PandaMania

Any comments or ratings are appreciated!! :-)

Yes, I know it's been a long time ... but this is what I've been working on. With some suggestions from some friends (thanks!!) ... it's not necessarily the final product ... but it could be. Enjoy!! :-)

It's really cool when you put them all together. Also I noticed that you put some thoughts in arranging the background of each panda. Works for me. :D

Lou Ann, I like how they all work together in a theme. So cute and cuddly. ^_^

Hi Lou Ann Aepelbacher - I am sorry but I cann't find something photographical on this picture. If you want to improve do the next time black lines between each panda and a little bit beautifuler and centraler title. Thank you.

Lou Ann, Final outcome works nicely. I'd consider the idea of lines, but I am not sure it would make a significant difference.

 

I am sure you will get the recognition you deserve for all your hard work.

LouAnn, Quite a collection! Cute, alot of hard work here....makes a nice poster.

LouAnn, it is nice to see up again. What a great job with the pandas. I love it. I know it took lots of work and it shows. Durr

It doesn't bother me if people don't like this ... but "nothing photographical"? Each panda was a separate photograph. Doesn't that qualify for "photographical"? Interesting.....

 

Thanks for your comments, y'all!! :-D

very good and original!!!!

Nice work Lou Ann. Pnina

the bright colors work really well...i enjoyed the holo-graphic background with the fun pandas. A definite up-beat collection.

Okay - time for a philosophical discussion here. Again I will repeat that I don't SO emotionally own my images that I care if some folks don't like them. So, fine ... if you don't like it ... not a problem. The thing that I don't get is 2's and 3's for originality on THIS ... especially when I put up a picture of a mountain and it does not get 2's or 3's (or even 4's) for originality. I mean, really ... how is a picture of a mountain original??? Especially when compared to this. Apparantly, everything is not relative!! Thoughts?

Hi, Lou Ann. I can't speak for the other people who have rated the photo (who might not even be the same ones that submitted higher ratings for the "mountain" photos), but I can only say what goes on in my own head when I think about originality. To me, it's not so much a matter of *what* the photo is about, but *how* it is about it. There are untold billions of pictures of mountains out there, so if you can manage one that compels people to stop for a moment and take notice, and that makes them look at the subject in a new and unexpected way, that's no small accomplishment.

 

But I think I see what Simon means when he says the composition is not "photographical." The very straightfoward way you've shot the objects (with seemingly inconsistent lighting and saturation) does not seem to improve on the experience of seeing the same objects laid out on a windowsill. The bright colours in your PS work do catch the eye, but I can't discern any harmony between the colours chosen for each panel, or a layout that makes the whole anything greater or more cohesive than the sum of its parts. As a result, I don't think it quite works as collage or as photography. But if you were selling those pandas on eBay, I'm sure this would be a helpful product image.

Apparently a few don't understand the digital darkroom work this took. Very original and very well done.

Lou Ann, you might try putting black lines between the different images and see how that looks. I'm thinking it may give more of a division between the pandas. I think this turned out to be colorful and fun.

Hi Lou Ann. Okay, sorry it took so long to get to this. Working from the original on your website, I incorporated the suggestions for the black lines, just to see what it would look like. I also repositioned two of the Pandas; the Soup Panda and the the Sitting Panda in the lower left corner. I also flipped him horizontally. This repositioning was done to effect somewhat more of a symmetrical presentation of the Pandas. I'm afraid I lost the banner along the right in the process, but that is easily restored.

I think you have a very cute graphic here, and I could see interest in this for, say, a decoration in a child's bedroom. I could also see this being used for a set of friendly occasional notecards. I say, go for it! Regards.

Thanks - those are the things that I was looking for as comments. We really do not all have the same idea about "originality" when we look at photos. That's life. I am really going for something here that someone would want to put on a child's bedroom wall, so I'm glad that you said that, Walter. (I also like the idea of notecards....) I'm if-fy about the black lines ... and am also open to working with new color schemes, as this one is rather random (given my very limited knowledge about working with gradients.)

Lou Ann, the problem with this submission is that it's not a photograph. It's graphic design, at best. Just because there are images that were taken with a camera does not make the final product a photograph, in the same way that a movie poster is not a photograph.

Thanks, Tim ... I can absolutely accept that assessment of the photography-ness of this image.

Since i know your intention in putting together this poster Collage, I want you to know i think you have done a fantastic job on it. I think you will find that it will work very well for your intended purpose and should be very sucessfull. I don't think there is anything that you need to add to it. The font is great and I like it running down the right side. I don't see the point in framing in the Panda's with black frames as your choice of background for each individual Panda does that so well now IMO. I'd leave it just the way you have it and consider it a great job well done. I bet you learned a ton in the process as well! What I would suggest next time you post anything similar is ask for opinions and not ratings and explain the purpose for the viewer to respond to. Excellent job, Regards Nova :)

Wow Lou Ann...I looked at those ratings and I don't understand the 2's and 3's! I'm thinking along the lines of a 5 to 6 (especially on Originality). I myself did not rate it yet because I was waiting to do that in the Rate Recent Que. I see of the 26 ratings so far that 11 of them have been generated that way.

In my opinion, the ratings from the Rate Recent are siginificant because they are responses from a diverse group of strangers (as in, potential customers). Regards.

So this is what you were working on! Sorry I never got back to you, Lou Ann. It came out really well.

Hi Lou Ann, you took pains to conceptualise and ask for opinion from others before putting it together. The final result is very clean and appropriate. If only those guys who rate low know that this is for a good cause and not coming only from you. Very good job Lou.

OK...This remark has little to do with Lou Ann, who seems to be a very sweet person and talented artist. But there have been several suggestions from some PN'ers that the ratings on this image should reflect the "good cause" and the amount of time and effort spent on the project. This strikes me as both fundamentally dishonest and a disservice to the artist.

 

When the vast majority of strangers (including potential buyers) look at photos, they do not know how much work went into them, or what a kind and gentle person the photographer was, or what the history of the project was. Nor should they care; when we want prejudiced and compassionate opinions we need only show our work to friends and family. Lou Ann has posted this image on PN to sample the reactions of strangers, expressing her acceptance that some people would dislike it. The lower ratings, including mine, are not a reflection of her efforts (as far as I know, she could have spent just as much post-exposure time on those mountain pictures), but an honest and accurate account of the viewers' visceral reactions.

 

I can see now that for many users, the ratings are being used and manipulated over more personal concerns in an absurdly political way. This is downright stupid, and does nothing to help the artists improve their work. Lou Ann is obviously comfortable with constructive criticism; I'm not so sure about some others.