| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/15/2004 01:09:28 AM · #76 |
thanks for the replies......feel more comfortable about voting now
sue |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 01:15:28 AM · #77 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
There really shouldn't be any "doesn't meet the challenge" comments or scores to that effect... these are all beautiful and I've had more fun voting on them than I've had voting in a long time. Congrats to all the folks who entered! :o) |
I had one "doesn't meet the challenge" though it pained me to say it. I've looked at a lot of info about impressionism, and my favorite shot in the challenge just doesn't seem to fit in that genre... I really wish someone could say, "yes, Lori, it does," but that just can't happen. :( It's a gorgeous shot... but doesn't fit into what I think is impressionism. I could be wrong... but it just doesn't look anything like what I would expect an impressionist work to look like. |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 01:20:22 AM · #78 |
This is going to be a toughie, most of the entries deserve at least a 9.
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 01:28:32 AM · #79 |
| Good job. I just went thru all the entries and will vote during the week. I have to say that all 39 of you are brave and are to be commended for the effort you put into learning about techniques that were perhaps new to you. Bravo. |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 04:56:55 AM · #80 |
There are some awesome shots in this challenge. To me, it is easily the most interesting and creative challenge every. I am in awe of the creativity and thought that went into most of the shots.
Congratulations to all. |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 05:11:42 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
This is going to be a toughie, most of the entries deserve at least a 9. |
guess i'm getting the brown
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 05:22:57 AM · #82 |
That's reserved to me!
For me impressionism isn't painting, painting is the medium used to create impressionism in 1850-1880, impressionism is more about light and color, and to use thick lines to outline a piece of beauty.
So in other words, I've already gotten the brown ribbon because I didn't add "paint" filter to my image. :-)
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 05:34:27 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by terje:
That's reserved to me!
For me impressionism isn't painting, painting is the medium used to create impressionism in 1850-1880, impressionism is more about light and color, and to use thick lines to outline a piece of beauty.
So in other words, I've already gotten the brown ribbon because I didn't add "paint" filter to my image. :-) |
Hello Terje,
You have a competition from me...I used paint filter but my picture is just un-impressionistic. I think in this challenge, the race for the brown ribbon is more exciting. I am in.
Manny |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 06:07:37 AM · #84 |
| This challenge should be renamed to Painting Challenge. :-) |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 06:38:07 AM · #85 |
I find it curious that, once again, there seems to be an almost universal agreement that all the entries are superb and all deserve very high scores.
I am not of the same opinion at all. I think there are some absolutely superb images entered but also some that I personally don't find appealing/ suitable at all.
So I'm sitting here wondering whether
a) it's a psychological effect - people expect excellence from the Masters and so they see what they expect rather than what is there
b) because of an appreciation of the difficulty of the challenge people are being more generous in their scoring
c) it's me who is seeing things funny and actually they are all absolutely amazing and I'm just not seeing it for some of them
I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I truly am not, but I am really interested that the hype from the last Masters seems to have carried through again.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I don't appreciate how hard this challenge is or how much talent many of the photographers have. And I know I couldn't have done as well as most of the entries, if any. But I still score on how much I like them and not on anything else.
I am scoring on my regular scale this time and have scored as high as 9 (though I know one of the 9s will emerge as a favourite and be bumped to a 10) and as low as 4.
Yes, 4.
Flame away!
EDIT: typo
Message edited by author 2004-11-15 06:38:55.
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 06:48:01 AM · #86 |
| I'm absolutely blown away by some of the entries, and am really starting to regret entering this one with such a mediocre image! I look forward to learning how some of these were done. Well done guys! |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 06:48:59 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
I find it curious that, once again, there seems to be an almost universal agreement that all the entries are superb and all deserve very high scores.
I am not of the same opinion at all. I think there are some absolutely superb images entered but also some that I personally don't find appealing/ suitable at all.
So I'm sitting here wondering whether
a) it's a psychological effect - people expect excellence from the Masters and so they see what they expect rather than what is there
b) because of an appreciation of the difficulty of the challenge people are being more generous in their scoring
c) it's me who is seeing things funny and actually they are all absolutely amazing and I'm just not seeing it for some of them
I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I truly am not, but I am really interested that the hype from the last Masters seems to have carried through again.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I don't appreciate how hard this challenge is or how much talent many of the photographers have. And I know I couldn't have done as well as most of the entries, if any. But I still score on how much I like them and not on anything else.
I am scoring on my regular scale this time and have scored as high as 9 (though I know one of the 9s will emerge as a favourite and be bumped to a 10) and as low as 4.
Yes, 4.
Flame away!
EDIT: typo |
I am glad you have come out and said that because I have been thinking the same since voting and was a little disappointed at some of the entries and saw much better images in the forums before the contest started.
Also the amount of entries was disappointing I would have thought the people entitlrd to enter would have jumped at the chance to expirement with a challenging style.
This post is in no way intended to show disrespect to those that did enter so don't flame me LOL.
Message edited by author 2004-11-15 06:49:26. |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 07:07:25 AM · #88 |
I didn't use any filters for mine, after looking through the entries, I kinda wish I took a different photo and killed it with photoshop.
The one I took looks PS'd but actually isn't.
I beginning to not like this challenge, most every entry looks less like photography, and more like painting.
Oh Well. It's a new technique I probably won't be practicing that often.
Message edited by author 2004-11-15 07:15:54.
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 07:20:58 AM · #89 |
Originally posted by ericlimon:
I didn't use any filters for mine, after looking through the entries, I kinda wish I took a different photo and killed it with photoshop.
The one I took looks PS'd but actually isn't.
I beginning to not like this challenge, most every entry looks less like photography, and more like painting.
Oh Well. It's a new technique I probably won't be practicing that often. |
I agree, rename it to "Paint challenge" :-)
It's about choice of subject, colors and light.. Not about LSD effects . :-D
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 07:53:16 AM · #90 |
I really don't like that canvas painting filtered look. It ruins some otherwise very nice photos. I read this definition of impressionism to help me judge the entries:
The practice of expressing or developing one's subjective response to a work of art or to actual experience.
I feel that trying to create impressionism, by making the photo look like an impressionist painting was the wrong way to go for many of the shots. However, there are a few that I think work quite well with extreme photoshop filters. |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 07:58:28 AM · #91 |
Actually, I am surprised at how many photos still manage to look like photos.
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 08:33:36 AM · #92 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
I find it curious that, once again, there seems to be an almost universal agreement that all the entries are superb and all deserve very high scores.
I am not of the same opinion at all. I think there are some absolutely superb images entered but also some that I personally don't find appealing/ suitable at all.
So I'm sitting here wondering whether
a) it's a psychological effect - people expect excellence from the Masters and so they see what they expect rather than what is there
b) because of an appreciation of the difficulty of the challenge people are being more generous in their scoring
c) it's me who is seeing things funny and actually they are all absolutely amazing and I'm just not seeing it for some of them
I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I truly am not, but I am really interested that the hype from the last Masters seems to have carried through again.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I don't appreciate how hard this challenge is or how much talent many of the photographers have. And I know I couldn't have done as well as most of the entries, if any. But I still score on how much I like them and not on anything else.
I am scoring on my regular scale this time and have scored as high as 9 (though I know one of the 9s will emerge as a favourite and be bumped to a 10) and as low as 4.
Yes, 4.
Flame away!
EDIT: typo |
Thanks, Kavey... I agree, too. And as I said, the one I like best doesn't even look impressionistic!
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 08:35:08 AM · #93 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
I find it curious that, once again, there seems to be an almost universal agreement that all the entries are superb and all deserve very high scores.
I am not of the same opinion at all. I think there are some absolutely superb images entered but also some that I personally don't find appealing/ suitable at all.
So I'm sitting here wondering whether
a) it's a psychological effect - people expect excellence from the Masters and so they see what they expect rather than what is there
b) because of an appreciation of the difficulty of the challenge people are being more generous in their scoring
c) it's me who is seeing things funny and actually they are all absolutely amazing and I'm just not seeing it for some of them
I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I truly am not, but I am really interested that the hype from the last Masters seems to have carried through again.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I don't appreciate how hard this challenge is or how much talent many of the photographers have. And I know I couldn't have done as well as most of the entries, if any. But I still score on how much I like them and not on anything else.
I am scoring on my regular scale this time and have scored as high as 9 (though I know one of the 9s will emerge as a favourite and be bumped to a 10) and as low as 4.
Yes, 4.
Flame away!
EDIT: typo |
Kavey, I thought about posting that last night as well. I wasn't as brave as you.
Not meaning disrespect to the shots, or the people, but rather to the concept of a "masters" challenge. As I've said before, it takes away the real anonymity of the challenge, and you get what I'll call the "masters effect". Everyone thinks these must be masterpieces, simply because of the crowd submitting, and therefore you get a lot of high scores for images that in a truly anonymous challenge would be in the 4s. (I'm saying that in general).
Personally, I plan on using the entire scale for scoring. I looked through the shots--I've seen some that I will score 10s and some that will get 3s. (Ok, that's not the entire scale, but I don't think many photos in ANY challenge deserve 1s or 2s.)
It will be interesting to see the score of the brown. Because of the psychological "masters effect" tbere probably won't be any that will score less than a 6 average. I have no doubt that under an open challenge with these same entries, the bottom of the scale would be average "4"s.
Sorry folks--as Kavey said, I mean no disrespect. I just think the Masters challenge is a bad idea--not because you get something extra, but because of the "masters effect".
We'll see.
Message edited by author 2004-11-15 09:26:07. |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 09:42:50 AM · #94 |
I have made a preliminary pass through the entries and was very impressed with most of them. This was an adventure away from my normal type of photography, which is to mainly take shots of something and present it in a perspective that is personal to me. (At least that has been my goal in the last few moments, subject to change at any time)
My entry has received both high and low votes, comments with praise and those that donĂ¢€™t. This leads me to believe that there is a certain amount of disarray between the voters/commenters as well as the people that went out and tried something that may be different for them.
Whatever the outcome I had a blast doing it!
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 09:49:11 AM · #95 |
I think I got the brown. I didn't use one either.
Originally posted by terje:
That's reserved to me!
For me impressionism isn't painting, painting is the medium used to create impressionism in 1850-1880, impressionism is more about light and color, and to use thick lines to outline a piece of beauty.
So in other words, I've already gotten the brown ribbon because I didn't add "paint" filter to my image. :-) |
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 10:04:57 AM · #96 |
It appears to me that many of our 'masters' have offered us a masterclass in how to:
> ignore the brief or misinterpret it
> bludgeon a photo with digital effects
> forsake photographic integrity.
This is really quite appalling and I don't think this is at all helpful to demonstrate photographic skill or sensitive post-processing to newbies or aspirational non-masters.
It looks a bit like Photoshop kindergarten to me I'm afraid (with a few great exceptions).
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 10:15:46 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by Sonifo:
I think I got the brown. I didn't use one either.
Originally posted by terje:
That's reserved to me!
For me impressionism isn't painting, painting is the medium used to create impressionism in 1850-1880, impressionism is more about light and color, and to use thick lines to outline a piece of beauty.
So in other words, I've already gotten the brown ribbon because I didn't add "paint" filter to my image. :-) |
|
People is giving me brown! No fancy effect, BROWN!
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 10:15:52 AM · #98 |
| Everyone that entered should feel proud of the fact that they did try something different. It's not whether you win or lose but what you have gained by exploring something different. I said in the non masters thread that since there are only 39 entries, it will be extremely easy to rank them. I will use the full 1-10 to rank them. But I do think the scores should not be counted in the scores from regular challenges. That way these people can try new things without being punished by having their overall score lowered if their picture is more experimental and not understood by the masses. And it will discourage the "it's taken by a master" high scores that are, imo, unrealistic. |
|
|
|
11/15/2004 10:17:15 AM · #99 |
We're all adults here, why not tell us what you really think ... no need to candy coat ;)
Originally posted by Imagineer:
It appears to me that many of our 'masters' have offered us a masterclass in how to:
> ignore the brief or misinterpret it
> bludgeon a photo with digital effects
> forsake photographic integrity.
This is really quite appalling and I don't think this is at all helpful to demonstrate photographic skill or sensitive post-processing to newbies or aspirational non-masters.
It looks a bit like Photoshop kindergarten to me I'm afraid (with a few great exceptions). |
|
|
|
|
11/15/2004 10:21:07 AM · #100 |
Originally posted by Imagineer:
It appears to me that many of our 'masters' have offered us a masterclass in how to:
> ignore the brief or misinterpret it
> bludgeon a photo with digital effects
> forsake photographic integrity.
This is really quite appalling and I don't think this is at all helpful to demonstrate photographic skill or sensitive post-processing to newbies or aspirational non-masters.
It looks a bit like Photoshop kindergarten to me I'm afraid (with a few great exceptions). |
I agree. I looked through the photos and I am not sure how to vote. How to compare the photo that was made by the manipulating the camera and the photo that was manipulated by PS?
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/11/2025 12:53:10 PM EDT.
