dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3577
share rss forum feed


29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to rcroning

Re: Excellent photo?

Nonsense. What's the story here: »/showpic/dimag···316&p=3?

Quoting from your post: :"If one is oblivious, one will not get it."

Why the personal attack mode; my comment simply said that art may or may not tell a story.



Coma
Thanks Steve
Premium
join:2001-12-30
NirvanaLand

1 recommendation


A horny flower ?



rcroning
D700 Rocks
Premium
join:2005-05-21
Winnipeg, MB

Horny flower!!! Absolutely!! Just waiting to "bee" had!!!

Like I said, the oblivious won't get it


krazyboi
Premium
join:2008-06-27
Mckinney, TX
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to SueS

said by SueS:

said by krazyboi:

I overall tend to like pictures with:

good composition
good lighting
clean backgrounds

I also like candids over posed portaits, unless it's 'creative' posed portraits.
I like HDR but not overused HDR on landscapes.
list goes on....

Are all those photos with those criteria excellent in your opinion or do you just like them?

IMO, kinda Both. I enjoy art/photography and feel it is subjective... so with that, I like seeing people 'progress' and get better. I'm not going to knock someone for trying or seizing the moment. Hard to learn if you're not trying or experimenting. As a photographer we sorta know what goes into making an 'excellent' picture. The 'criteria' are mainly for those who will post the same type of picture over & over and ask what is wrong with it. I'm on Instagram and majority of the photos there are from smartphones and I still enjoy looking at those pictures as much as browsing through Flickr or 500px.
Expand your moderator at work


richdelb
Go Hawks Go
Premium
join:2003-01-22
Algonquin, IL

3 recommendations

reply to SueS

Re: Excellent photo?

Reading this tread made me look at my photos in the gallery and ask "Are any of mine excellent?"

JKK thought this one was "excellent". Does it make it so? I don't know.. I like it (or I would not have posted it, I guess)

I think "excellent" is subjective.

I guess you can use technical indicators to see judge if a picture is properly exposed, in focus, composed correctly (rule of thirds being one "example" but not a DEMAND). If a person or subject is half way cut off the frame, that would be a demerit, etc. But an overall evaluation of "excellent"??? It's too subjective and individualized to be painted with a broad stroke.

The answer, in my opinion, is "It depends"

»/showpic/dimag···folder=0

Is this shot "excellent"? I don't know, but I thought it was good enough to share with you all, so I thought it was "up there"......



29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to rcroning

You're obviously (perhaps obliviously) avoiding my response to your statement that "All art tells a story"; perhaps you don't really believe it.


krazyboi
Premium
join:2008-06-27
Mckinney, TX
kudos:1
reply to richdelb

said by richdelb:

I think "excellent" is subjective.

I guess you can use technical indicators to see judge if a picture is properly exposed, in focus, composed correctly (rule of thirds being one "example" but not a DEMAND). If a person or subject is half way cut off the frame, that would be a demerit, etc. But an overall evaluation of "excellent"??? It's too subjective and individualized to be painted with a broad stroke.

The answer, in my opinion, is "It depends"

I agree....


SueS
Premium
join:2007-05-16
Macon, MO
kudos:2
reply to 29886823

said by 29886823:

You still haven't listed a single excellent photo that exists on this site. Hard to believe.

I am not one to point fingers, so I will not pick out any photos from our gallery.


SueS
Premium
join:2007-05-16
Macon, MO
kudos:2

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to richdelb

said by richdelb:

Reading this tread made me look at my photos in the gallery and ask "Are any of mine excellent?"

JKK thought this one was "excellent". Does it make it so? I don't know.. I like it (or I would not have posted it, I guess)

I think "excellent" is subjective.

I guess you can use technical indicators to see judge if a picture is properly exposed, in focus, composed correctly (rule of thirds being one "example" but not a DEMAND). If a person or subject is half way cut off the frame, that would be a demerit, etc. But an overall evaluation of "excellent"??? It's too subjective and individualized to be painted with a broad stroke.

The answer, in my opinion, is "It depends"

»/showpic/dimag···folder=0

Is this shot "excellent"? I don't know, but I thought it was good enough to share with you all, so I thought it was "up there"......

This was my reason for asking, I was sure we all had different ideas for the word. I like to reserve the word for the best of the best. If we were all making excellent images, wouldn't they be hanging in galleries?

I see wonderful photos everyday and enjoy them, but I don't necessarily think they are all excellent. The word means of a very high quality or standard. I also think that because so many folks are doing photography today that the bar is continually rising.


29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3

Who decides if a photograph is 'good' enough to hang in a museum? I think that if enough people with technical and artistic experience decide that a photograph is excellent it most likely is. In this sense excellent might be defined as a collective decision, and not a mix of disparate opinions.
I disagree that we all have different ideas of excellence - then nothing would hang in galleries. There has to be some common acceptance of what excellence means, or else it means nothing.
I also think that your statement that the bar for excellence is continually rising is also not quite true; there may be more people using better equipment, but for some time now equipment can be ruled out as a determining factor, while the human element remains the same.



29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3

said by SueS:

This was my reason for asking, I was sure we all had different ideas for the word. I like to reserve the word for the best of the best. If we were all making excellent images, wouldn't they be hanging in galleries?

I was under the impression that we had a Gallery here, and that possibly we had some excellent photos posted here.


rcroning
D700 Rocks
Premium
join:2005-05-21
Winnipeg, MB

4 recommendations

reply to SueS

marti hack old chap,

The only reason I did not respond to you is because it's a waste of breath and bandwidth. While others offer opinions, which they are entitled to, you just get argumentative. That seems to be they way you always are and it gets tiresome after a while.

You really need to get off that high horse you ride, shake that chip off your shoulder, take a chill pill...whatever. Just loosen up a bit. You talk with such authority, yet your photography is mediocre at best and does not reflect your (ahem) "expertise."

We are all here to have fun and share our love of photography. You however are the resident party pooper. Get with the program. Life is too short to be so grumpy all the time.

Lay off sucking the lemons for a few minutes and send me your mailing address. I'll gift you some nice Canadian Christmas chocolates. Maybe warm your heart and put a smile back on your face. I'm sure it's been a while.

With best wishes,

Ralph.



29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3

Ralph,
I think I won't bandy words with you, except to offer a few comments on your post. If you think my " photography is mediocre at best" I'll certainly accept your evaluation, but I believe that I can quote the opinions of some others, far better photographers than you, who've come to the opposite conclusion.
I'm not aware that we're all here solely to have fun; I thought it was to post our work and have better photographers offer help and suggestions. Alas, this has rarely occurred, and about the best thing I can say is that the best images provide standards to aspire to, though according to some others you might be hard put to find an "excellent" photograph here.
In the scheme of things I will even thank you for your IR images, which led me to explore this technique for myself, with images I think that are "excellent".
At this moment I do have a smile on my face,
Martin



29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to SueS

A Bit more on Excellence, Exceptional and Extraordinary

What might characterize the images posted in the Gallery? I can speak only for myself, but I suspect that everyone who works hard on their photographs will understand what I'm saying.

In the first place, we take our images with the notion that they will, after processing, let others see what we saw, views that we considered interesting.

In the second place, during processing we strive to produce an image that is not simply out of the camera, but touches on excellence, that is, it accurately portrays what we want it to, and if we're lucky, it may be an excellent photo, both technically and artistically, and will be seen as such. Since some posters here have a notion that excellence is whatever you decide about your own photographs, there is the further question of how your image is seen by others. I suppose that if more than a few independent viewers think the image is excellent, then it is. In addition, there may be those whose standards are so high that no posted images meet their criteria for excellence.

In the third place, every now and then we may be astonished that some of the images we're working on go beyond excellence, and occasionally are exceptional. If you have had this experience, you will recognize the feeling. Those of you who are artistically inclined will know exactly what I mean.

Rarely, you might produce an extraordinary image, but maybe this might be a once in a lifetime proposition. In any event, it will be the posted image that defines the photographer. I'm happy to be defined this way, and you might be as well.



vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium
join:2005-03-01
Wormtown
kudos:3

1 recommendation

Why does an excellent photo need to be processed?



EGeezer
zichrona livracha
Premium
join:2002-08-04
Midwest
kudos:8
Reviews:
·Callcentric

3 recommendations

reply to SueS

said by mhhack :

... I can quote the opinions of some others, far better photographers than you, ..

The judge of photographers has spoken. We are indeed humbled.

Well, maybe not.
--
Buckle Up. It makes it harder for the aliens to suck you out of your car.


Jodokast96
Stupid people really piss me off.
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to 29886823

said by 29886823:

Who decides if a photograph is 'good' enough to hang in a museum? I think that if enough people with technical and artistic experience decide that a photograph is excellent it most likely is.

I call BS. A prime example:


»news.yahoo.com/record-photo-sold···446.html

said by 29886823:

In this sense excellent might be defined as a collective decision, and not a mix of disparate opinions.

Except it really is both.

said by 29886823:

I disagree that we all have different ideas of excellence - then nothing would hang in galleries.

Again, BS. See example above.

said by 29886823:

There has to be some common acceptance of what excellence means, or else it means nothing.

See my second comment above.

said by 29886823:

I also think that your statement that the bar for excellence is continually rising is also not quite true; there may be more people using better equipment, but for some time now equipment can be ruled out as a determining factor, while the human element remains the same.

She never mentioned equipment, nor that it was the reason the bar is continually rising. But since you brought it up, the fact that equipment has gotten so cheap means that everybody now has some type of more than decent camera with them at all times. This has not only given people who previously may not have had any equipment at all to now enter the world of photography. And given the ubiquity of cameras out there, any and everyone can now truly "f/8 and be there".


Jodokast96
Stupid people really piss me off.
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL

1 recommendation

reply to 29886823

said by 29886823:

If you think my " photography is mediocre at best" I'll certainly accept your evaluation, but I believe that I can quote the opinions of some others, far better photographers than you, who've come to the opposite conclusion.

That just reeks of self loathing and snobbery, somehow all at the same time. You are far too caught up in the opinions of those with "titles". As I noted in another thread, those with such "titles" that you so desire recognition from, have deemed one of the blandest photos in history as "extraordinary". Their opinions are just that, opinions. Just like yours, just like mine. None is more valid than the next, nor invalid for that matter. What is important is the reasoning behind those opinions. It's a bit sad that you subject yourself to such narrow views to gain acceptance.


29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to EGeezer

I made that statement to another poster, not to you. Possibly you are unaware of the context.

I hope you're humbled. I see the "royal we" in use again. It's been tried before, with no result.



29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to vaxvms

said by vaxvms:

Why does an excellent photo need to be processed?

It doesn't ever get to the viewing stage without processing, and there just might be a reason for all the photo editing software out there.


29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to Jodokast96

About the only thing I can get from you that I understand is that all opinions are valid. Just so. Let me assure you that when I see a curated show, photographs, paintings or whatever, I make my own judgments, and give a bit more than lip service to the curators. I often see stuff I wouldn't hang on my walls, but then again art is in a sense a moving target, and some people may understand it a bit better than I do. Doesn't mean I like it any better.
It strikes me that in some ways I actually agree with you!



29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to Jodokast96

Let me pose a hypothetical for you: Suppose I've just visited your Gallery, and stated openly for others to see "that your photography is mediocre at best". I would understand that you considered your images from your own point of view as good work, otherwise why post them? I wouldn't consider it amiss for you to make others understand that the opinion was just that, an opinion, and there were others far more positive. An attack is an attack, as a rose is a rose.
I wouldn't that consider self loathing and snobbery had anything to do with it.



rcroning
D700 Rocks
Premium
join:2005-05-21
Winnipeg, MB
reply to 29886823

"It doesn't ever get to the viewing stage without processing, and there just might be a reason for all the photo editing software out there."

That's goose poop. I have several that have never seen post processing and are nice enough to view.



Coma
Thanks Steve
Premium
join:2001-12-30
NirvanaLand

said by rcroning:

I have several that have never seen post processing and are nice enough to view.


That is what I strive for but those are rare.

--
December is National Fruit Cake Month


29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3
reply to rcroning

Great, what else is new? I think you willfully misunderstand, making a mountain out of a molehill. I was under the impression that images are raw, and if you choose jpg you have a whole host of in-camera settings which you can control, or simply choose the manufacturer's settings. Same for raw.
Still ready to throw out your editing software?



Jodokast96
Stupid people really piss me off.
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL

3 recommendations

reply to 29886823

If you stated that about my photography, I'd probably agree with you. If you said it was shit, I may even agree with that. Or not, doesn't really matter. Truthfully, the things I've posted there, were at the time of posting, the best I had ever produced. But that's not why I put them there, nor why I leave them there. I put them there for me because I liked them, and thought that maybe some of the others here might enjoy them as well. If not, I really didn't care. I keep them there for me as well. As I've said many times, I like seeing how far I've come (or haven't).



vaxvms
ferroequine fan
Premium
join:2005-03-01
Wormtown
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Charter

1 recommendation

reply to 29886823

said by 29886823:

It doesn't ever get to the viewing stage without processing, and there just might be a reason for all the photo editing software out there.

Sounds like you're starting with less than stellar photos and using software to cover over the flaws in the photos. Reminds me of Tammy Faye Baker.


29886823
Premium
join:2005-03-29
kudos:3

Take a trip to Dxomark.com. There you will find that cameras and sensors differ natively, and some receive much better marks for their different photographic uses, ie, some cameras simply do a better job out of the box than others, but software and other shooting techniques enable a photographer to make up for these deficiencies. It's one of the reasons most people shoot raw.

As to starting with less than stellar images - why the sort of personal attack about my starting with less than stellar images? How do you know what my out-of-camera images look like? Have you ever shot in IR or HDR, just to name two techniques that you'd find impossible, unless your camera had special settings, and even then, they wouldn't compare with the possibilities offered by fine software.

If you take "excellent" photos right out of the box perhaps you might point them out in your Gallery.



rcroning
D700 Rocks
Premium
join:2005-05-21
Winnipeg, MB
reply to SueS

marti old chap, I shoot RAW all the time. And there are some which I convert straight from RAW to jpg without the need for any post work. Maybe that's something you can't achieve. Others can and do.