Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Real people V Photographers

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
puertouk
puertouk  21012 forum posts United Kingdom17 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 10:18 AM

Togs are more discriminating than the general public. Togs look for the technical side, whereas Joe Public looks at the aesthetics side of the image. I think that's the top and bottom of it in one sentence
Stephen

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
13 Jul 2012 - 10:18 AM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014554 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 10:20 AM


Quote: I have a feeling that on facebook people are looking at what is "right" in a picture, where as here people are looking at what is "wrong"

Right about here, though I don't think people analyse stuff at all on FBook, it's a gut reaction - I'll share things that made me smile, occasionally things with a strong point, and usually like witty comments and retorts. I'd think the same would apply to "normal people" looking at photos.

If it grabs them, they "like" it...

Here the picture which inspired the thread - it's just the canal near Castlefield in Manchester, really liked the bridge so grabbed the shot. Seemed to get by far the most "likes" and comments of all the shots I put on FB so chose it, out of probably 20 candidates, so put on here. So far it got 10 clicks.

So why would the public at large choose this over other more "photographer friendly" shots?

It's bright...
It's got a blue sky...
...

And why would Photographers not go for it...

It's bright...
It's got a blue sky...
...

Face it, unless its a sunset, it's a poor photo Wink

manc-hdr-031-2-3-2.jpg

scottishphototours

I think you've highlighted an important point on the differences between "us" and "them".

The sooner we begin to understand that WE need to produce stuff that THEY like then they'll want to buy from us. Case in point is Colin Prior and Bob Carls Clarke - one loved by the public and one loved by photographers, Colin having the distinction of appealing to both!!

If you want to appeal to photographers, plow your own furrow. If you want to appeal to the man in the street, that takes a whole different set of boxes to tick - and probably doesn't include the staple diet of the MPA/RPS/SWPP awards panels - ie, dark vignettes/duotone/soft focus/cropped off heads etc.

janeez
janeez e2 Member 51147 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 10:38 AM

I love Colin Prior's images. Grin

janeez
janeez e2 Member 51147 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 10:44 AM


Quote: So why would the public at large choose this over other more "photographer friendly" shots?

Possibly because a lot of people recognise the place as somewhere they know and maybe it is that feeling of shared familiarity that people like.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014554 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 11:02 AM


Quote: The sooner we begin to understand that WE need to produce stuff that THEY like then they'll want to buy from us.

Very true...

I think it's easy to get carried away with superfluous processing when most people seem overjoyed at the straight shots.. .I've certainly found this more and more.

I actually did my first ever "paid" montage last week, someone with loads of pets and horses and sheep - wanted them all in one shot... so spent an hour or 2 shooting around the farm till I got them all, then got to work layering them up.

Chose a very bright, positive field of wheat as the background, popped them in there and they loved it... it's about as far away as you can get from "photographer friendly", but all the people who saw it at the gym were raving about it...

Just doing more dogs and horses for them - in the same style!


I think "real people" are probably impressed with quirky effects, but are no more likely to buy them than the straight shot... ?

petebfrance
13 Jul 2012 - 11:16 AM


Quote: So why would the public at large choose this over other more "photographer friendly" shots?

Well some thoughts on possible reasons:

Strong composition / shapes catch the eye initially,
Nice, warm sunny colours and blue sky (make people 'want to be there' instead of sitting at computer),
Classic lead-in of the eye from bottom left, and importantly the 'viewer' is on the path, not in the river (wouldn't want to be there),
Lines lead the eye round and inevitably drag it to the left of the bridge where there is lots of interesting detail.

now I'm not suggesting that this is all rationalised at the time.....

(also the bit of building on the right stops the eyes wandering out of the picture,
the tall building behind the bridge on the left helps, not sure how to describe that....)

Last Modified By petebfrance at 13 Jul 2012 - 11:23 AM
SlowSong
SlowSong e2 Member 53997 forum postsSlowSong vcard England28 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 11:25 AM

I clicked on it because it reminded me of a super canal holiday and I think we actually moored up very near there. Don't remember the new high-rise though. (It was a long time ago). I click on an image for various reasons; some are quality shots (technical), some prompt an emotional response and don't need to be technically wonderful, and as I love animals I am rather drawn to a lovely doggy, horsey, pussy shots. I like quirky, original and fun shots too. So, I probably should be on FB and not here. Grin

Last Modified By SlowSong at 13 Jul 2012 - 11:25 AM
joolsb
joolsb e2 Member 927107 forum postsjoolsb vcard Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 12:04 PM

Why do "real people" and "photographers" see photos differently?

'Real people' see the subject not the photograph whereas we look at the photograph first and then see the subject.

What factors come into play?

A lot of time spent looking at pictures and figuring out how to make them better.

Do photographers suffer from image fatigue - craving something they've never seen before?

Certainly.

Who would you prefer your work to appeal to - real people or photographers? (and don't say both, or neither - you'd just want to please yourself - binary answer, tog/not-tog )

The more discerning real person. Wink

joolsb
joolsb e2 Member 927107 forum postsjoolsb vcard Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 12:07 PM


Quote: And why would Photographers not go for it...

It's bright...
It's got a blue sky...

It looks like bad HDR? Tongue Wink

searlem
searlem e2 Member 737 forum postssearlem vcard England1 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 12:12 PM

Doesn't answer the question and is totally unscientific, but spent last 5 minutes in coffee shop and asked my wife to pick 10 pictures in the gallery she liked all of them bright and in most cases kids and animals, I now think she is lying when she says that she likes a photo of mine.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014554 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 12:59 PM

Best do an animal based workshop next month then Mark Wink Know any friendly farmers....

Charming as ever Joolz Wink

"Bad" of course is a subjective term....

Is something bad because of the process? Are ALL HDR shots bad by definition?
or because they are poorly composed?
or because they have no message?
or because they are taken on anything other than a large format camera? Wink
or because there's no real point of interest...
or because there's one spec of dust which just ruins the whole thing
or because they've just gone too far in photoshop and it looks plain weird...

Tongue

keith selmes
13 Jul 2012 - 1:51 PM

Why do "real people" and "photographers" see photos differently?
Real people need photos that match their wallpaper
What factors come into play?
Wallpaper
Do photographers suffer from image fatigue - craving something they've never seen before?
When the lone tree at Rannoch Moor fell down, I did feel that every cloud has a silver lining
Who would you prefer your work to appeal to - real people or photographers? (and don't say both, or neither - you'd just want to please yourself - binary answer, tog/not-tog )
Real people. But this is a trick answer, because I think I'm probably a photographer, but I also like the photo that tiggered this thread, so I must be a Real Person as well.

petebfrance
13 Jul 2012 - 1:53 PM

Oh, and by the way. Just before I go shopping (oh what fun!) I have to admit that I don't think 'image' fatigue really seperates togs from non-togs. In my opinion (therefore not stating it as a fact) most people who use the internet / tv or whatever are bombarded with images. Whatever picture one puts up on 'general forums or whatever' has a few seconds only to grab peoples' attention - there has to be something to 'hook them in' in the first place otherwise whatever the deeper merits of the picture it's all just background noise.
Wink

joolsb
joolsb e2 Member 927107 forum postsjoolsb vcard Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
13 Jul 2012 - 1:58 PM


Quote: Is something bad because of the process? Are ALL HDR shots bad by definition?
or because they are poorly composed?
or because they have no message?
or because they are taken on anything other than a large format camera?
or because there's no real point of interest...
or because there's one spec of dust which just ruins the whole thing
or because they've just gone too far in photoshop and it looks plain weird...

All HDR shots bad? No of course not. Only the ones that have that 'comic-book' look we love to hate.
Poor composition? The only poor composition is the sort that is at odds with what the image is trying to put across.
Quite a few images have no message. An image doesn't need a 'message' to make a statement.
Not taken on LF? Well, one doesn't want to appear overly snobbish about this but anything taken on one of those dinky little DSLR-thingies is just a little, you know, common.... Wink Grin
You don't need a real point of interest (some of mine don't have that and they are all good! Wink
Speck of dust that ruins the whole thing? Absolutely. Carelessness costs lives - in this case that of the perpetrator. Wink
Going too far in PS? Let's not go there, eh? Wink

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.