| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/02/2011 06:25:18 AM |
Originally posted by Simms:
to most voters who spend no more than 4 or 5 seconds on a shot - this is a shot of your kid messing around shoehorned into the challenge - and they scored it as such.
|
You hit the nail right on the head.
Message edited by author 2013-07-09 04:18:26. |
|
|
|
11/02/2011 06:19:01 AM |
I voted, and I was one of your low votes.
I voted it such because the desat felt contrived and what was left seemed overdone, as well. Very artificial looking.
I'm not normally terribly fond of photos of children, so there's gotta be a significant connection to a moment conveyed, and I don't particularly get that here. There is no context conveyed, which is crucial for a successful candid. I would also question the "candidness" of this one, but that's a whole different argument. It's also in the awkward overlap between sharp and purposefully blurred. It's soft, but it looks soft not because you wanted it that way but because that's all you could do, unintentional, unconnected to the feeling you're trying to give the viewer. |
|
 Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
11/02/2011 06:16:10 AM |
I agree with previous comment - selective desaturation is a really gimmicky processing technique that rarely, if ever, enhances a photo. I know I have done my fair share of it whilst building my skills and I look back on those images today and shudder!
Regarding the actual subject of the image - pictures of our children, unless very well done, rarely score well - it may be a great shot to you as you have a connection with the child, and we all know that photos of our own kids are the best in the world! Sadly other people don`t have that connection with your subject and thus its sadly overlooked. Thats probably why this shot scored badly - to most voters who spend no more than 4 or 5 seconds on a shot - this is a shot of your kid messing around shoehorned into the challenge - and they scored it as such.
I am surprised you didn`t get negative comments on the eyes though.
Hope this helps! |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
11/02/2011 06:08:26 AM |
| I didn't vote on this challenge (new to the site), but to me, the selective saturation processing feels odd for a 'candid' photo. Also, giantmike's comments apply here. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
11/02/2011 06:04:00 AM |
I voted this down almost exclusively because of the eyes. Selective saturation (to me) needs to be done in a way that helps tell a story or convey a message. In this photo, I just see it as gimmicky.
Since the eyes are the most powerful part of a facial portrait, this effect completely removes that power and turns me away. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
Comments Made During the Challenge  |
|
|
10/30/2011 06:27:41 PM |
| Nice one, i thought of the Exorcist initially. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
10/30/2011 03:13:46 PM |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
10/26/2011 12:39:37 AM |
| Redrum! Eye's are creepy. |
|
| Photographer found comment helpful. |
|
|
10/26/2011 12:31:40 AM |
|
| 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: 04/03/2025 02:06:13 PM EDT.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
