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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Distressed II - Art Work / Photography
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 19 of 19, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/21/2008 10:43:27 AM · #1
From the response to my "Distressed" thread I'm following up with a perfect example of a work of art being judged as a photograph. As you can see the attached is a macro shot, very soft especially around the perimeter. When this work was judged it received more than one comment about it being blurry and OOF. Well duh, The beauty lies in its color changes, tonal quality, an almost "can feel softness" and its overall serenity. If you don't agree that's ok. The point I'm trying to get across is that there are multiple facet of photography with using photo's to create art one of my favorite pastimes.

You can try it yourself. Take a photo and turn into a non conventional work and see how it is accepted. Maybe great,maybe not but you might enjoy seeing what happens. The attached garnered a whopping 4.7394. Was that the correct rating? Who knows? Maybe it was and maybe it wasn't.

PLEASE NOTE: The attached is not the piece referenced in "Distressed". That work is currently in voting.

Comments please!
louisp



Message edited by author 2008-01-21 10:47:03.
01/21/2008 10:55:20 AM · #2
I am totally with you on this one.
01/21/2008 11:34:51 AM · #3
Originally posted by louisp:

... The point I'm trying to get across is that there are multiple facet of photography with using photo's to create art...
... attached garnered a whopping 4.7394...


I wouldn't consider it art (the beauty attributed to the image derives from and relies entirely on the subject. To consider it art, the made sense would need to be more dominant. As it is, I find something (the mild emphasis on softness along the lines of (personal) aesthetic preference rather than a convincing transport or metaphor. I do, though, see an image of quietly appealing aesthetics, a 5 in my book, a 6, perhaps, for someone more tenderly inclined.
01/21/2008 11:57:41 AM · #4
Originally posted by candlerain:

I am totally with you on this one.


Question. If I did not intend it to be a straight photograph then what would you label it?

louisp

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 11:59:06.
01/21/2008 11:58:39 AM · #5
Originally posted by zeuszen:

Originally posted by louisp:

... The point I'm trying to get across is that there are multiple facet of photography with using photo's to create art...
... attached garnered a whopping 4.7394...


I wouldn't consider it art (the beauty attributed to the image derives from and relies entirely on the subject. To consider it art, the made sense would need to be more dominant. As it is, I find something (the mild emphasis on softness along the lines of (personal) aesthetic preference rather than a convincing transport or metaphor. I do, though, see an image of quietly appealing aesthetics, a 5 in my book, a 6, perhaps, for someone more tenderly inclined.


Question. If I did not intend it to be a straight photograph then what would you label it?
01/21/2008 12:00:35 PM · #6
The thing you seem to be overlooking is the fact that people base their ratings not only on the photo but also on how it fits into the challenge. This shot to me doesn't exactly scream the unseen. Artistically and as a photographer i see the point that yo are trying to make, yes the beauty is in the color and tone changes but why make it grainy and why make the composition so boring. There is definitely an art side to this photo and i can understand what you're trying to say but an artistic photo should not need an explanation of why it's artistic it should be able to speak for itself.

-Dan
01/21/2008 12:04:17 PM · #7
Originally posted by louisp:

... If I did not intend it to be a straight photograph then what would you label it?


How about doing without a label and let it be what it is?

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 12:42:48.
01/21/2008 12:35:38 PM · #8
deleted by OP

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 13:16:57.
01/21/2008 12:49:08 PM · #9
I think the colour on Purple Fantasy is pretty good, purple can be quite difficult. The purple appears accurate.
I might prefer a title which adds description of the bloom, I did not recognize the flower as a pansy until I read your notes. Adding a proper botanical or common name can often contribute a clue to intention. Possibly Purple Pansy or Pansy Fantasy or Pansy Revealed or untitled Pansy. The soft quality, centered, radial view of the bloom and its colour character raise the questions for the viewer for the foto in any context or in the context of this challenge - What is being shown that may not be visible? What is it in this interpretation that am I looking for which reveals something unseen? (I thought this may have some uv characteristic, but apparently not) as opposite of experience, simply looking at the flower or photographed without intention to reveal something unseen.
Your emotive intention does not transfer, the title in this shot does not effect, or provide any clue.
The colour is good, but is not distinctly different from other purples.
The intended intoxication of the softness appears conventional and seeks character of light, without finding it.
voted 5.

01/21/2008 01:15:14 PM · #10
I have to agree with the comments you received. For whatever reason this shot does appear OOF and overall blurry. I think most people want and expect sharpness in MACRO style shots. Art? Well maybe? I think you are headed in the right direction but you should look at other works in the MACRO challenges to see what I mean. Softness and OOF is acceptable in some cases but this one isn’t one of those type of shots IMO. Sometimes OOF or blur can add to a photo. With your flower I think it takes away from it.

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 13:16:54.
01/21/2008 01:18:10 PM · #11
Thanks for the comments.
01/21/2008 01:24:47 PM · #12
I left one of the comments you are referring too. If the intention was art, I guess then it DOES fit into the challenge, because I don't see that. What I do see is a very noisy, soft image. If the intent was art I would hope it would be more smooth and soothing since you're going for "soft" look, that is not what you have there. I believe the scores reflect that. What I don't get is people who whine about scores and then say they don't matter...so why whine then? You entered it into a challenge, it did not meet the challenge in many eyes of voters. You didn't enter it into an "art" challenge. Sorry to be rude but I usually say what's on my mind.
01/21/2008 01:37:37 PM · #13
Soft focus and 'artsy' types of macro shots have done very well here at DPC. Ursula has made it a practice to put in some amazingly well received soft focus shots.



My impression is that the things that separate her images from the one you showed include:

1. Rich and deep colors (not overly saturated however)
2. Fabulous textures, even with the soft focus
3. Interesting composition. (Your shot was taken and displayed dead center and an image that is dead center composition needs to really have a great deal of stuff leading you to the center).
4. High dynamic range (in spite of the softness, there is a 'black' and there is a 'white' section
5. Fantastic use of light to illuminate the subject

Subtle processing has to fit the image and has to be extremely well carried off here to come off as 'on purpose'. If there is noise and soft focus and centered composition and shallow dynamic range and modest interest in the same subject and image, most viewers will assume that these all fit together to show an inexperienced photog that is just learning about their camera.

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 13:40:17.
01/21/2008 02:06:32 PM · #14
Originally posted by jschro:

What I don't get is people who whine about scores and then say they don't matter...so why whine then? You entered it into a challenge, it did not meet the challenge in many eyes of voters. You didn't enter it into an "art" challenge. Sorry to be rude but I usually say what's on my mind.


You are rude and I take exception to your last comments. So what if I stated the work got a whopping 4.something? If I were overly worried about scores I sure the hell would not be in dpc. My work never gets high marks because I am just a rank hobbyist and fact be told my work doesn't deserve better. I've achieved my goal when my score is in the mid to high 5's.

Speak you mind but be mindful of the impact of your assumptions.

louisp

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 14:14:58.
01/21/2008 02:07:19 PM · #15
Originally posted by bassbone:

Soft focus and 'artsy' types of macro shots have done very well here at DPC. Ursula has made it a practice to put in some amazingly well received soft focus shots.



My impression is that the things that separate her images from the one you showed include:

1. Rich and deep colors (not overly saturated however)
2. Fabulous textures, even with the soft focus
3. Interesting composition. (Your shot was taken and displayed dead center and an image that is dead center composition needs to really have a great deal of stuff leading you to the center).
4. High dynamic range (in spite of the softness, there is a 'black' and there is a 'white' section
5. Fantastic use of light to illuminate the subject

Subtle processing has to fit the image and has to be extremely well carried off here to come off as 'on purpose'. If there is noise and soft focus and centered composition and shallow dynamic range and modest interest in the same subject and image, most viewers will assume that these all fit together to show an inexperienced photog that is just learning about their camera.


What a great tutorial! Your reply is a perfect example of what DPC is all about. Thank you so very much.

louisp

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 14:08:43.
01/22/2008 02:18:50 AM · #16
Sometimes the truth hurts.

I am not questioning your photographical (I think I just made up a word) abilities. I am merely stating for this particular photo I don't see (ironic?) what you were getting at without a lengthy explanation from you. A picture should be able to stand on it's own merit. This one didn't IMHO. I've been there, done that. Guess what, I take bad shots too....well bad isn't what I'm looking for, maybe ineffective would be better. In fact, look at my submission for that same challenge....not good, I knew it but thought atleast the idea was creative so gave it a shot.

Don't take things so seriously...this is supposed to be fun.
01/22/2008 03:07:17 AM · #17
Welcome exposition by bassbone, worth study. Worth adding that Ursula also knows how to use the camera to see - at least that is what I see when I look at her work: however 'artsy,' it seems totally camera or lens based in a way that I can only dream about.
01/22/2008 05:18:22 AM · #18
i totally agree with you
01/22/2008 11:25:48 AM · #19
I recommend having a look at Dax- folio also if you're interested in arty macro photography.



Message edited by author 2008-01-22 11:26:38.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 02:33:43 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 02:33:43 AM EDT.