The month of May has been one of revelations and epiphanies.
The image below was submitted to an image competition organized by the local professional photographers association where I live. The format is very clear. The submissions are anonymous AND allowed no more than a line or two to tell a story about the image. So, part of the challenge is to come up with a descriptive title that conveys the backstory about the submission. So, my title for the submission was “bokeh of roses”. My intent was to highlight the “3D” effect on the roses through the smooth blur of the background, also known as “bokeh”.
I thought my title was clever enough to convey my focus while playing on the words. Since there is more than one rose, it was a bouquet (at least in my mind) and also it was bokeh that is creating the 3D effect without any distracting bokeh balls.
So, I thought. Interestingly enough the feedback was quite the opposite and verschimblessern was in full force. The judges felt the title misleading, in the sense that they focused on the background and felt there was way too much blurred background and not enough substance to judge. A very similar image with main subject occupying most of the frame scored higher. These judges go through a formal training on judging images through Professional Photographers of America and it is reasonable to assume they know what they are doing.
I was surprised by the feedback and was thinking how I could have made the image more appealing to the judges. I ran the scenario by another photographer I met on a photography forum who also happened to be a certified judge and ran my results and my reaction by him.
His primary observation was that more often than not, your audience quickly reacts to “what you said” and rarely modulate with who said it. He further observed that the judges may not know you personally enough to say it is a clever title.
The au fond of that conversation was that it is a mistake to assume you are given the benefit of doubt for who you are, and the inference is made purely on what was said. The sagacious conclusion is that because of this tendency, quite a few relationships are ruined, and sometimes it can reveal what they think of you. The observation(s) he made turned the month of May, one of revelations and epiphanies.
It was thought provoking and I accepted his input in approbation. I was introspecting the conversation and realized how prophetic and wise he was and how much spot on what he said. I recollected a conversation at a childhood friend’s house few years ago. The four out of five in our group were in attendance that night (article #31). That friend, another close friend and I started our career in the same area of specialization. The host within a year or so changed his career and after three decades of pursuing various endeavors, is very successful. The other close friend and I stayed in the same field and retired after a long career. In that conversation, few years ago, we were walking down the memory lane, and he made a statement that “area of specialization I started in is a dead end. I was smart enough to get out of it”. The two who retired from this “dead end” area exchanged glances and I was smarting for a moment feeling foolish for staying in that area. I would have considered it an insult or at least a dig on my career choice, had I not considered who said it. I knew his career was not going anywhere and he felt the need to get away from it, a decision vindicated by the tremendous success he had subsequently. It was not derisive and judgmental comment about my choice, but the tinge of hurt was unavoidable, though he would be the last person on earth who would hurt me anyone in general and me in particular.
Epilog: In addition to what was being said, knowing WHO is saying it, makes a difference. We are getting close to celebrating our 50-year anniversary of friendship, only because I did consider who said it in addition to what was said.
I talked about verschlimbessern in my article #17. To refresh your memory, verschlimbessern is a German word that means to make something worse in an honest but failed attempt to improve it. I want to use this term albeit slightly differently. I want to confine the scope to spoken words instead of using the term in a broad sense. There was one another recent episode that proved the point albeit with a negative outcome and perhaps attributed to my galling insouciance. I am happy to say everything is copacetic now.
