| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/03/2005 04:11:02 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by fotoshootme:
Originally posted by photodude:
I know I'll regret this but
"No Fat Chicks" |
this is why woman starve themselves....god |
Yes it is. A friend of mines girlfriend died of a heart attack yesterday. She was 26 years old, and anorexic. |
|
|
|
09/03/2005 04:15:44 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by azoychka:
This si a very elementary approach that takes less skill to execute. |
Less skill than what? I think Saracat was asking you to post some examples of shots that you think do take skill. |
|
|
|
09/03/2005 04:35:40 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by azoychka:
This si a very elementary approach that takes less skill to execute. |
Less skill than what? I think Saracat was asking you to post some examples of shots that you think do take skill. |
They all take skill, but less skill is needed when the work is only an object occuping a large black space. It is much more difficult to place an object into a space. You must deal with many more relationships that this presents. There are many examples in the nude challenge.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 04:54:30 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by azoychka:
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by azoychka:
This si a very elementary approach that takes less skill to execute. |
Less skill than what? I think Saracat was asking you to post some examples of shots that you think do take skill. |
They all take skill, but less skill is needed when the work is only an object occuping a large black space. It is much more difficult to place an object into a space. You must deal with many more relationships that this presents. There are many examples in the nude challenge. |
Only one of which is in the top ten, and I suspect it is because in that particular shot the background is not distracting. I think that the reason shots with black or white backgrounds did so well is that those backgrounds force the viewer to the subject, and only the subject - the nude. The challenge was to shoot a nude. Not a nude in a landscape/bedroom/bathtub/whatever. By restricting themselves to a simple study of the human nude, they have many fewer elements with which to disguise technical flaws.
For example:  by aplomb76 is a very well-conceptualised photo, IMHO (and one of my favorites in the challenge). However, remove the surroundings and you can see that the lighting is not particulaly flattering, the pose is somewhat flat, and the focus on the model is a teeny bit off.
In this shot,  nico_blue does not have the advantages that aplomb76 has in camouflaging technical flaws. He's either on the spot or not, and in this case he has demonstrated great technical ability.
How is that a less skillful application of photographic technique? Perhaps you could explain it to me since I can't seem to wrap my brain around it...
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 05:00:23 PM · #80 |
saracat....how long do either of these photos hold your attention? How long does it take you to see all there is to see?
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 05:03:25 PM · #81 |
Studio work is not easy. Controlled lighting that will flatter the complexities of human skin tones even WITH clothes on is a great excercise in patience. To add edpth, shadows, texures, keep it in focus, proper DOF AND make it interesting....very tough.
Try it and see.
I think it is quite the opposite of "not having any distracting elements to deal with". Mother nature does not help with beautiful lighting, complex shadows and colors from the the sky / sunset. There is no babbling brook (at least not in my studio) or trees.
All you have in the studio you have to think of and create.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 05:41:49 PM · #82 |
I think in or out of the studio has its own challenges.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 06:19:57 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by azoychka:
I think in or out of the studio has its own challenges. |
Then why deride pics taken in studio as not needing as much skill?
And as far as how long do they hold my attention, I recall that during the challenge they both held my attention for about the same span of time. In fact, I probably gave all of the photos about the same amount of attention and scrutiny during the challenge.
After the fact, I seem to spend more time looking at nico's and grigrigirl's photos than ony others, and it's not because they're on the front page. In bothe of those photos, particularly nico's, the amount of detail and definition is remarkable. While I still like aplomb's image, it does not hold my attention or interest for as long as nico's.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 06:44:50 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by saracat:
Originally posted by azoychka:
I think in or out of the studio has its own challenges. |
Then why deride pics taken in studio as not needing as much skill? |
You are mistaken. I did not deride studio work. I said a single object and only a single object within a blank black space is what is called a 'study' It is used to learn and practice. It is much simpler to execute than a piece which uses all of the space within it's four sides. Yes, there is great detail in those photos. A wonderful beginning for a picture.
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 07:22:11 PM · #85 |
Everyone who's gotten on photodude - he's not SAYING anything personally. He's quoting something, in fact a tshirt. Do we still not see this? Ok, how about if that shirt was on a FAT guy?
It's from Family Guy, not Simpsons as far as I can see.
I'm not posting this as my opinion or as a slam on heavy people at all. I'm pointing out where the "line" is from.
M
|
|
|
|
09/03/2005 07:39:24 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Everyone who's gotten on photodude - he's not SAYING anything personally. He's quoting something, in fact a tshirt. Do we still not see this? Ok, how about if that shirt was on a FAT guy?
It's from Family Guy, not Simpsons as far as I can see.
I'm not posting this as my opinion or as a slam on heavy people at all. I'm pointing out where the "line" is from.
M |
At first I thought wow, what an ignorant comment to make. Then a really good discussion ensued. Photodude was only the spark that lit this fire. It has been brewing. Sorry if came down hard Photodude.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2005 01:47:42 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by barndog:
Originally posted by mavrik:
Everyone who's gotten on photodude - he's not SAYING anything personally. He's quoting something, in fact a tshirt. Do we still not see this? Ok, how about if that shirt was on a FAT guy?
It's from Family Guy, not Simpsons as far as I can see.
I'm not posting this as my opinion or as a slam on heavy people at all. I'm pointing out where the "line" is from.
M |
At first I thought wow, what an ignorant comment to make. Then a really good discussion ensued. Photodude was only the spark that lit this fire. It has been brewing. Sorry if came down hard Photodude. |
I'm not sorry, as one of the "Fat Chicks" sometimes those comments just plain hurt. Another comment was made implying that we just don't know when to close our mouths at the dinner table, that is not always the situation. I know what I need to do, I know what I should do, but because I choose not to is no reason to put out a generic insult towards fat women. I don't care if it was from a TV show or his own mind, repeating it just continues the idea and the insult.
And just for the record, I may be fat by some standards but I can still keep up with my 3 year old, my 10 year old, my 13 year old and do barn chores 4 days a week, grooming and lunging a horse twice a week and the only time I break a sweat is when it's really humid. Fat doesn't always mean unhealthy either.
Deannda
Tired of "fat" comments and jokes, they aren't funny anymore |
|
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: 08/21/2025 01:55:25 PM EDT.
