|
Threads will be shown in descending order for the remainder of this session. To permanently display posts in this order, adjust your preferences.
| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/09/2016 11:16:51 AM · #1 |
|
|
|
11/09/2016 08:57:53 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by Mike:
my point out F--k you is that im tired of every time the rulesets come up is that these whining runts like glad come crawl out of their little cockroach hole and say its not photography... its not photography! if you want competition fine, i get it, make that argument but don't try to disparage editing as diminishing what a photograph is. that has always been my argument, this fake backlash against editing.
fwiw, this place needs to learn better editing precisely for the reason you suggested in in the other thread. people rely on it. kudos for scoring low for shitty processed images that try to get higher scores with gimmicks, i do the same.
we also need stop with the "learning" angle. we all learn differently, some from losing challenges, some from trying something new, etc. |
Two things.
a) Stop calling people names - it's especially ineffective coming from someone with the capacity for literate expression of a soggy tissue.
b) Stop with the crappy straw-man arguments. Nobody said it's not photography. Not one person even hinted at that implication. Nobody suggested, either, that editing somehow diminishes a photograph. What we all did say, repeatedly, is that we want to compete within limitations on an even footing. Good editing enhances photographs; but some forms of editing step far beyond the photographic technique. We want contests that restrict (at least some of) the challenges we participate in to something we actually want to be challenged at - pure photography.
We aren't uninterested in extended editing because we're somehow afraid of it. I for one have worked with photoshop and similar software since I was a teenager, and have professionally edited more photographs in the last decade than I've had hot dinners; I don't need to improve in that, and I simply see no appeal in challenging myself in that. There are, also, many more sites where one can participate in pure photoshop challenges. That's just not what dpchallenge is for, to me, and to many others here.
And yes, agreed, we all learn differently. Except nobody is trying to prevent you from learning by contributing to nebulously-scored extended editing free studies, if you want to; there are plenty of those, and nobody is advocating for their removal. We're advocating for the return of a challenge style that used to be a fundamental staple of this site, when we all first joined, years before you turned up here with your 1000D for the first time, which is what brought many of us here in the first place.
|
|
|
|
11/09/2016 08:45:44 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by riot:
Originally posted by Mike:
photography is a way you let others how you see the world, if its edited or not, so be it.
the big push to get more lax editing rules is because those of us that liked or needed to do more editing to share our images were restricted from doing so, while the minimal lovers always had the ability to share |
I understand that many here see dpchallenge as a means of self-expression, a way to share their vision, and that it isn't about competition for them.
That's fine. I can understand that.
But for many of us, myself included, it is exactly about the competition.
I personally couldn't care less how you see the world. I don't come here to consume your personal artistic vision; it does nothing for me. If I happen to see an interesting photo while I'm here, and can learn something from it, then all the better - but that's not why I come here. I come here to improve my skills, and I do that by being pushed, being challenged, being shown that someone else can do something better than I can.
Competition shows me both that there's scope for improvement, and the direction in which to improve. I come here to enter a challenge against you. I want to enter a contest, to shoot to a specific (and challenging) brief, knowing that you - and every other photographer here - has started with approximately equal opportunities to me in taking their photo for that brief, equipped with similar equipment and software and bound by the same restrictions. That in a competition against me, their advantage or disadvantage is limited only by their relative talent, skill, experience and imagination.
And I want to beat you, knowing that when I've done so, it wasn't because I had better equipment, or better software, or - most importantly - because I "chose" to enter a heavily edited photo while you "chose" to restrict yourself to minimal editing. Because then, when I fail to win, I will actually learn something. I will improve. That is not the case if I spend a day working on the perfect minimal photograph, only to be "beaten" by something I could myself do in photoshop in half an hour - because I'm not here to improve my photoshopping, I'm here to improve my photography. And the limited rulesets, combined with targeted challenges and helpful critique are my vehicle to doing that, and the reason I've kept paying my subscription all these years - even when I've been absent for several at a time.
Without that competition, and without that competition having both a point and an equal footing, this site is worthless to me. That's why I'm uninterested in free studies. It's why I'm mostly uninterested in extended editing challenges. It's why I've been increasingly frustrated by the dilution of enforcement of the "standard" rules recently. And it's why I'm especially uninterested in the self-aggrandising droning of those who try to tell us, as you put it, "F***-you", when we have no interest in participating in contests which are just your vehicle to "let others see how you see the world". Take your precious artistic vision - and your "digital art" - to somewhere like deviantart where they want that kind of thing, and leave dpchallenge.com to those who want an actual digital photography challenge. |
my point out F--k you is that im tired of every time the rulesets come up is that these whining runts like glad come crawl out of their little cockroach hole and say its not photography... its not photography! if you want competition fine, i get it, make that argument but don't try to disparage editing as diminishing what a photograph is. that has always been my argument, this fake backlash against editing.
fwiw, this place needs to learn better editing precisely for the reason you suggested in in the other thread. people rely on it. kudos for scoring low for shitty processed images that try to get higher scores with gimmicks, i do the same.
we also need stop with the "learning" angle. we all learn differently, some from losing challenges, some from trying something new, etc.
Message edited by author 2016-11-09 08:47:36. |
|
|
|
11/09/2016 07:58:25 AM · #4 |
|
|
|
11/09/2016 07:24:23 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Mike:
photography is a way you let others how you see the world, if its edited or not, so be it.
the big push to get more lax editing rules is because those of us that liked or needed to do more editing to share our images were restricted from doing so, while the minimal lovers always had the ability to share |
I understand that many here see dpchallenge as a means of self-expression, a way to share their vision, and that it isn't about competition for them.
That's fine. I can understand that.
But for many of us, myself included, it is exactly about the competition.
I personally couldn't care less how you see the world. I don't come here to consume your personal artistic vision; it does nothing for me. If I happen to see an interesting photo while I'm here, and can learn something from it, then all the better - but that's not why I come here. I come here to improve my skills, and I do that by being pushed, being challenged, being shown that someone else can do something better than I can.
Competition shows me both that there's scope for improvement, and the direction in which to improve. I come here to enter a challenge against you. I want to enter a contest, to shoot to a specific (and challenging) brief, knowing that you - and every other photographer here - has started with approximately equal opportunities to me in taking their photo for that brief, equipped with similar equipment and software and bound by the same restrictions. That in a competition against me, their advantage or disadvantage is limited only by their relative talent, skill, experience and imagination.
And I want to beat you, knowing that when I've done so, it wasn't because I had better equipment, or better software, or - most importantly - because I "chose" to enter a heavily edited photo while you "chose" to restrict yourself to minimal editing. Because then, when I fail to win, I will actually learn something. I will improve. That is not the case if I spend a day working on the perfect minimal photograph, only to be "beaten" by something I could myself do in photoshop in half an hour - because I'm not here to improve my photoshopping, I'm here to improve my photography. And the limited rulesets, combined with targeted challenges and helpful critique are my vehicle to doing that, and the reason I've kept paying my subscription all these years - even when I've been absent for several at a time.
Without that competition, and without that competition having both a point and an equal footing, this site is worthless to me. That's why I'm uninterested in free studies. It's why I'm mostly uninterested in extended editing challenges. It's why I've been increasingly frustrated by the dilution of enforcement of the "standard" rules recently. And it's why I'm especially uninterested in the self-aggrandising droning of those who try to tell us, as you put it, "F***-you", when we have no interest in participating in contests which are just your vehicle to "let others see how you see the world". Take your precious artistic vision - and your "digital art" - to somewhere like deviantart where they want that kind of thing, and leave dpchallenge.com to those who want an actual digital photography challenge.
|
|
|
|
11/06/2016 02:21:37 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
...
BTW, I don't see a November FS on the board. |
Not sure about yesterday, but there is one today! |
|
|
|
11/05/2016 10:39:12 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by RamblinR:
Originally posted by jagar:
I still don't understand why we have an expert free study and not a minimal, both would we good but having one without the other isnt really fair on those who are more minimal in their approach to photography. |
so we could do these alternately. One fortnight expert next foertnight minimal. Solved |
That sounds fair too. Either way.
BTW, I don't see a November FS on the board. |
|
|
|
11/05/2016 12:01:23 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
. . . in-camera to draw on, well... I'm sure I'm not the only one...
I guess my point is that kind of by definition Free Studies are there to make happier the people who want to be able to mine their monthly (or yearly) archives for pegs that never happened to fit in the challenge holes. That doesn't seem to be a natural match for Minimal editing, though this (of course) is just my personal opinion. On the other hand, It seems reasonable to have a "no topic" Minimal challenge every so often, with the new 2-week submission period, and we've got our first one of those right now/ Acceptable compromise? |
+ |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 11:14:02 PM · #9 |
The thing of it is, in the monthly Free Studies the "rationale", or the "gestalt", is that as the 4 weeks we you cull our work for stuff that we like that didn't mesh with any challenges, and then we polish that up and put it in. Most of us, I think, don't usually go out "shooting for" the Free Studies. But, basically, shooting Minimal is a conscious exercise. We have to plan for it and execute it. It's not just a matter of shooting RAW+JPG, either; the JPG parameters need tweaking in-camera, where we'd normally do that in RAW. So it gets sort of obtrusive, it makes the shooting process less seamless. At least for me. And when you consider that I've got like 30 years of experience getting color transparencies right in-camera to draw on, well... I'm sure I'm not the only one...
I guess my point is that kind of by definition Free Studies are there to make happier the people who want to be able to mine their monthly (or yearly) archives for pegs that never happened to fit in the challenge holes. That doesn't seem to be a natural match for Minimal editing, though this (of course) is just my personal opinion. On the other hand, It seems reasonable to have a "no topic" Minimal challenge every so often, with the new 2-week submission period, and we've got our first one of those right now/ Acceptable compromise? |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 09:34:02 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by jagar:
I still don't understand why we have an expert free study and not a minimal, both would we good but having one without the other isnt really fair on those who are more minimal in their approach to photography. |
so we could do these alternately. One fortnight expert next foertnight minimal. Solved |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 04:01:46 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Elaine:
To all who love the minimal challenges - why not get the very best shot you can out of your camera, then if it is not good enough to compete do a little editing. You are still challenging yourself to get the settings right, but are not limiting the rest of us. You will not need to spend a lot of time editing, so it will not be time intensive. There is never (that I can think of) a time in the real world that you would not be able to do a little editing. |
The point is not the competing, but the exercise, the companioning exercise, the striving for the possible within limits. Also in fact we know that, like the making of many books, the fiddling of many fiddles has no end. And I suspect that most people, minimalists and non, DO try to get "the very best shot" out of our cameras. ALL THE TIME. And I dare also to suspect that most of us, when we do post process, try to achieve the very best. Post processing is not to be sneezed at. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 03:16:56 PM · #12 |
| To all who love the minimal challenges - why not get the very best shot you can out of your camera, then if it is not good enough to compete do a little editing. You are still challenging yourself to get the settings right, but are not limiting the rest of us. You will not need to spend a lot of time editing, so it will not be time intensive. There is never (that I can think of) a time in the real world that you would not be able to do a little editing. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 02:43:31 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by jagar:
I think it's great we are having a minimal FS, it's also great we have extended FSs, let us keep this equality. |
Please everyone bear in mind this is NOT a "Minimal Free Study" in one significant sense; it's a 2-week submission period, not a 1-month submission period. Just in case anyone hadn't noticed... |
You mean like me, sorry. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 02:41:07 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by jagar:
I think it's great we are having a minimal FS, it's also great we have extended FSs, let us keep this equality. |
Please everyone bear in mind this is NOT a "Minimal Free Study" in one significant sense; it's a 2-week submission period, not a 1-month submission period. Just in case anyone hadn't noticed... |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 02:29:07 PM · #15 |
I think it's great we are having a minimal FS, it's also great we have extended FSs, let us keep this equality.
Like many established and renowned photographic etstablishments I am guilty of thinking that over processing a photo just kills the photo and makes it non photogenic in nature, the instant is transformed, distorted and made to look like what one would have wanted to capture but didn't. The golf analogy that I read above just doesn't work, the hole is a moment combined with a place, that can't be had with a fancy club used afterwards.
Message edited by author 2016-11-04 14:31:39. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 01:28:29 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Tiny:
Originally posted by Tiberius:
Wow  Mike! What's wrong with you? I like all my comments, I don't really care about how my pics compare with the others, yet I like minimal.
Just balance them.
And your comment came close to an insult... |
And he used a naughty word. |
fie, fie on 't. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 01:14:57 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Tiberius:
Wow Mike! What's wrong with you? I like all my comments, I don't really care about how my pics compare with the others, yet I like minimal.
Just balance them.
And your comment came close to an insult... |
And he used a naughty word. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 12:52:16 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by rooum:
Personally, I like Minimal and Extended challenges but for different reasons. I like messing about and adding textures getting heavily into the processing side of things and creating something. I also like being restricted to Minimal and walking around catching light and letting things happen. Two different approaches and I get different things out of them. I think there should just be an equal balance of Minimal/Extended to fit around the Standard challenges. Makes sense to me. |
Bingo. I think that describes my feelings too. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 12:49:25 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by rooum:
Personally, I like Minimal and Extended challenges but for different reasons. I like messing about and adding textures getting heavily into the processing side of things and creating something. I also like being restricted to Minimal and walking around catching light and letting things happen. Two different approaches and I get different things out of them. I think there should just be an equal balance of Minimal/Extended to fit around the Standard challenges. Makes sense to me. |
thank you. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 12:46:40 PM · #20 |
| Thanks for the minimal rule set free study. I believe this is a first. For those inclined, you could enter three free studies in November using three different rule sets. A chance to show off you versatility. Have fun! |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 12:25:50 PM · #21 |
| Personally, I like Minimal and Extended challenges but for different reasons. I like messing about and adding textures getting heavily into the processing side of things and creating something. I also like being restricted to Minimal and walking around catching light and letting things happen. Two different approaches and I get different things out of them. I think there should just be an equal balance of Minimal/Extended to fit around the Standard challenges. Makes sense to me. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 12:00:51 PM · #22 |
Golf's a lot like DPC photography, in a way :-) Why do I say that? Well, in golf we have a constantly-expanding technological capability. We have clubs that are easier to hit, balls that go further, all that sort of stuff. And we have a governing body that has rules, and local bodies that can create local rules. We have most golfers just playing (like most photographers just photograph) and we have a core group of golfers that compete. Amongst the ones that compete, well, they compete under a "common ruleset" that all golfers use, as modified by a competition-specific ruleset that governs the specific competition. So, for one example, there are folks that LIKE to challenge themselves by playing with old-school, wooden-shafted clubs and old-school balls, and there are competitions for those people.
And, even MORE to the point, whilst there are a few people who tend to mouth off and say "my golf is more "real" golf than your golf, closer to the roots of the game", that's a small percentage. Most of us don't care. We just find the level that works for us and tend to concentrate our efforts there. I'm not an especially good golfer; I'm good at some parts of the game and pretty bad at other parts. I just grin and bear it. I tend to play with people like me, and we make teams and compete against others like us, and we all have a good time, except when every now and then we get mad at ourselves and say a bad word. And every now and then we'll all, individually, go somewhere out of our comfort zone to compete, usually not very successfully, just because...
So it's understandable that the "minimal people" want to be better-represented in the challenges. We HAVE tended to do a disproportionate number of Extended Editing challenges recently. We intend to fix that. There's a Minimal challenge up now. We'll run them more often. But let's stop this business of putting down, or attributing motivations to, the folks who DO advocate for one ruleset or the other, please. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 11:32:25 AM · #23 |
Wow Mike! What's wrong with you? I like all my comments, I don't really care about how my pics compare with the others, yet I like minimal.
Just balance them.
And your comment came close to an insult... |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 10:39:51 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Originally posted by Mike:
every challenge can be minimal editing for anyone. why don't people here understand that? |
I don't know. I think they don't want to be forced to compete with (as they see it) people whose main skill is photochopping--not photography.
I think it's more about "real photography." People seem to think that any editing spoils the original & slows them down. That the point of photography is to take the photograph. Period. People seem to feel that post-processing is for covering up for a lack of skill in operating the camera. That photography is about the camera. Period. That a photograph should accurately document reality, even if the reality in front of the camera is totally set up.
|
precisely, they are to worried about how their photographs match up to others, its the same reason people don't like getting critical comments.
photography is a way you let others how you see the world, if its edited or not, so be it.
the big push to get more lax editing rules is because those of us that liked or needed to do more editing to share our images were restricted from doing so, while the minimal lovers always had the ability to share, they just choose to feel inferior about their choice. they told us that its not photography any more, its digital art. well F***-you. Quit projecting your lack of self esteem onto others.
expert isn't better (especially here) its just different. there isn't anything wrong with different unless you don't like being different. IMO, we need more different in photography.
I think unless you are documenting something, pictures need some kind of personalization from the photographer, otherwise what's the point of being a photographer.
Message edited by author 2016-11-04 10:42:40. |
|
|
|
11/04/2016 10:13:00 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by Mike:
every challenge can be minimal editing for anyone. why don't people here understand that? |
I don't know. I think they don't want to be forced to compete with (as they see it) people whose main skill is photochopping--not photography.
I think it's more about "real photography." People seem to think that any editing spoils the original & slows them down. That the point of photography is to take the photograph. Period. People seem to feel that post-processing is for covering up for a lack of skill in operating the camera. That photography is about the camera. Period. That a photograph should accurately document reality, even if the reality in front of the camera is totally set up.
I don't agree with any of this, but it's what I've read in the forums over the years. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 08:32:57 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 08:32:57 PM EDT.
|
