Does This "Wrong" Image Look Nice to Others As Well?

[JH Foto]

With only a very small part of the image in focus I think this one should go in the file marked B1N..

 

[bvjgcigh]

I don't care for it, how ever I do see a good photo in there if all the distracting stuff was gone, you may or may not like it better but there was part of the photo that drew my attention, the rest of the photo I found distracting.

This is what I would do with it.

View attachment 87611

This makes me wonder how this photo would have been if the little hill was in focus...

 

[vintagesnaps]

I like the idea of feeling like you're peeking down into the branches the way some are in the foreground framing the shot, but whatever's obscured makes for a distraction I think because you can't see what it is. And it seems like the composition ends rather abruptly in the upper left part of the picture.

This might be the kind of picture you keep in your own personal collection because you know it really isn't the greatest photo but for whatever reason it's rather interesting and you like it.

Figure out what you like about it and use the idea another time when you're taking a picture of something similar (maybe having branches frame a subject and creating the feeling you get with this one).

 

[shmne]

I took this image randomly recently, and for some reason- I like it a lot (yet everything about it seems wrong and "off"). However, I can't figure out why- and I don't know if this picture is appealing to other people as well... Any thoughts?

I'm actually going to a little against the grain here and explain a bit as to what it is you most likely enjoy about the photo, and why artistically it could be appealing.

Quick preface: I've been told before that out of focus images that lack subject are ugly, often they are, yet my highest selling piece is a blurry piece with no subject. Polarization of audience is often the quickest way to create interest in your piece, and whether the interest is positive or negative a strong reaction generally beats a weak one.

A lot of photographers look at what is "technically correct" because that removes the more subjective and artistic aspects from a critique. While often this makes a critique slightly more reliable and removes the element of opinion, this also means a piece can not be reviewed as an artistic image. Many individuals, especially on a forum like this, will dislike anything that doesn't fit into the technically correct category. However as you leave this world you'll find more and more people enjoying these kind of photos and for a rather important reason.

First, if you were to view this image as dark vs light you would find the composition pleasingly balanced. The heavier weight of the image takes up 2/3 and the lighter weight portion of this image takes up about 1/3. In general we know from Gestalt that this is pleasing. Then we have a nice repetition, another Gestalt theory, and unity (you guessed it, Gestalt) of elements. Finally the image has an interesting level of depth and a focus that makes you almost feel uncomfortable. These are all memorable and sometimes interesting qualities.

So the core of the image can definitely be appealing to some, but when you have an image like this it really needs to polarize the audience into hating it or loving it and I don't think this image brings that kind of intensity.

I know this was just a mistake image and understand that maybe this review was a bit in depth but I felt it would be worthwhile to play devil's advocate as to how these images can work and why this one is actually pretty close

 

[bvjgcigh]

I took this image randomly recently, and for some reason- I like it a lot (yet everything about it seems wrong and "off"). However, I can't figure out why- and I don't know if this picture is appealing to other people as well... Any thoughts?

I'm actually going to a little against the grain here and explain a bit as to what it is you most likely enjoy about the photo, and why artistically it could be appealing.

Quick preface: I've been told before that out of focus images that lack subject are ugly, often they are, yet my highest selling piece is a blurry piece with no subject. Polarization of audience is often the quickest way to create interest in your piece, and whether the interest is positive or negative a strong reaction generally beats a weak one.

A lot of photographers look at what is "technically correct" because that removes the more subjective and artistic aspects from a critique. While often this makes a critique slightly more reliable and removes the element of opinion, this also means a piece can not be reviewed as an artistic image. Many individuals, especially on a forum like this, will dislike anything that doesn't fit into the technically correct category. However as you leave this world you'll find more and more people enjoying these kind of photos and for a rather important reason.

First, if you were to view this image as dark vs light you would find the composition pleasingly balanced. The heavier weight of the image takes up 2/3 and the lighter weight portion of this image takes up about 1/3. In general we know from Gestalt that this is pleasing. Then we have a nice repetition, another Gestalt theory, and unity (you guessed it, Gestalt) of elements. Finally the image has an interesting level of depth and a focus that makes you almost feel uncomfortable. These are all memorable and sometimes interesting qualities.

So the core of the image can definitely be appealing to some, but when you have an image like this it really needs to polarize the audience into hating it or loving it and I don't think this image brings that kind of intensity.

I know this was just a mistake image and understand that maybe this review was a bit in depth but I felt it would be worthwhile to play devil's advocate as to how these images can work and why this one is actually pretty close

Thank you for the amazing reply. I think you nailed exactly why this image may seem appealing to me. A second look with what you said in mind gave me a perfect understanding of what was going on to add any amount of appeal to it. Hopefully, I may keep this in mind next time I take a picture- maybe even in the same location.

 

[AustinPhotoDude]

View attachment 87507
I took this image randomly recently, and for some reason- I like it a lot (yet everything about it seems wrong and "off"). However, I can't figure out why- and I don't know if this picture is appealing to other people as well... Any thoughts?

What I like most about the picture is the texture of the green leaves on what appears to be some kind of juniper or cedar tree. But, the out of focus branches in the foreground are terribly distracting. I also think they serve to distract the viewer from the brown/dead portions of the otherwise nice green leaves. That means, if a better angle were available, the subject wouldn't be very good anyway. In that situation, I'd suggest looking for a way to emphasize the leaves while minimizing the dead growth and foreground clutter.

 

[shmne]

I'm glad that made sense to you bvjgcigh, I hope that you take this better understanding of what is going on and improve on it