Why don't I get this kind of art?

Disclaimer: I am in no way trying to make fun/ridicule/criticize​/single out/start a flame war/belittle anyone's talent AT ALL.

But so many times I have come across photos like these

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/sefosse/3436909​741/
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nilliske/341016​3182/
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nilliske/300883​9508/
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/nilliske/334151​7313/

I'm in no way saying that the examples listed are not good photographs. They are, I just don't understand how SO many people comment/favorite them. They obviously have to love the shot.

This got me wondering why I enjoy other photographs SO much more than these, yet those are hardly appreciated, if at all?

Is it just that my taste of photography is indie and am I missing the basic essence of photography?

I can see these photos have amazing clarity, great natural colors and some subject of interest.

Is my taste that skewed?

I do not intend to offend.

That's the wonder and joy of artistic expression: what you consider art, others consider drek, and vice versa!

powerslave wrote in post #7728371
Is it just that my taste of photography is indie and am I missing the basic essence of photography?

As with any art form it is all about expression. Some people share your expression while others view it differently. This is why there is no right or wrong with any of the shots you posted, only likes and dislikes. But I think the "majority" of people would tend toward traditionalism when it comes to photographs. That being said I don't believe you are "missing the basic essence of photography" since you mention that you can see how others like the images.

Marketing always trumps the actual product. Look at the Pet Rock. It was a rock...with googly eyes...It made millions of dollars...A ROCK.

It's usually the "eh" photos that get the thousands of comments. I don't know why, and it DOES bug me as well.

The only one I like is the first one.

It has an emotion to it, almost brings a sense of happness to the viewer.

If you do not like it just let it go.

You have three photo links posted all by the same person. That's your reason.

Look at his photostream. Nearly every picture has 600+ comments. He has enough good photos that his photostream has built up a following. Every picture, good or bad, that he posts will get viewed hundreds of times at minimum. Nearly every photo he posts makes it to Flickr Explore. His followers all view his photos and some favorite them, all in a short period of time. It doesn't need time to have the photo 'found'. That's why his photos make Explore. Every photo he gets in there, he gets some more people who like his stuff and subscribe. It all builds up.

The second reason is the fact that these people put their images out there. They post them in 50 flickr groups. If it is half-way decent then it's going to get views and probably favorites. Many photos that I consider technically and artistically greater than many with thousands of comments doesn't get those comments because people haven't found it. If they posted that great photo to all the groups around flickr it would probably get many comments.

powerslave wrote in post #7728371
Is it just that my taste of photography is indie and am I missing the basic essence of photography?

I looked at the links, then I looked at the first link in your sig. Your first photo is "Wildest Dreams."

http://www.flickr.com …s/garagenoise/3​371796126/

Wow.

Follow your own path. Learn the craft, but photograph what you like. That's all that matters.

When I first got into digital, the first photography-related site I frequented and posted on was Photo.net

It didn't take long to realize that what Outbri says is right on the money. Now there were some folks doing awesome work but mostly it was a handful of people who nail something (a few shots, a theme, a processing technique) that really hits home with another handful of people and a cult of personality is born.

People are flickr whores. Less time clicking on "add to pool," more time shooting I say.

rklepper wrote in post #7732343
If you do not like it just let it go.

Why ignore a question that's itching to be answered? I never showed disrespect to any of the artists, nor am I claiming they're not good photographers/artists. Of course I let it go, but who knows, such art may be an acquired taste for someone like me, and why miss out on that?

outbri: I agree.

mathogre: Thank you and yes, I shoot what I love indeed!

Flyingphotog, mikekelly: Indeed.

Maybe its the whole simplicity thing that pulls one to such photographs.

Sexy doesn't sell. Marketing sells.

Marketing = Dictating what's "Sexy"