P3D Re: Can't see it? Is it there?

[jacob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Gabriel Jacob)]

I said:
>> This shows that the judges placed more emphasis on aesthetics
>> rather than on technical aspects of the images. It's much
>> easier to quantify technical aspects rather than artistic.

Mike K. replies:
>Isn't the purpose of technical details the  same purpose 
>as the artistic aspects?

I would think so.

>That is, aren't they both working toward the same purpose
>of having a pleasing image (or terrifying image... whatever)?

Yes they are but you have to remember that an image can
be very good technically but not aesthetically pleasing.
Conversely the image can be good aesthetically but
technically poor. I think a good image should be judged
on both aspects, but this is only my opinion.

>In other words, isn't the overall goal artistic?  So shouldn't
>that be the way judging should seem to go?

I don't know what artistic is! :-)
Again it all depends on the judges criteria. Are they judging
technical and aesthetic aspects. It seems that they are not.

>I don't say that the technical details aren't important.
>They are very important to the extent that they affect the
>end result which to me is where the focus should be.

Amen to that! :-)

Gabriel


------------------------------