DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
Challenge Entries
Portfolio Images
This image is not part of a public portfolio.

Photograph Information Photographer's Comments
Challenge: Texture (Classic Editing)
Camera: Canon PowerShot S40
Location: Munich, Germany
Date: Jul 18, 2002
Aperture: f/2.8
ISO: Auto
Shutter: 1/20
Date Uploaded: Jul 21, 2002

Detail of a stone "plaque" (for lack of a better word) on the side of Alter Peter, or the Church of St. Peter in Munich. This plaque is probably over 500 years old. The inscription is in Latin.

Place: 121 out of 218
Avg (all users): 5.1063
Avg (commenters): 5.5000
Avg (participants): 4.9167
Avg (non-participants): 5.4082
Views since voting: 829
Votes: 254
Comments: 35
Favorites: 0

Please log in or register to add your comments!

07/30/2002 11:56:00 AM
Im kinda horrified that so many comments criticise the lack of focus in this picture. The narrow depth of field was clearly intentional in this shot and I, for one, love it. Loads of drama in what could have been a very staid image.
07/29/2002 12:43:00 AM
there were a handful of shots this week that i think just completely went over the head of the people voting on this site. this was one of them. it's one of those things where most people just looked at it and were like "blurry and i don't know what it is" and automatically gave it a 4 or 5. this is a very artistic shot and has a lot of great merits. i gave it an 8, which is very high for me (i only gave 1 shot in this challenge a 9, and no 10s), and i think it deserves another look by everyone who gave it less.

good work.
 Comments Made During the Challenge
07/28/2002 10:07:00 PM
great shot. might benefit from a little more depth of field, but the soft focus in the foreground doesn't bother me too much. great subject and a nice angle. love the muted colors and texture. good work.
07/28/2002 10:42:00 AM
I don't think that a small DOF works well in this challenge, including here.
07/28/2002 09:31:00 AM
depth of field could be better
07/27/2002 11:42:00 PM
I would've made sure the foreground was in focus in this image. Even with that however, it wouldn't be very interesting to me. It would need more context. 4 sjgleah
07/26/2002 02:53:00 PM
I like the angle on this shot and the pull focusing.
07/26/2002 02:17:00 PM
This is such a great idea. Was the blur in the lower right corner intentional? I hope not, I don't like it. A wider depth of field, or backing away just a little might have helped. Are the letters colored? High angle attack shots create nice interest, but also create focal range problems. I think I would have been happy to see this more straight on. 6 Swash
07/26/2002 09:39:00 AM
makes me want desert! 7
07/25/2002 11:27:00 PM
good angle, choice of depth of field.
07/25/2002 09:19:00 PM
Not enough depth of field.
07/25/2002 02:24:00 PM
Shows texture. DOF doesn't work with the blurred bottom. Photo still seems a bit like a wallpaper shot, even with the use of the angle.
07/25/2002 02:19:00 PM
looks like brownies yum! 8
07/25/2002 01:54:00 PM
a bit too close , i would like to be able to read at least one of the words, if its in english
07/24/2002 06:24:00 PM
I tend to like photos that have the focused area in the foreground. Here the foreground is the unfocused, then the focused and then more unfocused.
07/24/2002 04:31:00 PM

Technical Aspects4
Meets Challenge6
Total Score5

For those that are just learning, like me.

Composition: Scoring in this area is based on basic composition of a picture and includes the rule of thirds, balance, cropping, and curved and diagonal lines. Subject matter that does not lend itself to the picture or otherwise unwanted is also considered here.

Originality: Scoring in this area is based on pictures or concepts that I have seen, as well as how much effort you have invested in the picture. Usually a little something that sets it aside from a snapshot. Does it make me want to come back for another look? You know things like that.

Technical Aspects: Focus, exposure, lighting, and other special effects (done by the camera), and post processing are all considered in this category.

Meets Challenge: This is based on my interpretation of if you, have/have not, met the challenge. This is fairly simple but quite important for this site.

There are many sites that can give you assistance in achieving better skills in photography, but I think the best way to learn is to take pictures and show them to other people. Believe me when it is a good one you will know it.

Good luck!

07/24/2002 03:26:00 PM
Neat subject for this challenge. I know probably everyone else is saying it, and you probably already know anyway, but it would be nicer with a bit more depth of field in the foreground. May or may not be within the limits of your camera though.
07/24/2002 02:59:00 PM
Unique subject, technically excellent macro, well composed and great variety of texture, excellent color saturation....10..hokie
07/24/2002 02:30:00 PM
Out of focus to an extent that it spoils the shot for me.
07/24/2002 12:11:00 AM
In Focus - 6, Lighting - 10, Color Levels - 9, DOF - 8 , Interesting Composition - 6, Interesting Subject - 6 >>> Tech Scores = 8, Subject Scores = 6, Final Score = 7, RLS
07/23/2002 01:28:00 PM
okay, where to begin...first off, i like it a lot! i couldn't have done it better. secondly, what a representation of texture. thirdly, great composition
07/23/2002 09:42:00 AM
Too much "fuzziness" for my taste.
07/23/2002 03:00:00 AM
i think the depth of field is a bit shallow, i'd have liked thismore had the front been more in focus
07/23/2002 12:43:00 AM
too much area out of focus
07/22/2002 06:51:00 PM
Almost no depth of field here.
07/22/2002 06:17:00 PM
The lack of DOF in the foreground is distracting,.. but the color and detail is wonderful.
07/22/2002 05:44:00 PM
I find that this has good exposure, but the blur in the foreground is excessive and throws me off. I suggest a higher f/stop for increased DOF and/or get the foreground in focus.
07/22/2002 05:28:00 PM
The blur caused by the DOF in front is distracting. That's the only flaw I see. Other than that it would be a really nice texture photo.
07/22/2002 05:21:00 PM
I think the point of focus would have been better suited to the bottom 1/3 of the image. *5* -balynch
07/22/2002 03:36:00 PM
Not sure what this is.....I like it, interesting, and lots of texture. Cool. Kee
07/22/2002 03:17:00 PM
I think this would have been a really interesting photo with the sharp focus in the foreground rather than in the back... = 5 - jmsetzler
07/22/2002 03:01:00 PM
Is this one of the ten commandments? Would have like to see more of the subject.
07/22/2002 01:42:00 PM
very cool, wish your angle was a tad higher though.... 8
07/22/2002 01:03:00 PM
cool shot, wish the aperture had been shot down a little in this shot, I want to see the foreground in focus for some reason. Still, a great shot!
07/22/2002 12:46:00 AM
Let me guess: brownies with chocolate fudge? :)
Would have liked it more if the foreground had been sharp and then fading out.

Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 08/04/2020 04:29:31 PM EDT.