Judging Photos

[Bruce Dayton]

Didn't this already start to happen when Velvia came on the scene to
give us that over-the-top punchy color in slides?  I'm sure our
viewing mediums have had some impact, but so has our social
environment.  Today, information is thrown at us in a very fast,
concentrated way.  All the media types do it - short, fast
commercials, movies instead of books, etc.  So to stand out from the
crowd - there has to be something catchy.  Photography is just a
follow on to that.

Some of my thoughts...

-- 
Bruce


Tuesday, May 1, 2007, 11:12:44 AM, you wrote:

mw> Doug Brewer wrote:
>> mike wilson wrote:
>> 
>>>>From: Mark Cassino <mcassino at chartermi.net>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Overall - it was a pretty interesting experience. I always imagined
>>>>judges looking at my photos like I look at them - pouring over them for
>>>>a long time, looking at the nuance and detail. I should of put 2 + 2
>>>>together - when you consider the numbers of photos they are looking at,
>>>>it's a pretty snap judgment process. And the slightest technical fault
>>>>can get your image booted...
>>>
>>>
>>>Your impressions coincide with my belief of the direction
>>>photography is going since the advent of consumer digital
>>>equipment.  It would be interesting to get the impression of
>>>someone who has been regularly judging during the changeover from
>>>chemical to digital.
>> 
>> 
>> Not sure what you mean here.
>> 

mw> I think that the possible subtleties of "chemical" pictures are being
mw> lost/abandoned in favour of "smack'em in the eye" colour and graphic
mw> composition.  It's only an impression, which I have no empirical 
mw> evidence for, but two people on this list in the last month have 
mw> mentioned it.  My belief is that the preponderance of viewing onscreen,
mw> using thumbnails to choose which pictures to look at in any depth,
mw> reinforces this type of selection.