Universally appreciated photo content? - FM Forums

Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Forum & Miscellaneous | Join Upload & Sell

2 end

Archive 2009 · Universally appreciated photo content?

nathanlake
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Universally appreciated photo content?

A recent thread on FM (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/752282) got me thinking about what type of photo content might be universally liked...or at least not disliked.

Leaving out the factors of composition, lighting, color, etc...what content will not create a negative response from anyone? I think the list is pretty short. Add back in the factors of potentially bad lighting, color, etc...and it might be almost impossible to take am image that all humans would like.

The thread I linked to contains a nude. That in itself is going evoke anger from some viewers, and the very first comment on that thread simply called the image "trash". Since no further explanation was given, we can only surmise about the commenter's thoughts. He could have been offended by the image of a nude woman. He might have been a photographer of nudes himself and felt the image lacked artisitic merit.

It is easy to make a quick list of topics that will elicit negative feelings in some group...nudity, violence, death/disease, overt anger, abuse, suffering, religion... And yet, these are the same topics that great photographers routinely use to create great photos.

Is it possible that any content that evokes an emotional response has a very high likelihood of being both admired and reviled at the same time, by different groups? Does this mean you can measure an image's potential greatness by how much it is hated by some?

Is it possible for a photo that is disliked by noone to be really liked by anyone? Is the cute little picture of newborn kittens so benign that is it disliked by nobody but at the same time not really liked by anybody?

Does certain subject matter contain an inherent risk of dislike that cannot be controlled by the photographer, or can you take offensive content and mitigate that offense through skill, lighting, composition, etc?

I don't have the answers...just questions.

Mar 20, 2009 at 04:50 PM

EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Universally appreciated photo content?

I only know that it is subjective. I doubt that another intelligent species would judge photos the same.

I shoot for personal use, so I don't know or care if anyone likes the images.

EBH

Mar 20, 2009 at 07:43 PM

Soenda
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Hasn't it been said of art at some point that if your work doesn't offend someone, it wasn't worth the effort?

I'd guess that the probability of creating a photo that doesn't offend a single soul approaches zero. Human beings are so diverse, and art is (potentially) so potent that opposite reactions are inevitable.

Some of the most poignant, impactful photos I have ever seen are of people who live on the streets in ugly conditions. The contrast between their vulnerability and the harshness of the environment is overwhelming. But overwhelming is generally a good thing in art, even if the subject is unpleasant. I'd be surprised if many people were not offended.

If what you're seeking is a photo that offends no one, then it would have to be the visual equivalent of Muzak. And why would anyone bother?

Mar 20, 2009 at 07:56 PM

EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Soenda wrote:
If what you're seeking is a photo that offends no one, then it would have to be the visual equivalent of Muzak. And why would anyone bother?

Sometimes photos are needed for evidentiary purposes. Some of them are truly banal, yet so bland as not to offend a reasonable person. For example, one could show you some really boring photos that correspond to P&IDs, if that were permitted.

EBH

Mar 20, 2009 at 08:15 PM

Spyglass
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Universally appreciated photo content?

There is more truth in the comments of EB-1 than EB-1 may know.

There is also more than a fair measure of wisdom if you'll really read what Soenda wrote.

Mar 22, 2009 at 01:33 AM

nathanlake
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Universally appreciated photo content?

EB-1 wrote:
Sometimes photos are needed for evidentiary purposes. Some of them are truly banal, yet so bland as not to offend a reasonable person. For example, one could show you some really boring photos that correspond to P&IDs, if that were permitted.

EBH

I think the photos for evidentiary purposes are an interesting example. They are photos created with a specific purpose that is ideally not at all subjective. Is the lack of subjectivity what makes an image non-offensive?

Mar 22, 2009 at 08:27 AM

liamh
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Universally appreciated photo content?

nathanlake wrote:
The thread I linked to contains a nude. That in itself is going evoke anger from some viewers, and the very first comment on that thread simply called the image "trash". Since no further explanation was given, we can only surmise about the commenter's thoughts. He could have been offended by the image of a nude woman. He might have been a photographer of nudes himself and felt the image lacked artisitic merit.

Or he could simply be rude, jealous or immature.

The poster who made that comment is certainly lacking the requisite skills for polite discourse on this site.

Mar 24, 2009 at 03:33 AM

liamh
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Universally appreciated photo content?

And FWIW there are many images that have universal appeal; skateboarding dogs come to mind...

Mar 24, 2009 at 03:36 AM

mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Cat pictures = universally loved

Mar 25, 2009 at 08:57 AM

Mickey
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Children, any size, shape, or color.

Mar 25, 2009 at 11:34 AM

nathanlake
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Mickey wrote:
Children, any size, shape, or color.

Nude or engaged in sex or posed in provocative positions? It is not just as simple as saying children.

Mar 25, 2009 at 11:49 AM

nathanlake
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Universally appreciated photo content?

mdude85 wrote:
Cat pictures = universally loved

Cats being physically abused or killed? I know I am being a bit picky, but there are pictures of cats that could be found offensive.

Mar 25, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Mickey
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Yes it is. Because you ask for "universally accepted". What you just mentioned never even crossed my mind as it's so universally UNacceptable.

Mar 25, 2009 at 11:53 AM

nathanlake
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Mickey wrote:
Yes it is. Because you ask for "universally accepted". What you just mentioned never even crossed my mind as it's so universally UNacceptable.

But to say that a picture of "cats" is universally acceptable is falling way short of an accurate description. What about a picture of a cat dieing of cancer with a huge tumor on its abdomen? What about an image of a vet, injecting an old, ill cat with a lethal dose of medication? For a picture of cat to be universally acceptable, it must be a healthy, well groomed cat that appears to be happy in a safe and comfortable environment.

Remove any of the conditions and you have something that might be offensive to some people.

What I am getting at here is that photographers need to be able to identify those characteristics of an image that might be found objectionable, and be aware of them in their images. You might need to be aware in order to keep them out of your images, or aware in order to selectively include them if that is your goal.

Mar 25, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Soenda
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Universally appreciated photo content?

nathanlake wrote:
What I am getting at here is that photographers need to be able to identify those characteristics of an image that might be found objectionable, and be aware of them in their images. You might need to be aware in order to keep them out of your images, or aware in order to selectively include them if that is your goal.

This is a wonderful thread, Nathan. I've been thinking about it, and maybe it's the way you are positioning your query that's making it complex.

Culture and avocation play such an important part in what people find appealing or objectionable. The sight of the lanced bull in a bull fight obviously appeals to a large number of folks from the Spanish traditions. Nudity is to be enjoyed on European beaches set aside for sun worshipers. And needless to say, there are a lot of people in Western culture who abhor cats. Subjects might sell a picture calendar to one person will offend or repel another.

So from this marketing angle, the more important approach is different from knowing in general what will offend. It's knowing your audience/market of choice and what appeals to/offends them.

On the other hand, if you are making photos to express yourself or record history rather than to appeal to a particular market segment, I'm not sure that photographers do need to be able to identify all characteristics that might be found objectionable, Some powerful photos are extremely objectionable because they depict the obscene. Here I'm thinking of the disturbing shots of concentration camp internees or the Vietnamese general executing a prisoner where he stood. Those pictures are offensive to the point that I doubt many people would choose to hang them on a wall, but they are highly valued, even iconic, nonetheless.

As an artists, photographers capture moments that speak to them. And that authenticity is what gives their work value. So if their work offends some people, those photographers must simply shrug it off. Caring what offends or doesn't can be more of an impediment than a boon to an artist.

Mar 25, 2009 at 03:53 PM

Mickey
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Universally appreciated photo content?

I believe we are both in agreement but under the terms as you state them there can be nothing that is universally acceptable. ANYTHING can be perverted to the point of being unacceptable to some viewers. If we are going to look for something that is 'universally acceptable' we must define a "normal" range of behavior. Generally children would be a universally acceptable content if we define the acceptable range of viewers as being within what we would say are "normal". I think we can agree that viewers that would find child pornography acceptable fall outside the range of "normal" behavior. To identify objectionable material means shooting within the standards of what is acceptable to your audience. The problem is photography is almost always viewed by a mixed audience as far as standards are concerned.

Mar 25, 2009 at 03:54 PM

Andi Dietrich
Offline
[X]

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Universally appreciated photo content?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg/599px-The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg

a very offending picture

Mar 25, 2009 at 08:19 PM

nathanlake
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Universally appreciated photo content?

Andi Dietrich wrote:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg/599px-The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg

a very offending picture

You might have a good one here. Not sure anyone from this planet would be offended by that unless they complained that it was US-centric.

Mar 25, 2009 at 08:38 PM

Soenda
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Universally appreciated photo content?

...Take another peek. I don't think that the US-centricity claim will hold up.

The Martians, on the other hand...

Mar 26, 2009 at 03:18 AM

Andi Dietrich
Offline
[X]

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Universally appreciated photo content?

No, this may go too far but all I wanted to say you are always going to find somebody who takes offence.

As for the "trash" I would never give such a comment, however somehow I am bored by a lot of so called serious photographers, because they seem not to wish to become emotionally involved in things. So many people started photography these recent years and all (most) of them look away.

Mar 26, 2009 at 06:04 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Forum & Miscellaneous \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.