| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/27/2009 07:37:02 AM · #26 |
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 07:43:47 AM · #27 |
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 08:51:15 AM · #28 |
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 10:40:57 AM · #29 |
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 10:56:50 AM · #30 |
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 02:45:26 PM · #31 |
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 02:54:53 PM · #32 |
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 02:55:56 PM · #33 |
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 02:58:38 PM · #34 |
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 03:09:28 PM · #35 |
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 03:21:19 PM · #36 |
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 03:24:39 PM · #37 |
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 04:40:36 PM · #38 |
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 06:37:02 PM · #39 |
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 06:45:43 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by SEG:
Get of your soapbox DNMC police and help out a fellow DPCer up from the ground. |
 |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 12:24:46 AM · #41 |
Hey guys, from some comments I've seen it is clear there are some strong misunderstandings about some of these techniques. I don't claim to be the expert, but in an effort to help clarify some of the techniques I've compiled this list. I tried to use DPC challenge descriptions as much as possible, but sometimes they don't define the technique. These definitions are NOT definitive. I've taken some liberties in editing. Hopefully they help clear up some confusion.
Backlighting - the idea of shining light at an object from behind, or lighting areas behind the object you want to highlight
Blur - the use of blur (out of focus, motion blur, etc.) on a subject of interest in your photo
Bokeh - more of a subjective technique than shallow DOF, it is the quality and "feel" of the out-of-focus foreground or background elements of a photo that is pleasing to the eye
Centered Composition - where the main subject is dead center
Deep DOF - The use of a small aperture diameter (high f-number) to achieve a deep depth-of-field. That is, elements of the image in the foreground and the background will be in sharp focus.
High Key - a mostly bright, low-contrast, image with strong highlights
Leading Lines - lines within an image that leads the eye to another point in the image, or occasionally, out of the image
Light On White - a photo in which the background is white and the subject is predominately a "light" color
Long Exposure - a longer than normal exposure used to create the impact of your image
Low Key - a mostly dark, low-contrast, image with few highlights
Portrait - a photographic form where the face of the subject and its expression are predominant
Motion Panning - panning is a technique used to suggest fast motion and bring out the subject from the rest of the photo
Rule of Thirds - suggests that if you picture imaginary lines dividing your photograph in thirds (horizontally and vertically), your points of interest should be placed on the intersections of those lines
Shallow DOF - The use of a large aperture diameter (low f-number) to achieve a shallow depth-of-field, often used to isolate a subject from its surrounding environment or to make it stand out by blurring the background and foreground but not the main subject.
Soft Focus - enhancing the mood of a photo by virtue of its lack of sharp focus, but not to the degree that it is considered blurry
Stop Action - catching your subject mid-action, with no motion trails
Tilted Angle - making use of an unusual angle to create design or movement in an otherwise ordinary photo
|
|
|
|
10/28/2009 06:49:05 AM · #42 |
I'm starting to get really tired of people who refuse to stay within the general description of the challenge calling those that bust them on it Nazis.
You don't want to conform, fine; you want to express your artistic self, fine; but if you knowingly and willingly flout the description, then live with what you get and quit calling the people who bust you on it names!!!!
You have the parameters......do with it what you want, but accept the responsibility for it, and if you screw around and get hammered, take it like a grownup and quit your whining!
Message edited by author 2009-10-28 06:49:35.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2009 06:56:31 AM · #43 |
| Well i could have entered a better image then the one i submitted but i knew there were a couple of flaws that would have been nitpicked on so i went with another image i wasnt going to entered this challenge with techniques been ask . |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 07:48:44 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'm starting to get really tired of people who refuse to stay within the general description of the challenge calling those that bust them on it Nazis.
You don't want to conform, fine; you want to express your artistic self, fine; but if you knowingly and willingly flout the description, then live with what you get and quit calling the people who bust you on it names!!!!
You have the parameters......do with it what you want, but accept the responsibility for it, and if you screw around and get hammered, take it like a grownup and quit your whining! |
Agreed! What's the name of the website? The challenge is to create something artistic that follows some basic guidelines.
I for one think this particular challenge has been great because the focus is on techniques rather than just topic. I hope we have another one soon. This type of challenge encourages those of us still learning (hopefully all of us) to use techniques we may not use otherwise. |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 10:09:31 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'm starting to get really tired of people who refuse to stay within the general description of the challenge calling those that bust them on it Nazis.
You don't want to conform, fine; you want to express your artistic self, fine; but if you knowingly and willingly flout the description, then live with what you get and quit calling the people who bust you on it names!!!!
You have the parameters......do with it what you want, but accept the responsibility for it, and if you screw around and get hammered, take it like a grownup and quit your whining! |
Fine...
Could we at least agree that alphabetizing the order of techniques has nothing to do with the images message or quality?
Could we agree that the images would look the same with a jumbled order of techniques listed and that it would be No More difficult for the viewer to decipher what was going on in frame, listed in any order?
Could we agree that alphabetizing the order of techniques is arbitrary and serves no purpose?
Could we agree that the photographers would have taken the exact same images using the same techniques and the Challenge outcome/end result might be visually better without that rule in place(assuming a few great images are being penalized for a rule that serves no purpose)?
Could we agree that doing things without good reason or relevance to an outcome of the task at hand, doesn't make sense? For example, alphabetizing Chili ingredients or breakfast foods (bacon, cheese, eggs, ham and orange juice) before preparing them.
I know...I know all great chefs and artists...Picasso, Escoffier alphabetized before creating their masterpieces but they're different (sarcasm).
Personally, I'd rather people be spending their precious few viewing seconds on something more worthy than alphabetization. For the record, I did follow the rule but never for the life of me, thought people would actually give a flying crap about it and factor in something so silly into complex visual realm with bigger, more important fish to fry.
Message edited by author 2009-10-28 10:25:55. |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 10:31:31 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'm starting to get really tired of people who refuse to stay within the general description of the challenge calling those that bust them on it Nazis.
You don't want to conform, fine; you want to express your artistic self, fine; but if you knowingly and willingly flout the description, then live with what you get and quit calling the people who bust you on it names!!!!
You have the parameters......do with it what you want, but accept the responsibility for it, and if you screw around and get hammered, take it like a grownup and quit your whining! |
Fine...
Could we at least agree that alphabetizing the order of techniques has nothing to do with the images message or quality?
Could we agree that the images would look the same with a jumbled order of techniques listed and that it would be No More difficult for the viewer to decipher what was going on in frame, listed in any order?
Could we agree that alphabetizing the order of techniques is arbitrary and serves no purpose?
Could we agree that the photographers would have taken the exact same images using the same techniques and the Challenge outcome/end result might be visually better without that rule in place(assuming a few great images are being penalized for a rule that serves no purpose)?
Could we agree that doing things without good reason or relevance to an outcome of the task at hand, doesn't make sense? For example, alphabetizing Chili ingredients or breakfast foods (bacon, cheese, eggs, ham and orange juice) before preparing them.
I know...I know all great chefs and artists...Picasso, Escoffier alphabetized before creating their masterpieces but they're different (sarcasm).
Personally, I'd rather people be spending their precious few viewing seconds on something more worthy than alphabetization. For the record, I did follow the rule but never for the life of me, thought people would actually give a flying crap about it and factor in something so silly into complex visual realm with bigger, more important fish to fry. |
I can agree that alphabetizing isn't really necessary as long as they are listed.
I can't agree that the photos choosen would be the same. I chose my photo because it clearly shows all three techniques that I wanted to emphasize. |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 10:47:01 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by albc28:
I can agree that alphabetizing isn't really necessary as long as they are listed.
I can't agree that the photos choosen would be the same. I chose my photo because it clearly shows all three techniques that I wanted to emphasize. |
Steve's saying there would be no change if the alphabetizing rule were not in place. He's not complaining about the list-as-title rule, but about the silly requirement that the list be alphabetized. Or, more specifically, that people are actually penalizing images for not alphabetizing the title list.
I have to agree with Steve there, that's BS. That's anal... A little earlier I was under the impression Steve *also* thought it was BS to penalize people for not listing the techniques in their title, and *that* I do not agree with, but the alphabetizing... ridiculous nit to pick...
R. |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 10:53:59 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I have to agree with Steve there, that's BS. That's anal... A little earlier I was under the impression Steve *also* thought it was BS to penalize people for not listing the techniques in their title, and *that* I do not agree with, but the alphabetizing... ridiculous nit to pick...
R. |
I, too, agree. I also think that they likely knew that would cause trouble when they added that rule to the challenge description. |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 10:54:59 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'm starting to get really tired of people who refuse to stay within the general description of the challenge calling those that bust them on it Nazis.
You don't want to conform, fine; you want to express your artistic self, fine; but if you knowingly and willingly flout the description, then live with what you get and quit calling the people who bust you on it names!!!!
You have the parameters......do with it what you want, but accept the responsibility for it, and if you screw around and get hammered, take it like a grownup and quit your whining! |
Thank you Jeb!! Added note...I did not penalize anyone for not alphabetizing...I just point out that they didn't follow instructions, and when specific instructions are given like Jeb said, we all make our choices...I only judged on the quality of the picture...a few didn't even have the right technicals...I didn't even count against that...asked questions but didn't count against that...my voting score was 6.85....that should tell you something....
Message edited by author 2009-10-28 10:59:29. |
|
|
|
10/28/2009 11:49:23 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by albc28:
I can't agree that the photos choosen would be the same. I chose my photo because it clearly shows all three techniques that I wanted to emphasize. |
For the record, I'm the one who suggested listing the Techniques in/as the title ( check here, 8 posts down, in the Challenge Suggestion thread) )
To the quote above: Did the alphabetizing rule change your vision? Not sure I understand...
I hope the absolute best image, that used three techniques the best way, wins and in no way is hindered by that rule.
However, I have decided to penalize anyone that didn't follow that silly, ridiculous, absurd rule by one billionth of a point and then I will round the final score up to the nearest whole number. I mean, this is all about photography...Right? Let's be serious...what's the meaning of art, without alphabetization! (sarcasm)
Message edited by author 2009-10-28 11:52:25. |
|
