Cliche?

[Torus34]

Loser101;

"I never meant it in a bad way . . ."

I never for a moment thought that you did!

Perhaps the reason why I feel my method of self-critique 'works' is that I've been concerned with art and aesthetics for many years.

 

[Garbz]

...in my opinion, it's not always what the photo is of that can be construed as 'cliche', but rather how it's done.

Very true. Exactly the reason why, when I went to Sydney, I didn't photograph the Sydney Opera House from the side, or with the bridge, or from the Rocks like every other photographer, but instead caught a water taxi to the other side of the river and shot straight down the centre of it from the pontoon. No one who's seen the picture so far has even recognised the building.

For something to be cliché there still needs to both the subject, composition, and all matching elements. Suppose someone took a picture of the opera house again with the bridge but has a huge red moon in the background (rare), is it still cliché?
http://images.google.com.au/images?q=sydeny opera house

 

[Efergoh]

iconic is something that is executed according to a convention or tradition

Cliche is anything that has become trite or commonplace through overuse

An iconic photo is a well executed cliche.

Chiche to me is neither good nor bad. It simply means that it has been done before...a lot. In and of itself it is not an acceptable critique to my way of thinking. It may b a cliche photo, but was it executed well? Does it bring something new to the table? Is it representative of something else? Perhaps the cliche was intentional.

Once could argue that wedding photography as a whole is cliche. How many wedding photographers have shown their portfolios to a bride to be and had her point to one of your photos and tell you that she wants you to shoot that shot for her? Bam...instant cliche.

 

[C.3.3.]

There are a lot of times I see photos that I've seen a million times before in one way or another. They can be well exposed, composed, and printed; interesting, even, in subject matter. But the fact that that the horse has already been beaten, whether it be a subject or a pose or what have you, often leaves me looking at a shot and thinking, "eh, cliche, :thumbdown: "

So my question is: Do you think "cliche" is a useful/meaningful critique in and of itself?

First I think it's important to point out that not everything that has been done many times before is a clichée because of that. Luckily, because what has not been done before in the age of digital photography?

The clichée lies in the approach the photographer has taken towards the treatment of the image, much more than in the choice of subject matter. And even in that approach carefulness is needed before judging some photo a clichée, as sometimes some important detail can make the whole difference.

So to answer your question, yes I think that "clichée" can be a valid critique if the photographer has lazily chosen a certain treatment of the image that has been done before, because he knew that treatment was succesful in the past.

 

[mysteryscribe]

What is it they say about writing, there are only ten original plots all the rests are adaptations.

I have no idea what if any relevance this has to the subject at hand. Except that maybe everything is a cliche.