Just going through free study, some nice people shots.
just curious, how does 'attractiveness' of a human subject affect your vote? do you go 'woah' and then step back and try to be objective, or do you give extra points for an attractive make/female subject?
attractiveness is ESSENTIALLY subjective, but I think I know what you are getting at. some people could model clothes, and others prolly could not. I happen to think most, but not all, such models are essentially boring, especially in their modelyness.
I think a person shot should define the character of the person, not the beauty or modelling ability. The most weatherbeaten old sailor could be the most good looking person due to the life lines, the world weariness and the sheer magnetism of the face:)
I think a person shot should define the character of the person, not the beauty or modelling ability. The most weatherbeaten old sailor could be the most good looking person due to the life lines, the world weariness and the sheer magnetism of the face:)
You stick with your old seamen Steve, I`ll stick to the young nubile models. Each to their own. :P
I think a person shot should define the character of the person, not the beauty or modelling ability. The most weatherbeaten old sailor could be the most good looking person due to the life lines, the world weariness and the sheer magnetism of the face:)
You stick with your old seamen Steve, I`ll stick to the young nubile models. Each to their own. :P
No nubile models for you, you just sell sweeties!!
Attractiveness does make a difference. It affects the appeal of an image and broad appeal is what wins challenges. I will say however, that I have given out some high votes on occasion, to someone who has done a wonderful portrait of a model not fitting the usual expectations of glamour and perfection. This entry from Tanguera is an excellent example.
I think the attractive factor plays a large part. An average picture of a cute girl will score higher than a excellent photo of an ugly dude.
I don't know if that is necessarily true. There are some really great photos of "ugly dudes" that have scored quite well on this site. Needless to say, there are more than a few members on this site that seem to abhor shots of sexy girls.
Hot chick photos are everywhere doing what they do... the photos that make you say wow though, are those of characters that have a story to tell just by what is written on their face. Photos like this masterpiece I find to be the most interesting people shots. Raw, real, amazing. Tip of the hat to the ballsy street photogs that collect this kind of material and share it with the world.
lol... The words say the pc correct answer but we all know the answer is obvious.... for good or bad... we are bombarded with that in so many ways it will happen even if we all pretend it will not. To some extent it's probably subconscious given the amount of eye time ad, products e.t.c all interact with us..... and that would not be the case if it did not work... advertisers would change the types of images if that were the case.
I'm prepared to admit it... yeah youth, female and attractive get more initial interest from me. Does that mean images of other subjects automatically drop to the bottom scoring - of course not.... but they have a handicap to get over (besides we have landscape challenges :-) ).
Edit - Just for giggles I wen thru my votes on the free study for 7 - 10 scores for images basically of a single person...
10 - 3 male
9 - 1 male, 1 female
8 - 1 male
7 - 2 male, 10 female
Change the question. Instead of "attractive model", think in terms of landscape photos and think "incredible location". Does that variable effect the score an image receives? Sure.
Also, another thing that I have been pondering recently, and that is the difference between being attractive and being photogenic. I absolutely want photogenic models, attractiveness is secondary to me.
