"Neat" Photos

[cherrymoose]

Is it just me, or do shots with borders or simple watermarks seem to be more popular, or at least get more comments?

I hardly ever put borders on my photos when I post them on here, mostly because of time management. Although it's quick, it usually always slips my mind to put a thin black line around each of my photos. But lately, I've noticed (I'm not really collecting statistics here; just here and there I've seen things), that the 'neat' looking photos, with respectable borders and maybe the name of the photographer in the corner, seem to get the most comments-- and even critiques. Is it that just having the shot on TPF's plain white background makes it look more like a snapshot, than a professional, well-composed photograph?

It's just something I've been randomly noticing lately... *goes off to add borders to my most recent post*

 

[Hertz van Rental]

It could be just you.
Or maybe it's that the sort of people who comment or give crits need to have those sorts of indicators in order to know how they should respond.
In fact the devil in me makes me say that I wouldn't be surprised if it was because most people don't actually know how to look at pictures but are merely influenced by things which are unimportant

 

[Alex_B]

As I just stated in your other thread .. I prefer your images without borders

 

[mysteryscribe]

If you need a border buy a matt like the rest of the world lol. Sorry that was mean and not very nice I apologize.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

I do it becuase it makes my images look more finished, becuase they are.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

I do it becuase it makes my images look more finished

It only makes them look more 'finished' to you. It is a statement by you: I have finished working on this image.
But other people may see it differently.

This whole notion of 'finished' appears to have only come about since the advent of digital.
With film, once the neg was developed it was pretty much 'finished'. If you didn't have it on the neg then you didn't have it. You could use intensifiers and reducers to a point. Or get a retoucher to do things. But these were seen by the majority of photographers as an admission of failure.
The same applied to the print. You could tone the print, hand colour it, retouch it - but that was, again, pretty much it.
But with digital, taking the picture is only the starting point for some. And PS is there to rescue what would once have been consigned to the garbage. In fact it could be said that work on a digital image is never finished (in a final sense). It is always there to be loaded into a programme and played with.
The use of borders and sigs on a print is a way of saying 'enough is enough'). A kind of visual full stop (period).
Discuss

 

[ksmattfish]

This whole notion of 'finished' appears to have only come about since the advent of digital. With film, once the neg was developed it was pretty much 'finished'. If you didn't have it on the neg then you didn't have it.

And this notion became popular when commercial photo labs where it is possible for photogs to outsource much of the work that goes into finishing the photograph became readily available.

 

[Garbz]

I only add borders and my name to images I post on the internet. My entire collection is border free. At home pictures in frames have a border already

 

[mystar-sky]

I think the whole border issue just depends on the person. Some photos look better with a border, while others don't. Maybe the posts just got lucky with the popularity issue??

as for the watermarks... that's one thing i'm fighting with on whether to add myself. I'm trying to mature into what I consider a real photographer to be, so i don't feel the need to add a watermark yet. Maybe one day, but I think people put the watermark on it just so nobody can steal it and claim it as theres, and again, that post just got lucky with popularity. It didn't have anything to do with the actual watermark.

or you can start paying people to comment on your pictures.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

And this notion became popular when commercial photo labs where it is possible for photogs to outsource much of the work that goes into finishing the photograph became readily available.

I think the whole 'photo finisher' thing started with what we Brits call 'High Street Photographers'. They did portraits and weddings. The labs would do the processing and the finishers did the framing or sticking in albums.
At one time putting the photos into albums was a family thing - I remember sessions when I was a child... I guess people think they are way too busy for that now and so a service industry is born...

 

[The_Traveler]

Some photos look better with a border, while others don't.

Sometimes I have pictures that need a dark surround or something to end the compo and - knowing they may be displayed on line with a light blue or grey blackground -so I add a little stroke or a border.

I have noticed that making frames, borders and semi-fancy logos is a skill that often comes very early in the development of a photographer. The photographer may not know his's' from his sRGB but will have a fancy frame with a fancy logo. (and in the first 3 posts will wonder about whether to be concerned about someone stealing the art.)

 

[Jeff Canes]

this seem like a Nikon Canon debate

 

[mysteryscribe]

Im with jeff its a matter of what you like, but for me it ain't part of the image so it's irrelivant either way. But as someone pointed it out since anyone with a program can do it, it means nothing at all. Good and bad images have borders so why bother.

It's not like Hertz's high street at all since everyone can do it. But Hertz wonder if that is where the term 'High Art' really comes from.

 

[gmarquez]

The use of borders and sigs on a print is a way of saying 'enough is enough'). A kind of visual full stop (period).
Discuss

My view...it's a way to simulate the matting and framing of a wall print on the computer. To some people, this may give a sense of "finish" (not as in 'done', but as in 'polish'), and a sense of legitimacy. The images on my web page are "matted" and "framed", while the ones I post here are not. I have no idea if matted or framed pictures get more comments. The images I print have no fake matte/border, as they will get those in real life.

Good and bad images have borders so why bother.

GOOD matting can enhace a photograph. It's up to the viewer to determine if it enhances or distracts on a particular photo.

 

[Alex_B]

GOOD matting can enhace a photograph. It's up to the viewer to determine if it enhances or distracts on a particular photo.

Often it separates the image from an ugly or unfitting wall.
You can turn the whole thing into a design disaster if you put the image onto the wall directly without a frame/matte.