File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
My photography teacher won't accept one of my pictures because she finds it tasteless. It's just a dead bird.

Thoughts? Is my picture any good?

I didn't have a lot of time in the darkroom so I had to make a print fast to scan and it came out all shitty.
>> Anonymous
What your teacher finds tasteless is moot in terms of artistic value.
I don't see the problem as long as you didn't kill the bird yourself.

The print is awful though. :( The shot looks decent too.
>> Anonymous
>>30425
>The print is awful though.
I was in a hurry. >.<
>> Anonymous
>>Thoughts? Is my picture any good?
well, it's just a dead bird.

that's probably why your teacher finds it to be tasteless. give the photo a story, show something more then just a dead bird.

just to give an example: take a long exposure of a dead cat near a road. moving cars will be blurred, emhpasizing their speed. the cat will be sharp and the background, though blurry, will show the viewer much more then "just a dead cat"
>> Anonymous
>>30423

>>My photography teacher won't accept one of my pictures because she finds it tasteless. It's just a dead bird.

you seriously need to ask yourself and other students in your class if you should be tought by this person.

>>"she finds it tasteless"

its not her job to project her veiws on taste. This photo is so far from being "tastless". you can read all sorts of things into the photo.

By todays photographys standars you would be hardpressed pushed to do/say anything that is "tastless".

TLDR: you "teacher" should fuck off.
>> Anonymous
>>30427
Wow, thanks.
>> Anonymous
you sure she didn't mean you have a bland boring composition? did she point out to you that your negative is so scratched that I'd guess you dropped it on the floor and kicked it around a bit?
>> Anonymous
>>30445
nah,it's okay for working prints to be scratched or not perfectly finished, afaik. composition not taking into account, the 'ewww' reaction from a female is not really surprising :)
>> Anonymous
>>30445
No, she said that picture was tasteless.

This is not the print I turned in. This is one I made for myself but I dropped the print on the floor. >.<
>> Anonymous
it isnt tasteless, its just boring and unoriginal... not tastless though.
>> Anonymous
you can't even tell it's a deadbird
>> it's not the bird anonymous
the composition is boring and it's flat. you also don't use the rule of thirds so basically it's a really boring shot, and the bird is almost centered which is a big no-no. In the future take more than one shot of something, i know it's not fun but the results are better.
>> Anonymous
I actually think the scratchy-ness of the picture gives it a more tragic effect. Kinda like a worn out to death feel.
>> Rawr !pBDDkuoH3.
>>30433

You're so illiterate you can't spell properly- and declare the teacher of the class incompetent. Priceless! 4chan idiotic arrangance at its best.

>>30447

It is tasteless. There's no "message", meaning, sentiment, or visual effect. It's just a barely recognizeable picture of a dead bird.

>>30454

The bird is not centered in the photo. It is offset to the left. Its tail is in the center of the photo.
>> eku
     File :-(, x)
>>30425

There is this Finnish guy, Teemu Mäki, who once killed a cat for one of his art movies. Later in the court he was fined for it, and showing the movie in Finland was banned.
Not because he killed the cat, but because he couldn't kill the cat fast enough.

Oh, and after killing, he masturbated and ejaculated over it.
He also wrote an essay about it, too. Though, it's only in Finnish.
(And you can't blame he for doing so, unless you know his motives, which are too long to be written here.)


My dead contribution included.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A80Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2006:08:28 22:32:58Exposure Time1/100 secF-Numberf/2.8Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.81 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height479RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>30493
is he a /b/tard? :3
>> des
>>30494
most finns seem to be
>> Jal
>>30423Its abit boring but I like it. Its not what your teacher like or dont like. Do what you like.


>>30456wot? halp me spel. Dont complain about spelling when its NOT what the subject is about!
fucking go to a language FORUM!
>> Anonymous
>>30493
FINLAND = WINLAND

What was the guy's name?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
here's my dead bird photo

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot A520Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.6Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2006:01:14 04:07:22Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/4.0Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.81 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width900Image Height675RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
>>30554

>There is this Finnish guy, TEEMU MÄKI... etc
>> Anonymous
>>30456

lol thank you oh master of all photography your opinion matters to us.

what would we do without you to enforce the "LAWS OF PHOTOGRAPHY".

THANK YOU RAWR, you and your canon EOS will teach us the truth. Your oppinion = truth.
>> Steven Seagull !n/fp6fEcxs
>>30565

He does have a point though. Why take a picture if the picture doesn't have anything to tell the viewer?

Can you tell why the picture was taken? If it was taken to show a dead bird, what's the dead bird's meaning? Could you comment on the angle how this photograph was shot? What about the composition? Is the tilt necessary to make the meaning clearer for the viewer? What about the usage of depth of field? Why was this shot as black & white?

These may sound fucking ridiculous, but these are the basic things to keep in mind when taking a photograph. All the good photographers out there think about the composition, even to the point where lighting, depth-of-field, exposure time and filters become more than just a visual gimmick to separate pictures taken with a DSLR from a pocket digicam.
>> Anonymous
> Why take a picture if the picture doesn't have anything to tell the viewer?
Because I like pretty pictures.
>> Anonymous
>>30568
PWND
>> Polvoron
It's a horrible shot. L2compose.
>> Anonymous
Demanding that every picture be an attempt to change the nature of the human condition is asking way too much and will stop a lot of really nice pictures from being taken. There are some of us who want nothing more than happy eyes.

As for the picture itself, the picture would be greatly improved by following the rule of thirds. If you can get another good print, crop it so the bird is on the lower-left intersection and see if it comes out better.
>> Anonymous
I agree that the shot is not tasteless, but it's not tasteful either.

When you take a photo, ask yourself how you feel, or how you are moved by your subject, then try to amplify that feeling for your viewers. For example, if upon seeing a dead bird in a park, you feel it's a bit tragic, you could amplify that feeling by including in the background people walking by as if nothing was wrong - Just going about their daily lives. That makes the effect all the more tragic, because the bird seems to have died alone, and nobody seems to care.

If you teacher asked for a 'point', 'purpose', or 'thought' behind the picture, then you responded with "it's just a dead bird," then I'd partially side with your teacher - the picture is not tasteless, but there was no taste involved in your attempt to photograph either. Bland is a better word, really.

If you had absolutely no opportunity to tell a story behind the picture, or to convey your purpose (and it doesn't seem from your posts that you had a strong one, if at all), and she responded to the picture immediately by calling it tasteless - then A) she can't see your purpose, and one can only speculate that she did or did not give a good effort, or B) she shouldn't be teaching art, on the grounds of "everything will offend someone," and any art teacher needs to recognize and get over that to objectively help their students
>> Anonymous
>>30574

>>would be greatly improved by following the rule of thirds

rule.....LOL. there are....NO SUCH THING AS RULES FOR PHOTOGRAPHY.

you can learn all the zone metering and rule of thirds bullshit you want. but it all comes down to developing your own style. fuck "rules" and your old shitty "how to" books.

go read some books on aesthetics or better yet SPEAK to ppl that know about the subjetct.

dont dismiss this guys photo because you dont like it. I love it for the very fact it pisses you guys off. what do you want more pictures of frozen tree branches in japan?
>> Anonymous
My photo teacher never taught us the rule of thirds because "well, it's kind of a shitty and stupid rule."

She then lost her job because she wasn't "teaching photography correctly."
>> Anonymous
>>30621
I just don't like it because it's bland. bark about style all you want, but a boring picture is boring. And like in any art, things like zone exposure are just tools that you can use, not hard fast rules, because the more you understand about HOW to do things, the easier it becomes to do them. Think of them as teaching tools, and ignore the folks who don't know any better, or all you'll ever do is troll shitty message boards
>> ?00 !XBOXgikTFw
>>30554
http://www.teemumaki.com/teemumakiphotography.html No sample pic cause the mods/janitors here are little girls who delete everything that doesn't fit in their lalala land.
>> Anonymous
>>30622

>>My photo teacher never taught us the rule of thirds because "well, it's kind of a shitty and stupid rule."

>>She then lost her job because she wasn't "teaching photography correctly."

do you for one second think that ppl will buy bullshit like this?

>>30624

these rules are for ppl that arnt creative and are used on cources/by teacher that know that it must look like they are teaching the class something. When infact its pointless because you cant teach creativity.

>>I just don't like it because it's bland.

that doesnt mean shit. your oppinion is stated, it doesnt matter, its not fact.
>> ??????? !KEBab7wem6
>>30634these rules are for ppl that arnt creative and are used on cources/by teacher that know that it must look like they are teaching the class something. When infact its pointless because you cant teach creativity.

You're right about that you can't teach creativity, but there's a reason why the rule of thirds has been around for a few thousand years.
>> Anonymous
>>30636

>>You're right about that you can't teach creativity, but there's a reason why the rule of thirds has been around for a few thousand years.


ironic post? so what if the rule of thirds has been around for that long. nothing moves forward in photography with a mathimatical ideal. Feeling, mood, narative...etc are more important than the "golden ratio" and such.

your post is ironic as your photos lack creativity. Dont get me wrong they are nice, sharp photos but nothing more than that.thats all you may want to do. but stop looking at photographs merely as a way to show stuff.

yeah so you can take pictures of frost, pushed to one side of the frame, on brances. prime example of lack of creativity and following rules.
>> Anonymous
>>No sample pic cause the mods/janitors here are little girls who delete everything that doesn't fit in their lalala land.
mmmm, a relevant sample photo is allowed you know

relating to the golden ration: the "rule" of thirds is just an easy application of it. it is good for beginners and even pro's sometimes use it. but by no means it is a "rule". I don't know what to think myself about a teacher that doesn't want to learn the rule of thirds.

the golden ration is, afaik, much more complex. you don't always need it, a good subject or emotion can overcome the classical rules of composition IMHO
>> ??????? !KEBab7wem6
>>30638

It's not completely that, either. Rule of thirds, or about any other photographic "rule", are good guidelines. The triangle rule, for example, is a good guide into practising harmonic composition of objects.

Of course, depending on whatever it is you're taking photographs of, your intentions may be different, and you break the rules or whatever. I just got the picture of your post that you aren't thinking about your composition, just because you want to act rebellious to whatever it's you're doing.

But about taking photographs merely as wanting to show stuff? What are they if they're not supposed to "show stuff" to people? The photos I posted about frost (yes, the first one has out-of-focus pinetrees in the background), I try not to think of them about the frost alone - the photos were more of a practice in creating a mood with colors and shapes.
>> Anonymous
>>30493

good point he really should of ejaculated on the dead bird and taken a picture of that
>> Anonymous
>>30634
>these rules are for ppl that arnt creative and are used on cources/by teacher that know that it must look like they are teaching the class something. When infact its pointless because you cant teach creativity.

you missed my point completely. they're to help people *develop creativity, and understand the media they work with. I'm not advocating holding people to these "rules" so try and relax a bit.

>your oppinion is stated, it doesnt matter, its not fact.

no shit. of course it's my opinion, this is a discussion board. Any mature person can decide for themselves what to listen to and what to dismiss. Quit trying to be such a prick, you're taking this shit too seriously
>> Anonymous
>>30653

you cant develop genuine creativity.

my point is this. the level of photography you guys are mostly interested in is the surface, if its in focus and what canon EOS it was taken on. Golden ratio, the rule of thirds and all that crap comes automatically to some and not to most others. it can be learnt but not really understood. its attractive to some as its a way to make "better" photographs, apparently.

WHY do these rules produce better results? What is a better photograph?
>> Anonymous
>>30658

Simple. To make an animation you first have to learn how to draw.
>> Anonymous
>>30641

>good point he really should of ejaculated on >the dead bird and taken a picture of that.

And you really should HAVE paid attention in English class. "Should of" makes no sense whatsoever.
>> Anonymous
>>30661

crap analogy
>> Anonymous
>>30658
I disagree. Creativity has to be nurtured, and artists mature with time. You aren't born a perfect photographer, just like you can't intuitively know how to paint a masterpiece. As for why they work, the rule of thirds and the golden ratio break people away from just pointing the camera at things and make them think about where they place an object and what kind of importance they want it to have-so they can develop they're own ideas about composition. They make people exercise creative decisions. I'm genuinely tired of lazy artists trying to debunk the methods of the art community because they don't see the benefit themselves. You don't like the rule of thirds, fine, but it IS useful, and until you post some work with your brilliant anti-conventional style then what sense does it make defending a photograph with an uninteresting subject, poor contrast, and no real value?
>> Anonymous
take a picture of some packages of chicken in the super market, and see if your teacher thinks its tasteless or not
>> Anonymous
All of you have been arguing over a bird for 6 days now. It's a dead bird guys, let it go.
>> SuperDeathSlut
     File :-(, x)
She should have just straight out said it was a shit photo..
No offence. I can't tell it's a dead bird.
Take the photo from above, see it's decaying face and whatnot. Be more morbid than some black lump.
Photography can never be tasteless.
It's capturing real life.

Photo is not mine. Maybe one day I'll get a photo of a dead bird too =3
I have been meaning to. But it's always on the way to school.
>> des
>>30717
bah, photography is like every other art, it's filled with lies and lobster telephone
>> Anonymous
Tell your teacher to fuck herself and die. She has no taste and she smells like shit out of a doggy's ass.
>> Anonymous
>>30743

really? i think that statement is a bit "art 101 for beginners" yes ok there is the tendancy for photographic artists to fall back on hype and name. Once someone has made a name for themself generally it doesnt matter what they produce as ppl will want it based on the name.

the hard part seems to be getting discoverd but if the work you do warents it then you will be picked up eventually. the difference lies in what you can offer over other ppl.

there are millions of ppl that can use cameras well. ppl need to stop thinking that because you know how to take "nice" photos then you are creative.so many ppl here just care about what camera they have and whore equiptment. what will make you different from the rest that do exactly the same thing as you and the thousands that do it better?
>> ROMANTIC FAGGOTRY TL;DR des
>>30797
>>...fall back on hype and name
that's why I said lobster telephone.
Lies are what people make when they want to make something people will like. Or what they're paid to make for commission work.
Lobster telephone is being "creative" with no direction or being wildly random for the sake of it.
There's nothing "wrong" with either and I'm not saying neither isn't creative. It's just that there are limits to what you can do in both methods, I think, and still be popularly accepted.
Photography is barely art in the art community itself, it certainly isn't for most outsiders. The digital revolution isn't helping. Even today, you see things like "Fine art and Photography" at most galleries. It's been a seperatist thing for a long time.
>>Once someone has made a name for themself generally it doesnt matter what they produce as ppl will want it based on the name.
That's all artists. It's laziness and pressure at the same time. Artists are lazy unless they're currently being tickled by something. Agents/patrons want them to keep pushing out the same style print/painting/song because that's what's currently selling hot.
Once art becomes a job, it's difficult to be creatively interested and/or interesting, I've seen it in myself and almost all of the local artist community. The only ones that are saved are the ones old enough or rich enough to not have to need to create to eat.
Just wait until your dead, then your family or agent can make a ton of bux on all that stuff you had saved up for when people were ready for it. It's a shame a legend begins at its end.
>> Anonymous
>>30799

your point but its a bit general isnt it? all artists? i suspose it depends on what you define as art. your points are along the line of "you dont understand it so you bash it"

>>Photography is barely art in the art community itself, it certainly isn't for most outsiders. The digital revolution isn't helping.Even today, you see things like "Fine art and Photography" at most galleries. It's been a seperatist thing for a long time.

Sorry, what? Photography has been accepted in the art community for a long time. your just making shit up that you have started to belive. have you ever been to any galleries or even picked up a book on the subject?
>> Anonymous
Re: The Rules
Rules are there so that you THINK before breaking them, as a great man once wrote in another context.


>>30453
He's just resting.