The 1x GOING TO GET PUBLISHED side challenge...

06/25/2011 07:59:41 PM · #176

Originally posted by MargaretN:

I decided to give 1x a break till the technical quality of my photos improves (I am still not there with consistency) and I zoom in on what I really like to photograph. Whether I will ever get anything into 1x I don't know but I will keep on trying in future as it gives me more motivation to improve. Contrary to some opinions I still believe that 1x is full of great photographs and has high artistic standards. It does not mean though that all great artistic photos will get published at 1x! Obviously not so there is an element of chance there. As to the "wax museum" comment from yanko on another thread - I don't have a problem with that :)

Well, with each site, 1x or DPC or where ever...we all create our own experience. ;-)

Message edited by author 2011-06-25 20:15:00.

06/26/2011 03:14:00 PM · #177

I was just going over some critiques on 1x from a couple photos submitted to the critique section. I keep forgetting to mention in my description that the photo was taken in 1 shot, not combined from multiple scenes. I guess at 1x combining photos is done so often that everyone just assumes that is what you did to get your shot. While I do like an occasional expert editing challenge I am proud that most of my photos I was able to get in a single exposure. I guess I am just to used to DPC rules it doesn't even occur to me that I need to explain that no I didn't choose to put that picture of the mountain in, it was the actual mountain. Sorry the snow on the mountain seems out of place, but there was actual snow on the mountain I didn't put it there. And so on.

Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G

06/26/2011 05:05:55 PM · #178

Originally posted by sjhuls:

Mmmmm...good point. Kind of a good news / bad news thing. The good news is that you get to use a full range of tools. The bad news is that so does everyone else and the expectations are different. ;-/

vikas

Apple iPhone 13

06/27/2011 01:28:23 PM · #179

My first published image
Shade @ 1x.com

fairly old picture from DPC

06/27/2011 01:51:14 PM · #180

Originally posted by vikas:

My first published image
Shade @ 1x.com

fairly old picture from DPC

I saw it yesterday, didn't know it was yours congrats!

06/27/2011 01:51:22 PM · #181

Originally posted by vikas:

My first published image
Shade @ 1x.com

fairly old picture from DPC

Congrats! Left you a comment...;-)

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM for Nikon

06/27/2011 02:00:05 PM · #182

another rejection, not a big surprise.

But this one is getting a lot of positive feedback from the critique forum.

Most people are saying I should re-edit and submit it again. I don't have a membership so I will have to wait until Sunday for another slot to open. I'm debating on getting a membership but I'm not sure I want to pay $50 just to have the privilege of being rejected more often.

bohemka

Nikon D700

06/27/2011 03:30:27 PM · #183

Originally posted by sjhuls:

another rejection, not a big surprise.

But this one is getting a lot of positive feedback from the critique forum.

Most people are saying I should re-edit and submit it again. I don't have a membership so I will have to wait until Sunday for another slot to open. I'm debating on getting a membership but I'm not sure I want to pay $50 just to have the privilege of being rejected more often.

What are they suggesting the edits should be? I wouldn't change a thing to that. It's an excellent image.

Sirashley

Nikon D7200

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

06/27/2011 03:41:20 PM · #184

Originally posted by vikas:

My first published image
Shade @ 1x.com

fairly old picture from DPC

Hey Congrats!!! That is awesome! I'm on my mobile now so I can't really get a good look at the image, but that must be a great feeling...

I went out and shot yesterday, but it was quick. I was expecting to have allot more time this weekend but that didn't happen. I have one shot that I am working with so we'll see and I have a shot in selection process now, but I am fully expecting a rejection... Anyway, good to see everyone making the effort. If anything, this thread has inspired me to make a much deeper personal connection with my photos. Whether or not I can translate that to improvement remains to be seen... time will tell, good luck everyone...

mbrutus2009

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35 f/4 ED VR

06/27/2011 03:48:09 PM · #185

#2 has been rejected... Again I didn't expect much from it but I thought I would enter it anyways.

After freestudies I will put it onto this thread.

antje1777

06/27/2011 04:28:42 PM · #186

I believe that the reason those three were chosen is not the lighting or the clouds. It is their uniqueness. The lonely tree is not lonely at all as it is part of a whole group lining the street. As to the boats, in both cases the photographers used the outlines of a boat rather than the actual thing, allowing the mind to fill in the things that are not there. So to me in a sense they are inspiring...
But that of course is just my humble opinion..

Originally posted by MargaretN:

Originally posted by FocusPoint:

Originally posted by MargaretN:
Any other suggestions for improvement?
I think their statement stays. Your links show two dead boat (not lonely anymore) and a tree with some truck next to it (also not lonely)
.
...of course you also know I am joking :P

YES
So what makes them special?

PS My attempt at the answer (most important aspect):
1 - light
2 - composition
3 - don't know

Message edited by author 2011-06-27 16:29:26.

Yo_Spiff

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

06/27/2011 06:47:56 PM · #187

Up to my third rejection:

Perhaps it is time for a different approach. I may try my Kermit & Piggy poster when I can upload again.

Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM

06/27/2011 06:53:32 PM · #188

Originally posted by bohemka:

Originally posted by sjhuls:
another rejection, not a big surprise.

But this one is getting a lot of positive feedback from the critique forum.

Most people are saying I should re-edit and submit it again. I don't have a membership so I will have to wait until Sunday for another slot to open. I'm debating on getting a membership but I'm not sure I want to pay $50 just to have the privilege of being rejected more often.

What are they suggesting the edits should be? I wouldn't change a thing to that. It's an excellent image.

They mostly didn't like the light rectangle at the end of the pier said it didn't match, also that I shouldn't have done so much noise reduction and then tried to sharpen it back up. But most of the feedback was really positive encouraging me to resubmit. Not that it means anything.

gg3rd

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

06/27/2011 11:52:10 PM · #189

Originally posted by sjhuls:

Originally posted by bohemka:

Originally posted by sjhuls:
another rejection, not a big surprise.

But this one is getting a lot of positive feedback from the critique forum.

Most people are saying I should re-edit and submit it again. I don't have a membership so I will have to wait until Sunday for another slot to open. I'm debating on getting a membership but I'm not sure I want to pay $50 just to have the privilege of being rejected more often.

What are they suggesting the edits should be? I wouldn't change a thing to that. It's an excellent image.

They mostly didn't like the light rectangle at the end of the pier said it didn't match, also that I shouldn't have done so much noise reduction and then tried to sharpen it back up. But most of the feedback was really positive encouraging me to resubmit. Not that it means anything.

It might improve the harmony if you fix the white retangle, but I wouldn't change the noise reduction... Very nice image!

WriteHeart

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

06/27/2011 11:53:46 PM · #190

Wow, if you guys are getting rejected with those images, then I have no chance!!!!!!

antje1777

06/28/2011 12:44:25 AM · #191

By no means am I an authority on this, but I wanted to say that I love picture number two. However, here is a suggestion. I do not know why, but somehow I find the person standing to the left of the pier disruptive. Maybe you could clone her out and resubmit. I think it is an absolutely fascinating image without the person!

Originally posted by sjhuls:

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

06/28/2011 02:42:52 AM · #192

Originally posted by antje1777:

I will throw in exactly opposite view - the person is what makes this image different from many similar images :)

Silent-Shooter

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

06/28/2011 04:30:17 AM · #193

Originally posted by MargaretN:

Originally posted by antje1777:
By no means am I an authority on this, but I wanted to say that I love picture number two. However, here is a suggestion. I do not know why, but somehow I find the person standing to the left of the pier disruptive. Maybe you could clone her out and resubmit. I think it is an absolutely fascinating image without the person!
I will throw in exactly opposite view - the person is what makes this image different from many similar images :)

I agree the person adds to the pic for me... but it would be a lot more symbolic for me if the person was looking down the "tunnel" towards the bright rectangle at the end of the pier. Want to have a bash at cloning the person over the right hand side?

jomari

Nikon D7000

Nikon AF-S DX 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 ED VR

06/28/2011 08:04:20 AM · #194

Originally posted by Silent-Shooter:

Originally posted by MargaretN:

Originally posted by antje1777:
By no means am I an authority on this, but I wanted to say that I love picture number two. However, here is a suggestion. I do not know why, but somehow I find the person standing to the left of the pier disruptive. Maybe you could clone her out and resubmit. I think it is an absolutely fascinating image without the person!
I will throw in exactly opposite view - the person is what makes this image different from many similar images :)

I agree the person adds to the pic for me... but it would be a lot more symbolic for me if the person was looking down the "tunnel" towards the bright rectangle at the end of the pier. Want to have a bash at cloning the person over the right hand side?

Exactly what I thought when I looked at it.

06/28/2011 02:14:09 PM · #195

Originally posted by sjhuls:

But this one is getting a lot of positive feedback from the critique forum.

Jenn? Would you please post the link to the discussion thread?

Message edited by author 2011-06-28 14:14:30.

06/28/2011 02:21:20 PM · #196

Nevermind...I found it.

Critique Thread for "Still" image

The helpful feedback you received seems almost worth the price of non-publication...well ALMOST!...;-)

I enjoyed the read...;-)

-M

Message edited by author 2011-06-28 15:49:09.

06/28/2011 03:48:57 PM · #197

Thanks for posting that Mae. I think I will re-edit it and submit it at some point. It is nice to get positive feedback, my other shots submitted for critique didn't fare so well.

06/28/2011 05:03:14 PM · #198

Originally posted by hihosilver:

Nevermind...I found it.

Critique Thread for "Still" image

The helpful feedback you received seems almost worth the price of non-publication...well ALMOST!...;-)

I enjoyed the read...;-)

-M

Very interesting comments. Any noise usually heavily reduces the score at DPC so I guess we do everything to avoid it :) As to the originality of the shot that's the really difficult one to me. Especially for landscape shots. Since a lot of us are still learning just getting a decent long exposure shot is a great deal! I have seen Jenn's jetty shots before in long exposure so that made the figure the key to the difference but still not that original according to 1x commenters.

So how do you achieve originality in landscapes? If you look at the recently published images it seems to me these factors are significant:

- technical excellence - that does not mean no noise, just no noise if it does not support the image; I think this one is a given
- unusual perspective - still difficult to be original there, low angle with something interesting in the foreground is the most common approach
- weather - this is a big one as extremes of the weather always make the photo look more interesting but not easy to control! Auroras, storms are great.
- light - another given, related to the weather and critical to the interest of the photo; can be significantly exploited in PP (I mean light can make an otherwise common image uncommon)
- strong mood - this is often achieved by using B&W, less color make image look less busy and more gloomy
- composition - strong composition is another given, there should be a single point of interest (I call it minimalism in photography in its broadest sense)
- subject - a wrecked ship or a dead tree usually help, for some reason happy images are much less liked :/ Unusual landscape features help a lot.
- textures - this why long exposure is popular as it changes the texture of the water and can change the clouds too; these help create a mood
- very skillful editing - PP can almost entirely alter the image but there is a limit to making unoriginal shot original

These are my unorganized thoughts. As I am keen to improve my landscapes I keep on thinking about this. What other factors matter to make the landscape shot original and different from millions of other similar shots?

PS Just realized one more thing - a lot of the color landscapes recently published at 1x are almost duotones, this must be a way to reducing "business".

Message edited by author 2011-06-28 17:09:09.

06/28/2011 05:11:44 PM · #199

Originally posted by MargaretN:

Originally posted by hihosilver:
Nevermind...I found it.

Critique Thread for "Still" image

The helpful feedback you received seems almost worth the price of non-publication...well ALMOST!...;-)

I enjoyed the read...;-)

-M

Very interesting comments. Any noise usually heavily reduces the score at DPC so I guess we do everything to avoid it :) As to the originality of the shot that's the really difficult one to me. Especially for landscape shots. Since a lot of us are still learning just getting a decent long exposure shot is a great deal! I have seen Jenn's jetty shots before in long exposure so that made the figure the key to the difference but still not that original according to 1x commenters.

So how do you achieve originality in landscapes? If you look at the recently published images it seems to me these factors are significant:

- technical excellence - that does not mean no noise, just no noise if it does not support the image; I think this one is a given
- unusual perspective - still difficult to be original there, low angle with something interesting in the foreground is the most common approach
- weather - this is a big one as extremes of the weather always make the photo look more interesting but not easy to control! Auroras, storms are great.
- light - another given, related to the weather and critical to the interest of the photo; can be significantly exploited in PP (I mean light can make an otherwise common image uncommon)
- strong mood - this is often achieved by using B&W, less color make image look less busy and more gloomy
- composition - strong composition is another given, there should be a single point of interest (I call it minimalism in photography in its broadest sense)
- subject - a wrecked ship or a dead tree usually help, for some reason happy images are much less liked :/ Unusual landscape features help a lot.
- textures - this why long exposure is popular as it changes the texture of the water and can change the clouds too; these help create a mood
- very skillful editing - PP can almost entirely alter the image but there is a limit to making unoriginal shot original

These are my unorganized thoughts. As I am keen to improve my landscapes I keep on thinking about this. What other factors matter to make the landscape shot original and different from millions of other similar shots?

PS Just realized one more thing - a lot of the color landscapes recently published at 1x are almost duotones, this must be a way to reducing "busyiness" (being busy!)

Message edited by author 2011-06-28 17:12:02.