JacaRanda
Hobbyist Birdographer
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2012
- Messages
- 5,472
- Reaction score
- 2,628
- Location
- Orange County California
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Ball of confusion!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Actually, what I am trying to say is that it is impossible to evoke the same feelings in the viewer the photographer had while making a photograph. Viewers may like the photo for entirely different feelings. Often times, when I show my friends photos I like they are affected by completely different things, hence my belief that the photographer's feelings are irrelevant as viewers are likely to assign their own meaning to it. Telling the viewer what they are supposed to feel in a photograph or what kind of story it tells defeats the purpose of making that very photograph, in my opinion.Can't the photographer simply take a picture because they liked seeing the scene and wanted to capture it without actually giving it a deeper thought?
They "liked" the scene they saw that's a feeling. If they were indifferent about the scene then why bother to take the photo. So you see it was a feeling that made them want to take the image to remember the scene, so why should the photo not try and convey that same feeling.
I think what you are trying to say is that you don't think a photo should be over analyzed.
We all know it's subjective, hence why the photographer decided to make the photo. There is no way the viewer is supposed to know what the potographer had in mind or wanted to express while taking it. I don't think I *ever* wondered what the photographer wanted to say when I looked and appreciated his work. They more than likely made the photo thinking it would look beautiful for a different reason than my reason for enjoying it.Most often, being a good image is enough.
Please define "good image"
Actually, what I am trying to say is that it is impossible to evoke the same feelings in the viewer the photographer had while making a photograph. Viewers may like the photo for entirely different feelings. Often times, when I show my friends photos I like they are affected by completely different things, hence my belief that the photographer's feelings are irrelevant as viewers are likely to assign their own meaning to it. Telling the viewer what they are supposed to feel in a photograph or what kind of story it tells defeats the purpose of making that very photograph, in my opinion.
We all know it's subjective, hence why the photographer decided to make the photo. There is no way the viewer is supposed to know what the potographer had in mind or wanted to express while taking it. I don't think I *ever* wondered what the photographer wanted to say when I looked and appreciated his work. They more than likely made the photo thinking it would look beautiful for a different reason than my reason for enjoying it.Most often, being a good image is enough.
Please define "good image"
Please define "good image"
You and anyone else is welcome to disagree, but in that case the gauntlet is thrown down: define "good"
Please define "disagree"?
Please define "define." :mrgreen:Please define "disagree"?
Actually, what I am trying to say is that it is impossible to evoke the same feelings in the viewer the photographer had while making a photograph. Viewers may like the photo for entirely different feelings. Often times, when I show my friends photos I like they are affected by completely different things, hence my belief that the photographer's feelings are irrelevant as viewers are likely to assign their own meaning to it. Telling the viewer what they are supposed to feel in a photograph or what kind of story it tells defeats the purpose of making that very photograph, in my opinion.Can't the photographer simply take a picture because they liked seeing the scene and wanted to capture it without actually giving it a deeper thought?
They "liked" the scene they saw that's a feeling. If they were indifferent about the scene then why bother to take the photo. So you see it was a feeling that made them want to take the image to remember the scene, so why should the photo not try and convey that same feeling.
I think what you are trying to say is that you don't think a photo should be over analyzed.
Wow, great way of discussing your point. Feel free to ignore my posts from now on as I am not here to hear my views are "crap."Your belief that "the photographer's feelings are irrelevant" is in my opinion crap.
Wow, great way of discussing your point. Feel free to ignore my posts from now on as I am not here to hear my views are "crap."Your belief that "the photographer's feelings are irrelevant" is in my opinion crap.
And you go back to primary school and learn the difference between "effect" and "affect" lol.Wow, great way of discussing your point. Feel free to ignore my posts from now on as I am not here to hear my views are "crap."Your belief that "the photographer's feelings are irrelevant" is in my opinion crap.
Now take that emotion you feel from reading my opinion and put it in a photo.