The Photographer’s Visual Grammar: Visual Rightness and Aesthetics of Artistic Photographs

We are living in a world where photography is everywhere, and almost everyone is a photographer (in the sense of producing photographs with some aesthetic aspiration). Yet, despite the democratic nature of the medium, which suggests that anyone can make great photographs, there are large differences in the aesthetic quality of photographs. Scientifically, we do not yet grasp very well what differentiates aesthetic from non-aesthetic photographs, and how this results in a different viewer experience. In this study, we explored the visual rightness of 21 high-quality artistic photographs, compared with their ecologically valid less-than-optimal variants (one to four alternatives). The high-quality photographs were selected from an online contemporary photography competition which is judged by experts (http://www.life-framer.com). The alternatives were variants provided by the photographers themselves. Participants (n = 187) preferred the original photograph significantly more than chance level for the majority of the sets (13 out of 21), and significantly less than chance level for a minority of sets (three out of 21). This is in line with the visual rightness theory of picture perception, maintaining that artists are experts in creating visually right images, and that this is salient to nonexpert viewers. Yet, the preference for the original differed greatly between sets (range: 9.63–79.68%) and the original photograph was also the most preferred one in ‘only’ 12 out of 21 sets. Qualitative content analysis showed that preferences were influenced by many levels of photographic information (color, contrast, sharpness, composition, emotional expression, etc.), which were often working together. The most aesthetically powerful photographs reveal a skillful combination of medium, form, and subject matter levels, to produce an optimal visual message. Results have implications for empirical aesthetics, the photography practice, and for our understanding of photography literacy, a key topic in a world where there are many more photographs than humans that can appreciate them. </p

Fusio

<p>2008 Johan Wagemans, University of Leuven (Belgium)</p

Safety pin arrangements 2

<div>I created this figure for the paper titled "Order, Complexity, and Aesthetic Appreciation" (see preprint here: <a href="http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GFDXB">http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GFDXB</a>).</div><div><br></div><div>It illustrates several ways in which order and complexity can be present in images of neatly organized compositions (in this case safety pin arrangements).</div><div><br></div><div>The level of complexity present on a dimension (e.g., size of the elements in a stimulus) influences the order or disorder that can be present on that dimension both quantitatively and qualitatively. Compared to the stimulus with lower complexity in the size of its elements (A), stimuli with higher levels of complexity on that dimension can show a broader range of quantitatively different (dis)order levels: B is much less ordered than C and D. Moreover, they can show a broader range of qualitatively different orderings, even with similar levels of order: C and D are both quite ordered but in very different ways (grouped by size in decreasing order in C and in order of increasing versus decreasing size in D).<br></div

Order, complexity, and their interplay in relation to aesthetic appreciation

I created this figure for the paper titled "Order, Complexity, and Aesthetic Appreciation" (see preprint here: <a href="http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GFDXB">http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GFDXB</a>).<div><br></div><div>The blue dotted and orange continuous arrows indicate the possibility of order and complexity as independent or interacting factors influencing aesthetic appreciation, respectively.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Acknowledgments and sources for the icons used: <br></div><div><br></div><div><div>* grid by Attilio Baghino from the Noun Project (<a href="https://thenounproject.com/term/grid/24532/">https://thenounproject.com/term/grid/24532/</a>)</div><div>* balance by IYIKON from the Noun Project (<a href="https://thenounproject.com/term/balance/1057820/">https://thenounproject.com/term/balance/1057820/</a>)</div><div>* dots by Alexander Skowalsky from the Noun Project (<a href="https://thenounproject.com/term/dots/363872/">https://thenounproject.com/term/dots/363872/</a>)</div><div>* like by Chameleon Design from the Noun Project (<a href="https://thenounproject.com/term/like/467436/">https://thenounproject.com/term/like/467436/</a>)</div><div>* like by Christopher Holm-Hansen from the Noun Project (<a href="https://thenounproject.com/term/like/39570/">https://thenounproject.com/term/like/39570/</a>)</div></div><div><br></div

Safety pin arrangements 1

I created this figure for the paper titled "Order, Complexity, and Aesthetic Appreciation" (see preprint here: <a href="http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GFDXB">http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GFDXB</a>).<div><br></div><div>It illustrates several ways in which order and complexity can be present in images of neatly organized compositions (in this case safety pin arrangements). </div><div><br></div><div>In a particular stimulus, complexity and order can be present on the same stimulus dimension (e.g., in the size of the elements in A) or on different stimulus dimensions (e.g., size complexity but configurational order in B). Simplicity and disorder cannot be present on the same stimulus dimension (e.g., in the size of the elements in C), but can be present on different stimulus dimensions (e.g., size simplicity but complexity in orientations in D). </div

Model predictions.

<p>The three trend lines (see legend) are the average predictions per GLP thickness for the six participants for A) homogeneous anisotropic smoothing, B) radial heterogeneous anisotropic smoothing (<i>a_v</i>, <i>a_h</i> depending on GLP thickness) and C) angular heterogeneous anisotropic smoothing (<i>a_v</i>, <i>a_h</i>, <i>r</i> depending on GLP orientation). The markers are the average experimental results adopted from <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0021091#pone-0021091-g004" target="_blank">Figure 4B</a>.</p

A visualization of the Gaussian convolution leading to a biased orientation perception.

<p>A visualization of the Gaussian convolution leading to a biased orientation perception.</p

Moving Stimuli Are Less Effectively Masked Using Traditional Continuous Flash Suppression (CFS) Compared to a Moving Mondrian Mask (MMM): A Test Case for Feature-Selective Suppression and Retinotopic Adaptation

<p>These are the data reported in: </p> <p>Moors P, Wagemans J, de-Wit L (2014) Moving Stimuli Are Less Effectively Masked Using Traditional Continuous Flash Suppression (CFS) Compared to a Moving Mondrian Mask (MMM): A Test Case for Feature-Selective Suppression and Retinotopic Adaptation. PLoS ONE 9(5): e98298. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098298</p> <p>Two files contain the experimental data, one the simulation data, and the last one the explanation of all the variables in the three data files. </p

The illusory orientation bias.

<p>Three Gaussian Luminance Profiles (GLPs) are elongated in the same direction (22.5° counterclockwise from the horizontal axis). From left to right, the orientations of the luminance profiles are perceived more tilted away from horizontal as their widths increase perpendicularly to the elongated direction. Nevertheless, all stimuli have the same main orientation as demonstrated by the shape of their isoluminance contours in the lower part.</p

Mean standard deviations.

<p>Average standard deviations of the orientation adjustments are plotted for each orientation and thickness. The orientation adjustments were more concentrated for vertically oriented GLPs (90°) and more diffuse for horizontally oriented GLPs (0° or 180°).</p