How (and Why) I Took the Shot #1: Overlook

[RLPhoto]

Never one to be afraid to put my nose in where it isn't needed, without any ill will to Dustin who does some great work and reviews, as a matter of principle I am very much against pure outside links, indeed I am surprised CR allows such posts. There is nothing difficult about including an entire blog post and image here and including a link to the original for people who have more interest to go and see, and I think, on principle, that is the more honorable way of doing things. Pure links just smell of site traffic manipulation to me, I am sure Dustin has a good following and has been asked by people to post more stuff (heck people even PM me questions), but he can answer those personal requests with directions to his blog and site, that, to my mind, is very different from making people click to even see if they are interested in a post.

Just my 10c worth.

+1
If it is a long article, a short synopsys along with the picture would be OK and a link at the end. But I'm not sure I think it is OK to use a forum like this to promote your own site, which I beleive has commercial motivation.

As for this specific post, I am a bit surprised why you selected an image like this. You have posted lots of images it could have been interesting to hear the story behind. But, without getting into any debate over the image, this was not one that raised any interest with me.

But keep posting, I may enjoy the next one more.

Fair enough. I absolutely am trying to drive attention to my website to continue building my brand. I have no problem acknowledging that.

But what you may not know is that traffic back to LensRentals is typically in my top 4 clickthroughs from my website (#3 today, in fact). I recommend that people rent lenses (try before you buy)and freely cite articles by Roger to direct people to Lens Rentals. Anyone that works with web design/development knows how importance this ecosystem is. Every clickthrough from this website (CanonRumors) to any other website helps build its brand and page ranking. It is a bit of a symbiotic relationship, which is probably why it is allowed here.

Even from the kind reactions on this thread I sense that this particular post and image are not the sexiest I've ever shared. ;D I'll try to up my game next time 8)

I liked some of your articles and some not so much but nonetheless you got hits. What I really don't like is photogs who have there site all Ad-ed up with little to no content of value. (Jared Polin is a big one.)

High amplitude and Low frequency is what keeps me going back to Mr. Hobbys blog often. I know the content is worth while.

 

[CarlTN]

Allow me, the always contrast to back padding, to toss in some critique.... Before I read a word, I didnt know didly squat about you, who you are and what you do and I didnt have the faintest idea what you wanted to signify with that shot.

Normally youd say a picture speaks a thousand words, in this case I feel more like the picture needed a thousand words in order to carryit across.

So is it succesful? Within a small back padding community... It might be, but as a work of art or communicative piece it falls very short. It reminds me of some of the shots of my very first film roll I shot.

So yes indeed, photography is a matter of taste and apparently also a lot about knowing the artist in this case.

Sorry, I dont want to be harsh, but it also gets sickening to see thread after thread celebrating mediocraty. For some reason the internet is riddled with the idea that one is not allowed to critize unless its based on something positive.

I can see where you are coming from. Perhaps you're being a bit harsh...but then even Dustin himself has accused me of being harsh with him...where I really was not. Some people just only want the positive side of a critique.

No offense to Dustin, but there are obviously those on here who feel he and his photography are a bit of a big deal. The images I have seen from him are mostly very nice. But I do feel he is getting caught up in promoting himself, to the degree that he is spending a lot of time and thought on particular images, where it is not all that called for.

Frankly much of the images he shoots like the one that started this thread...I shoot myself. So I kind of feel he and I have similar styles. I would call an image like the one in the thread starter, a "tree portrait"...I am quite fond of doing them myself! He would probably think of himself as several universes beyond what I do, but that's ok. He's not...he's just better at promoting himself at this time, and has quite a loyal following. Nothing wrong with that. But making a thread about it, does seem a bit over the top. To make a thread discussing one image (and to link to a story written about how and why the image was shot, etc)...that image really needs to be a bit more mind-blowing, as does the story. Am I really so wrong in saying that?

I mean, it's not as if Dustin is some kind of nature frontier pioneer/explorer like John Muir or Lewis and Clarke or something...That kind of thing can't really be done anymore. Maybe only in the deep ocean, or in Antarctica...except there aren't any trees there. There used to be, though...back when it wasn't at the south pole!

I have nothing against you though, Dustin, and your images are usually nice to behold.

 

[Arctic Photo]

Never one to be afraid to put my nose in where it isn't needed, without any ill will to Dustin who does some great work and reviews, as a matter of principle I am very much against pure outside links, indeed I am surprised CR allows such posts. There is nothing difficult about including an entire blog post and image here and including a link to the original for people who have more interest to go and see, and I think, on principle, that is the more honorable way of doing things. Pure links just smell of site traffic manipulation to me, I am sure Dustin has a good following and has been asked by people to post more stuff (heck people even PM me questions), but he can answer those personal requests with directions to his blog and site, that, to my mind, is very different from making people click to even see if they are interested in a post.

Just my 10c worth.

+1
If it is a long article, a short synopsys along with the picture would be OK and a link at the end. But I'm not sure I think it is OK to use a forum like this to promote your own site, which I beleive has commercial motivation.

As for this specific post, I am a bit surprised why you selected an image like this. You have posted lots of images it could have been interesting to hear the story behind. But, without getting into any debate over the image, this was not one that raised any interest with me.

But keep posting, I may enjoy the next one more.

Fair enough. I absolutely am trying to drive attention to my website to continue building my brand. I have no problem acknowledging that.

But what you may not know is that traffic back to LensRentals is typically in my top 4 clickthroughs from my website (#3 today, in fact). I recommend that people rent lenses (try before you buy)and freely cite articles by Roger to direct people to Lens Rentals. Anyone that works with web design/development knows how importance this ecosystem is. Every clickthrough from this website (CanonRumors) to any other website helps build its brand and page ranking. It is a bit of a symbiotic relationship, which is probably why it is allowed here.

Even from the kind reactions on this thread I sense that this particular post and image are not the sexiest I've ever shared. ;D I'll try to up my game next time 8)

Now suddenly opinions on a message board matters.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

....

The backstage of a picture is interesting if it's a great picture. The picture in question, a broken tree without any context, is not. It could have been taken anywhere, anytime. The caption and the picture have no apparent connection. The picture could have any caption, the caption could relate to any picture.

The photo means nothing by itself and the elaborate text looks like a futile exercise meant to draw attention. Any random shutter actuation can be embellished with touching words, but it doesn't turn any of them into interesting images.

I absolutely agree with you that any random shutter can be embellished with touching words ... but one must consider the possibility that image can speak volumes to the photographer or for many who view that image. My point is not about people not liking the image, its perfectly fine for someone not to like (I know people who don't like Ansel Adams work). But what is not fine is, people casting aspirations on the photographer's integrity, honor and what not. Strangely, till now, no one provided constructive criticism on how that image or an alternative could have been presented to make his message come across more effectively. Comments, questioning Dustin's integrity have only generated ill will, instead of providing an opportunity to learn something. Personally, as mentioned earlier, that image speaks to me (and several others) because of the message associated with it ... it does not appeal to some, that is perfectly fine ... but lets not reduce a fellow CR member (whose work, most of us like and follow) with suggestions that his intentions may not be honorable. There are comments that suggest that Dustin did not receive any requests etc ... now how the hell does someone know what requests/comments Dustin has received? are they Psychics? or did they read every single request he has received from every single source, including for his 1400+ posts in CR? or did they hack into Dustin's inbox? What is not fine is when a few of the members behaving just like a cheap media house i.e. latch on to a popular guy and make him look like a dishonorable person ... that's just sick and a low life thing to do.
Peace.

 

[Arctic Photo]

....

The backstage of a picture is interesting if it's a great picture. The picture in question, a broken tree without any context, is not. It could have been taken anywhere, anytime. The caption and the picture have no apparent connection. The picture could have any caption, the caption could relate to any picture.

The photo means nothing by itself and the elaborate text looks like a futile exercise meant to draw attention. Any random shutter actuation can be embellished with touching words, but it doesn't turn any of them into interesting images.

I absolutely agree with you that any random shutter can be embellished with touching words ... but one must consider the possibility that image can speak volumes to the photographer or for many who view that image. My point is not about people not liking the image, its perfectly fine for someone not to like (I know people who don't like Ansel Adams work). But what is not fine is, people casting aspirations on the photographer's integrity, honor and what not. Strangely, till now, no one provided constructive criticism on how that image or an alternative could have been presented to make his message come across more effectively. Comments, questioning Dustin's integrity have only generated ill will, instead of providing an opportunity to learn something. Personally, as mentioned earlier, that image speaks to me (and several others) because of the message associated with it ... it does not appeal to some, that is perfectly fine ... but lets not reduce a fellow CR member (whose work, most of us like and follow) with suggestions that his intentions may not be honorable. There are comments that suggest that Dustin did not receive any requests etc ... now how the hell does someone know what requests/comments Dustin has received? are they Psychics? or did they read every single request he has received from every single source, including for his 1400+ posts in CR? or did they hack into Dustin's inbox? What is not fine is when a few of the members behaving just like a cheap media house i.e. latch on to a popular guy and make him look like a dishonorable person ... that's just sick and a low life thing to do.
Peace.

Hi Rienz, I didn't question his person. I questioned his approach. If ones wants to promote one's work then be open about it. I've been doing business for about two decades and credibility and trust is everything. If you want to sell something then you should say so. I think you agree.

Maybe we saw different things here but that shouldn't make us enemies.

 

[Eldar]

The basic consept behind this thread is in my view interesting. I am a member of several photography groups and forums, where an enormous amount of images are posted and shared. Every now and then an image comes by that I would like to know more about. For the poster to be a bit more detailed on the story behind the image could be educational and help people make better images, it could inspire people to go and try something similar etc.

But in this particular case I find it more of a promotion of Dustin and his site. There is no specific invitation to come back with constructive critisism or to discuss any particular aspect of the image. There are lots to be said about choice of focal length, f-stop, framing, light, post processing, choice of motive to tell the story etc. etc. In some cases other aspects like geography, demography, climate, the trip to and from etc. are interesting to read and may also be fun for experience sharing. But in this case I only see an invitation to go to Dustin's web site, improve his traffic statistics and return with silence or a well done Dustin post.

And when it comes to the commercial loop, I believe Lens rental, B&H, Adorama and the other companies here actually represent revenue for CR, as they do for the-digital-picture.com and others, whereas a member's use of CR to channel traffic to his/hers commercial website is for free ...

 

[Albi86]

Rienz, I really don't know why you take things so personally.

An image has been shared publicly along with a story; the audience is responding to that. Some reactions are positive, others are negative. What's the deal? Nobody said "wtf is this sh*t!"; people who have expressed negative comments have done so in a most civilized and polite manner.

You are blowing it out of proportions. There has been no personal attack against Dustin, only the obvious accountability for what he does and how.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

....

The backstage of a picture is interesting if it's a great picture. The picture in question, a broken tree without any context, is not. It could have been taken anywhere, anytime. The caption and the picture have no apparent connection. The picture could have any caption, the caption could relate to any picture.

The photo means nothing by itself and the elaborate text looks like a futile exercise meant to draw attention. Any random shutter actuation can be embellished with touching words, but it doesn't turn any of them into interesting images.

I absolutely agree with you that any random shutter can be embellished with touching words ... but one must consider the possibility that image can speak volumes to the photographer or for many who view that image. My point is not about people not liking the image, its perfectly fine for someone not to like (I know people who don't like Ansel Adams work). But what is not fine is, people casting aspirations on the photographer's integrity, honor and what not. Strangely, till now, no one provided constructive criticism on how that image or an alternative could have been presented to make his message come across more effectively. Comments, questioning Dustin's integrity have only generated ill will, instead of providing an opportunity to learn something. Personally, as mentioned earlier, that image speaks to me (and several others) because of the message associated with it ... it does not appeal to some, that is perfectly fine ... but lets not reduce a fellow CR member (whose work, most of us like and follow) with suggestions that his intentions may not be honorable. There are comments that suggest that Dustin did not receive any requests etc ... now how the hell does someone know what requests/comments Dustin has received? are they Psychics? or did they read every single request he has received from every single source, including for his 1400+ posts in CR? or did they hack into Dustin's inbox? What is not fine is when a few of the members behaving just like a cheap media house i.e. latch on to a popular guy and make him look like a dishonorable person ... that's just sick and a low life thing to do.
Peace.

Hi Rienz, I didn't question his person. I questioned his approach. If ones wants to promote one's work then be open about it. I've been doing business for about two decades and credibility and trust is everything. If you want to sell something then you should say so. I think you agree.

Maybe we saw different things here but that shouldn't make us enemies.

Hi Arctic Photo, if you noticed I removed your name when I quoted Albi86 (above), coz I didn't want you to take it personally ... no hard feelings, we certainly not enemies ... we just happen to disagree ... who knows, if we meet in person we may get along famously. Don't take it personally. Have a nice day. Peace

 

[Rienzphotoz]

You are blowing it out of proportions. There has been no personal attack against Dustin, only the obvious accountability for what he does and how.

I think you missed a few comments from few members. By the way I am not taking it personally, too bad if you feel that way. What accountability? if CR is allowing him to post his link, what is it to the rest of us ... his post is being made to sound like it is some kind of crime. If one is so concerned about "accountability for what he does and how", should it not be taken to the CR admin, instead of making Dustin look bad?

 

[Arctic Photo]

....

The backstage of a picture is interesting if it's a great picture. The picture in question, a broken tree without any context, is not. It could have been taken anywhere, anytime. The caption and the picture have no apparent connection. The picture could have any caption, the caption could relate to any picture.

The photo means nothing by itself and the elaborate text looks like a futile exercise meant to draw attention. Any random shutter actuation can be embellished with touching words, but it doesn't turn any of them into interesting images.

I absolutely agree with you that any random shutter can be embellished with touching words ... but one must consider the possibility that image can speak volumes to the photographer or for many who view that image. My point is not about people not liking the image, its perfectly fine for someone not to like (I know people who don't like Ansel Adams work). But what is not fine is, people casting aspirations on the photographer's integrity, honor and what not. Strangely, till now, no one provided constructive criticism on how that image or an alternative could have been presented to make his message come across more effectively. Comments, questioning Dustin's integrity have only generated ill will, instead of providing an opportunity to learn something. Personally, as mentioned earlier, that image speaks to me (and several others) because of the message associated with it ... it does not appeal to some, that is perfectly fine ... but lets not reduce a fellow CR member (whose work, most of us like and follow) with suggestions that his intentions may not be honorable. There are comments that suggest that Dustin did not receive any requests etc ... now how the hell does someone know what requests/comments Dustin has received? are they Psychics? or did they read every single request he has received from every single source, including for his 1400+ posts in CR? or did they hack into Dustin's inbox? What is not fine is when a few of the members behaving just like a cheap media house i.e. latch on to a popular guy and make him look like a dishonorable person ... that's just sick and a low life thing to do.
Peace.

Hi Rienz, I didn't question his person. I questioned his approach. If ones wants to promote one's work then be open about it. I've been doing business for about two decades and credibility and trust is everything. If you want to sell something then you should say so. I think you agree.

Maybe we saw different things here but that shouldn't make us enemies.

Hi Arctic Photo, if you noticed I removed your name when I quoted Albi86 (above), coz I didn't want you to take it personally ... no hard feelings, we certainly not enemies ... we just happen to disagree ... who knows, if we meet in person we may get along famously. Don't take it personally. Have a nice day. Peace

;D I am sure we would. I know I'd like to learn a lot from you.

Take care!

 

[yorgasor]

I may be interpreting the post a little differently. It seems the photo was chosen deliberately, not so much as an image to stand alone, amazing all who look upon it, but to show that even simple images may be meaningful to someone.

I think the best images tell a story or convey a certain mood. These photos have meaning to people. This article wasn't intended to be a technical how-to, it was a 'meaningful how-to.' It describes why he took the photo, what the elements meant, and why he liked it. With the story, others could enjoy the photo as he did.

A point some are missing is that the photo isn't the heart of the article. The instructive part of the article is the thought process that went into creating a photo that had meaning (even if it was only meaningful to Dustin). I think we could all improve our photography by spending a little more time thinking about what message we want to convey, and then try to compose our images to speak that image.

Learning the technical aspects of photography is great, it gives us tools to create great works of art. But to make the transition from a plain photographer to an artist, we need to spend more time thinking about a message and trying to create a photo to match.

 

[CarlTN]

I may be interpreting the post a little differently. It seems the photo was chosen deliberately, not so much as an image to stand alone, amazing all who look upon it, but to show that even simple images may be meaningful to someone.

I think the best images tell a story or convey a certain mood. These photos have meaning to people. This article wasn't intended to be a technical how-to, it was a 'meaningful how-to.' It describes why he took the photo, what the elements meant, and why he liked it. With the story, others could enjoy the photo as he did.

A point some are missing is that the photo isn't the heart of the article. The instructive part of the article is the thought process that went into creating a photo that had meaning (even if it was only meaningful to Dustin). I think we could all improve our photography by spending a little more time thinking about what message we want to convey, and then try to compose our images to speak that image.

Learning the technical aspects of photography is great, it gives us tools to create great works of art. But to make the transition from a plain photographer to an artist, we need to spend more time thinking about a message and trying to create a photo to match.

You make good points. But as with other art forms, a lot of the message a piece of art conveys, already exists in the mind of the beholder. So the question here really is, is the art the photograph, or is the art the photograph, along with the thousand words intended to accompany it? It must be the latter...in which case, there is really art all around us. Even this web page with my words on it, is art. Or is it?