There was an interesting article in "American Scientist" (May/June 2006 )entitled "Perceptual Pleasure and the Brain", which to be honest, along with most of the others articles was a lttle over my head. However, what I found interesting is what they used for tesing equipment ; functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI),specialized goggles, and photographs.
The photographs were displayed using the goggles to subjects while their brain activity was being measured using the fMRI. Of particular interest to me was part of the experiment where they measured the responses to a series of images that had repeat images placed within the series. As people saw a repeat image , their pleasure response declined.
Also, they looked at subjects who enjoyed or seemed to enjoy repeated image situations. For example , people playing video games, where images and situations were often repeated but still the pleasure level was high.
OK, the conclusions that interested me ( there is a lot more to the article as well ); to quote
" Preferred pictures often contained broad views of landscape, especiallly scenes that provided a hidden vantage point where an observer could view the terrain from a place of refuge. Scenes with an element of mystery,where something was happening, or could happen were also favoured."
In the video game example,"What phyclologists call the mere exposure effect in which the familiar is preferred to the unfaimiliar, seems to contradict our hypothesis and our results. However we believe the key here is the subject's ability to understand the stimulus. For example, as one struggles to comprehend a new idea , there is increased pleasure with repeated exposure, which peaks at what has been called the "click" of comprehension".
I find it interesting that the science confirms many of the techniques of the many wonderful landscape photographs displayed here. However I also find it interesting that some of the other important conclusions are less common. Namely the sense of mystery, the holding back of information, as I would put it, making the viewer work for that click of comprehension, which if I understand the article correctly, may be an important factor in people
truly appreciating an image, after the initial Wow factor subsides.
I would invite you to try a little experiment of your own. Go back and look at a bunch of images you had created in the past. Are there many that just bore you now or perhaps you are just indifferent to? Are there some that still very much hold your attention, that give you a sense of quiet pleasure? Recognize any of the above mentioned qualities ( or lack of ) in them? Just a thought. Thanks, Tim
On one side of the spectrum, there are the "wow" images (eye candy) that immediately draw attention and interest, but are quickly forgotten because there is nothing there to "click." IMO, these "visual impact" photos are the easiest to create once one understands the techniques for doing so. It should also be noted that a strictly VI photo oftens gets the highest praise from the non-photographer observer.
On the othere side there are photos that upon initial observation seem drab or uninteresting, but slowly draw the viewer in and holds their attention. This kind of photo, IMO, is more difficult to construct. The understanding of what it takes to captivate the viewer beyond the initial impression is more complex than learning the rather straight-forward technique of creating a visual impact photo. This type of photo is often appreciated more by experienced photographers.
IMO, the most successful photos combine both visual impact to immediately capture attention, and a sense of mystery (or elicit an emotional response) to draw the observer further in and make the photo memorable.
I think it is important to note though Jim, that in this case at least, it was the "non photographers" or I guess, a sampling of the general public that preferred the more complex, in terms of mystery and action, or impending action. One reason I would to see more none photographers comment on NPN’s images.
I guess ,looking at our own images and evaluating them objectively may be somewhat difficult, because we have that emotional connection. We were there, we have that connection to the sensual experience.
But, referring back to the study, maybe that is why people prefer that , to quote "scenes that provided a hidden vantage point where an observer could view the terrain from a place of refuge." maybe that is a way the viewer can take ownership.
An example of that is this image, which when I viewed it, I didn’t really think
of the technique etc., what I thought , or felt, is , it was ME looking through the grass. Note how similar that peering through the grass is to the type of images “hidden vantage point “ that the people preferred in the study.
Also, here is another example , this great abstract, personally, I think that when it came
time to display this image, to the public , it would be better to give no clue as to what the subject is. As the photographer stated, some people think it is about feathers, fire, etc. I would bet money that once they make that connection, then they take a very personal interest in the image.
They own it, in a sense. The chances are very good that they will want to buy it, so they can actually own it, and enjoy it for many years to come As in the first example, that sense of mystery that this photographer instilled into the image allows that to happen, in my opinion.
One more, the stormy weather For all it’s wonderful qualities,, that we can evaluate, from a photographer’s viewpoint, to me the most impressive, or dramatic
thing is that sense of “something is happening or about to happen” that the people in the study
preferred. Think about it, thanks, Tim
Interesting topic. Concerning the vantage points, I find that photos that gives me a sense that I am looking from a location has a greater appeal. I am taken into the image. For example, I have seen photos here that gives me the feeling that I am looking down from a great height. It adds an unseen dimension to the image and I become aware of where the photographer was standing. I become, thus, far more involved in the image. Not talking about arial shots but I think that applies too. Near-far compositions gives the impression of actually being there; and LF photography and D SLRs with tilt shift lenses are especially effective in that area. The same thoughts apply to photos where I get the impression I am looking from a depth.
That landscape photos taken from a lofty location has great appeal is borne out by the fact that a great many (majority?) of roadside viewpoints are high as well. Jasper NP has many viewpoints where you'd look down into a valley surrounded by peaks.
Discussion
4 repliesThere was an interesting article in "American Scientist" (May/June 2006 )entitled "Perceptual Pleasure and the Brain", which to be honest, along with most of the others articles was a lttle over my head. However, what I found interesting is what they used for tesing equipment ; functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI),specialized goggles, and photographs.
The photographs were displayed using the goggles to subjects while their brain activity was being measured using the fMRI. Of particular interest to me was part of the experiment where they measured the responses to a series of images that had repeat images placed within the series. As people saw a repeat image , their pleasure response declined.
Also, they looked at subjects who enjoyed or seemed to enjoy repeated image situations. For example , people playing video games, where images and situations were often repeated but still the pleasure level was high.
OK, the conclusions that interested me ( there is a lot more to the article as well ); to quote
" Preferred pictures often contained broad views of landscape, especiallly scenes that provided a hidden vantage point where an observer could view the terrain from a place of refuge. Scenes with an element of mystery,where something was happening, or could happen were also favoured."
In the video game example,"What phyclologists call the mere exposure effect in which the familiar is preferred to the unfaimiliar, seems to contradict our hypothesis and our results. However we believe the key here is the subject's ability to understand the stimulus. For example, as one struggles to comprehend a new idea , there is increased pleasure with repeated exposure, which peaks at what has been called the "click" of comprehension".
I find it interesting that the science confirms many of the techniques of the many wonderful landscape photographs displayed here. However I also find it interesting that some of the other important conclusions are less common. Namely the sense of mystery, the holding back of information, as I would put it, making the viewer work for that click of comprehension, which if I understand the article correctly, may be an important factor in people
truly appreciating an image, after the initial Wow factor subsides.
I would invite you to try a little experiment of your own. Go back and look at a bunch of images you had created in the past. Are there many that just bore you now or perhaps you are just indifferent to? Are there some that still very much hold your attention, that give you a sense of quiet pleasure? Recognize any of the above mentioned qualities ( or lack of ) in them? Just a thought. Thanks, Tim
On one side of the spectrum, there are the "wow" images (eye candy) that immediately draw attention and interest, but are quickly forgotten because there is nothing there to "click." IMO, these "visual impact" photos are the easiest to create once one understands the techniques for doing so. It should also be noted that a strictly VI photo oftens gets the highest praise from the non-photographer observer.
On the othere side there are photos that upon initial observation seem drab or uninteresting, but slowly draw the viewer in and holds their attention. This kind of photo, IMO, is more difficult to construct. The understanding of what it takes to captivate the viewer beyond the initial impression is more complex than learning the rather straight-forward technique of creating a visual impact photo. This type of photo is often appreciated more by experienced photographers.
IMO, the most successful photos combine both visual impact to immediately capture attention, and a sense of mystery (or elicit an emotional response) to draw the observer further in and make the photo memorable.
I look forward to what others have to say!
I guess ,looking at our own images and evaluating them objectively may be somewhat difficult, because we have that emotional connection. We were there, we have that connection to the sensual experience.
But, referring back to the study, maybe that is why people prefer that , to quote "scenes that provided a hidden vantage point where an observer could view the terrain from a place of refuge." maybe that is a way the viewer can take ownership.
An example of that is this image, which when I viewed it, I didn’t really think
of the technique etc., what I thought , or felt, is , it was ME looking through the grass. Note how similar that peering through the grass is to the type of images “hidden vantage point “ that the people preferred in the study.
Also, here is another example , this great abstract, personally, I think that when it came
time to display this image, to the public , it would be better to give no clue as to what the subject is. As the photographer stated, some people think it is about feathers, fire, etc. I would bet money that once they make that connection, then they take a very personal interest in the image.
They own it, in a sense. The chances are very good that they will want to buy it, so they can actually own it, and enjoy it for many years to come As in the first example, that sense of mystery that this photographer instilled into the image allows that to happen, in my opinion.
One more, the stormy weather For all it’s wonderful qualities,, that we can evaluate, from a photographer’s viewpoint, to me the most impressive, or dramatic
thing is that sense of “something is happening or about to happen” that the people in the study
preferred. Think about it, thanks, Tim
That landscape photos taken from a lofty location has great appeal is borne out by the fact that a great many (majority?) of roadside viewpoints are high as well. Jasper NP has many viewpoints where you'd look down into a valley surrounded by peaks.
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada