Digital camera & digital photography resources
for professional & amateur photographers

Heya all,

First time poster, long time reader.

I've recently delved into this lovely world of photography and am running into a wall that some of you might be able to help with. I find that a picture that is aesthically pleasing seems to get higher ratings vs. those of a more artistic nature. Even those that are considered more artsy still seem to use aesthetics in some ways to bring across a nice image.

Do you ever think about this... the picture your taking, is it art or is it the conventions of aesthetics that motivates you?

Any thoughts are welcome!

Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged

Christopher,


Nice images are easily recognisable. Art is in many cases not understood. There is just a small part of the population that appreciates and understands real art.

I think that thats the reason why artistic pictures in common get a lower rate than artistic pictures.

Ron

Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged

Not completely knowing what your definition of the difference of art to artistic let me add this.

On this forum the users post pictures that appeal to them. Most are ameteurs shooting for fun. I think if you go back and look at the photos with the idea that the rating reflects the viewers desire to take the same type of photo, the ratings may make more sense.

When someone sees a picture that shouts 'I wish I took that' then it gets a high rating.

I have seen many famous photos in museums that I would never want to hang on my wall. They were rated great by the museum because of its place in history, the photographic breakthrough in the image or the subject itself.

Ratings depend on the use of the photo to the reviewer.

I usually do not rate photos since I have a specfic desire of what I want in the photo and do not say that it is the only way to see the image.

I only remember one rating I made where I thought a prior rating with a stated reason needed to have an opinion based on the same reason but coming to the opposite result.

Anyone giving a rating should always give their reasons. Then anyone seeing the rating can increase or decrease the number in their mind based on how they feel about the reason.

__________________
jerry

Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged

Hi Christopher
Art begins when one starts to alter the image in ANY way ..........it becomes unique to that person, hence ,it becomes *Art*
Cheers
Dave .........

http://www.pbase.com/dave1

Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged

... phylosophycal question:

I agree that aesthetically pleasing pictures generaly will have a broader and greated aceptance, expecially in portraits or people shots.

However I think "looking nice" is not always enough. I rather think that the key is the "emotional impact" the photo convey: whether the observer can establish an emotional conection with the photo. Photojournalist are very familiar and skilled with this part.

In my case, I usually comment on pictures I find emotionally charged, pictures that stir something inside me.

The technical side usually is a far away second place criteria. I agree good exposure and tack sharpeness are important, but are not the most important factors IMHO.

My 2 cents...

__________________
The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and seldom simple
[URL=http://gallery.bytephoto.com/showgallery.php?ppuser=4]Please let me know what do you think!!![/URL]

Report this to a moderator | IP: Logged