June 20, 2010 at 3:00 am #1876
Images that reflect what “tree” means to you. Is it something religious? Non-natural? Beautiful? Dead? An entire forest or a single, isolated tree, standing alone? Difficulty: no title or description; the images should stand for themselves.
Original theme description by jekxrb–thanks!July 28, 2010 at 3:20 pm #30133orionidParticipant
Difficulty: no title or description; the images should stand for themselves.
What about click for larger/flickr/photobucket/etc? The theme itsself would be easily enforceable, but hosting sites could allow a “description loophole.”July 30, 2010 at 9:45 pm #30134CuriousParticipant
it wouldn’t hurt my feeling at all if we simply outlawed the “click for bigger” option. while i find that the 640 pixel limit doesn’t do a lot of photos credit it is what it is.
i know that there are levels of skill, equipment and post processing that make even the 640 photos unequal but posting what amounts to a thumbnail of your image and then saying “this is the real photo” is disingenuous.July 30, 2010 at 9:51 pm #30135linguineParticipant
I have no problem with the click for bigger options, although I wouldnt be too upset if we got rid of it either. For me I tend to not click for the bigger version unless I already like whats posted on fark enough to vote for it.July 31, 2010 at 10:33 am #30136KestranaParticipant
I’m with linguine on whether or not I click but for this contest I don’t mind skipping the click to biggerJuly 31, 2010 at 11:01 am #30137ravnosticParticipant
I agree on the points made by C, l, and K. Skipping the clickr this time sounds reasonable.July 31, 2010 at 2:17 pm #30138sleepingParticipant
But the Flickr TOS, for example, do require you to link the image back to the original photo page.July 31, 2010 at 2:44 pm #30139ravnosticParticipant
…which is not to say you MUST link to the original flickr image. You could upload one of the appropriate size, separately. (Not that you couldn’t find it, but how many are going to go hunting around for them?)July 31, 2010 at 3:22 pm #30140orionidParticipant
For me I tend to not click for the bigger version unless I already like whats posted on fark enough to vote for it.
Now that I think about it, I’m the same way. And my click-through stats seem to show that trend holding. I also forgot about the flickr TOS. I guess in the big picture, it’s not really a concern, but I figured I’d just throw it out there for discussion.July 31, 2010 at 4:49 pm #30141
…which is not to say you MUST link to the original flickr image. You could upload one of the appropriate size, separately. (Not that you couldn’t find it, but how many are going to go hunting around for them?)
No, but your photo must link back to the photo page as sleeping pointed out. However, if you guys want to nix the “click for bigger” stuff, then people just wouldn’t comment “Bigger at Flickr” or “Click for Bigger” or whatever.
I’m pretty much in the same boat with everyone else. I don’t have a strong opinion either way, but one of the photos I’m considering using probably has a caption on Flickr now that I think about it. Like linguine, though, I typically only click on the “click for bigger” stuff if I already like it and want to see greater detail on the photo.July 31, 2010 at 4:51 pm #30142
…but posting what amounts to a thumbnail of your image and then saying “this is the real photo” is disingenuous.
That’s a fair point, there.July 31, 2010 at 6:16 pm #30143ennuipoetParticipant
You can link the Flickr photo without captioning it and still be within the Flickr TOS. The photo only has to be linked, not advertised.
I can live with or without the click, though I use it extensively. It’s about the option to see it in full size not the necessity. I, also, only click through for the ones I intend to vote for. I like the idea in general because I have a lot of photos not used for Farktography on my Flickr that I want people to see. Come for Farktography, stay for the other stuff.
edit to add: I’ve also found a lot of other people’s very cool pics by browsing around after a click through.July 31, 2010 at 6:19 pm #30144olavfParticipant
I personally like the ‘clicks to larger’. I don’t always click, but the 640x format is also really difficult to work with, especially for a more intricate photo. I don’t think it’s disingenuous unless the two pictures aren’t identical save for scale. In my mind stuff like ‘extreme cropping’ (cropping a 640x pic out of a 10MP picture) is much more disingenuous than that.
As for captioning, I kinda like a simple “who, what, when, where” to give the photos some context in most cases. “Ansel Adams in a bikini” would be much more significant than “some guy in a bikini” with no caption. I also think it cuts down on some of the chatter in the contest threads from people constantly asking “where is that?” “what is that?”, etc.July 31, 2010 at 6:51 pm #30145CauseISaidSoParticipant
I’m with olavf on both points.
In regards to captioning, for example with this theme where the photo is meant to represent an abstract idea, I’d like to know what feeling or idea the photographer was going for. I know some artists want the viewer to come to their own conclusions, and I certainly do that when viewing a photo I’m interested in, but sometimes when you know what the artist was going for, you can see things in the picture that you might’ve otherwise overlooked, if that makes sense.
Note that I’m not complaining about lack of caption for this contest – I’m completely OK with the theme originator making the rules.July 31, 2010 at 7:58 pm #30146
I don’t mind captioning in general, except when the person is basically trying to “sell” the photo as to why it should get votes and/or why you should click on the link to bigger image. A brief mention of place, people, or technical info is one thing. Telling us a paragraph of why the photo is “special” or a long story of what you did to take the picture is something else altogether. If you need to spend so many words talking for your picture, then maybe your picture doesn’t say enough on its own?
This theme’s requirement against captions was the original theme suggester’s intent a year or 18 months ago, and I just left it in there since that was the original theme description. I don’t think he meant that the photos all had to express abstract ideas, only that this was open to more abstract stuff if that’s what you wanted to express. I think the only real question at this point is whether “Click for bigger” type stuff would fall under the “no captions” portion of the description or not. I’m honestly ambivalent, though I see orionid’s point that it would allow people to have captions outside the thread thus circumventing the theme requirements. I don’t know how much this would influence voting, though.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.