lew_carver

<blockquote> <p>Talking about empirical principles of beauty, there is this app <a href="https://www.eyeem.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">EyeEm</a> that assigns aesthetic score to all your photos</p> </blockquote> <p>Yes, I think you are correct. I would guess that such programs rely on neural networks programmed with empirically derived data. Getting too old to keep up anymore.</p>

<p><blockquote>I was always on the opinion that there were certain empirical criteria for beauty, or a good photograph. </blockquote></p> <p>I too think that is incorrect. There are empirical rules regarding the capabilities and limits of human visual perception. At present, however, I don't believe empiricism plays any role in aesthetics. But, I'm open to being wrong; got sources, references?</p>

<blockquote> <p><a name="00dvMQ"></a><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=695896">Oliver Racz</a> It's not the pictures themselves that annoy me, but more the trend of using this effect without any consideration.</p> </blockquote> <p>I haven't yet encountered that as a trend and I have to admit that I liked "density" because its visual qualities expressed my feelings regarding the subject of the image. But yes, a flood of images created through the use of some "new" technical or aesthetic rubric is mostly going to be monkey see, monkey do, with little aesthetic value. And if one is not also enthralled with that type of look, it is not unreasonable to be annoyed by having to wade through them.</p> <p>Speaking for myself, Images developed with high saturation, extreme or wavy tonal curves and excessively creative use of HDR can feel like an assault on my sensibilities. Intellectually I understand that's my problem. But the mind is an emotion driven thing. With each felt assault the ability to recognizing and appreciate the artful use of such techniques is diminished by just a bit. So it is doubly annoying. The artist's life is a surprisingly difficult and perilous one ;) </p> <blockquote> <p><a name="00dvOi"></a><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=19592">Jeff Spirer</a> Things I find annoying are drunks on the steps outside at 3AM or a car parked so mine can't get out.</p> </blockquote> <p>Jeff, I understand what you are saying, and such aesthetic annoyances as Oliver and I have expressed are certainly petty in some contexts. But also, certainly not in others. Often there are multiple valid perspectives on a given subject and I think this is one of those cases.</p>

<p>Not as annoying as the bad HDR fad.</p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>D7200 1/60 sec. f/9 17mm, Nikkor 17mm-55mm f/2.8<br> <img src="http://i86.servimg.com/u/f86/17/50/72/69/hangin10.jpg" alt="" /><br> Untitled</p>

<p>D7200 1/80 sec. f/8 34mm, Nikkor 17mm-55mm f/2.8 (Cropped 4632 x 3195)<br> <img src="http://i86.servimg.com/u/f86/17/50/72/69/spring11.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="483" /><br> <strong>Spring Foreshadows Fall</strong></p>

<p>D7200 1/125 sec. f/9 45mm Nikkor 17mm-55mm<br> <img src="http://i86.servimg.com/u/f86/17/50/72/69/spring10.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="472" /><br> <strong>Spring Pastoral</strong></p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>As to the Title question:</p> <p>Aesthetically, it's irrelevant to judging the work. Ethically, that would depend entirely on the relationship between artist and model.</p> <p>As for the rest I can only give my personal reactions:</p> <p>I guess somebody has to help adolescents with their auto-erotic fantasies. Though I found two of them to have at least some aesthetic value, I rather liked the one with smoke. And the last, the one of the (somewhat ithyphallic) arm and fist grasping the model's shirt visually interesting though personally I found it unsavory in its implications.</p>

<div></div>

<p>I have to say that many of the posts here are impressive, humbling and inspiring. Thanks for sharing and motivating better work.</p>