***PORTALS***FINAL POLL is up in the lounge

[Immad2]

Great photographs everyone and congratulations to the winners in the final poll! :toast: :bounce: :thumbsup: :hi: :yourock: :woohoo: :applause:
Final Poll

Have an excellent day!

[JeffR]

1. Great job, Immad2

It was a shame that so many amazing photographs didn't make the Final. This contest has drawn some phenomenal submissions.

[Immad2]

2. Thank you so much, JeffR! I think everyone entering the contest...

should get all the credit. Every photo deserves first place. Every one excellent and phenomenal, as you say, in it's own way! A really talented group of photogs!:bounce: :thumbsup: :applause:

[Blue_In_AK]

3. Bvar22 is kicking ass SO HARD...

...the rest of us need not have bothered to enter this month. :evilgrin:

[priller]

4. That was a great shot

Easily my favorite of the bunch.

[regnaD kciN]

5. If I may be allowed a touch of cynicism about the Lounge Lizards...

I must admit I find the predictable "there were so many great photos -- it's so hard to choose!!!" posts downright funny when, in the results, one entry is running away with the contest (as in this month).

Obviously, in such cases, people are not finding it "hard to choose"... :eyes:

[JeffR]

6. And I'm absolutely gobsmacked

That your photo isn't running neck and neck with the leader. Same goes for Little Portals in the Woods, French Quarter Archway and Church and State.

[bvar22]

7. I'm mystified too.

I would prefer to have a poll for our contests that asks:
1) "Which is your favorite picture?"
2) "Why?"

[JeffR]

8. Rabrrrrrr made some insightful comments about that last month

Here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=5297654#5299384

I know many of these issues were debated long before I got involved in the group, and I'm darned if I can come up with a way to solicit more feedback.

BTW, I certainly didn't mean to imply your lead isn't justified. The best pic is going to win, and the Lounge can take pride in its communal taste.

I'm just puzzled by what's happening to some of the other entries. For that matter, I'm puzzled about mine, which shouldn't have made the Final at all.

[regnaD kciN]

9. Don't remind me of those "insightful comments"...

...since they were mainly spent ripping my entry in that contest. :grr:

[JeffR]

12. Insightful, not that I agreed right down the line with them!

;-)

[NashVegas]

11. Maybe People Just Don't Feel Qualified to Critique

Ever view the picture pages on Weather Underground? I've seen some wonderful photos go completely unrated, while mediocre or lesser shots get huge props. For the most part it's content over composition.

[JeffR]

13. Good point

On one hand, it's nice to get feedback from the Lounge because it's a matter of putting your work anonymously in front of a wide cross-section of the DU public. On the other hand, it doesn't compare to the feedback you can get from really talented photographers with their own unique visions and expertise.

Maybe what the Photo Group should have is a monthly roundtable of themed peer-reviewed submissions. (Having typed that, it looks pretty pompous, but I can't think of a better way to put it!). Not a contest as such, but a loosely-organized opportunity to get and share constructive criticism. Personally, I could use the help this would provide.

I belong to a photo site that does such things, but frankly, the opinions usually given are no more in-depth and helpful than the Lounge comments tend to be...
:shrug:

[bvar22]

15. I've always supported this idea (peer review).

My Primary Purpose here is to become a better photographer.

In earlier days, some of the prelims were held within the Photography Group, with the Finals going to the Lounge. In spite of the drawbacks (low sampling #s, the occassion of Zero votes, fan club influences), it DID offer feedback from individuals who had some knowlege and dedication to the Art of Photography. I have occassionally suggested that the Prelims be held within the PhotoGroup, but this is not a popular idea here. The last poll ran 10 to 1 "Against" with only 2 votes "For".

The Lounge is fun, but always picks the most popular picture, not necessarily (rarely) the Best Photograph. This is good information for a photographer to have, but does little to help improve the skills.

I am curious about WHY so many voted for my entry. I would love to be able to duplicate this response at will. My photo has some good points, but as a photograph it has some serious technical compromises.

IMHO, FGordon's "Church & State" was the best Photograph on technical merits (with several close runners).

I am also a member of another Photography Forum, and only recently had the courage to post some of my pics there. There are some crazies there who don't like any picture the they themselves didn't take, but there are also some very competent professionals willing to offer wholesome criticism. Sometimes that stings a little, but it is a good venue for the information neeeded to improve the skills.

I enjoy our informal contests here, and they seem to have appeal in The Lounge, so its all good.
But sometimes, :wtf:

[JeffR]

19. Speaking just for myself

Broken Portals is so compelling because the viewer has to make an effort to understand what he/she is actually seeing. The ambiguity of the scene is rewarding every time I look at it. And it fulfills the portal mandate by drawing the eye back through those receding planes.

I don't know if the Lounge response would be based on these things (that lack of comments thing again) but that's my take.

I have a vague idea for something we could do in addition to the monthly contest that we might all benefit from. Still finetuning the idea, but I'm going to "unveil" it when the current contest is over.

Hang in there, bvar22. I think you still have a shot at winning this one!
:rofl:

[Blue_In_AK]

20. What IS the viewer actually seeing in Bvar's photograph?

I STILL haven't figured out what it is. :)

ed. I'm not meaning I don't like the photograph - I'm just meaning that I don't know what it is. Bvar??

[bvar22]

29. OK. That explains some of it.

I know what it is, so there is no mystery for me....no "Whoa, WTF is THIS?"

The location is a huge abandonned Ammunition Plant south of St Paul. The bottom portion of these smokestacks never conducted any smoke, they just held up the top portion of the stacks where the smoke was introduced through a port on the side. That left 5 little round rooms with doors and windows at the bottom. Bizarre really, I've never seen anything like it.
The windows at the bottom all line up for a straight shot through all 5 smoke stacks.







Next time, I'm going to bring a small step ladder for more elevation across the sills, and pick a cloudy day so the lighting extremes aren't so radical.

[Blue_In_AK]

30. Thanks, Bvar22...

Now your picture makes so much more sense to me. I don't do well with ambiguity, I guess.

[bvar22]

31. No prob....

:hi:
Apparently, the ambiguity is what sold this pic in The Lounge.
I'm going to note that down somewhere for future reference.

[Blue_In_AK]

32. I fear my photos are always pretty straightforward...

Maybe I should stretch and try for a little ambiguity myself sometimes.

[RoyGBiv]

33. I don't think so ...

I think what sells that pic -- and the reason I voted for it -- is that is displays a logical geometry that is pleasing to the eye and the intellect. It's framed nearly perfectly, has an order to it, seems to represent something even if what that is isn't clear. Doesn't matter. The order to the photo is itself enough.

Studies have been done dealing with what people find physically attractive in others. Time and again the results indicate that logical geometry is the determining factor in most people's perception of what is and is not attractive. Loungers typically vote in these things on what they find attractive, and your photo fits that bill perfectly. It doesn't have to be right angles or left/right symmetry, the latter being what most people use as a determinant of attractiveness in people, but it has to make sense, even in its ambiguity, and while making sense it also has to stimulate the parts of our brains that seek order in chaos.

A few of the other photos mentioned in this thread concerning this topic all have one flaw, a flaw that may seem artistic, naturaly, or even necessary in the eye of the artist or those who see art in terms in which form and technical composition mean at least as much as substance or message, but which are not when viewed by a non-artist simply making his or her decision on what is best based on what the standard neural impulses tell him or her. To extrapolate the analogy a bit, I may see a certain individual as beautiful because I both appreciate the physical attributes and the underlying personality. Some of these people, if protrayed simply with a photograph, would not appear as beautiful to those who are judging purely on physical characteristics. The simple flaw in many of these photographs is that something is a bit off-kilter, such as some of the photos that include an archway cutting off the top of it. The "Church and State" photo has some clouds in the background and an incongruent shadow of one of the flags, both of which distract just a tiny bit from the main theme of the photo. Compared against a photo other than yours, Church and State, imo, is an exceptional photo. The logical geometry of yours, however, is better, even if it doesn't say as much openly.

Your photo is exceptional. Most of the rest of us submitted good photos that, by contrast, were just good photos because one or another simple flaw takes away from the whole. Mine, for example, is technically rather bad, but it does present a logical geometry because the archway is complete, and the scene is framed by it. Yours presents both a logical geometry and is technically excellent and offers an open path of thought that anyone can follow. Mine forces you to go pretty much one way in those thoughts, and even though the geometry is good, the technical aspects and the forced thinking make it inferior to yours. Other photos, like Church and State, the Banking Hall, the Archway in Poland, all are technically amazing, allow the imagination to run wild, but have a simple bit of the geomtry off that does not appeal to the average viewer who is thinking only in terms of "what I like."

I say all this as a non-photographer. I write. I take pictures that I sometimes find interesting and which I can combine with prose I want to write, all of which means I appreciate the photographer's art and think I can critique it to some extent. But, the phrasing I'm using is not "photographer" phrasing as far as I know. It's just the way my mind expresses what I see. Your photo, IOW, makes sense, distracts me in no way, and offers the kind of technical quality that prevents the viewer from being distracted. Every other photo, as good as they may be, has an element, often a very minor element, that prevents this from being said.

[Blue_In_AK]

36. Hmm, guess I ain't got no good taste....

...because it was the black clouds in "Church and State" that I liked...metaphorically, kind of like a storm brewing over the issue. But maybe I'm reading too much into things.

[RoyGBiv]

37. It's not about good or bad ...

It's about what some primitive part of our brains identifies as pleasing. Those with a more refined appreciation for art overwhelm these primitive parts and see things like you saw.

The black clouds are definitely a good part of that photograph.

My rambling comments above were an amteurish attempt to explain the phenomenon described by a phrase like "I may not know art, but I know what I like."

[Blue_In_AK]

38. Ah, that's better...

I LIKE being recognized as a "refined appreciator." :) I thought your rambling comments were very astute, by the way, and not amateurish at all.

[bvar22]

39. I agree with Blue.

I appreciate your comments.
Please don't hesitate to add your insight at any time.
All of the comments about the nature of art, beauty, and curiosity have been helpful.

[RoyGBiv]

40. Thanks ...

My hope is that the comments are taken in the spirit intended, particularly with regard to the photographs other than yours.

I deal with this sort of thing in my writing all the time. I have a limited audience for some of my writing that likes what I write a bit too much, and what I mean by that is that the only commentary I ever get is the equivalent of what most Loungers say about the photos. "Another great story." "What a brilliant essay." Yeah, okay, thanks. I know you want to make me feel good, and I know *you* like it because it speaks to your interests, that you know me and know what I'm trying to say even if I'm not saying it well, and that you'd probably like anything I wrote even if it began, "It was a dark and stormy night ..."

But that's not helpful to making my writing better, just as "another bunch of great photos" is not helpful to those wanting to make their photography better, especially in a case like the contest this month when one photo was so clearly preferred over the others. All of us, even you obviously, want to know *why* they feel that way so we can improve.

I have a friend who is an excellent critic, one of the few people I know who can both critique grammar and understand when non-standard grammar is necessary in a given passage, and that's a very important skill for a critic of writing. The equivalent in photography would be someone who knows how to detect good focus and composition but understands why some element in a photograph needs to be out of focus or why the composition may need to be non-standard. This friend *can* critique my writing, but he has trouble doing it, because he is a friend. The same sort of dynamic is at work in the Lounge. By and large, it's a friendly place, and people want to be friendly to their fellow DUers, not critics.

[priller]

23. Your photo --

It's interesting. It draws you in. It makes you look. I think that's it. Plus it reminded me of a Mondrian painting, which I liked.

--

I agree, *technically* FGorden's photo was better, but I think mainly photographers worry about that aspect of it (rather than viewers). You can look at many classic photos from the past and many are not really technically outstanding. I see many, many commenters at places like dpreview.com that are ONLY concerned with technical aspects of a photo, with no opinion on its artistic merit.

There's a "critique" group on Flickr that unfortunately had gotten taken over by technical nitpickers. So one clever guy put up an old photo by Henri Cartier-Bresson on there. This one:



And people started disapproving immediately, saying things like, "everything is blurry, not sharp", "why so soft, camera shake?", "looks contrived -- do it again and put the camera on a tripod", "no contrast, odd crop", etc.

Of course, a few people recognized the photo and were just about to die laughing. And the point was very well made, that technique is not everything -- you can't judge a photo on technical merit alone.


Anyway, the main reason I bring this up is that it's been on my mind lately. Ever since I've gotten my DSLR, I've been sort of consumed with the technical aspects of it -- learning its features, making the photos sharp, getting exposure right, how much aperture to get the DOF I want, which lens should I use, etc, etc, etc. The thing I haven't been thinking about so much is the photo itself. I been feeling that my photos have started to get rather straightforward and plain. And I look at my photos from my old Olympus compact and see I was being much more creative when I wasn't worried about the camera so much.

Of course, that's not to say having a good technical grasp of your camera is not important. But after you get a firm hold of that, you need to go back to *making photographs*. (I'm talking to myself here).

Okay, venting over.

[JeffR]

24. Ol' Point-n-Shoot Cartier-Bresson

That's priceless!

Best pics I ever took were on my mom's Kodak 110 Pocket Instamatic in the mid-Seventies. It had built-in time exposure, which I was facinated with. Prints tended to be pretty grainy, like this one taken about a half-hour after sunset, handheld:



but it produced impeccable slides.

Since I went to SLRs, my skills declined appallingly...

[regnaD kciN]

34. And, if you think Cartier-Bresson was bad...

...I just saw some Yosemite pictures by this guy named Ansel Adams -- they had the worst color saturation I've ever seen!

;-)

[priller]

35. Blown pixels everywhere!

Ha!

[regnaD kciN]

25. Not just Mondrian...

Plus it reminded me of a Mondrian painting, which I liked.

I also detected a touch of Escher in there as well. (bvar, you've got to stop stealing from other artists! ;-) )

[regnaD kciN]

27. It's especially important to have...

The Lounge is fun, but always picks the most popular picture, not necessarily (rarely) the Best Photograph. This is good information for a photographer to have, but does little to help improve the skills.

...for those of us who are trying to make a living from our photography. If you're going to try to sell prints, you want to make them of photos that have proven popular, not necessarily those that might be considered as "great art" but not something for which the average photography fan would want to spend his or her own money.

[regnaD kciN]

26. I thought that was the point of the "comments" thread for each contest...

...although, once you have submitted an entry, it's a bit late to find out what others think about it. I think, in practice, that this function is more often served by the "pick my entry" polls that tend to spring up just before the contest starts.

I like the idea of peer review in theory, but I have found that, in practice on web sites, it generally comes down to one of two reactions:

1) Every photograph is hailed as great, as if people didn't want to hurt other's feelings by saying anything negative. (And, truth be told, there are probably many who want nothing more than positive reinforcement.)

2) It develops into a cutthroat, competitive environment where every photograph is condemned for its flaws and, as one other poster put it, the participants clearly don't like any photograph unless they themselves took it. (Reminiscent of the old joke about how many guitar players it takes to change a light bulb: Ten -- one to change the bulb, and the other nine to stand around saying "I could do that better!" ;-) )

[JeffR]

28. That's why I'm thinking about a non-contest situation

Don't get me wrong. The contests are fun, and a chance to see some great work. I'm just thinking along the lines of a regular, in-group, non-competitive roundtable in addition to the contests.

What I'm missing personally is detailed feedback, and not necessarily from a technical perpective but from an aesthetic one. Why a particular pic touched a nerve, or perhaps more importantly, why it didn't.

Positive reinforcement is nice, but it doesn't help me take better photographs. I'm fairly confident with my eye, my brain and a camera, but a second or third or fourth opinion from much better photographers than I am would be really useful. As it is, I learn a lot just from looking at other people's stuff in this group.

I've seen both of the dynamics you mention on photography forums, and you're right, it's hard not to have things devolve one way or both. Anyway, I didn't mean to hijack this thread over all this, but I thought some discussion might be worthwhile.

[Blue_In_AK]

18. Rabrrrrrrr was being curmudgeonly

as I gently pointed out to him.

[JeffR]

21. True, but the post was thought-provoking

[regnaD kciN]

10. Well, if you watched the preliminaries...

...you'd have noticed whose photo kicked my entry's posterior. ;-) As I predicted it would -- as you well know, I was not expecting my entry to make the finals at all. That was actually the one big surprise for me. It was obvious, midway through the preliminaries, that bvar's entry was the certain winner. :applause:

[JeffR]

14. I was so sure you had the winning entry this month

Shows what I know, I guess...

[insane_cratic_gal]

16. I can't complain

I submitted a so/so photo from 2 yrs ago.. So I didn't really try and I was happy I got a single vote being my first contest of any sort I've ever submitted. DU being the first place I've ever posted any of my photos. I'm a bit shy about my work.


I tend to agree that Church and State was a better constructed photo, but broken portals was a strong contender as well. Both were interesting angles and perspectives.

I almost think if it had been named something else, it would of faired better. The political climate heh tends to damper the strength of construction of the photo.


The again Maybe a place for constructive criticism should be waged not here but say NikonCafe.com? or some other professional forum, we have to break away from our safety zones, myself included.

[Blue_In_AK]

17. I was very fond of Church and State, as well...

[CC]

22. I can see why

Broken Portals is winning. It grabs and holds you. The repetition and geometry draws the eye and compliment each other yet there is something that makes you feel a bit off kilter.

The average person isn't looking at the technical aspects and usually is drawn to what causes an emotional reaction within. Asking a non photographer to critique can be hard because sometimes they might not know how to explain exactly why they like something. Hell I am lousy are critiquing photos or saying why I like or don't like something more often than not and I take photos. Specially in words. See above.

As for critiquing the contest photos here, I always figured that was what the comments thread posted with the submission thread was for.:)

And great job Immad hosting. :toast::yourock::toast: