Read my comments, you'll understand. Never heard so many people repeat the same thing. The soft focus WAS intentianal, but since 95% of you thought it should be in focus, well, here it is...tell me what YOU THINK?
|
|
09/23/2002 10:40:10 PM · #2 |
| Personally, I like the sharp focus better. To each his own though. |
|
|
|
09/23/2002 11:18:27 PM · #3 |
I see. The soft focus brings all the tones closer together so that they become one image against the white.
sharp you have three things, mark, pen, shadow.
good call I say |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 09:00:16 AM · #4 |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 09:05:04 AM · #5 |
I liked the soft focus in the original... still like it better. In the sharper image, I think the subject is more mundane...
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 09:14:58 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by JohnSetzler :
I liked the soft focus in the original... still like it better. In the sharper image, I think the subject is more mundane...
So do we need a set of checkboxes for submissions / to help voters:
[ ] It is supposed to be in soft focus
[ ] I wanted a small DoF
[ ] I added the grain/ noise
[ ] I was trying to make it blurry
Just so everyone doesn't feel the need to tell you how to fix it ?
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 09:24:02 AM · #7 |
No, I think we just need to be able to disregard those comments that weren't helpful to us. My husband's photo this week had a similar phenomenon - everyone wanted one particular aspect cropped out; he knew that the cropping was intentional and found his version made a stronger photo, so he smiled each time he got that comment and disregarded it.
I don't think Zadore is complaining though. It seems as if he just really wants our opinion on whether hiis choice was over the top, given the options.
Zadore, personally I prefer the sharp focus. But ultimately YOU'RE the one who needs to be happy with it, so if you like it better soft, ignore me. :-)
Dawn |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 09:25:49 AM · #8 |
Soft focus is a tough issue on DPC. There are RARELY any instances where a soft focus photo doesn't get loaded with comments where sharper focus is preferred...
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 09:46:49 AM · #9 |
my 2ยข
I liked the original - the softer focus was better
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 10:08:57 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by JohnSetzler :
Soft focus is a tough issue on DPC. There are RARELY any instances where a soft focus photo doesn't get loaded with comments where sharper focus is preferred...
That's sometimes true, but I think in a lot of cases when faced with
a picture that is potentially badly focused, people go for the easy
advice, that they are sure they can give, and suggest how the person
could have improved the focus.
If there was something that said 'I know its soft, I want it that way'
people would have to think about if it works for the picture or not,
rather than assume its a 'mistake' or something that should be fixed
as a technical problem.
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 10:13:53 AM · #11 |
I agree... based on this, I have also forced myself to assume that whenever i see soft focus or lack of focus, I always assume it is intentional. Then I decide if I like it or not.
In this particular photo, I definitely like the soft focus more than the alternative. The reason I like it more is because I think it adds an interesting element to an otherwise uninteresting subject.
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 10:15:01 AM · #12 |
I think if you can dish out comments like:
zadore - 9/19/2002
nope, I can't even identify the subject of your photo...1
...then you should be able to handle constructive focus comments about your own photo...
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/24/2002 10:15:09 AM. |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 10:21:21 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by alansfreed:
I think if you can dish out comments like:
zadore - 9/19/2002
[i]nope, I can't even identify the subject of your photo...1
...then you should be able to handle constructive focus comments about your own photo..[/i]
I don't see anywhere that he's not taking the constructive comments.
He provided the alternative and asked for opinions, which is all
very constructive, up until this post. If you'd like to discuss
your picture more, then please feel free to start a new thread and
ask about specific improvements you might have made or start a
constructive discussion. Discussing particular feedback from one source
would be better served via an email exchange.
* This message has been edited by the author on 9/24/2002 10:21:40 AM. |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 10:28:31 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by alansfreed:
I think if you can dish out comments like:
zadore - 9/19/2002
[i]nope, I can't even identify the subject of your photo...1
...then you should be able to handle constructive focus comments about your own photo..[/i]
I knew that would come back to haunt me :) Good.
I don't know if you read the post or not...but I am NOT complaining, I simply asked for an opinion. READ carefully, before you post.
As for your photo, it's very nice and pretty, and if the topic had been cityskapes I would have given it a 9-10. BUT, I looked hard to figure out WHAT you took a picture of, and what the Negative Space was...sorry, I could not find anything. Hence my comment, and my score.
I thought I would try leaving my name back with a few of the comments I gave to my low marks, if you have a problem with that...too bad. I would like to know who gave me my 15 1's and why (not to argue with them, just to know what their thinking was)
Sorry if I upset you !
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 11:45:06 AM · #15 |
You could use a higher contrast to blow out the greyness of the paper, and make the drawn line sharper. The image itself has potential for 'dynamic equilibrium'. Take a look at the work of Piet Mondrian, then imagine the line going all the way across the image.
Your pic would also be greatly enhanced by the inclusion of a naked lady somewhere in the top right corner. |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 12:03:03 PM · #16 |
I replied last night, went to bed and thought, "I really should have told why i would like it sharper." (Isn't that a sign of addicts, you think about the forums after you go to bed?)
I did not mind the soft focus, in one respect, I thought it was interesting. For me though, that kind of pen always conjures up images of technical work, etc. and for me, it seemed that a sharper focus with high contrast (which I told Z. in his comment) would work better for me.
It is not that I have a problem with soft focus. I promise. I even felt like this was one picture where it was intentional, but like i said before, it just seemed ot me that that kinda of subject would look better sharp. |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 12:30:25 PM · #17 |
I like the sharper one better. For me, as if it mattered to anyone else, I tend to like the soft-focus shots more when the subjects are more natural, like portraits (esp. nudes because it adds a little more mystery) some landscapes and sunsets and stuff like that. Man-made stuff, like buildings, bridges, cars and things of that nature is better seen in focus. Just personal preference though. I never thought of it that way until I started writing this, but I think for the most part that's how I've voted since I started poking my head in here.
|
|
|
|
09/24/2002 01:03:32 PM · #18 |
i prefer the sharper image. it's a technical pen, they are sharp, and draw sharp lines, and that's why.
soft focus might work but i feel you layed it on a bit too thick. it looked to me like a mistake, ie, trying to focus closer than your macro would allow you to.
maybe if u tried a less extreme soft focus i would like that more.
hope that helps : ) |
|
|
|
09/24/2002 03:06:44 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by inspzil:
I like the sharper one better. For me, as if it mattered to anyone else, I tend to like the soft-focus shots more when the subjects are more natural, like portraits (esp. nudes because it adds a little more mystery) some landscapes and sunsets and stuff like that. Man-made stuff, like buildings, bridges, cars and things of that nature is better seen in focus. Just personal preference though. I never thought of it that way until I started writing this, but I think for the most part that's how I've voted since I started poking my head in here.
Wow! This brought me to a realization that i tend to have the same inclination. Hmmm, ...I'll have to reflect on that. Thanks for spelling it out Inspzil. :-)
Dawn |
|
|
|
09/27/2002 09:03:37 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by zadore:
Read my comments, you'll understand. Never heard so many people repeat the same thing. The soft focus WAS intentianal, but since 95% of you thought it should be in focus, well, here it is...tell me what YOU THINK?
 can no longer be seen because in so minimal an image, it's huge distraction. But beyond that, it's quite good with the pen finally in focus.<br><br>CJ<br></td></tr></table></td></tr>
</table>
<img src=)
|
|
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 04:54:54 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: 04/18/2024 04:54:54 PM EDT.
|
|
 can no longer be seen because in so minimal an image, it's huge distraction. But beyond that, it's quite good with the pen finally in focus.<br><br>CJ<br></td></tr></table></td></tr>
</table>
<img src=){kind=small}