Choco-what? - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

07/27/2004 01:22:45 AM · #1

Others may be thinking it, but I feel like saying it: I just went through about 50+ images in the new challenge and I'd guess that maybe 2 were in focus. Many people meaning well, but unintentional bad focus just ain't cuttin' it.

Digital Grizzly

Canon PowerShot A10

07/27/2004 01:48:01 AM · #2

Most of the ones that I have voted on (all of them) are in focus. I happen to believe that although this is a competitive web sight/competition, you shouldn't tell people that. in the comment you made it suggests that most of them were blurry. So, if you were in that challenge then you are most likely to have (what you think) is a blury photo. I was in that challenge and I know what it feels like to have my feelings hurt by mean camments. It hurts. so sorry but that is not what I was thinking.

boomer

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

07/27/2004 01:58:27 AM · #3

Gold, if you are finding 96% of the images are out of focus, could it be you need glasses? lol

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

07/27/2004 02:00:36 AM · #4

Originally posted by GoldBerry:

I know you are in Canada ,but do you have to booze to keep warm in July ?

jadin

Nikon D800

07/27/2004 02:00:39 AM · #5

Saying something is out of focus isn't exactly a personal attack. I recommend you not take things so personally grizzly. Most people here are here to learn, and learning that they shot something out of focus is probably something they should know.

As far as GoldBerry is concerned, I don't remember that many being that out of focus. At most I'd say some appear soft due to resizing.

BooZon

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

07/27/2004 02:39:50 AM · #6

I think some of the reason is ppl trying Macro for the first time. We need to encourage ppl to try new things, so I think it's great. Go guys!

Message edited by author 2004-07-27 02:40:06.

Harryg

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

07/27/2004 04:56:04 AM · #7

you are all assuming that this is unintentional. what if people are trying for a different effect. at a recent art exhibition i attended evey single photo was "out of focus" so dont be so quick to critisize until you know what the people are trying to achieve

siggi

Canon EOS-10D

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

07/27/2004 05:12:39 AM · #8

very sharp, sharp, soft, very soft, out of focus.
Some might be going for soft, very soft but you say OOF.

NI makes everything soft/smoot - not OOF.
Focus point can be at the wrong place - retake not always possible.

Kavey

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

07/27/2004 05:16:23 AM · #9

Am not going to comment on whether the entries are out of focus or not... though I didn't find an unusually high proportion that were out of focus in the chocolate challenge. There are some OOF shots in most challenges.

But I do want to comment on the suggestion that hurtful comments should not be made.

Grizzly, whilst I'd agree that there should be no personal attacks and no uneccessary rudeness, one of the central points of this site is for photograpghers to receive comments from a range of viewers that help them understand how they might improve their skills.

Receiving praise is always nice but receiving an accurate assessment of the weaknesses of your entry is even better - because it means you can apply what you learn from it to make the next entry even better.

That's not to say that a photographer must heed every comment they receive - there will always be a range of opinions about the image and their own personal decisions and preferences must rule. I.e. if one commenter says that the DOF is too shallow and another says it's perfect then they will no doubt realise that it's just about taste. However if every commenter tells them the image is too blurry or the lighting is too bright or something, perhaps there is something in it.

Message edited by author 2004-07-27 05:52:13.

Jacko

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

07/27/2004 05:43:53 AM · #10

I'll be most interested in seeing some of this bad focus you're talking about, after the challenge is done.

Originally posted by GoldBerry:

rgordon

Canon PowerShot A70

07/27/2004 06:58:20 AM · #11

Originally posted by Jacko:

I'll be most interested in seeing some of this bad focus you're talking about, after the challenge is done.

Originally posted by GoldBerry:
Others may be thinking it, but I feel like saying it: I just went through about 50+ images in the new challenge and I'd guess that maybe 2 were in focus. Many people meaning well, but unintentional bad focus just ain't cuttin' it.

Indeed. And does "out of focus" mean the entire image, or just parts of it? I mean, do we have to stop using shallow depth of field for submissions because (not necessarily you, GoldBerry) don't get it?

Sigma 28-105mm f/2.8-4.0 Aspherical for Canon

07/27/2004 02:16:40 PM · #12

LOL

I'm confused, I'm not supposed to post my opinion on photos, but it's a-okay for other folks to post personal attacks on moi? Tis sad I say. Nay, down right hypocritical. [hippo-krit-uh-kull]

Now I'm off to push little old ladies off of curbs! *looks* Now where'd I leave my cape and tights...hmmm...

Message edited by author 2004-07-27 14:22:02.

Rooster

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

07/27/2004 02:48:48 PM · #13

I have looked thru all of the shots & many are indeed out of focus. Why do people cry, whine, say their feelings are hurt, when they get honest feedback? Infact, why do people do this when they perceive some faded inference that they are being 'attacked"?

Giving comments on technical merit is NOT an attack. If you think this, than it seems to me that you are not here to learn. If you want everyone to love your shot no matter what it looks like, then show it to a family member or girl/boyfriend. You are bound to get a "oh that's great!" comment.

Harryg

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

07/28/2004 12:20:41 AM · #14

gold berry , you go on about personal attacks, well i would say calling someones work "human excrement" personal. if you cant give contructive critism dont bother

jadin

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

07/28/2004 03:22:04 AM · #15

My concern wasn't that the comment was 'hurtful' or 'too personal', but rather that a 96% OOF percent is a little high. Chances are something is wrong with the viewer than 48 photographers.

Message edited by author 2004-07-28 03:22:26.

07/28/2004 01:52:46 PM · #16

Originally posted by Harryg:

gold berry , you go on about personal attacks, well i would say calling someones work "human excrement" personal. if you cant give contructive critism dont bother

oooo the classic misquote used to serve your own purpose! Actually, I said the object in the photo .resembled human excrement - not that the photo itself was sh*tty, and considering the object which was chocolate, I'd say I was accurate. And I never said I didn't like the photo..it was intended to be a joke. Now, where did I put that little old lady...hmmm....

Message edited by author 2004-07-28 14:03:53.