DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Out and About >> Freeman Patterson Workshop Group Thread
Pages:  
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 231, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/28/2005 01:14:31 PM · #76
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
To me the berries are the subject in this image. This seems to be the main problem when trying to break this rule. The OOF object doesn't carry enough weight in the image to be the main subject. With more definition it might command more attention (more DOF). Also, if fewer berries were part of the image, maybe in the bottom right corner it may also have worked better.


I agree with you - the viewer's perception most often seems to be that the thing in focus is the subject. I've tried the reverse of that berries picture - a single flower in the foreground OOF, the main subject sharply focused, and the comments are like "get rid of the flower, move to the left."

As for this shot, I took some others at this site that day - straight foliage shots, and looking vertically, and with only a few berries focused in the foreground. This one turns out to be my favorite. The reason I TOOK the photo at all was to capture the foliage in the background, but the reason I LIKED this one best was that the berries were more interesting. Just like you said...

But if I were to post-process a "few-berry" shot, MAYBE I could get somewhere with the main-subject-OOF concept. We shall see.
 07/28/2005 01:43:23 PM · #77
I think I've learn something looking at all our attempts to break rule 2.
The main subject, I'll call this the 'primary target' cannot be too far out of focus, otherwise the viewers eye discards it as not applicable. Also the 'secondary target' which is sharp must be a very minor element which the eye can skip over.

Now - I tried to rework another version of my Foolow Lane image with these principles in mind. What do you think?


07/28/2005 02:34:04 PM · #78
I left a comment on your blog. Thanks for commenting on mine from last night. (I've just added another blog today.)
 07/28/2005 02:42:20 PM · #79
Originally posted by wkmen:
I left a comment on your blog. Thanks for commenting on mine from last night. (I've just added another blog today.)


Commented on your latest blog.

Message edited by author 2005-07-28 15:45:54.
 07/28/2005 03:31:46 PM · #80
Originally posted by Falc:
I think I've learn something looking at all our attempts to break rule 2.
The main subject, I'll call this the 'primary target' cannot be too far out of focus, otherwise the viewers eye discards it as not applicable. Also the 'secondary target' which is sharp must be a very minor element which the eye can skip over.


I think you're on to something here. Thanks for the observations and "putting it into words".
 07/28/2005 04:41:34 PM · #81
OK, got my blog set up:

ursula's workshop
 07/28/2005 04:43:06 PM · #82
Originally posted by dwterry:
Originally posted by Falc:
I think I've learn something looking at all our attempts to break rule 2.
The main subject, I'll call this the 'primary target' cannot be too far out of focus, otherwise the viewers eye discards it as not applicable. Also the 'secondary target' which is sharp must be a very minor element which the eye can skip over.


I think you're on to something here. Thanks for the observations and "putting it into words".


Just teasing a bit here, but I thought that part of this was that you can't say "cannot" (as in "... the 'primary target' cannot be ...."). :)
 07/28/2005 04:56:35 PM · #83
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by dwterry:
Originally posted by Falc:
I think I've learn something looking at all our attempts to break rule 2.
The main subject, I'll call this the 'primary target' cannot be too far out of focus, otherwise the viewers eye discards it as not applicable. Also the 'secondary target' which is sharp must be a very minor element which the eye can skip over.


I think you're on to something here. Thanks for the observations and "putting it into words".


Just teasing a bit here, but I thought that part of this was that you can't say "cannot" (as in "... the 'primary target' cannot be ...."). :)


OK Yes lol - you have me bang to rights ;-)
In my defence I should say that FP says experiment and find out what works. My observation was about why this works.

kneels and begs forgiveness for using the reserved words 'cannot' and promises never to do so again.
 07/28/2005 06:12:22 PM · #84
:)
07/28/2005 06:35:08 PM · #85
Okay, finally got my pictures all loaded up on DPC. Some of them are breaking the rules, some are following the rules, I'll go over it in my blog when I get a chance. my blog

Here are the photos that did the best. The rest can be seen here: portfolio

Steady Camera Rule:


subject out of focus rule:


and here are ones that followed the rules, to better effect i think:


But the exercise did send me in different directions, which was really good, getting rid of my assumptions and challenging the way I normally take photographs.
 07/28/2005 11:28:22 PM · #86
Rules broken and posted to blog:

Rule of Thirds
Keep Camera Steady

Finally! Now it's off to bed I go. ;^)
 07/28/2005 11:30:57 PM · #87
Joel - I like this one!


07/28/2005 11:33:50 PM · #88
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Joel - I like this one!



Yes, this one works very well. The eye is draw to the OOF areas of the image due to the texture and lighter colour.
 07/29/2005 09:02:38 AM · #89
OK - I'm a bit confused (as usual)...are we supposed to be experimenting or trying to get good photos? I posted my experimental shots, which I thought is what we were doing...getting the feeling that maybe that's not enough?

If we're supposed to experiment AND get good results I know I don't have the time to participate properly. :-(
 07/29/2005 09:12:59 AM · #90
Originally posted by glad2badad:
OK - I'm a bit confused (as usual)...are we supposed to be experimenting or trying to get good photos? I posted my experimental shots, which I thought is what we were doing...getting the feeling that maybe that's not enough?

If we're supposed to experiment AND get good results I know I don't have the time to participate properly. :-(


To me, FP's point is to get out there and experiment. See differently. Don't worry about finding just the right subject that will highlight the breaking of the rule. Just try things!

His point is that by doing this, sometimes you WILL get a good or great photo. But you shouldn't worry about it if you don't. Otherwise, you won't continue to see/experiment.

With digital, there's no real penalty or cost to experimenting in this way.

I posted two losers in my blog in breaking Rule 2. I've broken a few more rules and have some more that are probably not "keepers" to post, but haven't had the time yet. I am not forcing myself to come up with good photos when breaking rules. I am just trying to break them, see what happens, and learn from it.

It's important we are not competing for best photos here. It's also important that we feel comfortable posting shots where we've tried but the results are not "keepers". We will all learn from that.

In short, feel free to post your results, and move on to the next rule. You don't have to get a winning shot each time.
 07/29/2005 09:13:06 AM · #91
Finally got down to creating my blog! its here
www.dundubhi.com/blog/

Will post my fp-hoto outtakes today.
I'm just stunned a
 07/29/2005 09:13:13 AM · #92
Finally got down to creating my blog! its here
www.dundubhi.com/blog/

Will post my fp-hoto outtakes today.
07/29/2005 09:23:46 AM · #93
Originally posted by glad2badad:
OK - I'm a bit confused (as usual)...are we supposed to be experimenting or trying to get good photos? I posted my experimental shots, which I thought is what we were doing...getting the feeling that maybe that's not enough?

If we're supposed to experiment AND get good results I know I don't have the time to participate properly. :-(


Stay with it, there's no rule which says you have to produce anything. Its a big plus if you can come up with an image which might be worth keeping. I've spent quite a bit of time thinking about how I'm going to approach the assignments and then fired off 100+ shots on each occasion. I still haven't got an image I would keep, but that wasn't the object.

I have learnt a hell of a lot in only a few short days, and I hope you have and will continue to learn too.
 07/29/2005 09:25:55 AM · #94
Originally posted by suprada:
Finally got down to creating my blog! its here
www.dundubhi.com/blog/

Will post my fp-hoto outtakes today.


I am trying to add you to our blog link list (see Team Blog)

Your link doesn't appear to work.

BTW here's the latest team link code for anyone wanting to put it in their blog template:

Links





Message edited by author 2005-07-29 09:30:56.
 07/29/2005 09:27:45 AM · #95
Originally posted by suprada:
Finally got down to creating my blog! its here
www.dundubhi.com/blog/


The URL doesn't work - I get 404 not found
 07/29/2005 09:29:55 AM · #96


Sorry about that...Will look into it in the evening. I cant open my site at work, because the company thinks I have pornography on my website, and they've blocked it
lol

Will look into it this evening.
 07/29/2005 09:54:17 AM · #97
My latest futile attempt to break the rule of thirds is published on my blog. I will have to go and try again by the looks of it.
 07/29/2005 10:16:36 AM · #98
Thanks Keith.

I'll keep plugging...got a bit off track when the subject for some of my experiments ended up being attractive for one of the challenges currently under submission, so of course I couldn't post those for the workshop.

Then most recently I've been Mr. Fixit man. Had a lightning strike on the house that fried the water pump, TV, and phones. The dryer went out the day before. The dishwasher gave up a few days ago. So far everything is fixed/replaced except for a leaky connection on the dishwasher. I did all of it except for the water pump. Oh, and the garage door opener sensor needs adjusting...perhaps this afternoon. If I get the camera out before finishing the dishwasher and garage door my wife will skin me. ;^)

Thanks for letting me vent in this thread...if I can't share my excuses with you guys, who can I share them with?! He-he.

Originally posted by Falc:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
OK - I'm a bit confused (as usual)...are we supposed to be experimenting or trying to get good photos? I posted my experimental shots, which I thought is what we were doing...getting the feeling that maybe that's not enough?

If we're supposed to experiment AND get good results I know I don't have the time to participate properly. :-(


Stay with it, there's no rule which says you have to produce anything. Its a big plus if you can come up with an image which might be worth keeping. I've spent quite a bit of time thinking about how I'm going to approach the assignments and then fired off 100+ shots on each occasion. I still haven't got an image I would keep, but that wasn't the object.

I have learnt a hell of a lot in only a few short days, and I hope you have and will continue to learn too.

07/29/2005 10:20:22 AM · #99
btw - anyone had a look at Ursula's attempts yet - total rubbish ;-)
 07/29/2005 12:50:46 PM · #100
Originally posted by Falc:
btw - anyone had a look at Ursula's attempts yet - total rubbish ;-)


Gee, thanks Keith! That's the kind of free publicity I need ;-)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 04:12:03 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 04/25/2024 04:12:03 PM EDT.