Amazon Kindle Unlimited Offer: 1-Month For FREE!

What do you want??

SteveCharles 18 2.3k 18 England
16 May 2005 2:55AM
Luke, whilst you may not be in the 'mainstream', you still have your fans - me included (you are on my small list of favourite photographers).

I know what you mean about the wildlife thing, I guess for a lot of people photography as a hobby goes hand in hand with a love of nature and wildlife. Perhaps it's a British thing, I don't know.

Personally, I find most wildlife photography boring, especially birds. Sunsets, well we all take them, I suppose the amount that inevitably get uploaded cause overload. Thing about sunsets, I think they flatter the novice photographer - point a camera at a nice sunset and you'll usually get an attractive image.

There are other things that I don't like - tacky 'glamour', pets, kids.

But despite these things, I still like the site because even though it's so big now, there are little pockets of good stuff. A lot of noise is made about the size of the gallery, the click system etc, but now that the site is bigger, I find it easier to stick to stick to the bits I like. The gallery is huge, so there's no point in trying to keep up with it all. Instead, using the filters, I can look at what I'm interested in; black & white, architecture, photojournalism etc.

OK I'm really rambling here and probably not making a clear point. What I would say to Luke though, is not to get so despondant that you are one of the few photojournalists in a sea of wildlife and sunset photographers, and know that there are those who truly appreciate and admire your work, even if they are a minority.

16 May 2005 3:04AM
I can see both points of view. Ed's right about the winter and when everything starts to grow again then obviously the gallery will be full of those nature images. But I love variety and it has been lacking of late and can only think its because of despondency about not enough attention. I dont think this is easily changed or needs to be, just more awareness perhaps. You cant make someone like a particular genre but an appreciation of it is possibly down to enlightenment. I'm reluctant to mention the c****er thing again because enough has been discussed in the past, it hasnt changed anything much in some parts and a good image is not necessarily one with the most of those little blue things. You are on my list of favourites too but I dont use it as I feel it can unfaily limit the time I have. If I stuck to commenting on those on my favourites then I wouldnt get to see the gallery so much.
ljesmith 17 1.1k United Kingdom
16 May 2005 3:20AM
Thank you for the comments, although I appreciate being on peoples favourites I don't automatically see it as a good thing, I feel that rather than look at a favourite we should be looking at individual photographs and judging them on merit, I believe that there are some photographers (quiter than me) who have a lot of potential but are stifled by the fact that people generally do not look beyond the obvious when veiwing the gallery, this is not how it should be, for myself I don't really need the encouragement as I get paid to do the style of photography I enjoy, who could want more but I feel that we could do more to encourage others.
Tooth 16 5.8k 227 Ireland
16 May 2005 3:26AM
Luke: I get despondent when I look for a pair of size 42 jeans and can't find any because they all stop at 40. I also have to find 29 inch leg, which means it seriously limits the trousers I can buy
(so what, you say...)
Well, I just have to accept that that's my size and keep looking for the occasional ones that fit. There's no point me giving out about why they don't make things to fit me - it's just the market.
So in the same way, the gallery is for everyone and unfortunately you're in one of the minority categories. This doesn't make you any worse a person (and you may well be a better photographer than many) - it just means you have to look harder to find what you need on this site - but you can't expect people to like things or not to suit you

As Pete says, it would be a sad day if the "minority" specialists were to move away from the site - its variety is what makes it for me. You need to carve out your own niche - you'll get a few solid fans and the occasional dropper in out of the blue. From reading your posting, you're obviously not the type to compromise your art for the masses, and that's good, but it brings its own problems
Hang on in there!

Ramble over, sorry if it went on a bit. Best wishes
joolsb 16 27.1k 38 Switzerland
16 May 2005 3:31AM

Your images are appreciated, albeit by a minority. But with your type of photography that will always be so. However, I've been looking at Photography Monthly this month and there are two articles on pros involved with documentary photography - so maybe the trend towards pretty-pretty images is coming to an end?

Personally, I comment on any image that grabs me - whether it's bw reportage, a superb landscape or somebody's bizarre Photoshop fantasy-collage. I also comment on stuff where the image could be vastly improved with a little critical input. Yours most often fall into the first category.

So keep up the good work and don't worry about clicks. Rest assured that your work appeals to those of us who like to look a little deeper into photographs and not just settle for surface gloss...
randomrubble 16 3.0k 12 United Kingdom
16 May 2005 3:34AM
This is an interesting thread, I think Lukes work is good, and I reckon the click count is OK given thype of shots in there. Ultimately what sells sells, and the little blue hearts reflect this. This site is a reflection of the wider world, and in that world Practical Photography and Photography Monthly are in every newsagent, but Lenswork is pretty hard to find.

Keep doing what you do, and keep posting, it is important that a site like this reflects all sorts of photography, not just landscape and Natural History.
UserRemoved 17 4.2k
16 May 2005 3:42AM

Quote:Ultimately what sells sells, and the little blue hearts reflect this.

Far from it.
Mixpix 17 1.1k England
16 May 2005 3:44AM
Luke don't give it up. It is disheartening when your work is sitting next to a nice landscape getting totally ignored but thats human nature and you cant change it, the difference between you and me is your work has quality it just doesn't appeal to the wider audience. Your not alone though in thinking is it worth it anymore.

User_Removed 19 7.3k 6 United Kingdom
16 May 2005 3:47AM

Quote:Ultimately what sells sells, and the little blue hearts reflect this

Not so - all they mean is that a very few people who are all photographers have decided that a given image is worthy of a click.

Often this is because:
1. Lots of other people have clicked before them
2. Pete has given it an EC
3. They know or like the fellow member
4. They think the picture is cute
5. They think the picture must have been difficult to take etc etc etc.

Whether the image in question is saleable is likely to have nothing to do with any of the above

Barrie Smile
digicammad 18 22.0k 40 United Kingdom
16 May 2005 3:48AM

Quote:I like to think of the gallery as a bit like a TV schedule. It's 70% soaps, make overs and reality TV. But buried in there, with low viewing figures are some real gems.

Couldn't have said it better myself Ed.

Luke, having minority appeal is not a bad thing. If somebody has added you to their favourites list that only means you are capable of producing photos in a style they like so they want to be able to find you again. It doesn't mean they will mindlessly click on every shot of yours, in fact that is less likely when your photos are more specialised than the norm.

SuziBlue 18 16.2k 10 Scotland
16 May 2005 3:55AM
Don't get despondent Luke. I don't take mainstream images as a general thing, and a lot of my experimental work gets passed by with not a lot of attention. Landscapes get huge attention and I'm pleased for the photographers. But I'm not going to take photos of what's popular just to attract more clicks - I take what I want to and I work on instinct - and I still post it because people do drop by and the comments do appear ..

Just please yourself.

And Stephen just puts it in a nutshell Smile
stevem 17 238 United Kingdom
16 May 2005 4:16AM
Don't get hung up on clicks - I don't but then I've got no choice Smile)

The clicks don't necessarily mean the image is outstanding in terms of photographic brilliance - it's people connecting with the author, or subject. Photosig uses a rating system for feedback - technically brill, well composed but technichally could be better etc.. Maybe this sort of rating system could refine the feedback. They also use a system where the more pics you review, you earn points enabling you to upload more than one pic a day. I agree with Edward about the content, remember ther's a lot of poeple who use the site who are still learning basic techniques & who are proud of their first sunset etc...
ljesmith 17 1.1k United Kingdom
16 May 2005 4:29AM
Clicks really don't bother me. they are a way of saying you like a picture, and to me liking something is a fairly weak response. Comments are a much better way of showing why you have reacted to an image.
Mixpix 17 1.1k England
16 May 2005 4:37AM
Luke I think a lot of people on here are afraid to say anything other than I like it incase they offend or it starts a fight. I'm starting to try and improve the quality of my comments but not everyone wants to or has the time to and sometimes what I say is probably complete crap but at least its an honest opinion.
User_Removed 16 4.3k 2 United Kingdom
16 May 2005 4:39AM
Luke, for me photography is a way to escape from life. Your pictures are very good but I don't particularly want to be reminded how awful life is for some people.
Having said that if the photograph was distressing but eye wateringly good I would click on it and comment.
Black and White is always the first section I check when I'm doing my gallery trawl.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.