Viewing online galleries

[dmp]

I jointed photopoints today - it's a site where one can rate photos and recieve ratings.

I'm looking through the galleries when it strikes me; Nothing 'moves me'. The galleries are chock-FULL of fantastic photos. Yet nothing so far 'really' gets my attention. I'm wondering if others look at my photos and feel the same sense of 'blah. yeah? so what?'

Could it be My photos are so often 'blah' when I get a GOOD photo I REALLY like it? Maybe it means more to me because I took it? But - see? I look at Jon's pics (misterblu) and I get the same feeling that I get when I look at pics I've created - so that can't be it.

anyone else feel like this at all? I doubt my ability to articulate how I feel - perhaps another can read this rambling and sort of 'get me'.

?

 

[dmp]

Maybe it's how pretentious some of these pics are?

 

[dmp]

Maybe I'm judging them too heavily on 'artistic merits' vs. 'techincal merits'

 

[dmp]

I'm finding I don't generally care for staged photos. Different than photos with a model posing...although I'm not sure how I'd express how I can differentiate...

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I jointed photopoints today - it's a site where one can rate photos and recieve ratings.

I'm looking through the galleries when it strikes me; Nothing 'moves me'. The galleries are chock-FULL of fantastic photos. Yet nothing so far 'really' gets my attention. I'm wondering if others look at my photos and feel the same sense of 'blah. yeah? so what?'

Could it be My photos are so often 'blah' when I get a GOOD photo I REALLY like it? Maybe it means more to me because I took it? But - see? I look at Jon's pics (misterblu) and I get the same feeling that I get when I look at pics I've created - so that can't be it.

anyone else feel like this at all? I doubt my ability to articulate how I feel - perhaps another can read this rambling and sort of 'get me'.

?

In looking through flickr, which I feel I've done pretty extensively, I've found only 5 photos that have earned a spot amongst my "favorites" area that flickr provides. So I don't think you're alone.

I think, obviously, that pictures you take have more meaning than to the average person. The pics I just took of Callie I'm pretty sure I like more than anyone else... but I think part of that is I have the memory of the scene, and all the emotion, if you will, that surrounded it. For everyone else, it's a picture. To me, it's a reminder of the little things your memory slowly begins to forget.

I think what moves someone is entirely subjective. Some people are more interested in well-taken, technically, shots. Others are moved more by what's in the pictures and aren't as concerned with cropping, lighting, etc. etc.

As for your photos, I don't think any of them would crack into my favorites area on flickr... neither would Jon's. That's not to say that they aren't excellent work, and not to say that they aren't better-composed/framed/whatever than my, because they are. But rather they lack that special x-factor that can't be described. And I'm not sure you could, with any consistancy at least, attempt to include certain elements that would make me be moved by it. It's almost random luck/coincidence/whatever.

I've actually wondered the same thing myself, as I sift through the millions and millions of photos on flickr that make me feel so completely amateur. What I've found really interesting is what other people pick for their favorites from the shots I've taken. Usually they don't match up with the shots I like the most.

In conclusion: it all depends :

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I'm finding I don't generally care for staged photos. Different than photos with a model posing...although I'm not sure how I'd express how I can differentiate...

I think you prefer to look at "action shots" taken of people who are unsuspecting, as opposed to lining everyone up wedding style. Yes?

You're definitely not alone there.

Or maybe more in general, you don't prefer going to lengths to set a shot up, and enjoy more the spontaneity of a shot?

 

[dmp]

If you'd actually POST UP pics of callie instead of links to 'nowhwere' I could 'see' them

I judge pics on the feeling I get while looking upon them; THEN by technical criteria. I've often found pics which aren't technically good, to be GREAT 'feeling' - but I've NEVER found a pic which wasn't great feeling to be 'a great shot' on technical prowess alone.

 

[dmp]

I think you prefer to look at "action shots" taken of people who are unsuspecting, as opposed to lining everyone up wedding style. Yes?

You're definitely not alone there.

Or maybe more in general, you don't prefer going to lengths to set a shot up, and enjoy more the spontaneity of a shot?

I suppose that's fair - I like pics of things I could actually SEE by happenstance - although taken from a unique perspective? maybe? compared to shots where somebody obviously set up a 'scene' - not counting portraits among that last group.

There's a pic on photopoints of an old-skewl alarm clock sitting on a stair with somebody's blurry legs walking past behind.

It's called something pretentious like "MOMENT!".

My thought? "So f'ing what?"

The "So-What?" test is a bitch.

lol

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I suppose that's fair - I like pics of things I could actually SEE by happenstance - although taken from a unique perspective? maybe? compared to shots where somebody obviously set up a 'scene' - not counting portraits among that last group.

There's a pic on photopoints of an old-skewl alarm clock sitting on a stair with somebody's blurry legs walking past behind.

It's called something pretentious like "MOMENT!".

My thought? "So f'ing what?"

The "So-What?" test is a bitch.

lol

What do you mean, so what? So what who cares? So what that's stupid?

What makes the title pretentious?

 

[dmp]

What do you mean, so what? So what who cares? So what that's stupid?

What makes the title pretentious?

I mean "it's an alarm clock on a stair. So what?"

It's a very mundane photo that somebody tries to make better with artsy-fartsy names and junk.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I mean "it's an alarm clock on a stair. So what?"

It's a very mundane photo that somebody tries to make better with artsy-fartsy names and junk.

It's mundane to you. You're projecting your more concrete/defined artistic tastes and evaluators on everyone else.

I mean, I think there are plenty of people who think they're doing this really clever shit when it's not. But that doesn't mean that an alarm clock on a staircase couldn't be cool just because of what it is.

Clearly you're not big on symbolism through photography.

 

[dmp]

It's mundane to you. You're projecting your more concrete/defined artistic tastes and evaluators on everyone else.

I mean, I think there are plenty of people who think they're doing this really clever shit when it's not. But that doesn't mean that an alarm clock on a staircase couldn't be cool just because of what it is.

Clearly you're not big on symbolism through photography.

I'm not projecting anything upon anyone. 'dmp' is saying 'that pic is nothing special.'

I'm HUGE on photographic symbolism; however If I have to search too deeply to 'get' said symbolism, the pic often doesn't pass the so-what filter - which kicks in after about 10 seconds.

 

[dmp]

I'm looking at these thinking "what am I going to do to make my pics stand out?"

I'm getting tired of seeing the same basic shots - albeit different subjects and junk.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I'm not projecting anything upon anyone. 'dmp' is saying 'that pic is nothing special.'

I'm HUGE on photographic symbolism; however If I have to search too deeply to 'get' said symbolism, the pic often doesn't pass the so-what filter - which kicks in after about 10 seconds.

In other words, the symbolism needs to be obvious to you. If it needs to be explained, then you don't like it?

I can understand and relate to that. I think you definitely prefer things that are more concrete than abstract. More straight-forward and/or clean than convoluted and/or dirty. That's just from looking at the style of photos you post.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I'm looking at these thinking "what am I going to do to make my pics stand out?"

I'm getting tired of seeing the same basic shots - albeit different subjects and junk.

Stand out to you, or stand out to others?

One is easier than the other...

 

[dmp]

Stand out to you, or stand out to others?

One is easier than the other...

yes.

 

[dmp]

In other words, the symbolism needs to be obvious to you. If it needs to be explained, then you don't like it?

Not so much as explained, but 'justified'

 

[misterblu]

Blah...blah...blah...

Less talking and thinking about taking photos. Go take some photos. Try something new. That's how you get better.

:

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Blah...blah...blah...

Less talking and thinking about taking photos. Go take some photos. Try something new. That's how you get better.

:

That too...

over-analyzation does more harm then no analyzation.

 

[dmp]

Except that I'm not over-analyzing anything.

(shrug).