| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/03/2005 03:07:47 AM · #26 |
I think some animals react when they are being photographed. If you don't agree go to your nearest racetrack and watch the track photog take the winner's circle pictures.
Is it a "posed" picture if someone sees you aiming at them and mugs for the camera? For some, that moment of reaction, be it a scowl or a smile, is the essence of candid photography. I had a ball with this challenge. I didn't think I would but going to a place where lots of people were taking pictures helped immensely.
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 03:09:53.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 03:41:30 AM · #27 |
Regarding the issue of "posed" versus "unposed", it kind of goes to the essence of what a candid photograph is. From my perspective, after looking at every entry and doing my initial high/low seed, I can say that I'm definitely inclined to reward the spontaneous over the formal. I am reacting more emotionally toi pictures that look like they just happened, rather than ones that seem to be planned. Whether the subjects are aware of the "planning" or not is not an issue with me. In other words, as a hypothetcial example (not thinking of any particular image here) If you set up your camera, or took your stance, within a carefully-chosen environment and then waited for some person/s to come through and "complete" the composition, this would not be candid in my eyes, regardless that they were unaware they were being photographed.
On the other hand, if you "catch" an image of an emotional moment as it is happening, spontaneously, it's immaterial whether the emoter, the subject, is aware of what you are doing; the emotion is real, and it is the crossing of photographer and subject in time and space that allowed the happenstance of the image. That's candid, or one kind of candid anyway.
I think for a photograph to be a really effective, "true" candid, it has to have an emotional component and a spontaneous component. I'm not reacting well to perfectly composed images, now matter how nice, that lack the emotional quotient. The person (or annimal) is there, but they are an emotional tabla rasa. Other images, less photographically "perfect", capture a raw, spontaneous edge of vitality, and I will be scoring these high.
I'm happy with this, because in the main DPC challenges reward the other sort of work; highly technical, highly composed, highly controlled. For this reason I am inclined to lean the other way in this challenge and reward the risk-takers, the ones who dared to be spontaneous and slightly out-of-control. Lord knows we give them little enough room to maneuver, here, in the "usual" challenge.
On a different note, I am amazed at how many of these images are composed to B/W; it seems that many, many of us equate B/W with "candid", and this may well be a valid thing. It's certainly refreshing to see. "Overworked" images are not floating my boat either; the obvious use of digital manipulation seems to be translating, in my eyes, as "anti-candid."
Another thing that doesn't work for me is scenic or architectural shots that have small, human elements in them going about their business. I want this to be about that emotional element, wherever it is found. Some of the animal pictures, incidentally, are "working" for me, but a lot of them are not. Animals CAN convey emotion, they CAN be in situations where we relate to them at an emotional level. A good example, one that did not appear in any challenge entry, would be a snarling dog at the end of a chain, lunging at the photographer in fury. This would be a true "candid" in my eyes.
I am going on at such length because I will soon be commenting, and it may be simpler to refer photographers to this post for an explanation of why I reacted as i did to their work; it's not that it isn't a wonderful image, a lot of the time, it's just that I think the other direction is more true to the spirit of the challenge.
Peace, Robt.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 07:00:43 AM · #28 |
I had this shot submitted until about 7 minutes before the start of the challenge. I pulled it, not because I thought it was a bad photo, but because I knew the posed vs. unposed would be an issue. My son had no idea I was going to take his picture. He was rolling around in the yard, playing with friends...and I snapped a shot at a very rare moment - when he was actually still. I know, though, from experience, that DPC voters are very literal and would, in their 3-second pass through of the shots, say "posed...1." As I vote, I'm being quite generous because candid moments can happen even if someone looks at the camera.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:57:01 AM · #29 |
I pulled this thread over here for trnqlty after mk locked it so others can comment
Originally posted by trnqlty:
I have an entry in the candid challenge that is without question the best picture I have ever taken of someone. I'm getting voted down though because it looks like it must have been posed. It wasn't! Please, please, give the picture the benefit of the doubt and assume it is candid. My original clearly shows that it is. Are others having this problem? |
Originally posted by mk:
Yes, there's a thread about it here. |
Originally posted by sdw65:
I believe others are having the same problem from some post I have read. I think people may assume mine is 'staged' but it is not and like you said my original can prove so. But voters will vote the way they want, you can't change there minds. I however am going to give the photographer the benefit and assume it is 'candid' unless there is a positive reason to believe it's not. |
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:01:09 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
I had this shot submitted until about 7 minutes before the start of the challenge. I pulled it, not because I thought it was a bad photo, but because I knew the posed vs. unposed would be an issue. My son had no idea I was going to take his picture. He was rolling around in the yard, playing with friends...and I snapped a shot at a very rare moment - when he was actually still. I know, though, from experience, that DPC voters are very literal and would, in their 3-second pass through of the shots, say "posed...1." As I vote, I'm being quite generous because candid moments can happen even if someone looks at the camera.
|
I agree, but I do get suspicious when the subject in the 'candid' is a beautiful model wearing make-up with that 'oh so perfect' smile and she happens to be standing in perfect lighting...
I was told to give the photographer the benefit of the doubt, so I scored it a 9. I will be really disappointed to find out it was posed.
I completely disagree that photography is theatre and that if you can fake, fake it...It can be that way sometimes, but when the challenge is to capture a "Candid"? Give me a break... |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:06:20 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I completely disagree that photography is theatre and that if you can fake, fake it...It can be that way sometimes, but when the challenge is to capture a "Candid"? Give me a break... |
100 % agree with you on that. If that was so then this would be an 'illusion' challenge. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:15:28 AM · #32 |
If your entry looks posed, then you can't really start complaining if people agree it looks posed.
Perhaps it isn't posed, but if even the photographer seems to think it looks like it is you really can't complain.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:22:51 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Mark of SRQ:
I think it is an implied rule that it involves people... |
Oh great. As if meeting the exact wording of the challenge wasn't enough, now we have invisible challenge details to meet too?!
Originally posted by Mark of SRQ:
A person will change in the presence of a camera ... Any picture of an animal, therefore, is candid, because they don't know. |
Uhh, try taking a photo of my dog. The first thing he does *every* time he sees the camera is walks up to it and sniffs it. He then stands there looking at you until you go away! All my best shots of him are candids.
Originally posted by Mark of SRQ:
I've just opened myself up for flaming, but that's what I believe. |
Happy to oblige, but remember that the name 'bod' next to a post implies that the post is sprinkled with invisible smileys.
: )
(note: I don't have an entry to defend, I'm just having fun.)
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:22:56 AM · #34 |
I didn't enter this challenge because I was certain the "Meet the Challenge Police" were going to be out in force rewriting the challenge so they could vote things down. In fact I've only entered one challenge since I re-upped my membership 2 months ago because of this. My one entry was in the Night Shot challenge and it got voted down because it was an indoor shot. I read the challenge over and over looking for where it said it had to be outdoors... Apparently voters don't feel constrained by little things like what the challenge actually says. I'm beginning to regret coming back to the site...
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:34:07 AM · #35 |
One of the charming things about candid photographs is the feeling of spontenaiety, and if a photo looks posed it loses some or all of that charm, whether or not it was actually posed.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:35:38 AM · #36 |
I agree with with mygyl.
Honestly, we all know that there are other places (contests and challenges) that are more willing to accept art and interpretation. This is a very uptight site regarding rules. The most innocent forum threads can cause a major uproar. Just check out graphicfunk's thread about keeping bag-head comments invisible until voting is over. I sometimes feel like people are sitting in front of their computers in suits and ties: rigid and a more than a bit anal. That doesn't mean that this site is bad. It just means that it doesn't always work for me except to push me technically. When I need that, this is the place where I come. Many people here are very willing to share their expertise regarding dp, and that is when this site shines and is at its best. The important thing is to know what works for you and when to walk away.
peace out, all... |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:50:31 AM · #37 |
About 6 posts in, I decided to stop reading.
It seems that many of us no longer care or fathom what this site was at one time. A challenging location for people to come and get better at taking pictures. It seems that a lot of 'artistic' and 'interpretive' view has crept in and seriously degraded the worth of the concept.
How do I know? I've only been here for a few months.
Go back and look at the challenges that started this site. Read the definitions. See the outcomes and the voting. ART was not the defining point in a winning shot. Interpretation of the challenge seemed to be a keypoint, but rarely something that caused the waves of ones and twos on solid photography.
JMO, I think we 'the new' and we the old and tired have not taken enough time to remember what DPC was before we took on the responsibility of casting a vote.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:12:23 PM · #38 |
Arcanist, I believe that is what I just said. But if the population swings toward art, you will have to live with it because it is a "majority rule" site. Implied rules and the "challenge police" are not in the spirit of the site, either.
Just let me caution that history shows that if you cling too tightly to something, you destroy it. I feel a sense of some sort of fear or panic in these forums. That somehow some subversive subgroup might try to get "by" with something. There is much sadness in that. I also see a lot of anger. Anger is a secondary emotion. It never comes first. It always covers pain. I think we need to ask ourselves what that pain is.
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 12:17:55. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:21:31 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by SDW65:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I completely disagree that photography is theatre and that if you can fake, fake it...It can be that way sometimes, but when the challenge is to capture a "Candid"? Give me a break... |
100 % agree with you on that. If that was so then this would be an 'illusion' challenge. |
This is possible and has been done with good results on dpc.
Challenge: Stopped Motion II
Details: Catch your subject mid-action -- that means no motion trails! Let's see how well your timing meets your creativity. Good luck!
and one of the highly rated submissions
which has no action but an illusion of action :)
** The above photograph is used for illustration purpose only. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 02:28:16 PM · #40 |
These types of things are starting to get on my nerves... Oh it doesn't meet the challenge... HOW do you know!!! where you there to take the picture... it seems like i'm suffering from that and i just hate that.
It's just plain stupid this!!! the more and more people just make me wanna stand out the challenges because of this!!! |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 02:49:07 PM · #41 |
No one should be allowed to comment that an image does not meet the challange.
Are we all not our own individuals with unique perspectives???
Interpretation/meaning will vary from one person to another and if someone enters a picture that they believe fits the challenge then so be it. If you vote down a picture because you cannot interpret the entry, then vote it down!!! Don't comment that it doesn't meet the challenge simply because you don't understand. Why not send a PM afterwards, if it bothers you that much, to have that person explain it to you or simply read their explanation of why they submitted that image.
If there is a challange entitled "Blue" and I enter a picture of yellow paint entitled "1/2 way there", some people would have the smarts that yellow and green make blue, thus the entry. Others will be clueless and leave a comment that it does not meet the challenge, when in fact they don't have the intelligence to figure it out.
My first DPC rant of 2005...Stay tuned for more ;o)
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 14:56:23.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 02:58:51 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by rmtm333:
No one should be allowed to comment that it does not meet the challange.
Are we all not our own individuals with unique perspectives???
|
That is precisely why we can choose to decide that the photo doesn't meet the challenge. I'm not voting the photographer's opinion, I'm voting mine.
I've never bought the whole "vote on the assumption that the photographer intended it to meet the challenge" bit. If I voted that way, I'd also need to assume that the photographer intended the photo to be a 10 and vote it that way.
The whole point of the challenge topic is to put an extra twist, to add extra challenge, not to just add a category in which I am to give the photographer the benefit of the doubt. The idea is to be able to effectively communicate that theme in your photo. If everyone missed it, it's probably not because everyone is too stupid to get it but because you failed to communicate it in a way that was accessible to the viewers. Sure, not everyone wants to pander to the common voter, but then don't complain about your results.
And why not comment that you don't feel it meets the challenge? People are forever whining about receiving low scores without explanation...I'm guessing not meeting the challenge would be a pretty good explanation. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 03:02:46 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by rmtm333:
If there is a challange entitled "Blue" and I enter a picture of yellow paint entitled "1/2 way there", some people would have the smarts that yellow and green make blue, thus the entry. Others will be clueless and leave a comment that it does not meet the challenge, when in fact they don't have the intelligence to figure it out.
|
I'm smart. 1/2 way there isn't blue for a blue challenge. It's creative and thought provoking but it isn't blue. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 03:10:35 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by RHoldenSr:
Same as before. Take your camera with you everywhere this week, and capture a candid moment. Try to emphasize the mood of the moment while not forgetting the technical elements of photography.
It did not say a person/human had to be in the shot :)
You should look close before voting.
ROFLOL |
I am getting hammered just because it's not a human oh well |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 03:12:10 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by mk:
but then don't complain about your results. |
Never do!!!
Originally posted by mk:
And why not comment that you don't feel it meets the challenge? People are forever whining about receiving low scores without explanation...I'm guessing not meeting the challenge would be a pretty good explanation. |
I have entered photos that I know will be a stretch and expect a lower score because of it. Those that comment that it does not meet the challange and provide their reasoning for saying so is acceptable in my eyes. But to simply say it without your opinion is worthless!
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 15:16:59.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 03:13:07 PM · #46 |
| Yah but the problem is that i feel i meet the challenge 100% and people seem to think it's posed!! |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 03:52:40 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by myqyl:
I didn't enter this challenge because I was certain the "Meet the Challenge Police" were going to be out in force rewriting the challenge so they could vote things down. In fact I've only entered one challenge since I re-upped my membership 2 months ago because of this. My one entry was in the Night Shot challenge and it got voted down because it was an indoor shot. I read the challenge over and over looking for where it said it had to be outdoors... Apparently voters don't feel constrained by little things like what the challenge actually says. I'm beginning to regret coming back to the site... |
That doesn't sound like you are getting much satisfaction out of this site. Why don't you try something different for a change? Challenge yourself to come up with a shot that fits the topic so closely that you won't have to give a second thought to the "Meet the Challenge Police". Let your concern for score and art sit down for a week and just enjoy the freedom of knowing you're in the groove. That you have ribboned is proof that you can capture the voters at least some of the time. Take a shot at the mainstream and see what happens. If for no other reason just to get a little something different out of the 25 you ponied up.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 04:03:59 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by KDO:
Arcanist, I believe that is what I just said. But if the population swings toward art, you will have to live with it because it is a "majority rule" site. Implied rules and the "challenge police" are not in the spirit of the site, either. |
But neither are the "voting police" in the spirit of the site. We have a policy of allowing people to vote by whatever method/scale they choose, so long as they apply it consistently to all photos. That includes deciding how well a photo meets the challenge.
I'm all for artistic freedom and creative interpretation, and composition over technical perfection -- my low average score will attest to that. But telling people they're voting wrongly will not improve things. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 04:14:22 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I'm all for artistic freedom and creative interpretation, and composition over technical perfection -- my low average score will attest to that. But telling people they're voting wrongly will not improve things. |
Agree with this statement. My personal point made earlier was to simply state that if you cannot interpret my image and feel that it does not meet the challenge than give me a why ("I feel this image does not meet the challenge because..."). At least this way I can us the comment constructively and improve the image next time or for another challenge.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 04:28:34 PM · #50 |
Well, I was deep in the middle of this mess early on in this thread, with talk about animals not counting as candid. I work in a gigantic book store and went to the photography section today. I did find a book that says pets can make for great candid photos. So I will accept animals as equal to humans as far as candid photography goes. If it's in a book it has to be true. ;)
But that dog better not be posin'
Thank you, and I'm sorry for the feathers I ruffled, you were all right and I was wrong.
Mark
|
|
