"Sugar water film" is a term used by "neocons" to satirize the work of traditional technical photographers. A typical expression is: "good for the eyes, bland for the mind". In order to be qualified for the "sugar water film", the first thing you have to do is to have a good visual experience, which is what the "neocons" have to admit. As for the psychological feeling, that is again a matter of opinion, too deep. Nothing is absolute, and many of the subjects of traditional photography have neither deep connotation nor visual aesthetics. And the so-called sugar-water films pursued by the new mankind can in some cases serve to convey emotions in addition to their primary aesthetic beauty. Contents Visual feel good Other meanings Pertinent definitions Portrait photography Edit Visual feel good For example: the depressing mood of dark tones or the bright mood of light tones. Nothing in the world is absolute, and art itself is constantly abandoning itself, as a symbol of the transition from traditional painting to modernism, Impressionism was also difficult to be recognized by the French mainstream art world at the beginning of its birth, and in the same vein there was also the survival of American jazz in the jungle of classical music at the beginning of the 20th century. Therefore, new things must have their vitality. I think it's good to start with a "good visual experience" first thing first. This is a word that is often asked about and often used. Originally, I just wanted to explain it casually. But now I found that some people misunderstood it, so I specially looked up some information to explain the ins and outs of this word, and I hope to satisfy everyone. The term "sugar water film" was first invented by Royal (also known as Halted Duck, former moderator of Sina Photography Forum) in Jianghu Jiejie, at that time it referred to landscape films, and later it specifically referred to the mushy films in landscape films, that is, the films that look pretty, but have no philosophical flavors (moods?). The movie is not philosophical in flavor (mood?). Finally, I'll quote the netizen "fotobug" as a conclusion, because it's a more objective evaluation of the source of "sugar water movie". (Because I was just a wallflower in the Sina era, fotobug and Royal/Bobo/Bozeman are all very familiar with each other.) Landscape films are always inseparable from water, so river water, lake water, and even pond water are often included in the lens of the earliest Sina (after the split into Wuhu and Jianghu) moviegoers, and the word "pond water" appears frequently in the film reviews. The word "pond water" appeared frequently in the movie reviews, and was later used as "sugar water", a double entendre, meaning "pond water", but also meaning "sweet and greasy". Edit other meanings of the so-called landscape "sugar water film", in fact, is not a pejorative term, is the majority of photography enthusiasts on the kind of picture that looks sunny, beautiful scenery of the landscape picture of the common name. Because it is "folk", oral, understanding more ambiguous, and no authority can give it an accurate, scientific. Edit this paragraph pertinent definition from the content of the picture, scenery "sugar water film" is mostly scenic spots, landscapes, trees, pavilions, etc. From the light of the picture, scenery "sugar water film" is either bright and beautiful, or feminine and charming, delicate and gentle from the picture technique, scenery From the picture technique, landscape "sugar water film" is mostly large depth of field, small light ratio, traditional perspective, regular composition, natural color transition. From the performance effect, landscape "sugar water film" is mostly relative to the object and I, the mood of each other purely objective fine description and accurate record, many commercial films require such, just and landscape "art film" subjective expression of writing in contrast. Because of the characteristics of the camera itself, especially the modern camera, most people slightly have some common sense to pick up to shoot, especially the general landscape tourism photography, some people easily get some beautiful and charming landscape pictures, I think this is far from reaching the level of landscape "sugar water film", because the real "Sugar water film" in the use of the camera, photographic operation process has a very high technical content, the same scenery, because of the differences in the operation of personal technology, scenery "sugar water film" of "sugar" Levels vary greatly. Edit this section portrait photography for portrait photography, now the digital equipment with simple lighting, can present a clear picture, in the past, take a picture is very troublesome, when the subject is determined, composition, adjust the scene to rely on changing the shooting distance to complete. Now the use of zoom lenses only need to rotate or push and pull the zoom ring to obtain the ideal scene, to complete the composition; metering, the photographer needs to walk to the subject in front of the sub-point metering, and then calculate the exposure index, to determine the correct exposure combination, and then adjust the camera. Now set a variety of metering methods in a machine, the use of p program just half-press the shutter button, you can automatically set the correct exposure index, the completion of the exposure combination, with some colorful and simple post, a portrait of sugar water film also came out. In the past, manually adjust the aperture, shutter, focus, and then remove the viewfinder screen, replace the film cartridge, pull open the film shutter and then give the shutter winding before waiting for the right moment to press the shutter Nowadays, more and more people, more and more do not care about the meaning of the photo itself, and to pay attention to the beauty of the photos presented, a large number of large batches of portraits, the pursuit of sweetness, sexiness, and forget about the true meaning of photography and the things to be expressed! The "Sugar Water Pieces". Although the term "sugar water film" has been shouted in the photography industry, but I have seriously asked a lot of photographers, but no one can comprehensively and systematically clear. However, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that, regardless of the categories of nature, landscape, portrait, still life, folklore, documentary, conceptual, etc., the "aesthetic" style of photos is not a sugar-coated film because "aesthetic" is, after all, a kind of beauty. After all, "aesthetic" is a kind of beauty, a style. The reason why I have criticized it relentlessly in the past is that it is actually a one-size-fits-all phenomenon that the photographic crowd is pursuing; especially in the category of "Nature Scenery", which is not only manifested in serious homogenization, but also in the existence of the so-called "landscape masters" and other opinion leaders who only believe that "aesthetic" is the most important style of photography. Especially in the category of "Nature Scenery", there is not only a serious homogenization, but also a few so-called "Landscape Masters" and other opinions, and the wrong comments and guidance of the leaders who only think that "aesthetics" is the highest level, which has become a huge obstacle affecting the all-around development of Chinese photography. But what kind of photos are considered "sugar water photos"? This question is both complicated and simple. The so-called complexity is mainly due to the fact that the person who takes a sugar-water photo does not have no idea or pursuit at all, and it is impossible for him to take photos like a "vegetable" or a "robot", so it is not easy for the general viewer to distinguish them clearly. The so-called simplicity can be seen at a glance if you can only grasp a few characteristics of the photo or even the photographer. I would like to list the main three, purely personal opinion, for reference only - 1, only technology - no art many sugar water film is very much about the technical aspects of photography, such as aperture, focal length, white balance, sensitivity, exposure, color, color temperature, saturation, light and dark, reality, depth of field, levels, Contrast and so on, but also very concerned about the use of cameras, lenses, film and other equipment and so on. Their understanding of "beauty" is actually more about technology; at the same time, they also mistake these films made through various technologies as art. As I have said before, the basic characteristic of art is "imitating reality-refining reality-transcending reality", which is indispensable; and the higher level is "thought is art". Most of the sugar-water films only stay at the stage of "imitating reality", although a few of them can reach the level of "refining reality", but they never have the ideological height of "transcending reality". Many sugar water film often also "beautify the reality" mistaken for "beauty" and even "beyond reality", which is actually the biggest crux of the sugar water film. "Beautification" is never beautiful, just a false whitewash, is something to deceive people. The photos taken by the city's "photo studio" are typical of this kind of "glorified" sugar-water film. This kind of portrait is not the advantages of someone for artistic enlargement or prominent performance, but to cover up the shortcomings of someone, such as using the eyebrow or eye shadow makeup means to make small eyes bigger, with the soft light mirror effect to cover up the wrinkles on someone's face. That person's eyes although large, but not her; that person's face wrinkles although not, but the face of flesh and blood is also gone ...... and the photo reflects the final result can only be that person's a fake face!2, only the composition - there is no intention of wherever the plane of visual things on the composition, such as diagonal lines, Parallel lines, triangles, trapezoids, symmetry, asymmetry, area, volume, near and far relationship, the relationship between reality, the relationship between primary and secondary, the relationship between light and heavy and so on. But these are only visual elements, is a good photo contains part of the factors, not all or the focus. The important thing is what you want to do with this photo? What do you want to express? If the photographer only regarded the composition of a photo as the most important thing, the composition is the intention of the photo, the same is the composition of the wrong "beauty", at best, it is only the "beauty of the form" only, in addition to that, you in that photo will never be Other than that, you can no longer see anything in that photo. For example, in flower photos, most of the photos are only about color, light, shape, and composition. Another example is natural scenery photos, the mountain, the water, the cloud, the moon, the tree, the stone, etc., reflecting only the composition and light and shadow technology; many of the effects of the picture, although there is no lack of "fresh and clear" or "misty rain", some even "beautify" the picture. "beautify" the natural scenery, the so-called colorful, clean picture and so on, and this is considered "beautiful", which is what I'm going to say "only sensory beauty - no beauty of the soul! "3, only the sensory beauty - no spiritual beauty to the human senses to create an appearance of "beauty", in fact, very easy to reach. This is like letting you see a "beautiful woman", is just a beautiful face and devil body only, the three girls can do, as for the "beautiful woman" has no cultural cultivation, ethics, rich temperament, etc., in fact, a little life experience, can also be from her As for whether the "beauty" has culture, ethics and morals, rich temperament, etc., in fact, those who have a little life experience can also see from her speech and demeanor at a glance. This corresponds to the "candy flakes", that candy flakes are - only skin-like beauty, no inner temperament, cultivation, talent! Ancient Greek thinker Prodin has long believed that beauty is a hierarchical division of ---- the senses are low-level, the mind is the senior.