Apart from the fact that I definitely want a monkey (and I know that I am not alone), I wanted to take that discourse on photography. I know you do not care, but who cares: the blog is mine and I write what I like.
After a long discussion, mostly devoid of any sense, I came to the conclusion that you can associate the concept of "photographs" to the personality of the photographer. This, I think, all too natural, if you wish, as I did, that the "photograph" is subjective.
Then, in comments to the post, which was released in each photograph is a representation of reality as one sees it.
I would now like to talk about when we say "ah, how beautiful this photo!", Ie the beauty that we attach to a snap . These days I have had the opportunity to reflect a bit 'on these topics and everything flowed from that forum I frequent have been posted photos that I really do not say anything at all (*). Of course, not to create havoc in the forum, I did not say that the photos I did not like - to say the truth was the only one I did not like at all - for me and I kept thinking I'm going to do. The episode is then followed by comments from other users who praised (and sometimes) these shots. So, after reading these comments, and having witnessed other episodes like this, I thought. I
said to then you do not understand anything! Well, for some this may seem certainly true and in fact they do not have a point. But I have reached a different conclusion: think (and say) "what a beautiful picture!" Is a collection of things. The photo can enjoy the colors, how it was made the shot, how it was handled the light, to the point of recovery or other factors. So even on distorted professional, I must say that break that "what a beautiful" in its components .
It 's a bit like when you send photos to a contest and the jury vote. It 'clear that a photo can enjoy a juror while in another the same photo sucks. Who is right? If the judging system of a photo was made solely on the basis facebook "like", not whether it will turn out. So there must be necessarily of the judging criteria , certainly both artistic and technical criteria, and those engineers are perhaps more objective (put that picture is clearly over-exposed, for example) while the artists are based on the feelings of the juror. However, even while making the mechanism of decomposition that I mentioned above, do not think there can be a completely objective opinion .
I make a case in point. I want to do a doctorate in astronomy at Padua but I wrote a thesis in theoretical cosmology. For as things stand, those who are observing a thesis in many cases easier to participate in the PhD, while I would be penalized by the fact that the Board is composed of purely observational (**). So, I can send pictures of the landscape in a contest, but if the judges are specialized in the picture, it is obvious that those who send photos of portraits is more advantaged than the landscape.
Moreover, even if the jury was entirely composed of landscape architects, it is said that my photo is selected or rewarded. Why? And here we return to the initial speech on the relationship between "pictures" and photographer. Everyone has a different view of "photographs" and each has its own way of interpreting a picture, even the most trivial. So, leaving out the technical evaluation by the speech, it is natural to conclude that say "but this beautiful picture!" Makes no sense .
(*) Do not ask me to show you these pictures because I could not: for the simple reason that to see photos of the forum must be registered!
(**) I do not want to create controversy or food. I respect everyone's work.
