Is this a portrait? Should it have placed 3rd?

[cgw]

Product photography...

 

[benhasajeep]

Rules are there for a purpose. If they were suggestions so as to give photographers some leway. Then call them suggestions!

 

[vintagesnaps]

What I think is PetaPixel often seems to promote something to get people to the site, as do plenty of other sites... too bad we aren't talking about the winning portrait which I think is a moving and powerful image.

Having done submissions to juried exhibits, in my experience the guidelines are developed by the organization or gallery that will be holding the exhibit; the judges probably didn't write them. Usually judges are selected by the sponsoring organization to view the works but they probably weren't handling the submission process.

If it was an anonymous judging the photos would have been viewed not knowing who took the photos or anything about them (usually if you need to include a bio or description with the entry, that's for display but not necessarily used in judging).

I noticed that a model release was required but maybe nobody caught the fact that this must (or should) have been a property release? and the photo didn't qualify. Obviously they'll need to clarify that a portrait submitted must be a real living breathing human (and maybe have entrants verify that), or revise the guidelines to include mannequins, robots, statues, or whatever.

I'm not sure why this was selected; the only thing I can think is it has a somewhat surreal look, and selections may be made in part because an entry is unusual or creative or unique. The guidelines say that judges' selections are final so entrants would (or should) have known that.

 

[fmw]

It is a portrait. Just not a very good one.

 

[chuasam]

Androids are people too

 

[benhasajeep]

Androids are people too

Not until the future where Starfleet has the trial to determin that. That's a couple hundred years off.

 

[chuasam]

Androids are people too

Not until the future where Starfleet has the trial to determin that. That's a couple hundred years off.

Robotic Emancipation, Now!

 

[benhasajeep]

Androids are people too

Not until the future where Starfleet has the trial to determin that. That's a couple hundred years off.

Robotic Emancipation, Now!

Oh, another Union revolution? Are you going to organize all the robots in the factories? Not going to be a pretty sight. Like history is repeating itself.

 

[DanOstergren]

To me, it's not a portrait that falls under the rules of the competition, and in that respect it should not have placed. If the judges feel that the rules should be changed, those rules need to be changed before people start sending in their submissions, that way it's an even playing field. Changing the rules after the fact is a really crappy thing to do, and I feel sorry for the person who would have placed had this product image not been selected, you know, because it's a PRODUCT IMAGE. As well, from experience I believe it's much more difficult to take a good photo of a living, breathing subject compared to photographing an inanimate object, especially considering that very little posing or direction is required to take a shoulders-up photograph of a non living, non moving subject.

 

[Peeb]

What I think is PetaPixel often seems to promote something to get people to the site, as do plenty of other sites... too bad we aren't talking about the winning portrait which I think is a moving and powerful image....
I'm not sure why this was selected; the only thing I can think is it has a somewhat surreal look, and selections may be made in part because an entry is unusual or creative or unique. The guidelines say that judges' selections are final so entrants would (or should) have known that.

Knowing that the judges' selection is final is NOT the same as knowing that you are free to disregard the rules in composing your entry. The contestants were expressly TOLD that the subject must be living. If an artist wishes to break with convention or social mores, then power to her, but disregarding the CONTEST rules gave this entrant a wholly unfair advantage over the folks who believed and trusted the organizers of this contest when the "rules" were announced. Its no different than giving first place in a landscape photography contest to the photo of a puppy because, while not a landscape shot- what a cute puppy! We love puppies. Look at those sweet eyes.

This organization broke it's express agreement with all who entered.

Very irritating. Think I'll go take a picture of a puppy. Or an android puppy. Hmmm....

 

[petrochemist]

The judges could have given it an 'honorable mention' to bring it to attention if that's what they want.
To be placed it must conform to the rules - if they are incapable of applying the rules then their competition just gets added top the increasing number that photographers will simply ignore.

 

[waday]

Very irritating

Would you say you’re peeb’d off?

 

[benhasajeep]

The judges could have given it an 'honorable mention' to bring it to attention if that's what they want.
To be placed it must conform to the rules - if they are incapable of applying the rules then their competition just gets added top the increasing number that photographers will simply ignore.

I think all the portriats put more weight to the subjects personal background situation than the actual photographic techniques involved. The winning picture never really told me anything. If I had not read the information, my first thought was he was a captured pirate. Nothing conveys his look / appearance / attitude. It litterally looks like a mugshot the navy takes of pirates they capture! The 2nd picture I think says the most. Rain on the window, her somber mood. That tells you something. The robot is a typical average everyday portrait. But as discussed it does not meet the rules. It's nothing special, just a portrait that "pays the bills".

 

[limr]

I disagree about the winning portrait. He doesn't say "pirate" to me at all. I think there's a whole world in those eyes and that look. The fact that you can't see any boat but just water behind him, for me, emphasizes the loneliness and despair.

As for the android, the judges' comments are interesting:
"Judges comments: During the judging process, only the title of each portrait is revealed. It was unclear whether the girl was a human or an android, and this ambiguity made the portrait particularly compelling. Tammi’s portrait offers a provocative comment on human evolution."

So they didn't actually know for sure if it was an android or not. She is quite disturbingly lifelike and even after knowing she is an android, I find myself staring to see what the differences are. (On another note, if it's not immediately apparent that an android's super-smooth skin and dead eyes are not human, that says a lot to me about how heavily portraits of actual humans seem to be edited these days.)

But even giving the judges the benefit of the doubt for a second and believing they had no idea they were breaking the rules, the question still remains of whether or not it should have even been accepted into the contest at all.

The picture does start a conversation about the increasingly blurred lines between organic life and artificial "life." However, why choose to begin that conversation by flouting the rules of an existing contest? Would it have made such an impact otherwise?

(Those questions are musings, btw, but feel free to answer them if you feel like it )

 

[benhasajeep]

I disagree about the winning portrait. He doesn't say "pirate" to me at all. I think there's a whole world in those eyes and that look. The fact that you can't see any boat but just water behind him, for me, emphasizes the loneliness and despair.

As for the android, the judges' comments are interesting:
"Judges comments: During the judging process, only the title of each portrait is revealed. It was unclear whether the girl was a human or an android, and this ambiguity made the portrait particularly compelling. Tammi’s portrait offers a provocative comment on human evolution."

So they didn't actually know for sure if it was an android or not. She is quite disturbingly lifelike and even after knowing she is an android, I find myself staring to see what the differences are. (On another note, if it's not immediately apparent that an android's super-smooth skin and dead eyes are not human, that says a lot to me about how heavily portraits of actual humans seem to be edited these days.)

But even giving the judges the benefit of the doubt for a second and believing they had no idea they were breaking the rules, the question still remains of whether or not it should have even been accepted into the contest at all.

The picture does start a conversation about the increasingly blurred lines between organic life and artificial "life." However, why choose to begin that conversation by flouting the rules of an existing contest? Would it have made such an impact otherwise?

(Those questions are musings, btw, but feel free to answer them if you feel like it )

I don't see dsipair in his eyes. I see anger. Lowered straight brow, narrowed eyes, slight tilt of the head down. Now his lips / mouth do not convey anger.