it's a turd. Don't ask me to score it higher because it has perfect DOF, spot on focus, follows the rule of thirds and has incredibly creative lighting. It's still a turd shot... |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 07:33:47 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Photography is as much if not more about content over the technicals. I can never understand how someone can say a shot doesn't deserve a certain score because of that content. If I can't stand turds and you do a technically perfect photo of a turd, I'm still gonna give it a low score because, well it's a turd. Don't ask me to score it higher because it has perfect DOF, spot on focus, follows the rule of thirds and has incredibly creative lighting. It's still a turd shot... |
Brilliant! |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 07:47:39 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by GuGi:
Your photo got 7 1's, 12 2's and 27 3's. Now that is outrageous. It is not a bad picture and 1's-3's is what you give bad pictures. The voters are going for content, not the photograph and I am afraid there is nothing to be done about it. Your photograph deserved a higher score. |
Don't ask me to score it higher because it has perfect DOF, spot on focus, follows the rule of thirds and has incredibly creative lighting. It's still a turd shot... |
Please, I am not telling or asking anyone how to vote, neither is the person who started this thread. We are having a conversation, stating our views.
Rule of thirds is apparently less important than rule of turds.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 07:53:39 AM · #22 |
Let's just suppose that I don't like this picture.
It doesn't matter WHY I don't like this picture, because I'm going to vote it low regardless of why.
If I take the time to TELL you why I don't like it, you should consider it an added bonus. I would be really upset if I left a comment on your photo and then you jumped into a public forum whining about my comment. That's just rude and inconsiderate, and I wouldn't at all be tempted to be open minded in the future. I probably just wouldn't say anything at all, and the quantity of comments on all photos would sneak downhill a little.
Whining about comments, the quality of, the quantity of, the nature of, etc etc etc, is a long-standing tradition here at DPC - and it ALWAYS gets on my nerves.
Two words, my friend. You went to a lot of trouble to make a photo about something that offended someone. They left you two words. You are apparently even more offended by those two words than they were by your photo. Perhaps YOU need to open YOUR mind to the fact that not everyone agrees with YOU that "this" is OK. Just take it as a lesson, if you care, or ignore it, if you don't. No need for this public embarrassment for the commenter.
My opinion. Take it or leave it. |
|
|
|
03/29/2006 08:03:18 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by blackenedwhite:
What ticks me off, however, is when people comment negatively on something they do not yet understand. I think people who give out unpremeditated opinions should shove their morals up theirs. |
There were so many more positive comments than negative! And one of 'em was mine! I feel like you're totally ignoring the positive comments here. Why? What do you expect with a photo like that, anyway? Accept it, dude. People have opinions. They share them because they're proud of them. You have them too. I'm sure somewhere in this world you've spouted opinions at people.... why get angry here? I say you take another look at your comments, take another approach to your reaction to other's having opinions, and just chill.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 08:05:31 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by blackenedwhite:
Hoookay, hold up. My fault, Dan, Bud, and Gene, for not making my point clear. So to clarify things:
I'm not raising hell or anything remotely similar to that here. I wasn't upset at the comment but at the thought behind it.
DPC is an international community made up of people from different background, cultures, and ethnicities. I just think that, for the benefit and betterment of everybody in the community, we, as voters and commenters, should encourage growth and improvement within and among each of us.
I just wish people would avoid comments or opinions that, however looked at whichever angle, doesn't have anything but unedifying thoughts and sentiments. C'mon, what could anyone possibly glean from "Bad taste."?
Yes, I may have intentionally created a photo that just asks for a reaction but I would've liked a constructive (however negative) reaction. As I have said in the "Hands" thread, I wouldn't mind, heck I'd even love it, if my photo was raped, lambasted, even murdered, as long as it were in a constructive manner.
A little open-mindedness, please. For all the future entries, not just mine. |
I've thought the same thing. I have even gotten comments against my American flag image that were just barely helpful...see webster's.
We (or at least I) am here to learn and grow in something I love to do but don't have the means or really opportunity to go to formal school for. We (I am) are submitting for a virtual ribbon but more than that we/I want technical help. People should vote on whether I got the lighting right, whether I totally framed it wrong...no one is going to like what every image stands for but they should be able to vote on its technical merits...and yes I did get a lot of technical help from voters on this image but that one comment was totally uncalled for.
and by the way BRAVO on your submission
Message edited by author 2006-03-29 08:07:44.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2006 08:25:03 AM · #25 |
The picture did not "deserve" a better score, it got the score it got because of the content and the context as well as the group of voters.
You want to know how the picture would be viewed by a random cross-section of photographers and people interested in photography, you got your answer.
Some shots get hosed out of a better score because there is some extra meaning that isn't immediately apparent to voters in the picture alone. For instance a picture not too long ago that was quite heartbreaking taken by a photographer in the last few hours he spent with his father in the hospice. The picture got a major new dimension after the voting. As such, it may have "deserved" a better score than it actually got. That example touches on context rather than content.
There may be content related reasons that also might affect the score "deserved" as opposed to the score "received". One-in-a-million shots that are captured in uncontrolled and chaotic circumstances as opposed to in a contrived studio setting are a good example of this.
Such situations are naturally quite rare and the "deserved" score is generally quite an irrelevant concept. It's usually just an expression of a feeling.
This shot has nothing to it outside of the image. There is enough in the image to judge the picture on it's own merit.
Technically, it's above average. It's not stunning, but it seems fairly well composed and focused. The red could have been deeper and more consistent over the palm.
Content DOES need to have some role to play in the voting and in this case, probably takes MORE of a role than usual because there is nothing really amazing in the technical aspect of it. As for the location of the hole, I've always heard from history teachers and religiously oriented folk that the hole was more likely slightly below where the palm meets the wrist which would provide a much stronger support for the weight of the body (mode of killing in this case was suffocation/exhaustion as practiced by the Romans at the time, with the hands held together above the head - courtesy Grade 8 History teacher with PhD in History), while also not conflicting with the word used to describe Thomas's request to view the 'wounds' in the resurrected Jesus.
So what of the content? I didn't vote and while I'm a pretty religious guy, I can tell you that personally, I was not offended by the picture in the slightest. On the other hand, I found the concept stupid and pointless. Is there a secret hidden message here? Is there anything at all relevant to me? Is there anything I can think of that might be relevant to the average Joe walking down the street? Is it even interesting?
It's got interest to you and if you like it, then be happy with that. You might have some friends who like it too. If you want it to have meaning to a wider group or a more educated group, you're going to have to start by doing more homework :).
I probably would have given it a 2-4 vote depending on how much I thought about it. Thinking more about it probably would have lowered the vote.
Sorry if this bothers you and it is nothing at all against you as a person. I don't think it means that you suck and shouldn't go on taking pictures. Or that you should stop taking pictures that have an edge in your own viewpoint.
I'm just saying that I don't like it and it has nothing to do with the religious offense aspect.
EDIT:
Originally posted by blackendwhite:
C'mon, what could anyone possibly glean from "Bad taste."? |
Easy. You can learn that when you put a picture with strong connection to highly controversial topics, you can expect people to feel strongly about it.
There will always be people who dislike your pictures, just as there will probably also be people who like them. Put something out there on a topic like this and people will feel more strongly about it. They will therefore be more likely to say something and do something in response.
It's always good to examine your picture as to what it's central core is before putting it to other's opinions. When the topic is sensitive, it's doubly important.
It's good for people to think about their religious views and stands, but exactly WHAT and HOW are you trying to make people think with this picture?
I can't think of anything deep, let alone worthwhile myself.
Message edited by author 2006-03-29 08:30:28. |
|
