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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> AA results a disgrace?
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 135, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 03/14/2005 10:19:30 AM · #26
Originally posted by srbrubaker:
An element I was expecting in this challenge was wide angle with visual elements from within a foot or so of the camera to infinity all in sharp focus and with lots of detail. I have been surprised at how few photos seem to have been made this way. Was I wrong to expect this to be an essential element in AA's style (I guess so.) Wasn't this one of a very tiny handful of crucial elements mentioned in the AA thread just before the challenge?

There are limits to how much detail can be expressed in 640 pixels.
 03/14/2005 10:38:13 AM · #27
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by jonpink:
Originally posted by Seanachai:
no, the only disgrace is insensitive threads like this one! Congrats to the winners :)


Insensitive? Was the AA challenge a sensitive subject?

Not a sensitive subject, but sensitive photographers. While I largely agree with your evaluation of the general nature of many entries, I, like just about everyone else, am going to have a negative emotional reaction to having my photo called a disgrace -- I don't think that should be surprising at all.

I personally find that couching my criticisms in non-inflammatory and emotionally-charged terms will get it heard, without compromising the actual content. While I feel people should also be free to express themselves as they wish, I think the abrasive route is less effective at getting people to incorporate your suggestions.


I'm sorry general, but after reading this thread I fail to see where Jon called anyone's photo a disgrace. Where did you get that from? He was speaking about the results when he asked the question. Jon has a right to his oppinion and I defend his right to express that oppinion in any form he chooses.
03/14/2005 10:49:19 AM · #28
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by srbrubaker:
An element I was expecting in this challenge was wide angle with visual elements from within a foot or so of the camera to infinity all in sharp focus and with lots of detail. I have been surprised at how few photos seem to have been made this way. Was I wrong to expect this to be an essential element in AA's style (I guess so.) Wasn't this one of a very tiny handful of crucial elements mentioned in the AA thread just before the challenge?

There are limits to how much detail can be expressed in 640 pixels.


A good argument for increasing the image size!
 03/14/2005 11:01:00 AM · #29
I was wanting to shoot something like this wonderful example (but never found my subject) and was expecting to see many more like it. Plenty of detail and interest even at 640px.
 03/14/2005 11:03:35 AM · #30
Originally posted by GeneralE:
There are limits to how much detail can be expressed in 640 pixels.


That sounds logical, but Gringo and Dsidwell always seem to manage.
 03/14/2005 11:23:49 AM · #31
I think calling the results a disgrace and the photos a disgrace are two very different things. I took Jon's post as criticizing the voters and not the winning entries.

This site is multi-faceted. We do not just enter photos. We do not just comment on and rate photos. We consider all the elements, front- and back-end that go into making excellent images within certain guidelines. Not at all black and white (pun intended).

AA was a difficult challenge in all its aspects. I for one have learned a great deal this week. When I have the opportunity to review the comments on the photos, I'm sure I'll learn a good deal more--if only about human nature.
 03/14/2005 11:33:54 AM · #32
However undisably-toned, jonpink's comment has merit. Detail was one of several attributes of AA's work, and whether by NI or not, the top three are all more smooth than detailed. But dpc voters like smooth, and they like more dodge & burn than Ansel used. The ribbon winners are, IMHO, more in the tastes of dpc voters than in the style of Ansel Adams. Perhaps the disgrace is, if there is one here, that we don't understand that there is a difference.

I think all three ribboners look like well executed entries. The fact that they may not please my tastes; or that they do not fit many of our various interpretations of how an AA should look is irrelevant. The voters have made them winners. If you disagree with the decision of the voters, take it up with them, not the ribboners. I think that is what jonpink was aiming to do with this thread.

Congratulations to all three, but especially to Telehubbie and mocabela on their first ribbon.
03/14/2005 11:38:49 AM · #33
I think the result I received for my entry was fair, however, I have to agree with the original post, the voting was a disgrace. The winning images were very good but did not display the detail and quality one would expect from an AA image, in comparison to many of the other entries.


03/14/2005 11:47:51 AM · #34
Looking at the top 20 photos I think they deserve there positions. You all need to go back and look at the top 20 and then compare yours against theirs. Is your shot really better? Don't be such whiners. Except your position and leave it at that.

I mean seriously..how are you all supposed to grow as photogaphers if all you do is complain about your placement? You should be looking at the winner shots and saying to yourself, "How can I beat this person next time, what can I do different to get a ribbon?". Push yourselves and learn to please the voters and you will learn that pleasing the voters also means pleasing yourself.
03/14/2005 11:49:28 AM · #35
Originally posted by Sonifo:
Push yourselves and learn to please the voters and you will learn that pleasing the voters also means pleasing yourself.


Not necessarily, quite the opposite in a lot of cases...
 03/14/2005 11:57:30 AM · #36
Originally posted by Sonifo:

I mean seriously..how are you all supposed to grow as photogaphers if all you do is complain about your placement? You should be looking at the winner shots and saying to yourself, "How can I beat this person next time, what can I do different to get a ribbon?". Push yourselves and learn to please the voters and you will learn that pleasing the voters also means pleasing yourself.


I don't have a placement, but pleasing the voters does little to please myself. I will shoot as I will and if it gets voted one way or another on DPC is irrelevent to my oppinion of the photo I entered. It's nice to ribbon because it is nice to have your work recognized once in a while, but to shoot and change your style in order to ribbon is a sell out.
 03/14/2005 12:03:36 PM · #37
I will be the first to admit that I have a lot to learn. And that is why I'm posting to this forum; I learn by thinking and talking about things.

But I also have a sense for what kind of photographer I wish to be. Sometimes the things that work at this site appeal to me. Sometimes I think 'if that is the kind of photograph I need to take to score well l at this site, I will simply never score well.'


03/14/2005 12:05:04 PM · #38
I fully agree that the top finishers are only at first glance "Ansel-esque" and don't actually reflect his work. BUT I think the challenge was to do something in the ansel-spirit, not just to exactly replicate his technique. That being said, I think the top placers did that job quite well. I especially love the horse shot.
 03/14/2005 12:13:34 PM · #39
Originally posted by Imagineer:
...For what it's worth, here are a couple of forgotten gems in the pack:



Thanks, Jon, for posting 'California Hillside' here. I might have missed it without your mention, which would have been a real shame.
 03/14/2005 12:18:33 PM · #40
I'm not quite sure what has Jon's feathers ruffled.

Here's how I see it.

1. We are given a challenge. Vague, and open to interpretation.

2. We all go do our best - what else could be expected

3. We vote for the images that we like best. (pretty sure not many of us have taken a class studying AA or the zone system)

Where is the disgrace?

There are thousands of things I would love to change about my entry, I didn't have months to work on it, I couldn't work on it full time for the week I had been given, I just did my best.

I named the files on my hard drive "angel horses", so I saw it too. People seem to like them glows. I've sold lots of this "disgraceful" print.

So how do we judge success?

BTW, 3 Horses will be disqualified. I don't have the original file from the camera. See the commentson the file while you can for more detail.

Message edited by author 2005-03-14 12:19:51.
 03/14/2005 12:21:03 PM · #41
Originally posted by nsbca7:

but to shoot and change your style in order to ribbon is a sell out.


Agreed
 03/14/2005 12:30:33 PM · #42
Let me clarify for those that don't read. I haven't said the results were a disgrace, my thread title is a question (this is why it ends with a question mark) it is not a statement.

Sheesh :D
03/14/2005 12:31:16 PM · #43
Originally posted by rex07734:
Originally posted by nsbca7:

but to shoot and change your style in order to ribbon is a sell out.


Agreed


Then why put your shots in the challenges? lol Hello! wake up call..you complain that you don't get ribbons and your pictures get low scores.
 03/14/2005 12:33:42 PM · #44
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by Sonifo:
Push yourselves and learn to please the voters and you will learn that pleasing the voters also means pleasing yourself.


Not necessarily, quite the opposite in a lot of cases...


You seriously don't like your pictures that have ribboned? hmm..I love all the shots of mine that have ribboned. I wouldn't have changed a thing. Well I do see how I could have taken them better no that I look back.

I do like some shots better then others but usually don't enter them because I know they won't meet the challenge description and get voted low.
 03/14/2005 12:38:11 PM · #45
No one is complaining about their score. This thread was a discussion about whether any of the winning pictures deserved to win. That is a question open to debate. Personally I thought that the images in the top three were excellent but I'm not sure if I'd have scored them that highly.
This is exactly the sort of debate we should be having.

I don't think that anyone has said that their own image should have done better.
 03/14/2005 12:39:06 PM · #46
Originally posted by Sonifo:
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by Sonifo:
Push yourselves and learn to please the voters and you will learn that pleasing the voters also means pleasing yourself.


Not necessarily, quite the opposite in a lot of cases...


You seriously don't like your pictures that have ribboned? hmm..I love all the shots of mine that have ribboned. I wouldn't have changed a thing. Well I do see how I could have taken them better no that I look back.

I do like some shots better then others but usually don't enter them because I know they won't meet the challenge description and get voted low.


I wasn't speaking in my own case, but many people who used to ribbon loads became dissatisfied with the way those photos turned out and completely changed directions and no longer score as high as they could do.
03/14/2005 12:52:29 PM · #47
As a point of interest here:


And glad to be of service Zeus.
 03/14/2005 12:55:45 PM · #48
Originally posted by Sonifo:
Originally posted by rex07734:
Originally posted by nsbca7:

but to shoot and change your style in order to ribbon is a sell out.


Agreed


Then why put your shots in the challenges? lol Hello! wake up call..you complain that you don't get ribbons and your pictures get low scores.


Hello! wake up call.. I don't think you have ever heard me complain about where my photos finnish in a challenge and I have never complained about not getting a covetted high dollar virtual ribbon. I enter the challenges for feedback and for something to do.

If you wish to let DPC dictate your style I guess that is your business. I have a certain degree of selve confidence about my work.

Message edited by author 2005-03-14 12:57:43.
 03/14/2005 12:56:10 PM · #49
This was obviously the best picture in the challenge. :)

03/14/2005 12:56:47 PM · #50
At the risk of being hated I feel compelled to enter my two cents. Practically everybody beat me so you are all my superiors in this challenge. Yes, I did have an image I wanted to submit but unable to drive because of my double vision forced me to walk around the corner and do my shoot. Mostly a 9th zone study. Yes, we all know that too much 9th zone or any one zone is boring. However, I never anticipated the trashing. It is well received. However, to the topic of this thread and this challenge.

My warm congratulations to all the winners. I take nothing from you for the voters have decided, me included, and yours is the best that could have been had in this challenge. Rarely does any image invite full cooperation in popularity as there are always dissenters.

Let me deal with Jonpinks' comments. As many of you are aware there are threads which had already expressed dissapointment in the challenge right after the voting started. So, yes, there is something missing or something lacking in many, not all, but many of these images. With his caliber of experience I expected Jonpink to be a contender here.

Okay, his comments simply expressed the explosion of a sentiment and instead of tempering his words he merely let lose and note that he was quick to apologize. Yet, the content of his argument can not be easily dismissed if the object here is to learn. I will try to explain a little about the zone system and its object, because it is here where most images, not all, but most images failed.

The zone system is a means to find your center of interest and to exposed for that zone. Remember, the mean exposure is at zone 5 so as to favor the low and high zones evenly. Yet, zone 5 images begin to lose detail at zone 3 and two often blends with zone 1 and what you have are images that are too dark and worst, missing detail in zones 3 and 2. It all depends on the subject. many zone 5 are ideal for the majority of subjects. However, mid day is not friendly for zone 5.

The point is that many of the images in this challenge deny the time of day in which they were taken. An image at two o'clock can not have zone 1 in the sky. By the same token, to find an oberabundance of zone 1 in the fields or mountains is just not correct. Look again at the AA images and while you will find rich areas with zone 1, you will always see a hint of detail which becomes more apparant as it transitions into the second zone. This was AA fortes, he gave you detail in the lower zones, especially zone 2 and 3.

For example, say you want to do a detailed image which lies more in the shade. If you expose for the 5th zone, then the shadows areas, those receeding from the light, will quickly fall into zone 1 and 2. here you will have to dodge to see the detail in zone 2 and 3. So, the remedy is to expose for the 4th. (It is okay to dodge but remember that full reliance will place the burden on you to balance out the overall tonal balance.) This gives you more detail in zone 3 and 2 and doging and burning is minimal.

So again, whenever you see an image that has a stark look with the 1st zone prominent, you have a problem. If there is no transition to the 2nd zone with visible detail, then the exposure has suffered at the outset because you have zones blending into the other with their distiction lost.

An example of a high zone image, look at the image by Bear Music. Notice how detail is held in the higher zones. Since this image treats a light colored structure as the main subject the image will sacrifice an apprecaible amount of the very lowest zones. But it is the subject wherein the attention must be paid. Look at how nice the detail was held with the structure. This is an example of an exposure to accomplish detail in the higher zones.

On the other side, that is the lower zone, look at Imagineers image. Notice how the eye can dance about the image with a good sense of the detail that you are seeing. Here, the exposure benefits not from the 5th but the 4th zone to make zones 2 and 3 sing.

My minor complaint is that many, not all, of these images were not exposed to achieve the detail that could have been had. Yes, AA images were high contrast but the zones were separated and in many of the images in this challenge the zones were compressed.

Please understand, I have selected these two images to illustrate my point. There are many others with great merit. Also, this is not to take anything away from the winners. This is more a scholastic topic aimed at the purity of the AA style.





Message edited by author 2005-03-14 13:01:37.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/24/2025 03:11:58 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 09/24/2025 03:11:58 PM EDT.