| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/27/2009 06:37:02 PM · #51 |
I think the main issue is that people on this site love to point out a DNMC in comments because it's easier than actually putting yourself out there and giving a good critique of the shot. If this is a learning site and made to help us learn about photography how does DNMC help you. How about a DNMC comment followed by a, "but as far as the shot goes, I feel this way about it." I've gotten DNMC before and every time I see a new comment I get excited that someone is giving me constructive criticism only to find DNMC sometimes followed with a semi-rude comment and a quote from the rulebook. That doesn'e help in the learning process at all. I'm OK with quoting the rulebook, that's educational too but also say something about the shot to help the photographer on how you feel about the artistic merit of the shot.
Get of your soapbox DNMC police and help out a fellow DPCer up from the ground.
/rant
Message edited by author 2009-10-27 18:37:29.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2009 04:40:36 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by albc28:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Ja-9 - Some rules are meant to be broken (especially really silly ones, imho) BUT in this case that particular rule is so utterly and completely irrelevant to photography or the essence of the Challenge I'm not sure why anyone would pay it a bit of mind. |
I beg to differ. That part of the title plays a big role in photography. Last I checked this is also a learning site. Learning to better our photography and our photography business. You are educating those in the three techniques you have choosen. You are supposed to tell them what three techniques you are highlighting...it's not a guessing game. That way the viewer can look at which three techniques you are highlighting and how you put them together to create an aesthetically pleasing photo. Otherwise this would just be a free study. i see this almost as you getting an assigment to shoot a pepsi can and you come back back with a coca - cola can. You need to be able to follow a given assigment if you are to keep your business running or gather more business. You can't follow a simple assigment you deserve to lose a point or two...now if it's just an argument on the alphabetical part....well then that isn't really a deal at all. |
Whoah...whoah...whoah...
I'm actually so annoyed by that post...just speechless.
Pedantic - hairsplitting, particular, formal, precise, fussy, picky (informal), nit-picking (informal), punctilious, priggish, pedagogic, anal retentive, overnice all his pedantic quibbles about grammar.
Most important is that that rule couldn't be more irrelevant to photography or the essence of the Challenge. If it in some way helped the viewer or image...OK, BUT it doesn't do either.
Message edited by author 2009-10-27 17:05:40. |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 03:24:39 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by albc28:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Ja-9 - Some rules are meant to be broken (especially really silly ones, imho) BUT in this case that particular rule is so utterly and completely irrelevant to photography or the essence of the Challenge I'm not sure why anyone would pay it a bit of mind. |
I beg to differ. That part of the title plays a big role in photography. Last I checked this is also a learning site. Learning to better our photography and our photography business. You are educating those in the three techniques you have choosen. You are supposed to tell them what three techniques you are highlighting...it's not a guessing game. That way the viewer can look at which three techniques you are highlighting and how you put them together to create an aesthetically pleasing photo. Otherwise this would just be a free study. i see this almost as you getting an assigment to shoot a pepsi can and you come back back with a coca - cola can. You need to be able to follow a given assigment if you are to keep your business running or gather more business. You can't follow a simple assigment you deserve to lose a point or two...now if it's just an argument on the alphabetical part....well then that isn't really a deal at all. |
here here (or is is hear hear)...my point...(obviously today I have more time to engage online...me thinks I should crawl back under my rock here in FL) |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 03:21:19 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Ja-9 - Some rules are meant to be broken (especially really silly ones, imho) BUT in this case that particular rule is so utterly and completely irrelevant to photography or the essence of the Challenge I'm not sure why anyone would pay it a bit of mind. |
I beg to differ. That part of the title plays a big role in photography. Last I checked this is also a learning site. Learning to better our photography and our photography business. You are educating those in the three techniques you have choosen. You are supposed to tell them what three techniques you are highlighting...it's not a guessing game. That way the viewer can look at which three techniques you are highlighting and how you put them together to create an aesthetically pleasing photo. Otherwise this would just be a free study. i see this almost as you getting an assigment to shoot a pepsi can and you come back back with a coca - cola can. You need to be able to follow a given assigment if you are to keep your business running or gather more business. You can't follow a simple assigment you deserve to lose a point or two...now if it's just an argument on the alphabetical part....well then that isn't really a deal at all. |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 03:09:28 PM · #55 |
Ja-9 - Some rules are meant to be broken (especially really silly ones, imho) BUT in this case that particular rule is so utterly and completely irrelevant to photography or the essence of the Challenge I'm not sure why anyone would pay it a bit of mind.
Message edited by author 2009-10-27 15:15:17. |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 02:58:38 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Ja-9:
but when the title does not follow the instructions I will make note, I take that instruction to be literal...sorry... |
I don't think you should have to apologize for that, any more than any of us be taken to task for voting down any image that didn't do the one basic thing that was asked in the challenge description.
Step outside the box at your own peril.
If us cretins don't appreciate your vision, then whose fault is that anyway?
If every person in the room is clueless other than you, well.....
|
|
|
|
10/27/2009 02:55:56 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
I find the challenge to be funny.
1) Voters are so ignorant that if the techniques aren't listed in alphabetical order in the title then they won't be identified in the photo.
2) Left to their own devices, no one is going to look at a photo long enough to identify three basic photographic techniques without written hints. And that's ok.
Funny stuff. |
I didn't understand the purpose of alphabetizing the techniques but whatever. I figure I'd ignore that part as it should be.
As for people looking...? I think they are but keep in mind some images may have actually used up to 5 or 6 of the techniques on the list although the three may be the most important to the shot or the most pronounced. My image has 7 techniques that were listed and I could have edited in another with no extra effort but three/four dominate the shot.
Message edited by author 2009-10-27 15:06:23. |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 02:54:53 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
I find the challenge to be funny.
1) Voters are so ignorant that if the techniques aren't listed in alphabetical order in the title then they won't be identified in the photo.
2) Left to their own devices, no one is going to look at a photo long enough to identify three basic photographic techniques without written hints. And that's ok.
3) Given 1 and 2, the people least qualified to do so will determine the outcome of the Technique challenge.
Funny stuff. |
ok...here is what the challenge details said...
Details: Choose three techniques below and apply them while shooting your entry this week. Your title should be your three techniques, in alphabetical order to also aid in the education of voters.
Technique list: Backlighting, Blur, Bokeh, Centered Composition, Deep DOF, High Key, Leading Lines, Light On White, Long Exposure, Low Key, Portrait, Motion Panning, Rule of Thirds, Shallow DOF, Soft Focus, Stop Action, and Tilted Angle.
I have been giving out some DNMC due to that one flaw in their titles...BUT I might add that I'm not punishing them because I don't see the elements...my score so far is:
Stats: You have rated 114 of 139 images (82%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 114 images (81%) in this challenge.
You have given an average score of 6.8509.
I have been very impressed with the work in this challenge...also I have fav'd several in it...these are very, very good pictures all around...but when the title does not follow the instructions I will make note, I take that instruction to be literal...sorry... |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 02:45:26 PM · #59 |
I find the challenge to be funny.
1) Voters are so ignorant that if the techniques aren't listed in alphabetical order in the title then they won't be identified in the photo.
2) Left to their own devices, no one is going to look at a photo long enough to identify three basic photographic techniques without written hints. And that's ok.
3) Given 1 and 2, the people least qualified to do so will determine the outcome of the Technique challenge.
Funny stuff.
Message edited by author 2009-10-27 14:46:14. |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 10:56:50 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by kashi:
My comments received show that I completely mangled one of the techniques - what can I say ? I'm not a pro, I'm trying and learning.
Thankfully, my score is still respectable.
I'm thinking that people are not just handing out 1's and 2's for one of three techniques not being 'correct' or obvious, etc. |
I'm not (I never/rarely hand out 1/2's)...I look at the overall and taking into consideration the 3 techniques...I'm in the process of commenting so it is taking me longer than usual as I am trying to look at all 3 elements and how they are executed. So far only 1 DNMC IMO... |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 10:40:57 AM · #61 |
My comments received show that I completely mangled one of the techniques - what can I say ? I'm not a pro, I'm trying and learning.
Thankfully, my score is still respectable.
I'm thinking that people are not just handing out 1's and 2's for one of three techniques not being 'correct' or obvious, etc.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2009 08:51:15 AM · #62 |
My simple point which is being gobbled up is that the technique needs to be present but to any degree.
I'll first state that my score is high enough to qualify that I met the Challenge well, head on...
"the (technique) is too slight to be mentioned..."
"not sure i agree with (technique)"
"Evocative regardless of the (techniques)." <<< I'm guessing they didn't like any of my choices? lololol
Again, my score is beyond cool and I'll add that the technique that's being referenced is clearly there...no question. It's obviously clear to a huge majority of voters and it works nicely with the image and if I pushed it the image would have looked ridiculous. So, why would people have an issue with it's degree? It's there, it's clear, it works. That's all that needed to be taken into consideration. If people do not like the image I'm cool with that.
I never said, forget technique. What I am saying is, don't treat them like chew toys.
eta: The word Nazi is used to describe those that are too extreme. There are images that I think missed the mark, where I don't recognize the techniques listed ...even remotely and I'm NOT arguing in favor of that. Don't abandon the techniques but within some comfort zone, a more artistic way of appraisal could be applied... I'm talking about fine lines and splitting hairs in hope that people will be less robotic in the way they judge. I assume many people here will agree that many voters ARE too robotic, on occasion? Well, since we're applying 3 techniques, I think there should be some artistic latitude...within reason.
BTW I think people did fine in this Challenge. Over the years I've seen single concepts (Missed Focus, for example) get totally mangled so, we're in pretty good shape here comparatively, having taken a more complex approach to the system.
Message edited by author 2009-10-27 10:26:43. |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 07:43:47 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by ralph:
part of the problem is that people like to have it obvious
the three techniques explicitly shown
but not all are that simple
photographers intent as opposed to whats shown |
Wouldn't that be all the more reason to specify what techniques were used?
|
|
|
|
10/27/2009 07:37:02 AM · #64 |
part of the problem is that people like to have it obvious
the three techniques explicitly shown
but not all are that simple
photographers intent as opposed to whats shown |
|
|
|
10/27/2009 07:14:35 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
[quote=pawdrix]Well, nobody said "be technique Nazis" while voting"... |
I beg to differ. This challenge is all about technique. The idea is to follow a technique. If you are supposed to be showing rule of thirds and you have your subject directly in the center of the photography, you don't know the technique and are dumbing down others who don't know it very well. This challenge basically said you can photograph whatever you want....You just have to use three of these TECHNIQUES. So if you did technique wrong, doesn't that say that you didn't know what you were doing when you shot, and wouldn't the lesson learned be a lower score and a comment on why you did the technique wrong? Yes this challenge is all about technique nitpicking.....Okay some people may take rule of thirds too far. I wouldn't be putting a grid on a photo, but at a glance it should seem somewhere near a third of the photo. I should be able to put imaginary lines on a photo with my eyes and it looks about there. Deep DOF seems to have been abused in this challenge also. If your entire background is blurred, you probably didn't do deep DOF.
As for the title thing. I think you should have followed the description and gave it the right title. I'm not supposed to be sitting here and guessing what techniques you used. I'm not supposed to tell you which one you used. You were supposed to tell which 3 you used and I'm voting on how you used them to make a beautiful piece of work (photograph). If I have to guess which one you used, my only assumption is that you don't know what you used or you didn't care about your score enough to follow the challenge description. If you are doing a school assignment and you don't follow directions...the teacher normally takes off a few points for not following the assignment directions right? The same thing applies here....for this challenge...one of few that gave clear cut directions in the description.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2009 06:01:07 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Well, nobody said "be technique Nazis" while voting"...
The mentality of site does not necessarily have to be one way, always. Unless it's members allow it to be that way. For the record, I think the Challenge is great and the discussion is even better. Anything provocative is welcome and if this Challenge mixes it up...praise be!
If this Challenge positively effects the way a few people think that's all we can ask. I think it's fun.
Basically what we're doing here is the same thing we do in almost every Challenge it's just being parsed differently. Read my last post in this Challenge Suggestion thread...
eta: I was going to try and bail out of this discussion by deleting my previous post but you quoted me...dammit! |
Okay.....let me toss this back to you, Steve.
I hear about "Technique Nazis", "let's not nit-pick", "too literal"......if all these are true, then what's the point of a challenge description?
If you've got 100 entries, the challenge description says:"Your title should be your three techniques, in alphabetical order to also aid in the education of voters." and an image pops up after you've looked at 43 that have had alphabetical descriptions that says "Statue of Liberty", what do you do?
43 people have followed the guidelines, so does that make you a "Nazi", a "Nit-picker", or "Too literal" if you vote it down because the photog either missed the boat, or didn't care?
I'm certainly not going to give the guy a 1, but by the same token, what do I give the image if it clearly has three of the techniques on the list and is a fine image?
Would it be fair to award it the same score you would have had the photog "Followed the challenge guidelines as stated."
I have a little bit of a problem with the way that there's always someone squaking about Nazis and literalism when people do NOT follow the guidelines.
They're there.......don't follow them, suffer......and don't call out people for busting you for them.
I've been busted for not "Following the spirit of the challenge." whatever *that* means, so why on earth is it not reasonable to pop someone who just plain didn't do what they were supposed to do?
To me, the creative interpretation thing comes into play when the title of a challenge is stated, and the challenge details are: "N/A", or "Creatively use _______ as your example of _______."
What prompted this is that I just had an image pop up that I can't make head nor tail of the title........at all. It's not even words.
If I'm not supposed to utilize the challenge description as it's written, then what's the point of having it?
|
|
|
|
10/26/2009 05:43:53 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Wow...this is really pedantic bullshit, at it's finest. |
It may be pedantic, but in the context of DPC it unfortunately has weight...
R. |
I certainly understand the meaning of things but when people get so bollixed up in nickel and dime issues the death of creativity is sure to follow.
It's high time on this site that people collectively reel against such things. |
And the way to do that is to propose a challenge that requires people to choose 3 from a laundery list of techniques/rules and apply them to their images?
R. |
Well, nobody said "be technique Nazis" while voting"...
The mentality of site does not necessarily have to be one way, always. Unless it's members allow it to be that way. For the record, I think the Challenge is great and the discussion is even better. Anything provocative is welcome and if this Challenge mixes it up...praise be!
If this Challenge positively effects the way a few people think that's all we can ask. I think it's fun.
Basically what we're doing here is the same thing we do in almost every Challenge it's just being parsed differently. Read my last post in this Challenge Suggestion thread...
eta: I was going to try and bail out of this discussion by deleting my previous post but you quoted me...dammit!
Message edited by author 2009-10-26 17:57:50. |
|
|
|
10/26/2009 05:33:02 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Wow...this is really pedantic bullshit, at it's finest. |
It may be pedantic, but in the context of DPC it unfortunately has weight...
R. |
I certainly understand the meaning of things but when people get so bollixed up in nickel and dime issues the death of creativity is sure to follow.
It's high time on this site that people collectively reel against such things. |
And the way to do that is to propose a challenge that requires people to choose 3 from a laundery list of techniques/rules and apply them to their images?
R. |
|
|
|
10/26/2009 05:20:19 PM · #69 |
...
Message edited by author 2009-10-26 17:36:10. |
|
|
|
10/26/2009 04:28:56 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Wow...this is really pedantic bullshit, at it's finest. |
It may be pedantic, but in the context of DPC it unfortunately has weight. I would NEVER use the ROT grid to create my compositions for my "own" work, I just do what feels right to me. But DPC voters are *notorious* for voting down images that don't adhere to the "rules". So when I have an image that is basically organized on a ROT principle, I definitely use the grid and, where possible, adjust cropping so ROT is satisfied without any debate.
When I DON'T do that, I get dinged by nit-picking voters.
In the meanwhile, in THIS challenge we have ROT as one of the options, and naturally this means the nit-pickers are watching like hawks to make sure that users of the rule actually FOLLOW the "rule". It's sad, but it's reality.
In my own personal world, compositional "rules", like scansion in poetry, are something that's applied after the fact to analyze *why* an image works, or does not work. These "rules" are informational, descriptive, not prescriptive.
But this particular challenge (indeed, *any* technical challenge) makes the "rules" prescriptive for that challenge.
Kinda like doing exercises on the piano... Useful stuff.
R. |
Well said (as usual). Even the name of the thing, the "Rule" of thirds makes me want to throw up. And the rigidity with which some "Comply With The Rule Of Thirds" and insist that a composition is inherently wrong if it does not do so is abhorrent to me. Clearly in a challenge where the assignment is to apply the so-called-rule of thirds, one would need to do so, but to otherwise regularly apply it as a constraint on one's own images, and to measure other images by that yardstick is fundamentally ridiculous to me. But, on the plus side, when someone informs me that I have VIOLATED the RULE of Thirds, I can tell right away that they are, at best, a reverse-barometer for me :-)
Message edited by author 2009-10-26 16:30:08. |
|
|
|
10/26/2009 03:22:45 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Wow...this is really pedantic bullshit, at it's finest. |
It may be pedantic, but in the context of DPC it unfortunately has weight. I would NEVER use the ROT grid to create my compositions for my "own" work, I just do what feels right to me. But DPC voters are *notorious* for voting down images that don't adhere to the "rules". So when I have an image that is basically organized on a ROT principle, I definitely use the grid and, where possible, adjust cropping so ROT is satisfied without any debate.
When I DON'T do that, I get dinged by nit-picking voters.
In the meanwhile, in THIS challenge we have ROT as one of the options, and naturally this means the nit-pickers are watching like hawks to make sure that users of the rule actually FOLLOW the "rule". It's sad, but it's reality.
In my own personal world, compositional "rules", like scansion in poetry, are something that's applied after the fact to analyze *why* an image works, or does not work. These "rules" are informational, descriptive, not prescriptive.
But this particular challenge (indeed, *any* technical challenge) makes the "rules" prescriptive for that challenge.
Kinda like doing exercises on the piano... Useful stuff.
R.
Message edited by author 2009-10-26 15:23:49. |
|
|
|
10/26/2009 11:26:33 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Regarding the "rule of thirds", that's an interesting question. In my mind, people mislabel images as ROT a LOT. Not that these images may not follow ROT to some degree, but the dominant compositional motif is often something else.
For example, using Wendy's blossom-n-bug as an example, it's more of a centered composition, I believe, than it is an ROT composition. This actually was an amusing thought that was occurring to me early in the week, to do an image that contradicted itself, like combining "centered" with "ROT", or "soft focus" with "deep DOF", stuff like that. But it seemed a quixotic enterprise so I slapped myself down.
R. |
Yeah.....I'm kinda on the same page as to centered, 'cause even though the title of the image directs it to be the skipper, the big yellow p[osie in the center of the comp tells me that's the focal point.
'Course, I'm an uneducated heathen so what do I know?
What I have been having problems with is the images that I've been seeing that say deep DOF, and the ONLY thing that's sharp is the foreground. I don't really know what to do, 'cause they've been good images, and IMO, terrific exammples of *shallow* DOF. |
ah, so the flower is more the issue? I was curious why people had problems with it. The face of the skipper was at the third lines because I wanted the eye to flow to him. Perhaps the flower is just too invasive for the 1/3 to work for the bug. Interesting... |
What happens when i look at it is even though the eye may be perfectly on the third intersection, the wings pull it up and away, and are more "dominant" making it look off of the thirds, and thus feels unbalanced to me. (But, then again, I go by "feeling" not by the ruler). So, while technically, it may "follow" the ROT, it doesn't "feel" like it does to me.
|
|
|
|
10/26/2009 11:08:48 AM · #73 |
| Wow...this is really pedantic bullshit, at it's finest. |
|
|
|
10/26/2009 09:56:26 AM · #74 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I don't mean to be stupid or anything, but is there a ROT grid that gives you the exact latitude and longitude or something???? |
In Photoshop, in your preferences, on the "grid" tab, you can set grid frequency to 33.33% and number of divisions to 1. Then, when working on a picture, you can use the view menu to "show grid" and the program will superimpose a 3x3 grid on the image. This is how you can check ROT while processing, though it's not useful for *voting* of course...
R. |
|
|
|
10/26/2009 09:41:39 AM · #75 |
FWIW, I think this is a wonderful challenge to view, vote, & comment as I'm learning again.....8>)
LOVE that!
|
|
