|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/27/2009 06:28:41 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'm believeing less and less in trolls by the day.......yeah, I guess it's possible that people do that, but it sure seems like a lot of effort for no gain, so it just doesn't make sense to me to put much stock in the idea, and there certainly aren't enough to affect the curve. It is what it is. |
I'm not so sure about that. When I was last actively submitting for challenges, the vote wasn't broken down by participants and non-participants. With the exception of the Best of 2008 challenge, for all the challenges currently on the front page, the participant vote is lower than the non-participant vote on most all of the images, sometimes by as much as an entire point. Now, one could say that the people entering the challenge were more discriminating with their vote but, I don't believe that to be the case - check out the two basic challenges, open to non-members and members. If anyone can offer an excuse other than trolls, I'd like to hear it... |
|
|
|
01/27/2009 06:51:23 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'm believeing less and less in trolls by the day.......yeah, I guess it's possible that people do that, but it sure seems like a lot of effort for no gain, so it just doesn't make sense to me to put much stock in the idea, and there certainly aren't enough to affect the curve. It is what it is. |
Originally posted by dahkota:
I'm not so sure about that. When I was last actively submitting for challenges, the vote wasn't broken down by participants and non-participants. With the exception of the Best of 2008 challenge, for all the challenges currently on the front page, the participant vote is lower than the non-participant vote on most all of the images, sometimes by as much as an entire point. Now, one could say that the people entering the challenge were more discriminating with their vote but, I don't believe that to be the case - check out the two basic challenges, open to non-members and members. If anyone can offer an excuse other than trolls, I'd like to hear it... |
Wouldn't that be more of a case for frustrated photogs than the concept of people voting low just for spite?
I guess it's just an attitude and prespective thing for me. If I don't empower them by getting uptight over the few really low votes I get, then they have no hold over me.
On my top five scoring images, only one of which was over 6.8, I got 1-1, 2-2s, and 9-3s.....if I go back to the top ten, I still only add 2-1s, 2-2s, and 9-3s.
I just have to base it on what I see. My #10 image is a 6.2455.....plenty low enough for trolls to stomp it, wouldn't you think?
Went to fifteen.....still only added 1-1, 4-2s, but 16-3s....
So my total for my 15 best-scoring images is: 4-1s, 8-2s, and 34-3s....and the threes break down to 2 and changes 3s per image.
I just don't think I have any room to squawk. It looks to me like I've been treated pretty decently.
|
|
|
|
01/27/2009 07:15:56 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Wouldn't that be more of a case for frustrated photogs than the concept of people voting low just for spite?
I guess it's just an attitude and prespective thing for me. If I don't empower them by getting uptight over the few really low votes I get, then they have no hold over me.
I just don't think I have any room to squawk. It looks to me like I've been treated pretty decently. |
I'm not squawking or complaining. I couldn't care less about scores and I find the ranting about them amusing.
I was simply replying to your statement about there not being trolls. I disagree, and I would argue that the people you refer to in your first sentence above can be considered trolls. Frustrated over their scores or just out of spite, anyone who votes lower to either raise their ranking or lower someone else's score is a troll, plain and simple. |
|
|
|
01/27/2009 07:43:02 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by fir3bird:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Vented....done. |
Yup, I post nit-pics and they make DAMN LITTLE DIFFERENCE
in the scores I give.
Posts like yours have a tendency to keep some people from making
comments. I like comments on my entries, as few as I make. I will take ALL COMMENTS given on my work. If someone posts that my entry looks like SH*T my back is waxed just like a duck. Crap slides right off. So if you can't stand the heat, I'd respectfully suggest that you get out of the kitchen. At least you posted this in rant where the entire membership won't see your lovely attitude. |
Well then, I'm so glad that I waxed MY back, prior to posting because your comments here have just slllid right off. :) |
|
|
|
01/27/2009 08:00:29 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
The second one (the buggy), I did not mark those as helpful because I couldn't move an entire set of buildings nor, did I want to! If you look at the description I put in on this one....the very fact that the buggy was sitting in an industrial area was PART of what I was trying to portray in this shot! So, it wasn't "helpful" to me that the buildings were a "distraction" (as talked about in my original post). |
Regardless of your own intent, isn't it "helpful" to know how people will react to a similar image in the future? Your own interpretation or vision just may be out-of-step with the general public -- absolutely a good idea in an artist -- but don't you want to know where your vision lies on the public perception spectrum? I find pretty much any comment which gives me any insight at all as to what the viewer thought when the photo popped up on their screen to be "helpful" -- I might think their opinion is BS, but I know how they reacted. Whether I want to take that potential reation into account in future submissions is a separate question. |
Sorry, but this is assuming that I did find the comment helpful. In this particular shot and this particular instance, I did not find the comment helpful to me so, are you saying that I NEED to check off and be "thankful" for everyone's comments, whether or not I find them helpful, just because they commented? That's what this type of message seems to be saying. :)
I try to make as many comments as I can find the time to make or more importantly, in giving comments that I feel I MAY help with in some way. Do I expect that everyone will check them off as "helpful"? NO! And, heaven knows, I have made lots of comments that others don't check off as helpful. Do I take offense to that? NO! I don't expect that my comments will be helpful for a number of reasons that only that photographer knows.
So, that track runs both ways. In giving a comment, one must also respect the fact that it might not be helpful to the photog or his/her situation or individual shot. I don't make comments to collect check marks but, I give them honestly and in the same turn, I won't give check marks as Brownie points!
If one were to look at my overall images and the fact that most of the comments are checked as helpful, one would get a better perspective on the fact that I DO look at each point and take them all into consideration.
It's just HIGHLY lopsided and suspicious that  Chinabun went through my portfolio, to take only these two photos out in an attempt to make her own point. |
|
|
|
01/27/2009 08:01:28 PM · #56 |
Ok so what about the comments that tell you about your lighting? and your shots out of focus? You didn't check those as helpful. The reason I didn't pick other photos is because you are complaining about buildings being removed and the image I chose is of what you are complaining about.
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by Chinabun:
I see quite a few comments that people left that were trying to be helpful and maybe that's why your shot scored low, but it seems that you only mark helpful when it's someone who says they love your shot.
In these two you have good and bad comments but the only ones marked helpful are the ones who agree with you or "understand" what you were working with.
 |
You've picked two of my dozens of entries. And, yes...there are some unmarked. The tomato shot...everyone said the same thing, I got the point and didn't revisit the comments afterwards...got the points. And, if you really looked, you'd see that I did mark those types of comments helpful on a lot of them. Call it battle fatique and point taken.
The second one (the buggy), I did not mark those as helpful because I couldn't move an entire set of buildings nor, did I want to! If you look at the description I put in on this one....the very fact that the buggy was sitting in an industrial area was PART of what I was trying to portray in this shot! So, it wasn't "helpful" to me that the buildings were a "distraction" (as talked about in my original post).
However, in being fair....did you look at the dozens, upon dozens of other shots where I have marked all comments as helpful?! Or, were you "cherry picking" the 2 photos to bolster a "nit pick"? :) |
|
|
|
|
01/27/2009 08:01:58 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
I think that we are a part of a very diverse, culturally and otherwise, website with people of all creeds and levels, and that we should learn to take the good and take the bad as a part of it. As for saying that any image place on this site is automatically demanding technical critique? Hrm, demanding, no, but open for? Yes. That's what this site is. It's what it always has been. There are plenty of ways to find higher ground and level of discourse here, and many people have it and find it. That doesn't mean that just outright calling out people for leaving comments you don't enjoy is good either.
There's only one way to lift the level of discourse and education, and that's to become a teacher. Just sitting back and whining and hoping it happens automatically isn't helping anyone. It also doesn't help to believe that your own photography is above critique. It's your right to believe that that photograph that sells to a magazine is untouchable, but if you put it out there to a wider general audience, it becomes open season. Period. Not saying that you are like this completely, but I get that feeling from your posts a lot.
I don't know what else to really tell you, but like someone above me said, even a comment like "That crack in the wall is very distracting" helps me in a lot of ways AS PERTAINING TO THE IMMEDIATE NATURE of the challenges and the reason I'm submitting to this website in the first place, and that reason is very simple, competition. I am here to learn to score well in a mass market. If that means having to deal with things that I wouldn't even think about dealing with on a photo that is going up in a gallery, or a photo I'm selling to a newspaper, or a photo that I'm hanging on Aunt Linda's wall, then so be it. If that means listening to people that for 90% of my outside DPC photography life, I wouldn't give the time of day to, so be it.
There's a vast world of photography out there, and DPC itself is a vast melting-pot of photography and photographers. Like Posthumous and many others, it's about finding your own niche within it, but letting go enough to play the game as well. C'est la vie and all that. Instead of trying to change the entire site to your liking, hammer out a small part of it for yourself and let the rest roll off you.
Or continue to believe that your way of looking at things is the only way of looking at things and continually be disappointed and bitter :) |
Just a point here to consider, Ed....in talking about a mass market, there are all kinds of "mass markets" in photography. Street photography for instance, is not well liked in DPC because it doesn't fit the mold of DPC's tradtional qualities. Technicals are usually horrendous by DPC voting standards as one example. Yet, there is a "mass market" for Street photography. The same holds true of other styles of photography such as candids.
Point? Well, my point is that in saying that one is learning to appeal to "the mass market" by learning how to please the voters/members in DPC, one can only say that they have learned to appeal to ONE type of "mass market" and therefore, is pegging themselves into a particular style. That is why I also belong to other sites otherwise, I could become pegged into one hole and one hole only type of photography.
Just a thought. |
Context. I am learning to appeal to the mass market of DPC and DPC alone when I enter on DPC. Kind of goes without saying, I thought.
*EDIT* Especially since my whole reply was based on, you know, talking about DPC specific things ;D |
LOL...well, at least you can say that you know your "mass market"! ;) |
|
|
|
01/27/2009 08:12:28 PM · #58 |
Well, there are those who do tend to habitually check off every single comment as "helpful"...even the ones that simply say "yes...." and nothing else....such as a comment in this one  :) There's a lot of people who feel that they should mark even if it makes no sense at all! May I ask what you found helpful in that "yes...." comment that furthers your photographic skils??? :)
Personally, I don't feel the need to mark shots as helpful if I, personally, don't feel that they are helpful. It only sets up a situation where everyone feels that it's ok to give whatever comments they feel like giving and getting a "reward" for just saying anything.
Originally posted by Chinabun:
Ok so what about the comments that tell you about your lighting? and your shots out of focus? You didn't check those as helpful. The reason I didn't pick other photos is because you are complaining about buildings being removed and the image I chose is of what you are complaining about.
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by Chinabun:
I see quite a few comments that people left that were trying to be helpful and maybe that's why your shot scored low, but it seems that you only mark helpful when it's someone who says they love your shot.
In these two you have good and bad comments but the only ones marked helpful are the ones who agree with you or "understand" what you were working with.
|
You've picked two of my dozens of entries. And, yes...there are some unmarked. The tomato shot...everyone said the same thing, I got the point and didn't revisit the comments afterwards...got the points. And, if you really looked, you'd see that I did mark those types of comments helpful on a lot of them. Call it battle fatique and point taken.
The second one (the buggy), I did not mark those as helpful because I couldn't move an entire set of buildings nor, did I want to! If you look at the description I put in on this one....the very fact that the buggy was sitting in an industrial area was PART of what I was trying to portray in this shot! So, it wasn't "helpful" to me that the buildings were a "distraction" (as talked about in my original post).
However, in being fair....did you look at the dozens, upon dozens of other shots where I have marked all comments as helpful?! Or, were you "cherry picking" the 2 photos to bolster a "nit pick"? :) |
|
|
|
|
|
01/28/2009 10:32:26 AM · #59 |
I think to have this discussion we might need to agree that there's an abundance of ridiculous criticism that get's tossed around that lacks serious perspective. If you don't agree with that or don't care then there's not much point having this talk.
Someone PMed me yesterday saying that they were just here to have fun and they don't take things too seriously. That's fine and I get that BUT there are some folks here who do take this stuff, deeply and personaly. Some of those folks have even carved themselves out really serious carreers...Joey Lawrence, Julia "grigrigirl" Bailey to name a few. There are easily 30 people who began here and now make respectable money...perhaps $800-10,000 per day, maybe more.
If you look at their work you'll see a good deal of their sucess is in their ability to think broadly, "out of the box" and NOT get bogged down in the silly stuff I'm railing against. Some folks can tune that stuff out some can't, won't or don't know better. I'd simple prefer acting to let people know what I think
of these comments since I found them a little harmful when I was first going. If it weren't for the saving grace of may 10 (well studied) members I may have thought that my work sucked. Since I like to shoot I may have gravitated to the mainstream to connect.
Gen IE-Thinking about your waiting by the newstand to see reactions, comment. Has anybody ever seen a comments box by art that's hanging in the museums?
Could you imagine Picasso checking in daily at Museo del Prado, in Madrid to see his comments...
"you have a slight magenta shift in the skin tones. You can easily fix that with a selective adjustment. Otherewise good luck."
" nice picture but I'm not too crazy about her expression"
"the little girl is cute but too bad about the eyes"
"I kinda like the muted tones but the brighter colors hurt my eyes. Maybe it's just my monitor?"
"the horse is a bit of a distraction that keeps pulling my eye"
"this is a good pick but it would be better without the horse"
"creepy image. You may want to fix the horizon that would make this better. It's not too bad just off by a hair.Good Luck!
Message edited by author 2009-01-28 10:38:43. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 10:38:20 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Could you imagine Picasso checking in daily at Museo del Prado, in Madrid to see his comments...
"you have a slight magenta shift in the skin tones. You can easily fix that with a selective adjustment. Otherewise good luck."
" nice picture but I'm not too crazy about her expression"
"the little girl is cute but too bad about the eyes"
I kinda like the muted tones but the brighter colors hurt my eyes. Maybe it's just my monitor?"
"the horse is a bit of a distraction that keeps pulling my eye"
"this is a good pick but it would be better without the horse"
"creepy image. You may want to fix the horizon that would make this better. It's not too bad just off by a hair.Good Luck! |
I'd wager that comments just like those were made when Picasso introduced this piece. Probably by serious art critics of the day. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 10:40:41 AM · #61 |
I'm so glad he didn't listen to those jack-asses. Aren't you?
Keep in mind, what he did was so over the top...probably scary for his day. So, I could honestly understand people freaking out.
What bothers or annoys the crowd here is often minor or fabricated. A lot of folks here are taught to agressively find flaws no matter how small or insignificant.
What will we find in Marc Chagalls comment box at The Museum Of Modern Art...
"too busy"
"a better crop would make this more effective"
"Cutting off the mans ear bothers me for some reason. Nice tonal range. Looks like LucisArt."
"Tone mapping isn't my favorite and I don't think it works very well here"
"This would be good if you showed more of the mans face. The blown catch light in his eye is also a bit distracting. You could fix that in Photoshop"
Message edited by author 2009-01-28 15:06:47. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 10:58:36 AM · #62 |
| I'm not sure if it is really nitpicking, or an effort to explain a mediocre to low vote. Depends on how it is perceived, I suppose. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 11:20:15 AM · #63 |
Ok what's your point? I'M NOT THE ONE WHINING about comments. That would be YOU.
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Well, there are those who do tend to habitually check off every single comment as "helpful"...even the ones that simply say "yes...." and nothing else....such as a comment in this one :) There's a lot of people who feel that they should mark even if it makes no sense at all! May I ask what you found helpful in that "yes...." comment that furthers your photographic skils??? :)
Personally, I don't feel the need to mark shots as helpful if I, personally, don't feel that they are helpful. It only sets up a situation where everyone feels that it's ok to give whatever comments they feel like giving and getting a "reward" for just saying anything.
Originally posted by Chinabun:
Ok so what about the comments that tell you about your lighting? and your shots out of focus? You didn't check those as helpful. The reason I didn't pick other photos is because you are complaining about buildings being removed and the image I chose is of what you are complaining about.
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Originally posted by Chinabun:
I see quite a few comments that people left that were trying to be helpful and maybe that's why your shot scored low, but it seems that you only mark helpful when it's someone who says they love your shot.
In these two you have good and bad comments but the only ones marked helpful are the ones who agree with you or "understand" what you were working with.
|
You've picked two of my dozens of entries. And, yes...there are some unmarked. The tomato shot...everyone said the same thing, I got the point and didn't revisit the comments afterwards...got the points. And, if you really looked, you'd see that I did mark those types of comments helpful on a lot of them. Call it battle fatique and point taken.
The second one (the buggy), I did not mark those as helpful because I couldn't move an entire set of buildings nor, did I want to! If you look at the description I put in on this one....the very fact that the buggy was sitting in an industrial area was PART of what I was trying to portray in this shot! So, it wasn't "helpful" to me that the buildings were a "distraction" (as talked about in my original post).
However, in being fair....did you look at the dozens, upon dozens of other shots where I have marked all comments as helpful?! Or, were you "cherry picking" the 2 photos to bolster a "nit pick"? :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
01/28/2009 11:24:08 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I'm so glad he didn't listen to those jack-asses. Aren't you?
Keep in mind, what he did was so over the top...probably scary for his day. So, I could honestly understand people freaking out.
What bothers or annoys the crowd here is often minor or fabricated. A lot of folks here are taught to agressively find flaws no matter how small or insignificant.
What will we find in Marc Chahalls cooment box at The Museum Of Modern Art...
"too busy"
"a better crop would make this more effective"
"Cutting off the mans ear bothers me for some reason. Nice tonal range. Looks like LucisArt."
"Tone mapping isn't my favorite and I don't think it works very well here"
"This would be good if you showed more of the mans face. The blown catch light in his eye is also a bit distracting. You could fix that in Photoshop" |
I wouldn't get hung up on what DPC commenters would say about works from masters in the fine art world.
I hate to break it to you, but 99% of the images here are not fine art and never will be. Most are from people trying to develop their art and skill set; the comments and suggestions could potentially help in the regard. The site also allows people to see how their images and interpretations measure up to others.
If the comments aren't particularly helpful, then my advice is:
Don't sweat the small stuff, . . . and it's all small stuff. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 11:47:46 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I'm so glad he didn't listen to those jack-asses. Aren't you?
Keep in mind, what he did was so over the top...probably scary for his day. So, I could honestly understand people freaking out.
What bothers or annoys the crowd here is often minor or fabricated. A lot of folks here are taught to agressively find flaws no matter how small or insignificant.
What will we find in Marc Chahalls cooment box at The Museum Of Modern Art...
"too busy"
"a better crop would make this more effective"
"Cutting off the mans ear bothers me for some reason. Nice tonal range. Looks like LucisArt."
"Tone mapping isn't my favorite and I don't think it works very well here"
"This would be good if you showed more of the mans face. The blown catch light in his eye is also a bit distracting. You could fix that in Photoshop" |
Here's the way I look at it:
DPC is our "museum" and the people who stroll through it checking out the images are our "masses that frequent the museum." *Comments* are like a little window into the mind of the masses. When I lived in NYC I had membership at the Modern and I used to spend a lot of time there when I wasn't in class. I watched people walking around, *reacting* to the Chagalls and the Picassos, and I would have paid any price to be able to *hear* what they were thinking, because I was, and am, fascinated by how people react to art. I strongly suspect that you tongue-in-cheek "comments" on this Chagall (and on the Picasso too, for that matter) actually DO represent what *some* people think when they look at the painting (leaving out the photoshop-centric comments, of course).
Anyway, that's what comments at DPC are, to me, a device for listening-in on what people are thinking as they view an image, *my* image. I appreciate them all because I find it all so *interesting*...
As far as "nit-picking" goes, I'm probably one of the great nit-pickers in DPC. I'm not afraid to dissect images and find out which components seem to be working *for* the image and which are working *against* it. I'm not unaware, when I do this, that sometimes the shooter had no choice, but it doesn't mean the referenced component is not still working against the image; just that, sometimes, the image can transcend its own limitations, whether they be technical or compositional. We do see plenty of instances at DPC where ribbon-winning images have transcended imperfections in the eyes of the voters. For one example from my own work, I got a red with this very dramatic but seriously flawed (technically) image:
So I don't think the voters are always such sheep when it comes to be automatically turned off by anything-less-than-perfection.
In the meanwhile, though, if we take the word "comment" and replace it with "critique", then we find we're dealing with something pretty universal, for what it's worth. That is to say, out there in the "real world" we have *artists* and we have *critics*, and the artists (the painters, the sculptors, the poets, the film-makers, whoever) have always had a love-hate relationship with the critics; they want to be seen, to be noticed, and the critics play a vital role in this, but at the same time they feel misunderstood and mistreated whenever a critic doesn't "get it". And so forth and so on. You know what I mean; you live in New York City.
I'll continue offering my (occasional) detailed critiques as the mood strikes me, because no matter how much it is (or may be) *ART*, an image is still created with *CRAFT*, and craft can be dissected, commented upon, and (hopefully) improved. I have no problem with separating the craft from the art, and offering my impressions on the former as completely separate from my appreciation of the latter. And I'm sure I've shown, in the Lensbaby thread for example, that I am not hung up on some arbitrary definition of "technique" as it relates to photography...
R.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2009 11:59:18 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I'm so glad he didn't listen to those jack-asses. Aren't you? |
But why are they jack-asses if the work just didn't appeal to them?
Personally, I don't care for Picasso's work.
That doesn't make me a jack-ass, other things do, it's a taste thing.
I'm a more traditional fan, like Wyeth, Remington, or to go surreal, Dali.
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Keep in mind, what he did was so over the top...probably scary for his day. So, I could honestly understand people freaking out. |
Wait a minute.....so now they're NOT jack-asses???? They just didn't understand or care for the work?.....8>)
Originally posted by pawdrix:
What bothers or annoys the crowd here is often minor or fabricated. A lot of folks here are taught to agressively find flaws no matter how small or insignificant. |
Wait.....why is it that you are so bent out of shape about others' opinions anyway?
That's all they are.....their opinions based on their feelings and perceptions. If you find them incorrect for your usage, fine, but it doesn't make them any less valid in their interpretation of the image.
And what's with this "taught to agressively find flaws no matter how small or insignificant"???
How??? Where??? When???? I never got that memo....
That's the thing.......you can never tell what's good or bad 'til you have a buyer, or don't.....what if someone wants to have an image they saw of yours blown up to 4 by 6 feet, on canvas, in an elaborate gilt frame......yet it's an image that you don't particularly think is all that good?
If we're talking about a $2800 package, is it art, or does the image suck and the guy's an idiot, albeit a rich one, who wants the wrong thing?
Part of the reason I ask is because I have two images that I have sold recently, one of which is photographically challenged, yet sold for GOOD money in two days at the gallery where it was juried, yet two of the jurors plain flat didn't like it, and it did a 5.4 here in a challenge.....and the 5.4 wasn't because it was shoehorned, it just has its share of flaws. The other one did a 6.135, has received much critical acclaim, won a contest for $300, sold a big print, been juried, and I love the thing (28x35 on my dining room wall)......but it is flaw-ridden as well.
So I was happy to get the feedback, and the perspective from here as well as the other venues that I've shown and sold images, and I will continue to enter work, and post images to get the impressions from other photogs that I do here.
It seems to me that this place will give you a concentrated cross-section of people who will give you feedback, I for one am thrilled to get so much diversity in commentary, and if you don't like what someone says, big deal.....move on.
I guess my beef is that I get sort of frustrated with having people wanting to qualify commentary, grumbling that they want comments on one hand, others say they don't, some only want complimentary comments, others say the comments are wrong.......make up my freakin' mind already!
Why on earth would you post up images and/or enter challenges if you're going to get annoyed by comments? |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 12:15:47 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
That's the thing.......you can never tell what's good or bad 'til you have a buyer, or don't.....what if someone wants to have an image they saw of yours blown up to 4 by 6 feet, on canvas, in an elaborate gilt frame......yet it's an image that you don't particularly think is all that good? |
In my experience this site has a lot less to do with the fine art market than the world of advertising art. Images best liked here tend to be those that would do well in a mass market magazine; colorful, sharp, and a bit sexy if possible. The sort of images found in magazines like Apature which fine art photography buyers tend to buy, tend to get snubbed here. This web site is not a juried exebition, it is democracy in action. Sometimes that drives me crazy, but it is the nit pickers and the technical hounds that rip my entry that I'm here for. And to be honest while the ones and twos are awful I know I have no more earned them than the tens. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 01:03:45 PM · #68 |
Perspective.
Comments do act on people. What I'm trying to point out is that comments and atittudes do get into peoples heads. One of the biggest ironies is that my commercial work...or what art directors request goes directly against the grain of the site. If I listened to a lot of folks here, I'd have my thumb up my ass. Maybe it's worth letting them know on occasion, what the deal is...?
I can't speak or relate this to everybody but it's a bizarre thing when a string of people tell you, what you should have done, how you could have made it better...or that you made a wrong choice, when the choice was made by a highly paid, experienced professionals with years and years of experience, as opposed to the critic who just picked up a 350D Rebel last month. You tell me...
Some people completely lack perspective. If they are bold enough to make a comment that lacks perspective or a better educated pov...knee jerk reactions based on a few comment they themselves received the week before they might be in line for some straightening out, every now and again. If education is the goal. I suppose it could/should cut both ways. No?
I'm not calling for a major smack down but if a few folks help put the breaks on some of the extreme, more ridiculous shizzle when they notice it or find the time it could be helpful for those who wish to breathe more creatively.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know 3/4 of the site doesn't care but most of the comments I'm speaking of come from noobs or beginners and perhaps if they were better steered from the get go the site would be more up to date to current trends, ways of seeing and a whole huge world of money making opportunities.
eta: Maybe I'll just become a one man wrecking crew and crack open a few cans of whoop ass on some unsuspecting commenters. That sounds fair...
eta again: Bear if I know the person who's critique my work and they understand what I'm doing my atittude is day and night from people who view work anonymously and throw around advice like nickles.
Message edited by author 2009-01-28 13:42:35. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 01:31:42 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Perspective.
eta: Maybe I'll just become a one man wrecking crew and crack open a few cans of whoop ass on some unsuspecting commenters. That sounds fair... |
Okay, SIR!!!
Have a great day!!
(Backs away s l o w l y smiling & nodding.....) |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 01:43:02 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
eta: Maybe I'll just become a one man wrecking crew and crack open a few cans of whoop ass on some unsuspecting commenters. That sounds fair... |
Or, you could follow site rules and respond calmly, rationally, and politely as to exactly why you might disagree with the commenter's opinion. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 01:48:25 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I can't speak or relate this to everybody but it's a bizarre thing when a string of people tell you, what you should have done, how you could have made it better...or that you made a wrong choice, when the choice was made by a highly paid, experienced professionals with years and years of experience, as opposed to the critic who just picked up a 350D Rebel last month. You tell me... |
Well... The "critic who just picked up a 350D Rebel last month" has his/her own particular POV, his/her own particular expectations, as it were, and has chosen (it IS voluntary, ya know?) to express how this image measures up, so to speak, against these "requirements". The "highly paid, experienced professionals with years and years of experience", likewise, have their own particular POVs, their own particular requirements, and they have themselves "rated" your image against their needs/expectations, with your "ribbon" in this case being tangible cash upon purchase.
So what are you saying? I mean, the dynamics are identical, just the audience and the rewards are different. hat's not so well appreciated here may meet with acclaim elsewhere; we all know that, it's inevitable. The problem is, it sounds to us like you're making the assertion that your cutting-edge art directors somehow represent a more *valuable* or *correct* or *~whatever~* point of view, artistically and/pr commercially, than the voting collective (or the commenting collective) on DPC. In other words, you're expressing the hope that we can *change* the collective DPC gestalt to embrace these sorts of images more readily, presumably at the expense of the ones we currently embrace.
I'm not sure that's reasonable. I mean, DPC *is* what it is, and the people, collectively, feel what they feel. If you want a different gestalt, you need a different site. As just one currently-being-discussed example, there's the 1x site, which has a wildly-different aesthetic than DPC. Now, I'm in sympathy with attempting to get DPC voters/commenters to be a little more appreciative of "outlier" aesthetics; this is exactly what people Like Don and others are doing within the Posthumous Awards thread, and in my opinion it has had a trickle-down effect on voting in general, so some more-outré images have done better than one would have expected. But I'm not especially supportive of any idea that DPC becomes a *better* place if these sorts of images consistently rule the roost and currently-favored aesthetic sinks into disrepute (as if that would ever happen), because that would just flip the balance, not change anything fundamentally as far as openness and fairness go.
I'm probably overstating your case, though, I'm sorry. I know you just want a more-level playing field where excellent work, of whatever style, is rewarded accordingly.
R.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2009 01:53:52 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
eta: Maybe I'll just become a one man wrecking crew and crack open a few cans of whoop ass on some unsuspecting commenters. That sounds fair... |
If you truly believe that these are noob, uneducated commenters then instead of opening a can of whoop ass don't you think it would be more educational and productive to inform them the error of there ways? Your whole issue seems to be with the new, uninformed, unguided and inexperienced, how will they learn the proper way, as you see it, unless someone shows them? How did you learn that the way you used to do it, as you stated earlier in the post about regurgitating others comments, is the wrong way? Did someone tell you or did you figure it out yourself? We might as well make this a place for the experienced only, it all just sounds elitist to me. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 01:56:46 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
eta: Maybe I'll just become a one man wrecking crew and crack open a few cans of whoop ass on some unsuspecting commenters. That sounds fair... |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Or, you could follow site rules and respond calmly, rationally, and politely as to exactly why you might disagree with the commenter's opinion. |
I'm pretty sure that's where I'm getting lost.....how can opinions and impressions be wrong?
They are strictly what's been evoked in the viewer.
If the viewer thinks the image should have this or that to be improved, that just means that's what the image needs to suit him/her.
That's not right or wrong, it just is.....
In another thread, when it was discussed about the viewer's imnability to "Get it", it was pointed out that the onus of conveying the point is on the photog. Since the viewers are wide ranging and diverse here, it's inevitable that some won't get it.
C'est la vie.... |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 02:06:47 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
eta: Maybe I'll just become a one man wrecking crew and crack open a few cans of whoop ass on some unsuspecting commenters. That sounds fair... |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Or, you could follow site rules and respond calmly, rationally, and politely as to exactly why you might disagree with the commenter's opinion. |
I'm pretty sure that's where I'm getting lost.....how can opinions and impressions be wrong?
They are strictly what's been evoked in the viewer. |
Sometimes the burden falls on the commenter to express their opinion as an opinion, rather than a pronouncement from on high. Compare the following:
• "You should have used a second light to eliminate the shadows on the model's face."
• "I prefer less-stylized, more evenly-lit portraiture."
Personally, I more-or-less automatically translate the first statement into the second, and thus find the comment helpful rather than irritating. |
|
|
|
01/28/2009 02:13:24 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Well... The "critic who just picked up a 350D Rebel last month" has his/her own particular POV, his/her own particular expectations, as it were, and has chosen (it IS voluntary, ya know?) to express how this image measures up, so to speak, against these "requirements". |
I did jokingly suggest a NO Comments Button but maybe it's not such a bad idea. That would speak louder than words and politely at that.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
you're making the assertion that your cutting-edge art directors somehow represent a more *valuable* or *correct* or *~whatever~* point of view, artistically and/pr commercially, than the voting collective (or the commenting collective) on DPC. |
It's safe to say that balls on accurate.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I'm not sure that's reasonable. I mean, DPC *is* what it is, and the people, collectively, feel what they feel. If you want a different gestalt, you need a different site.
R. |
I think it's reasonable BUT not practical. I am however willing to take a stab at it in whatever small ways I can.
I also find that these threads and discussions usually produce a few posts PM's my way where people state an understanding ro an appreciation for my point of view and when I read those peoples comments you can see a change in how they approach things. The Side Challenges have been brilliant in witnessing maturity all ways around. That of my own and in others.
Maybe the Side Challenges are a better model for elevated learning than the Challenges?
Could anyone here see both being more inline or tightly aligned with one another?
Many good suggestions have been made to guide things in that direction but but it seems like many people are a bit complacent not to rock the boat or challenge the members a bit more.
There are things that keep me floating here but I've never been one for superficial engagement. I'd hate to think it could be time to move but you could be right. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/27/2024 05:10:19 AM  |
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: 04/27/2024 05:10:19 AM EDT.
|
