Crisp or Blurry? Intentional over exposure...

05/14/2003 01:37:49 PM · #1

hey everyone,

just had a couple comments. i've been a member for a while (but just made my first submission) and have seen some really amazing photographs win the challenges and for the most part, they have all been photos that are extrememly crisp, clear and perfectly exposed. they have also been (for the most part of what I've seen) very straight forward with their imagery meaning that a lot of stuff here is quite commercial -which isn't bad at all! i just submitted a photo which was intentionally ranging in focus and overexposed. i got some comments stating that because of these elements, they did not like it. granted, it is not an award winning picture and it wasnt meant to be, but i just want to make sure that viewers here are not turing their backs on something that is not in focus and overexposed without taking a minute to experience those flaws in a positive way as part of the image.

i would like to start submitting more work here, and most of my work is intentionally imperfect.

i would also just like to state that i have seen many excellent photos on this site and i am not trying to insult anyone's opinion.

Dan

Message edited by author 2003-05-14 13:42:58.

dsidwell

Canon EOS-5D

05/14/2003 01:41:53 PM · #2

Great dan-o! It will be fun to see your stuff! But please take the title of your current entry out of your posting; voting is supposed to be anonymous.

dan-o

05/14/2003 01:43:39 PM · #3

sorry about that, it's out

dsidwell

Canon EOS-5D

05/14/2003 01:43:48 PM · #4

By the way, this topic has been discussed much of late. For example, this thread:

//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=23615

Contains some of what you discuss here. Good luck!

bamaster

Canon EOS-D30

05/14/2003 01:44:46 PM · #5

Stylized photos are almost always slammed on. Peope either don't get it or simply think it's bad photography. I mean, it couldn't possibly be that the photographer WANTED a slightly unfocused shot.

Feel free to submit something creative. Just be prepared for less than stellar votes.

matt betea

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

05/14/2003 02:23:58 PM · #6

Message edited by author 2003-05-14 17:12:09.

Journey

Canon PowerShot G3

05/14/2003 03:42:53 PM · #7

Originally posted by bamaster:

I mean, it couldn't possibly be that the photographer WANTED a slightly unfocused shot.

ROTFL. Well put, bamaster. Do i detect a certain frustration here? :) In voterland, however, what the photographer tried to do and convey is entirely irrelevant.

In my SecColor submission 2 out of 3 comments said that i should have removed something. I could have easily taken it out but while making the shot i deliberately, for a reason, decided to leave it in. My mind was telling me though "you'll get comments on exactly that" and sure enough :)

sagestudio

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

05/14/2003 04:04:45 PM · #8

I've had the same thing happen, Journey, people suggesting I take out a vital element to my photo. It reminds me of my sister saying, "I like fried ice cream, except for the coating". It's frustrating sometimes to not be understood, but that's what we have to put up with here, I guess. I am a better photographer for it, though, but perhaps not as likely to take risks. : )

frisca

Nikon D70

05/14/2003 05:11:01 PM · #9

Originally posted by Journey:

Originally posted by bamaster:
I mean, it couldn't possibly be that the photographer WANTED a slightly unfocused shot.

ROTFL. Well put, bamaster. Do i detect a certain frustration here? :) In voterland, however, what the photographer tried to do and convey is entirely irrelevant.

In my SecColor submission 2 out of 3 comments said that i should have removed something. I could have easily taken it out but while making the shot i deliberately, for a reason, decided to leave it in. My mind was telling me though "you'll get comments on exactly that" and sure enough :)

I'm experiencing the same thing with my secondary colour entry. I left a "flaw" in, infact, I created it intentionally to try to emulate a look, and all I get is "nice, but take out X to make it better" I guess that means either I failed at my attempt, or maybe it was just an unpopular idea? Ahh, well. I promised not to complain about my score at all this week!

Toddh

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM

05/14/2003 05:41:10 PM · #10

at the risk of offending..... chances are if people are commenting negitavely on the content then you probably didn't carry it off as well as you could have.... otherwise it's impact in the image would be a positive thing.... and the comments would reflect this.....

frisca

Nikon D70

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

05/14/2003 06:50:28 PM · #11

point taken Todd. I think I didn't do as good a job as I had hoped with it, but I still think it has meaning outside of what it was being interpreted at as a whole. As someone mentioned in another thread, I think its important to think for a moment what the photographer might be trying to achieve and use that to evaluate the photograph rather than just your view of what the picture ought to be.

Zeissman

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

05/14/2003 06:55:02 PM · #12

hey, it hurts when everyone does not like what you did, but hopefully a few people got it. Try to get what you can from the negative, and be glad for the positive.

Of course, my photos have always done poorly.

dan-o

05/14/2003 11:30:12 PM · #13

thanks for all your responses. it's good to know that so many members are thinking the same way. it was never the scores that i was concerned about. it was more the comments as i want some constructive criticism rather than "too blurry" or "too bright". thanks again!

Dan

Chez

05/15/2003 12:03:32 AM · #14

This is my third challenge and I have had mainly positive comments to my efforts and I am grateful for that. This site is great for driving the effort you put in to trying to be a more accomplished photographer. However, style is an individual issue which interpreted loosely in all things is a statement of personal taste. Not everyone will like what you do or I do as individuals but if we are happy and content that's good enough.

You only have to look at some of the photos that win to know that there are a lot of people with creative flair on this site and with the same token those without. However, one may learn to become more creative in such an environment. I think my point is that it doesn't really matter that much unlesss your an ego maniac who says what about your photographs as long as you content with them, after all they are yours. Accept life as it is and sleep easy.

Message edited by author 2003-05-15 00:45:53.

dsidwell

Canon EOS-5D

05/15/2003 12:15:42 AM · #15

Originally posted by Toddh:

I agree with this to some extent, realizing that only certain KINDS of photography generally do really well here, and some photographers prefer to do other kinds. Photos that do really well here are usually simple, easy to grasp in a few seconds, have some drama, and are unique. But there are some great photographers here who take wonderful, marvelous photos that either take longer to analyze than most voters are willing to give, and perhaps are more subtle in their drama. Some are also quite experimental, pushing our art form into new territories.

As a comparison: Rembrandt and Rubens and Winslow Homer might do really well on this site, if we were judging paintings, but I doubt Monet or Van Gogh or Jackson Pollack would do consistently well. So DPC can be a fickle "client." Many of my favorite photographers on this site have never won a medal, but I sure hope I'm as good a photographer as they are someday.

Message edited by author 2003-05-15 00:16:45.

Chez

05/15/2003 12:52:46 AM · #16

So this painter and that painter may well do badly here, and I am sure that lots of people who take great photos do badly as well as visa versa, but that's life and if everytime you do badly you give up or let your spirit dwindle then your on a downward spiral. Those painters you mention are individuals who have definite appeal to some people and popular cultural appeal to others, my point is at the end of the day it is their work and ultimately their style. I personally like what I like and that's it. I think partly it is DNA, partly cultural and sometimes personal. The orginal thread about exposure is open to interpretation.

I am not so technically minded, for me the whole is important, doesn't matter if it's under or over cooked as long as I like the taste.

DennisF

Sony DT 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 Aspherical ED Super Wide Angle Zoom

05/15/2003 12:57:31 AM · #17

I don't agree with this. Monet, Van Gogh or Jackson Pollack would do well - they did good work. I think we reviewers do recognize good work - regardless of the genre. Most of the "misunderstood" work I see is just poorly done. If you are going to put it out there and experiment - which I encourgage - don't expect extra points for trying. It has to be done well - concept, composition, and execution. Learn and go on.

Dennis

e301

05/15/2003 04:40:57 AM · #18

Monet and Van Gogh maybe, but Jackson Pollock would get comments like 'did you spill the paint tin?'.

And you could imagine Mark Rothko having taken this shot: look how it scored.

In the primary colour challenge there are a number of 'off the wall' shots - and I hope I gave them all some thought - but they just weren't intersting to me.

Ed

Message edited by author 2003-05-15 05:39:19.

MikeO

Fujifilm x100

05/16/2003 04:33:45 PM · #19

I understnad what your aiming for Dan - this is one of my pics and its one of my favourites

//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=19566

sebadore

Olympus C-3000Z

05/17/2003 02:13:01 AM · #20

You won't score well with arty/emotional photographs. The fact is, most ppl think digital pics should be clean, noise free, sharp focused, well exposed photo..etc etc... It's not so much about the composition or the emotional value of it. But then, I think you already know that.

You should look at sites like deviantart.com or usefilm.com Those sites aren't about scores, but more about exchaning ideas and giving each other feedback and support. There are lots of interesting photographers out there.. lots.

some nice galleries..

//www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=14013
//epitomei.deviantart.com/thumbnails/?do=sort&deviantID=214725&sort=date&order=desc&resolution=0&limit=60
//visceral.deviantart.com/thumbnails/?do=sort&deviantID=192916&sort=date&order=desc&resolution=0&limit=60

there are tons more out there.. you just have to look.

Originally posted by dan-o:

for the most part, they have all been photos that are extrememly crisp, clear and perfectly exposed. they have also been (for the most part of what I've seen) very straight forward with their imagery meaning that a lot of stuff here is quite commercial -which isn't bad at all! i just submitted a photo which was intentionally ranging in focus and overexposed.

Dan

JPR

Sony Alpha a55

06/12/2003 09:48:18 PM · #21

This site is exactly what you're afraid it is comrad dan. That's exactly why you should keep submitting the kind of stuff that you like. We need more of it on here. Plus, if you manage to score really well on here with something meaningful and personal you know you've got a real winner on your hands that can be subtle and artistic while still appealing to a mass market and you should go out and submit it to photography contests as soon as possible. Don't stop submitting because people aren't "getting" your work. I'm sure there are a few people who did. As long as I get one positive comment on my pictures I don't feel so bad.

I think my Office Art photo is one of my best ones yet, and easily in the top 20 pictures. Unfortunately, the voters disagree, and I have my lowest scoring image yet. It boggles my mind, but whatever, I'll still blow it up real big and put it on MY office wall!

magnetic9999

Canon EOS-20D

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

06/13/2003 07:16:26 AM · #22

the second challenge i ever submitted to was the first 'Self Portrait' challenge, with this shot:

//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=398

This was before we were allowed to crop (for all the newbs, for a LONG time, we could only sub 640x480 or 640x427 pictures). If we had been allowed to crop, I would have taken out the parts outside of the blue, but otherwise, that pic is EXACTLY like I wanted it to be.

And if I re-did it, I'd probably do it on a more interesting or less distracting bg altogether.

The people that 'got it', saw exactly what I saw in it: "David Lynch", "H.R. Giger". Trippy, scary, weird. Needless to say, most people that voted didn't care much for it. Nonetheless, it remains one of my favorite shots ever.

Jacko

Canon EOS-20D

06/13/2003 08:43:24 AM · #23

If I like it, I vote it high. If I don't, I vote it low.

I personally like high key shots (even the really blown out photos), though I can say I've even done one. What I don't like are teh so-called "strategic out of focus shots", when there doesn't seem to be any reason for the blurriness. I like shallow depth of field shots. My recent Beatle shot and Drop of Honey both used shallow depth of field. Some like it, some don't.

Primary objective: shoot something the way you like it. If it scores well, that's just gravy.

eloise

Sony DSC-P7

06/13/2003 09:18:18 AM · #24

While we're rehashing entries, I was puzzled by the comments on my Liquid entry. Comments like "The colors are very pretty, but everything is so out of focus, that you really can't appreciate the colors." just leave me blinking, because until I resized it slightly it was so sharp you could count the threads in the bedsheet that forms the background.

Looking at it now, does it help any to know it's a gloppy puddle of hairstyling gel? Nobody that commented seemed to think it was a liquid, which means my attempt to show a viscous liquid as a sculptural shape clearly didn't work. :->

eikidigi