| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/20/2009 04:40:47 AM · #26 |
| Maybe the trolls do not understand glamour, or is it the rest of us...? |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 04:57:22 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by BrianR:
Maybe the trolls do not understand glamour, or is it the rest of us...? |
Well it makes you wonder eh lol |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 05:11:45 AM · #28 |
Votes: 27
Views: 42
Avg Vote: 4.1852
Comments: 1
I entered this more to make a statment than anything else. And of course I'll finsih low because I refused to shoot a scantly-clad half-starved model. Anyway, to me it potrays glamour in a different sense. Reading the entry guidlines it didn't just say potrait, it also said - a shot that conveys glamour. But oh well, the voters obivously didn't read that xD
(Not being offensive to anyone, its just been a bad day all over Lol) |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 05:42:56 AM · #29 |
This isn't aimed at you in any way Jemma but I think this challenge could be influenced by what you might call political voters.
By which I mean people who don't care to see women portrayed in this way and therefore allocate low votes on that basis rather than
voting on theimage as a standalone piece of work.
|
|
|
|
05/20/2009 06:50:06 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by FrozenMoments:
scantly-clad half-starved model. |
nicely said Frozen :D, I second that |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 07:00:16 AM · #31 |
Votes: 35
Views: 77
Avg Vote: 5.4000
Comments: 2
Favorites: 0
|
|
|
|
05/20/2009 07:04:04 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
This isn't aimed at you in any way Jemma but I think this challenge could be influenced by what you might call political voters.
By which I mean people who don't care to see women portrayed in this way and therefore allocate low votes on that basis rather than
voting on theimage as a standalone piece of work. |
So they're thinking we women are FORCED to pose this way and smile? *rolleyes* Some women (not including me) ENJOY being glamorous and posing.
Interesting concept that some would be against dressing up and smiling... |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 07:20:37 AM · #33 |
Well i was doing ok but since getting the 2 I'm not recovering
Votes: 38
Views: 94
Avg Vote: 6.0789
Comments: 1 |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 07:29:15 AM · #34 |
I think of shooting for challenges the same way I would think of shooting for a buyer. If the buyer says "I want a picture of The White House" I would not think: on moral principles I refuse to shoot a picture of The White House and so I will shoot a picture of any old white house instead. And if I did, I then get mad at when the buyer refuses to pay me for the work? No. I would not only shoot THE White House, but I would make the very best image of The White House I could possibly manage.
If it were a moral issue, rather than offer the buyer work that does not meet his expectations I would simply pass on the job and let another photograher create the image.
My 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
05/20/2009 07:59:16 AM · #35 |
No offence taken, I'm actually not voting at all in this challenge I've decided, because as you said my votes may portray the way I feel about the challenge entries.
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
This isn't aimed at you in any way Jemma but I think this challenge could be influenced by what you might call political voters.
By which I mean people who don't care to see women portrayed in this way and therefore allocate low votes on that basis rather than
voting on theimage as a standalone piece of work. |
|
|
|
|
05/20/2009 08:10:36 AM · #36 |
I know what you are saying through this, but prehaps you missunderstood my comment. I did not enter a photo of a model, my entry was of something else I thought potrayed glamour. I would understand the comment and low scores If this had been a Glamour Photography challenge, but it was not. Straight from the details: Shoot a glamour portrait or a shot that conveys glamour.
I made a point of looking up the dictionary on the word glamour, to put it one dictionary's words: Quality that somebody or something possesses by virtue of seeming much more exciting, romantic, or fashionable than ordinary people or things
Reading this I would say that a handbag, piece of jewellery, shoe etc can be just as glamorous as a photograph of a person, it just depends on how someone looks at it.
My comment was more so stating that just because I did not shoot a human, it does not mean my photograph cannot portray glamour.
But then again, maybe I should come back and explain what I mean later when I have a clear head and can say what I mean a little more logically.
(And please, don't take this the wrong way, simply trying to make what I said before a little clearer.)
Originally posted by idnic:
I think of shooting for challenges the same way I would think of shooting for a buyer. If the buyer says "I want a picture of The White House" I would not think: on moral principles I refuse to shoot a picture of The White House and so I will shoot a picture of any old white house instead. And if I did, I then get mad at when the buyer refuses to pay me for the work? No. I would not only shoot THE White House, but I would make the very best image of The White House I could possibly manage.
If it were a moral issue, rather than offer the buyer work that does not meet his expectations I would simply pass on the job and let another photograher create the image.
My 2 cents. |
Message edited by author 2009-05-20 08:11:51. |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 08:20:50 AM · #37 |
| I understood what you mean't Jemma and I agree with you that it was not necessary to shoot a person in order to meet the challenge, and in fact by not doing so you have given us more variety to look at. |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 08:39:32 AM · #38 |
Coming in around where anticipated so far.
Votes: 41
Views: 68
Avg Vote: 5.3171
Comments: 0 |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 08:46:59 AM · #39 |
6.0789 to 5.9487 in one vote.
Many thanks indeed to the kind voter who jut gave me a 1 very clever I hope he or she feels very satisfied |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 08:53:45 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Many thanks indeed to the kind voter who jut gave me a 1 very clever I hope he or she feels very satisfied |
I am am believer in the concept of an electric shock for a vote of 1 or 2 without the courtesy of an explanation. Can we do that with HTML, or would such a feature require the use of Javascript? |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 08:56:29 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Many thanks indeed to the kind voter who jut gave me a 1 very clever I hope he or she feels very satisfied |
I am am believer in the concept of an electric shock for a vote of 1 or 2 without the courtesy of an explanation. Can we do that with HTML, or would such a feature require the use of Javascript? |
Or maybe use the "WE KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE" cookie lol |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 09:00:01 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Many thanks indeed to the kind voter who jut gave me a 1 very clever I hope he or she feels very satisfied |
I am am believer in the concept of an electric shock for a vote of 1 or 2 without the courtesy of an explanation. Can we do that with HTML, or would such a feature require the use of Javascript? |
Not sure, but if we could try it in the following pseudo code:
If ($lowvoter == regular_offender && $comment_box == empty)
then {
volts == supercharged
}
else {
volts == enoughtohurtandmakevoterthinkbetternexttime
}
endif
Only joking although it might be a nice experiment haha |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 09:41:11 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by FrozenMoments:
Straight from the details: Shoot a glamour portrait or a shot that conveys glamour.
I made a point of looking up the dictionary on the word glamour, to put it one dictionary's words: Quality that somebody or something possesses by virtue of seeming much more exciting, romantic, or fashionable than ordinary people or things
Reading this I would say that a handbag, piece of jewellery, shoe etc can be just as glamorous as a photograph of a person, it just depends on how someone looks at it.
My comment was more so stating that just because I did not shoot a human, it does not mean my photograph cannot portray glamour.
|
That´s perfect,  FrozenMoments!!! Somebody or something much more exciting, romantic, or fashionable than ordinary people or things!!
And the rule is "Shoot a glamour portrait or a shot that conveys glamour"
Period!!
Message edited by author 2009-05-20 09:42:34. |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 10:17:37 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by jotaga:
Originally posted by FrozenMoments:
Straight from the details: Shoot a glamour portrait or a shot that conveys glamour.
I made a point of looking up the dictionary on the word glamour, to put it one dictionary's words: Quality that somebody or something possesses by virtue of seeming much more exciting, romantic, or fashionable than ordinary people or things
Reading this I would say that a handbag, piece of jewellery, shoe etc can be just as glamorous as a photograph of a person, it just depends on how someone looks at it.
My comment was more so stating that just because I did not shoot a human, it does not mean my photograph cannot portray glamour.
|
That´s perfect, FrozenMoments!!! Somebody or something much more exciting, romantic, or fashionable than ordinary people or things!!
And the rule is "Shoot a glamour portrait or a shot that conveys glamour"
Period!! |
I think an excellent still life of some jewlery, nice bag, shoes, etc... Would score well, at least it would have from me. It would just have to be a GREAT shot to have inanimate objects compete with the human form. That being said, I shot a person but this is the kind of stuff i like to shoot for fun, sometimes a little pay, anyhow. I never expect to score well on this site but I would certainly have been a little more annoyed than usual if this didn't do well.
Votes: 50
Views: 129
Avg Vote: 6.8600
Comments: 4
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 05/20/09 10:17 am
Message edited by author 2009-05-20 10:22:43. |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 10:38:06 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by trnqlty:
Originally posted by jotaga:
Originally posted by FrozenMoments:
Straight from the details: Shoot a glamour portrait or a shot that conveys glamour.
I made a point of looking up the dictionary on the word glamour, to put it one dictionary's words: Quality that somebody or something possesses by virtue of seeming much more exciting, romantic, or fashionable than ordinary people or things
Reading this I would say that a handbag, piece of jewellery, shoe etc can be just as glamorous as a photograph of a person, it just depends on how someone looks at it.
My comment was more so stating that just because I did not shoot a human, it does not mean my photograph cannot portray glamour.
|
That´s perfect, FrozenMoments!!! Somebody or something much more exciting, romantic, or fashionable than ordinary people or things!!
And the rule is "Shoot a glamour portrait or a shot that conveys glamour"
Period!! |
I think an excellent still life of some jewlery, nice bag, shoes, etc... Would score well, at least it would have from me. It would just have to be a GREAT shot to have inanimate objects compete with the human form. That being said, I shot a person but this is the kind of stuff i like to shoot for fun, sometimes a little pay, anyhow. I never expect to score well on this site but I would certainly have been a little more annoyed than usual if this didn't do well.
Votes: 50
Views: 129
Avg Vote: 6.8600
Comments: 4
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 05/20/09 10:17 am |
My point is more to the mood of the picture than the subject itself... if the scene (with humans or not) conveys glamour (meaning the excitement, romantic, fashionable or magic feeling), so it is glamorous...
This is not a "portrait x still life" fight... Im just saying that some "portraits" simply are not glamorous, as some "still life" simply are... (the magical, fashionable, romantic feeling...)
|
|
|
|
05/20/2009 10:41:38 AM · #46 |
I've always wanted to do this in a scores thread.
Votes: 56
Views: 147
Avg Vote: 
Comments: 4
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
|
|
|
|
05/20/2009 11:00:43 AM · #47 |
This is a very painful and slow recovery following the vote of 1
Votes: 50
Views: 126
Avg Vote: 6.0400
Comments: 1 |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 11:34:54 AM · #48 |
Votes: 52
Views: 95
Avg Vote: 4.6346
Comments: 2
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Eh...about where I expected it to be. Like a handful of others, I took the "shot that conveys glamour" route and ended up right where I thought I would. But in the end, I like my photo and that's all that matters.
On to the next challenge!! |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 11:35:13 AM · #49 |
Mind you it's moving in the right direction
Votes: 54
Views: 135
Avg Vote: 6.1111
Comments: 2 |
|
|
|
05/20/2009 11:40:12 AM · #50 |
Climbing a little. One critique that assumed this was a model shoot and suggested I should have done something differently. It's doing ok for a "found" shot in challenge that favors staged models and manipulated lighting.
Votes: 56
Views: 98
Avg Vote: 5.3750
Comments: 1 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 03:31:09 PM EDT.
