Image |
Comment |
| 03/01/2007 01:55:58 AM |
|
| 02/28/2007 10:04:01 PM |
|
| 02/25/2007 03:56:17 AM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 02/24/2007 08:58:41 PM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 02/23/2007 04:20:43 PM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 02/23/2007 10:04:30 AM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 02/23/2007 08:51:37 AM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 02/23/2007 03:39:11 AM |
|
| 02/19/2007 01:36:11 PM |
Reading the Good Bookby doug61853Comment by posthumous: Greetings from the Critique Club!
Scoring is just a measure of how well you pleased DPC voters, and nothing else. I would say this scored over 5 because it clearly met the challenge. The reason it didn't score higher is because for a set-up shot like this, the DPC voter expects a Studio Shot, whereas this is more like a candid, with natural light (with blown highlights) and a soft focus (but not out of focus, imho). Ironically (though it's an irony that is now second nature to me), those are the very things I like about this photo. The natural light is much more attractive and interesting than studio light, and the shadows create strong diagonal shapes that add interest to the picture. I also think that it is the "candid" genre that caused you to put the book "upside down". In a candid shot, we're always looking at someone else, and when you look at someone else's book, it is always upside down! In a studio shot, everything belongs to the viewer. That is why most studio shots are dull. There is no tension between viewer and object. |
Photographer found comment helpful. |
| 02/12/2007 05:55:50 PM |
|
Photographer found comment helpful. |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/04/2025 03:54:34 AM EDT.