People's Taste - I don't understand

[table1349]

This is a hammock.

Nor a particularly "artistic" shot, but catches your attention.

 

[jcdeboever]

I think it's kind of like watching some kind of medical or law drama.

I cannot watch any of the "police/detective" shows. Not that I'm any kind of expert, but I see so many holes in the story that it is insulting. Imagine what a real police detective thinks about them.

I'm the same way. I like the Andy Griffith show though...

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Dikkie]

I get the most likes on my most rubbish photos I put on the net.

So the "likes" really don't mean much, do they?

It's social media on an annonymous internet, does any of it mean much other than a pat on the ego?

Well when talking to my friends about social media, most of them seem to find it important to get these likes, and it's human that it feels good when it strokes your ego.

For me aswel, won't deny it... but the point is that for quick snapshots, it actually doesn't bother me much. If no one likes, I can understand it because it was a rubbish shot. It bothers me more in the other case.

For example... a shot where I spent lots of time to create it, put it online, no one seems to care about it. 5 minutes later I put a quick picture online of some st00pid laughing baby, immediately 20 likes! At that moment you think about why you're putting efforts in making decent photography if no one cares about it.

Who cares what others like? I take photos that I like.

That's a very interesting way of thinking about it.
Perhaps I care too much about feedback and other's opinions and stuff like that.

What's even more important actually, is the time spent taking a photo, creating, editing... without even putting it online.
That satisfies me already a lot, ... but what's worth this kind of happiness if you don't share it with someone?

 

[Designer]

For example... a shot where I spent lots of time to create it, put it online, no one seems to care about it.

O.K., here's an idea:

Start a second page/album/website and put your best shots on there and call that page your "art photography". So maybe they take the hint and start looking at them differently.

Call the first one "snapshots".

 

[dennybeall]

People look for "the story" and photographers look for photo quality. If the photo tells "the story" they are interested, no story = no interest. Beauty is what you look for on vacation or at the museum, not in a photo anymore.
AND, don't get me started on TV Cop shows - like last night - Oh, 3 guys are shooting at me with automatic weapons but I'm supposed to die according to the script so I'll just step out in the open and face the bad guys as I raise my pathetic little 9mm Glock,....................

 

[Designer]

AND, don't get me started on TV Cop shows -

Oh, I started it, didn't I?

 

[table1349]

I get the most likes on my most rubbish photos I put on the net.

So the "likes" really don't mean much, do they?

It's social media on an annonymous internet, does any of it mean much other than a pat on the ego?

Well when talking to my friends about social media, most of them seem to find it important to get these likes, and it's human that it feels good when it strokes your ego.

For me aswel, won't deny it... but the point is that for quick snapshots, it actually doesn't bother me much. If no one likes, I can understand it because it was a rubbish shot. It bothers me more in the other case.

For example... a shot where I spent lots of time to create it, put it online, no one seems to care about it. 5 minutes later I put a quick picture online of some st00pid laughing baby, immediately 20 likes! At that moment you think about why you're putting efforts in making decent photography if no one cares about it.

Who cares what others like? I take photos that I like.

That's a very interesting way of thinking about it.
Perhaps I care too much about feedback and other's opinions and stuff like that.

What's even more important actually, is the time spent taking a photo, creating, editing... without even putting it online.
That satisfies me already a lot, ... but what's worth this kind of happiness if you don't share it with someone?

Perhaps you need to evaluate who you are shooting for and why. If it is for the ego stroke shoot for the crowd. If it is for you and what you want to produce then who cares?

 

[SquarePeg]

...At that moment you think about why you're putting efforts in making decent photography if no one cares about it.

Either do it for money or do it because you love it (or both!) but don't do it hoping other people will care about it. It's your passion, not theirs.

 

[robbins.photo]

People look for "the story" and photographers look for photo quality. If the photo tells "the story" they are interested, no story = no interest. Beauty is what you look for on vacation or at the museum, not in a photo anymore.

So just make sure you include a cat doing something silly in every landscape. Bam. Problem solved.

AND, don't get me started on TV Cop shows - like last night - Oh, 3 guys are shooting at me with automatic weapons but I'm supposed to die according to the script so I'll just step out in the open and face the bad guys as I raise my pathetic little 9mm Glock,....................

Or my personal favorite, the guy that gets shot with a kevlar vest on, then jumps back up like it's nothing. Right.. lol

 

[otherprof]

Hi peeps !

Just need to say that... I don't understand.

Now, that said....

When you put photos online, it happens you get comments or likes or faves or whatever.
(for example on Instagram / Flickr / forums... )

What strikes me a lot lately ... is that I get the most likes on my most rubbish photos I put on the net.
Quick snapshots with my cellphone, with less quality, through dirty windows,...

And I get less appreciation for photos where I put tons of effort in it. Like waiting for the right timing of the day, blue hour, ... exploring the surroundings, area some weeks before I go shooting,... having lots of postprocessing or editing later on.

Sometimes really strange.
I get the idea that most of the people watching the internet are not looking for quality or added value anymore.

What do you guys think?

That's why they sell vanilla, chocolate and strawberry . . .

 

[snowbear]

I really think it depends on your audience. I've found that on FB and Instagram, since most of my "friends" and followers are actual friends or family then they "like" the photos that have people that they know in them.

This is why anyone serious about art, be it photography or painting, does not seek true critique from friends and family. Unless the friend or relative is fairly serious about art, themselves, or they are very honest, the are probably going to like whatever you do.

 

[spiralout462]

The only ones I want people to "like" are the ones which are framed with a price tag on them!

 

[Derrel]

Discerning people tend to like things that other discerning people tend to like. In this town, microbrewed beers and ales are popular, and there is a lot of scorn for macrobrews from the big, old American or Canadian brands. We have hundreds of thousands of beer snobs here.

In my photo groups, the most Likes go to the best photos--those groups have a pretty high percentage of photo snobs in them, these are by-invitation, rather small FB groups of under 2,000 members each. However,on Facebook in general, I think that cute subjects (kittens,puppies, sunsets, babies, children, good selfies, or very charming nostalgic images from the film era) and fun photos, happy photos, very simple, unpretentious photos are the types of photos that are generally liked most often. If lots of people personally know the people in the photos, the likes can go through the roof.

In open, general,public Facebook posts, the simplest wedding announcement shot, or a first birthday cake smash shot, can easily tally ten dozen likes within a few hours.

 

[xenskhe]

I get the most likes on my most rubbish photos I put on the net.


And I get less appreciation for photos where I put tons of effort in it.

Don't put rubbish photos on the net. Then superficial people will have no choice but to like your best work if they need to like something.

 

[Dikkie]

Yes, these are interesting things posted here.

Not for me personally, but in general.
I like to learn about how people behave in Social Media nowadays.
Analysing statistics and stuff,...

As I have to deal with Social Media in my current job aswel (online sales, which has nothing to do with photography).


Anyway, it is good to put things in perspective, and to exchange thoughts about it with others doing the same, like you guys.

In fact, it all depends on the audience you're targetting.
And the 'likes' you get weigh more in value depending on the person who likes, I think.
If an artist, or a good photographer likes your photo, it has more value than a like from someone who actually doesn't bother about anything.

Of course I create for myself. It's only me that needs to like it.
But I think it's nice to know that relevant people seem to like it too.
"you're making it for yourself" ... ok, but am I relevant? Does it matter that I ever create?
Questions that matter...

Another important thing is: timing.


Reminds me of that musician Nick Drake, made specific singer-songwriter music in England, in an era (70's) where Punk was all the way to go.
In fact, he didn't reach audience, he sticked to his own idea of music.
If he made punk he would probably have been famous that time.
To make a long story short: he finally committed suicide. And many years later, his artwork has been picked up by someone. Right now, the audience loves his kind of music. He finally gets his likes, but sadly enough, he's can't enjoy it anymore.
He was just making his art at the wrong time.

People look for "the story" and photographers look for photo quality. If the photo tells "the story" they are interested, no story = no interest. Beauty is what you look for on vacation or at the museum, not in a photo anymore.

So the perfect recipe for a strong photo is having a good story to tell in your photo, and create it with quality.
Making a series of it, and trying to get it into a museum.
Now we're getting somewhere, aren't we ?