| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/16/2013 02:25:27 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by nygold:
Isn't that pretty much a Free study? |
Somehow they rationalize otherwise. But yes, yes it is - next they'll advocate lifting the date restrictions too, and why bother with the whole 'digital' thing? Does anyone even use that word anymore?
;)
Seriously though, yeah, they are advocating for a very loosely constrained near-free study - it's not quite the same, since you really should get some 'feel' of whatever the subject is, without the subject being present. Like I said, I too enter these types of shots, but I never really think they should do well.
Maybe it's time for a new classification of challenge?
Challenge suggestions might include: (please do go suggest your own version this any of if this actually appeals to you)
"Impressions of a warm day" (Take a picture that gives the viewer the feeling of a warm day)
"Impressions of life" (Convey the idea of life in an impressionist method of photography or processing)
"Impressionism - Rural photo" (Take a photo that conveys the idea of "Rural" in the prescribed style)
"Indistinct - Red" (Take a photo that showcases the color red and is somewhat or entirely indistinct)
"Creative Interpretation: Streets" (Take a photo that is extremely tangential, but still conveys the idea of "Streets")
"Interpretation of Portrait" (Shoehorn your best here - be boring and enter a portrait if you must)
"Not a bird, but still a bird" (Show the viewer a bird that is not a bird)
"Decay Rock Not Chainsaw Lizard Pie Egg Yolk" (We're crazy over here, it's fun, show us you belong with the group by entering the most incoherently schizophrenic photo you can possibly manage) |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 02:29:09 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by Cory:
...
My issue is with the attitude that "this is great art and should be appreciated"... I can appreciate the hell out of it, and still happily drop a 3 or a 4 on an image. |
Who are you quoting? |
Paraphrasing.
You were just saying, more or less, exactly this right? That you think people should reward the shots that don't conform more readily than they currently do? Perhaps I've misunderstood you, but I think that I agree with you that creative interpretation is a great thing, however we diverge on what role that should play in DPC. For me, it's the spice of challenges, just a little is fun, and enjoyable - but like spice in a dish at an eatery, you aren't likely to say "wow, that was some awesome black pepper on my grilled chicken breast and risotto" - it might happen sometimes, but it'd better really be some mind-blowing pepper.
My point is this - you can, and should, enter what you enjoy shooting and love - but it's also important to recognize that only rarely to personal styles/preferences line up well with DPC's norms, so to think that images like this somehow *should* score well isn't particularly rational. |
Wow! I said no such thing. And, you are taking my thoughts and opinions and twisting them into something completely different. I wasn't saying anything like what you placed in quotes. I resent the obfuscation. |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by hahn23:
It's not limited to a literal fork in the road. There are many scenes which are figuratively a "fork in the road". Use your imaginations. Only conform to the literal if scores are more important than your photographic art. |
I agree -- but usually the challenge description isn't so specific:
"Could be the spot where one road diverges into two -- or a still life, with a fork creatively posed on the pavement. Or both. You decide"
I think you're asking for trouble if you ignore it. |
The term "fork in the road" is an idiom. "Fork in the road" means a time when it is necessary to make a decision. A "fork in the road" is also a metaphor, based on a literal expression, for a deciding moment in life or history when a major choice of options is required.
I would score highly an image representing a creative interpretation of the idiom or metaphor. I would score lower an image which only takes the phrase at its simplistic, literal interpretation.
The challenge description says, in part, "Could be the spot where one road diverges into two..." The term "road" is not necessarily intended to be taken literally. We will all miss a lot if the phrase, "Fork in the road" does not inspire images and concepts which take flight. |
Originally posted by hahn23:
[...] because score doesn't matter to me. I currently have a 3, a 4 and a 6 going in challenges in the voting phase. So, from one perspective, I'm screwing up. From another perspective, I'm photographing the things I want to photograph that meet the challenge in my mind.
I would really like it if DPC challenges were broadly interpreted and the emphasis returned to assessment of the photographic excellence (artistic and/or technical) of images. |
As I said, perhaps I've misunderstood, but that is how the above ends up reading to my mind. |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 02:32:44 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by nygold:
Isn't that pretty much a Free study? |
No.
Take the "Green" challenge, for example. There will be some who will say it MUST be the color "green". To the narrow minded, any subject not colored "green" will be DNMC. Because that's what their image is and that's what their clique said the challenge is all about. That's the kind of limited thinking to which I object. There are many meanings and interpretations of "GREEN". |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 02:33:51 PM · #29 |
I get it, who ever takes the prettiest picture wins.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 02:35:13 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Cory:
...
As I said, perhaps I've misunderstood, but that is how the above ends up reading to my mind. |
Don't paraphrase. You misunderstand and misrepresent. |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 02:46:13 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by nygold:
Isn't that pretty much a Free study? |
No.
Take the "Green" challenge, for example. There will be some who will say it MUST be the color "green". To the narrow minded, any subject not colored "green" will be DNMC. Because that's what their image is and that's what their clique said the challenge is all about. That's the kind of limited thinking to which I object. There are many meanings and interpretations of "GREEN". |
When the subject isn't about the color green it's clearly stated in the description.
Judging by the past challenges titled "Green" it was about the color.
Message edited by author 2013-05-16 14:47:47. |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 02:52:09 PM · #32 |
There is nothing wrong with going out of the box BUT if you go out of the box and you don't WOW the crowd your score will suffer.
Sometimes there is a fine line between refreshingly different and head scratching homework.
Message edited by author 2013-05-16 14:52:57. |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 03:34:59 PM · #33 |
| If you don't like my DPC, you don't have to participate in it. (ah, I love the irony) |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 03:37:30 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
I see Richard's point- and I agree,
one could take the stance that artists don't take things literally, in the way that craftsmen do.
We should strive to be artists, not craftsmen, as a result, could be the moral of that story.
Back to the text- can we really think that the challenge is about either a literal fork or a literal road junction? It has to be
figurative- not literal. It would be lousy to take such a soaring metaphor and limit it to cutlery.
assuming that people can vote the way they want, I would certainly caution voters away from being too literal. If you want to give higher marks to someone who creatively puts a fork in the middle of two roads, so be it, go for it- but in the case of ambiguity, don't turn all DNMC literal. |
I assumed it was open ended -- until I read the description. He pretty much said one literal description or the other literal description or both. It would have been a better challenge if there was no description. A much better challenge if there was no description. But we've pretty much been limited by a pretty straight forward description. You can wiggle around all you want, but there's only a tiny big of wiggle room there.
So there is a challenge, and the challenge is to be creative in such a limited field. It would have been MUCH easier to shoot without a description, and would have yielded a much more interesting challenge. But now the challenge is -- how are you going to be different and interesting within these limitations? It's easier to think outside of the box when there is no box. Let's see if you can think outside of the box when you're locked inside of one, strapped in a straight jacket.
(ok, just saw nygold had an out of the box reference...)
Anyway, the point is, sometimes someone comes along with something absolutely brilliant and unexpected while still meeting the challenge. I think that's where the true genius lies in such a limiting challenge like this. Originality is going to be very difficult.
That being said, green has many meanings, and all are valid. :)
Message edited by author 2013-05-16 15:39:12.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 03:52:31 PM · #35 |
Golly, I'm laughing so hard I fell out of my lazyboy. I tried to write a challenge description that couldn't be parsed. Tight. Simple. Where DNMC would be clear. Oh, dear.
But you know the idea of a series of challenges where there is no description, just a cryptic concept title, would be a fun change. Examples:
Bad Hair
Sugar Coma
Empty Nest
Dead End
Freakin' Hilarious
Blown Away
Baby Daddy
Fast Food
Big Kahuna
Bad Dog |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 03:55:52 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
I see Richard's point- and I agree,
one could take the stance that artists don't take things literally, in the way that craftsmen do.
We should strive to be artists, not craftsmen, as a result, could be the moral of that story.
Back to the text- can we really think that the challenge is about either a literal fork or a literal road junction? It has to be
figurative- not literal. It would be lousy to take such a soaring metaphor and limit it to cutlery.
assuming that people can vote the way they want, I would certainly caution voters away from being too literal. If you want to give higher marks to someone who creatively puts a fork in the middle of two roads, so be it, go for it- but in the case of ambiguity, don't turn all DNMC literal. |
I assumed it was open ended -- until I read the description. He pretty much said one literal description or the other literal description or both. It would have been a better challenge if there was no description. A much better challenge if there was no description. But we've pretty much been limited by a pretty straight forward description. You can wiggle around all you want, but there's only a tiny big of wiggle room there.
So there is a challenge, and the challenge is to be creative in such a limited field. It would have been MUCH easier to shoot without a description, and would have yielded a much more interesting challenge. But now the challenge is -- how are you going to be different and interesting within these limitations? It's easier to think outside of the box when there is no box. Let's see if you can think outside of the box when you're locked inside of one, strapped in a straight jacket.
(ok, just saw nygold had an out of the box reference...)
Anyway, the point is, sometimes someone comes along with something absolutely brilliant and unexpected while still meeting the challenge. I think that's where the true genius lies in such a limiting challenge like this. Originality is going to be very difficult.
That being said, green has many meanings, and all are valid. :) |
+1
And a quotable quote "It's easier to think outside the box when there is no box." |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 04:07:36 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
I see Richard's point- and I agree,
one could take the stance that artists don't take things literally, in the way that craftsmen do.
We should strive to be artists, not craftsmen, as a result, could be the moral of that story.
Back to the text- can we really think that the challenge is about either a literal fork or a literal road junction? It has to be
figurative- not literal. It would be lousy to take such a soaring metaphor and limit it to cutlery.
assuming that people can vote the way they want, I would certainly caution voters away from being too literal. If you want to give higher marks to someone who creatively puts a fork in the middle of two roads, so be it, go for it- but in the case of ambiguity, don't turn all DNMC literal. |
I assumed it was open ended -- until I read the description. He pretty much said one literal description or the other literal description or both. It would have been a better challenge if there was no description. A much better challenge if there was no description. But we've pretty much been limited by a pretty straight forward description. You can wiggle around all you want, but there's only a tiny big of wiggle room there.
So there is a challenge, and the challenge is to be creative in such a limited field. It would have been MUCH easier to shoot without a description, and would have yielded a much more interesting challenge. But now the challenge is -- how are you going to be different and interesting within these limitations? It's easier to think outside of the box when there is no box. Let's see if you can think outside of the box when you're locked inside of one, strapped in a straight jacket.
(ok, just saw nygold had an out of the box reference...)
Anyway, the point is, sometimes someone comes along with something absolutely brilliant and unexpected while still meeting the challenge. I think that's where the true genius lies in such a limiting challenge like this. Originality is going to be very difficult.
That being said, green has many meanings, and all are valid. :) |
I defer to you Wendy, because you are very talented and creative- and you understand the way challenges work. Alas, we shall wait until there is no box, or at least a bigger one, or one made of cardboard... |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 04:19:57 PM · #38 |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 04:56:02 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Does this work? |
No. Fork it! :) |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 05:06:25 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
I would score lower an image which only takes the phrase at its simplistic, literal interpretation. |
Oh boy, now that's rich.
So just because YOU (and a few others like you) don't agree with something, you take it upon yourself to punish everybody who actually does exactly what is asked of them? Not because the photo is bad, but because it delivers what it was supposed to deliver, instead of what YOUR ideal interpretation of it is.
Heaven help the bride who might decide to hire you to shoot her wedding. I guess she'd only get a few mountains, cloud formations and a photo of a little pebble, because that is what YOU feel presents a marriage/wedding best.
Wow. I hope my tongue won't start bleeding from all the biting on it that I'm doing right now. |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 05:28:47 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Beetle:
Originally posted by hahn23:
I would score lower an image which only takes the phrase at its simplistic, literal interpretation. |
Oh boy, now that's rich.
So just because YOU (and a few others like you) don't agree with something, you take it upon yourself to punish everybody who actually does exactly what is asked of them? Not because the photo is bad, but because it delivers what it was supposed to deliver, instead of what YOUR ideal interpretation of it is.
Heaven help the bride who might decide to hire you to shoot her wedding. I guess she'd only get a few mountains, cloud formations and a photo of a little pebble, because that is what YOU feel presents a marriage/wedding best.
Wow. I hope my tongue won't start bleeding from all the biting on it that I'm doing right now. |
+1 Amen.
People would never act like this in real life. |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 05:51:14 PM · #42 |
The mountain air is thin what do you expect. ..
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 05:51:15 PM · #43 |
Dp
Message edited by author 2013-05-16 17:52:22.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 05:56:02 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by nygold:
Originally posted by Beetle:
Originally posted by hahn23:
I would score lower an image which only takes the phrase at its simplistic, literal interpretation. |
Oh boy, now that's rich.
So just because YOU (and a few others like you) don't agree with something, you take it upon yourself to punish everybody who actually does exactly what is asked of them? Not because the photo is bad, but because it delivers what it was supposed to deliver, instead of what YOUR ideal interpretation of it is.
Heaven help the bride who might decide to hire you to shoot her wedding. I guess she'd only get a few mountains, cloud formations and a photo of a little pebble, because that is what YOU feel presents a marriage/wedding best.
Wow. I hope my tongue won't start bleeding from all the biting on it that I'm doing right now. |
+1 Amen.
People would never act like this in real life. |
Oh for cripesake people! It's a perfectly reasonable statement. Let's just rephrase it slightly; "I will score higher those images that show some creative thinking in their approach to the topic."
Anyone have a beef with THAT?
R.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 07:57:41 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by nygold:
Originally posted by Beetle:
Originally posted by hahn23:
I would score lower an image which only takes the phrase at its simplistic, literal interpretation. |
Oh boy, now that's rich.
So just because YOU (and a few others like you) don't agree with something, you take it upon yourself to punish everybody who actually does exactly what is asked of them? Not because the photo is bad, but because it delivers what it was supposed to deliver, instead of what YOUR ideal interpretation of it is.
Heaven help the bride who might decide to hire you to shoot her wedding. I guess she'd only get a few mountains, cloud formations and a photo of a little pebble, because that is what YOU feel presents a marriage/wedding best.
Wow. I hope my tongue won't start bleeding from all the biting on it that I'm doing right now. |
+1 Amen.
People would never act like this in real life. |
Oh for cripesake people! It's a perfectly reasonable statement. Let's just rephrase it slightly; "I will score higher those images that show some creative thinking in their approach to the topic."
Anyone have a beef with THAT?
R. |
There's a definite difference between the two statements. I prefer Bear's statement. One is punishing someone for meeting a challenge. One is rewarding someone for going above and beyond the challenge.
I'd rather keep an open mind and not decide to purposely mark things down ahead of time, but take everything in, and see how it hits when I see the photo. I've seen photos that are trite, that somehow still manage to blow my socks off. Something makes them incredibly special, and they stand out, even though it's a pattern that we've all seen before. Sometimes someone throws in something that's so out of the box, but when you see it you think -- "wow... how could the whole world miss that?? It's so freakin' obvious, and it's just so right."
We can have differences between whether we think a challenge description is obvious. But deciding ahead of time to punish people for shooting a straight forward shot (or a figurative), instead of judging the shot on it's own merit, seems a self fulfilling prophecy. "I already know that literal (figurative) shots stink, so I'm voting them down."
Please, no.
Message edited by author 2013-05-16 20:24:22.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 07:59:36 PM · #46 |
I would score lower an image which does not include a knife, fork, spoon, and road.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 08:24:00 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
I would score lower an image which does not include a knife, fork, spoon, and road. |
With roadkill, of course.
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 08:35:23 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
I would score lower an image which does not include a knife, fork, spoon, and road. |
With roadkill, of course. |
Bonus points if it's a squirrel.
 |
|
|
|
05/16/2013 08:43:28 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
I would score lower an image which does not include a knife, fork, spoon, and road. |
With roadkill, of course. |
Bonus points if it's a squirrel.
|
NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
05/16/2013 08:44:21 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
I would score lower an image which does not include a knife, fork, spoon, and road. |
With roadkill, of course. |
Bonus points if it's a squirrel.
|
NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
they're so much better cooked fresh.
|
|
