3 ms·

Bliss – The story behind one of the most famous photographs (2012)

16 points by susam 1y ago

esafak 1y ago
It doesn't look real because it's oversaturated and overexposed. Look at the clouds. I don't think it is a good picture because there's no detail to hold your attention. Certainly not for years on end, as the Windows desktop picture.
- frfl 1y ago
  Sorry, but what's the point of your comment exactly? It's a famous picture and the article already mentioned it's criticized by some for lacking a focal point. Yet it's a famous and iconic photo that's immediately recognized by hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, around the world. "Real" seems completely irrelevant. Windows 98, Vista, 7, 10 all dont look real, but are they going to have the same fame as XP and it's background did...probably not on the same level.
  - raffael_de 1y ago
    >> there's no detail to hold your attention > lacking a focal point Aren't those actually desirable features for a desktop background?
    - esafak 1y ago
      You could say that but it should be interesting to look at, otherwise what's the point? For example, if you replace it with a picture of your family, it is nice to look at when you do look at it, but you can easily ignore it. I like the MacOS dynamic wallpapers for the same reason: they have a little movement to hold enough interest.
      - afiori 1y ago
        I would not want a picture of my family as the default wallpaper of a global OS with millions of installs
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
metalman 1y ago
...instantly unrememberable.. ...perfect example of asymetric infuence.... it's not actualy famous, no one has ever....... .....paused.....when they see it ubiquitous grot! and honestly I did not recognise it without the caption, and personaly treat all forced "options" as evidence of the mass attempt to instiutionalise everything. proof would be in the form of having to choose/create a background image durring initial set up, or having the default a black background but hey, it's 2025, and there are cults of everything, so if there is actualy a fan base for that image, welllllll, ok, but then they have to know that this has not got much general traction
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- jrajav 1y ago
  It is objectively very famous, by the simple definition of the word. Not everything has to be for you, and that is okay.

16 points by susam 1y ago

It doesn't look real because it's oversaturated and overexposed. Look at the clouds. I don't think it is a good picture because there's no detail to hold your attention. Certainly not for years on end, as the Windows desktop picture.

frfl 1y ago
Sorry, but what's the point of your comment exactly? It's a famous picture and the article already mentioned it's criticized by some for lacking a focal point. Yet it's a famous and iconic photo that's immediately recognized by hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, around the world. "Real" seems completely irrelevant. Windows 98, Vista, 7, 10 all dont look real, but are they going to have the same fame as XP and it's background did...probably not on the same level.
- raffael_de 1y ago
  >> there's no detail to hold your attention > lacking a focal point Aren't those actually desirable features for a desktop background?
  - esafak 1y ago
    You could say that but it should be interesting to look at, otherwise what's the point? For example, if you replace it with a picture of your family, it is nice to look at when you do look at it, but you can easily ignore it. I like the MacOS dynamic wallpapers for the same reason: they have a little movement to hold enough interest.
    - afiori 1y ago
      I would not want a picture of my family as the default wallpaper of a global OS with millions of installs
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

metalman 1y ago

...instantly unrememberable.. ...perfect example of asymetric infuence.... it's not actualy famous, no one has ever....... .....paused.....when they see it ubiquitous grot! and honestly I did not recognise it without the caption, and personaly treat all forced "options" as evidence of the mass attempt to instiutionalise everything. proof would be in the form of having to choose/create a background image durring initial set up, or having the default a black background but hey, it's 2025, and there are cults of everything, so if there is actualy a fan base for that image, welllllll, ok, but then they have to know that this has not got much general traction

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
jrajav 1y ago
It is objectively very famous, by the simple definition of the word. Not everything has to be for you, and that is okay.