| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/17/2011 06:31:29 PM · #1 |
| Do you think boots would be voted down as DNMC? |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 06:35:27 PM · #2 |
| I'd hope not. LOL! You just never know around here though. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 06:36:35 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 06:47:08 PM · #4 |
does DNMC mean "does not meet criteria?"
if yes, I think boots are fine
look at the "Shoes II" challenge, boots were the winner |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 06:51:14 PM · #5 |
| I'm doing boots, so I consider them in. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 06:51:37 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by kichu:
does DNMC mean "does not meet criteria?"
if yes, I think boots are fine
look at the "Shoes II" challenge, boots were the winner |
Well i have a shot that would work if boots are in :)
Message edited by author 2011-02-18 00:13:33. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 07:12:17 PM · #7 |
--
Message edited by author 2011-02-17 19:12:44. |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 08:30:46 PM · #8 |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 10:30:17 PM · #9 |
| Let's hear it for boots! Maybe I can find these again... |
|
|
|
02/17/2011 11:47:20 PM · #10 |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 06:13:52 AM · #11 |
Challenge description: "Photograph shoes without feet inside of them in black and white."
It does NOT say creative in here anywhere this time does it? :-)
No boots, no sandals...show me shoes. :-D |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 09:53:46 AM · #12 |
Also doesn't say there can not be feet in the picture.
Does anyone remember Flanders and Swann duo? They had a song about left rubber boots.
Message edited by author 2011-02-18 09:55:29. |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 03:38:12 PM · #13 |
Oh, so many nuances...
So, it states, "shoes"...does that mean at least 2 shoes without feet in them? would a single lonely shoe be DNMC ?
-mefnj |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 04:29:48 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by mefnj:
Oh, so many nuances...
So, it states, "shoes"...does that mean at least 2 shoes without feet in them? would a single lonely shoe be DNMC ?
-mefnj |
I am comfortable with a loose interpretation. I certainly will not deduct any points for a nice picture of a one shoe (or one boot). Last month was a "Wheels" challenge and a couple pics of a single ferris wheel did quite well. So, perhaps it is not just me. |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 04:37:40 PM · #15 |
DNMC: 1 Shoe Only
DNMC: 2 Shoes shot B&W in color
;x) |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 04:40:02 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by markwiley:
I am comfortable with a loose interpretation. I certainly will not deduct any points for a nice picture of a one shoe (or one boot). Last month was a "Wheels" challenge and a couple pics of a single ferris wheel did quite well. So, perhaps it is not just me. |
I agree with you. I think as long as there is some type of footwear in the photo, in whatever quantity, feet or no feet in the picture (as long as they are not in the footwear)....then it's all good.
I won't deduct points either for boots or sandals, or just one shoe vs two. The point of these challenges is to improve our photography skills. Let's focus on that. |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 06:48:12 PM · #17 |
pity I did it too early  may have to locate the other one |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 07:16:03 PM · #18 |
| I see that the challenge description had been updated. Thanks SC, or whoever did it. |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 08:39:11 PM · #19 |
Dammit. The original shot doesn't have to be taken in black and white does it? Just the phrasing implies it might... "Photograph shoes without feet inside of them in black and white."
And,  EL-ROI, is one shoe really DNMC? Or were you joking?
|
|
|
|
02/18/2011 09:20:58 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Dammit. The original shot doesn't have to be taken in black and white does it? Just the phrasing implies it might... "Photograph shoes without feet inside of them in black and white." |
I don't think the voter has any way to tell whether the image was shot in B&W (converted in the camera) or converted later, and failure to meet the description is not grounds for a DQ absent an "Extra Rule" being posted, so I don't think it matters, unless you just want to take the opportunity to experiment. I plan to shoot in color and convert later ... |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 09:22:34 PM · #21 |
DNMC: They don't look lonely. :P
|
|
|
|
02/18/2011 10:11:42 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
And, EL-ROI, is one shoe really DNMC? Or were you joking? |
The original description may have said something about a single shoe, i can't remember the exact words. But it;s been updated to plural. |
|
|
|
02/18/2011 10:18:22 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Cyberlandz:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
And, EL-ROI, is one shoe really DNMC? Or were you joking? |
The original description may have said something about a single shoe, i can't remember the exact words. But it;s been updated to plural. |
Nope. The only change was "fee" to "feet".
See this thread for the original wording. |
|
|
|
02/19/2011 06:01:00 AM · #24 |
hmm. i wonder what the grammar nazis have to say about this.
i dont know if "shoes" in this case demands multiple shoes. "photograph shoes." "photograph (two|many|some|more than one) shoes." "photograph sports" i wouldnt think would require more than one sport in the shot. "submit entries" multiple entries are disqualifies. "go to your wives" (husbands) poligamy is illegal. all these examples use the plural form of the word but mean the singular. language is so unclear there is genuinely no way we can know what they want... there is an appropriate quote here if i can remember it...
i do believe a sole (gedit?) shoe is lonelier than two.
i dont believe shoes demands more than one, to summarise, but rather the collection of shoes from the entrants (be they individually singular or plentyful) satisfies, by definition, the challenge.
thanks for the clarification, GeneralE.
also, is silver efex legal in basic? obviously not control points, vignettes and burning edges and things like that. but the global colour sensitivity adjustments? i think they are, but thought id check before proceeding.
and is the colour filter in it legal? again, it changes the presence of a colour globally in the image so i think it is.
Message edited by author 2011-02-19 06:10:00.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2011 12:55:42 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
hmm. i wonder what the grammar nazis have to say about this.
i dont know if "shoes" in this case demands multiple shoes. "photograph shoes." "photograph (two|many|some|more than one) shoes." "photograph sports" i wouldnt think would require more than one sport in the shot. "submit entries" multiple entries are disqualifies. "go to your wives" (husbands) poligamy is illegal. all these examples use the plural form of the word but mean the singular. language is so unclear there is genuinely no way we can know what they want... there is an appropriate quote here if i can remember it...
i do believe a sole (gedit?) shoe is lonelier than two.
i dont believe shoes demands more than one, to summarise, but rather the collection of shoes from the entrants (be they individually singular or plentyful) satisfies, by definition, the challenge. |
yes,yes, exactly! i would be really disappointed if people worked hard and produced some beautiful photos, only to get low marks from people who had a very narrow definition of what the entries were supposed to be. :( |
|
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 09:39:25 AM EDT.
