| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/09/2002 11:03:47 AM · #1 |
I'm being bad, but I'm not terribly impressed with this week's submission. Yes, I include my submission in that statement. I knew we'd see a lot of blur, but there are many pics where it just looks like snapshots of things moving. Although there are a could where the whole photo is moving without much blur at all... I liked them ones.
Like most challenges tehre are several photos that are strikingly similar. This was a hard challenge to vote on.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:18:28 AM · #2 |
I tend to agree and feel that the scores will be generally lower this week as in some challenges that we have had in the past.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:18:44 AM · #3 |
I think some people took the idea of motion blur a bit too far. I noticed that there was an other entry similar to (and better than) mine. Hope they are doing better than my low score! I also noticed that 2 other ideas I had for the challenge had been covered too.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:21:21 AM · #4 |
| not to rip on anyone here, because there were some good shots, but stopped motion was already done here, are those that are obviously stopped motion supposed to be judged as motion? |
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:26:36 AM · #5 |
| does motion pictures have to be clear? u can't see anything in a blur but u can still see the line of colors that is captured during a motion and that color u can't see when objects are still. |
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:27:27 AM · #6 |
It is my humble opinion that even stopped motion is an image that depicts motion. I am strictly a novice. However, a stopped motion with compositional elements...lines, curves, blur....that conveys to the viewer a sense of motion will get marks from me for having met the challenge. But it has to have those compositional elements to it.
A pic of a monkey, talking on the cell phone and sipping on java while getting ready for a rough day at work at the zoo, would WOW me, but would not meet the challenge if it doesn't have those compositional elements.
But I am just one man with one opinion!
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:28:17 AM · #7 |
In my opinion the challenge was to show the MOVEMENT of an object, and not simply show an object that is moving.
Does that make sense?
Message edited by author 2002-12-09 11:28:46.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:30:13 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by achiral:
not to rip on anyone here, because there were some good shots, but stopped motion was already done here, are those that are obviously stopped motion supposed to be judged as motion? |
It's entirely up to you.
Does the picture 'convey' motion to you? (uh, I'm sure there's a bad pun trying to creep into that somewhere).
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:31:48 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by achiral:
not to rip on anyone here, because there were some good shots, but stopped motion was already done here, are those that are obviously stopped motion supposed to be judged as motion? |
Well, I tried to vote higher for those pictures which made my eyes move across the photo instead of those with blur or implied motion (i.e. stopped motion). There are several pics where the shutter was so slow that to me the motion was defeated... the moving object was blurred solid and almost became inanimate (sp). Didn't care for those. I preferred the ones that used the subject to move the eyes, instead of the motion of the subject.
And for more misunderstood comments, please visit the inside of my brain.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:41:58 AM · #10 |
If a stopped motion image conveyed motion, as opposed to just looking 'still', then for me that fits the challenge.
As for long exposure shots, if you can tell what they are meant to be, instead of just a blurr, that fits for me too.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:43:32 AM · #11 |
| how can it convey motion if it is stopped correctly |
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:46:38 AM · #12 |
If I saw a perfectly stopped photo of a dog in mid air catching a frisby, then to me that still conveys motion.
There can still be 'energy' in the picture, even if it frozen.
Message edited by author 2002-12-09 11:48:25.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 11:48:38 AM · #13 |
| fair enough, i would agree actually that that passes, at least more than some other types of stopped motion...who am i to say what people should do, everyone has their own opinions and tastes...oh well |
|
|
|
12/09/2002 12:01:54 PM · #14 |
There are many pics of water. Some are frozen solid and to me lack "motion". I know water moves, but the photo stopped that. Some of the water pics were taken at such a slow speed that the water has become misty (same with car tail/head lights). Photo becomes more abstract to me... still absent of motion.
The question I asked is... does the photo move my eyes? That gives a photo motion for me.
But then again, motion can be found in still life. Being still makes me move to tears. Tears are made of water and water moves. Movies move at a frame rate of like 30 fps. Seconds are elements of movement. Time is of the essence. I eat food. Food makes my stomach move. To move is to jesture. To jest is retarded. Retarded I am.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 09:57:55 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by achiral:
not to rip on anyone here, because there were some good shots, but stopped motion was already done here, are those that are obviously stopped motion supposed to be judged as motion? |
I must be dense. How do you show anything other than stop motion in a still picture?
Cub |
|
|
|
12/09/2002 10:43:37 PM · #16 |
basically, there's "stopped motion" which shows and object in motion clearly (ie: fast shutter speed) or a "motion blurs" which exagerates the effect of motion by actually tracking the path of the subject (or background) over a set period of time (ie: longer shutter speed)
the first, in my opinion, is harder to pull off effectively. it's to easy for the subject to NOT look in motion at all. i'll probably be voting higher on stopped motion pics because they are the more risky, daring, and tricky pictures this challenge.
my picture, btw, is blurred. i'm not totally satisfied with it. lol.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2002 10:56:20 PM · #17 |
| I have both in mine -- part of the subject is moving quickly and little blurred, another part slowly and pretty sharp. STILL under 4.3! Oh well.. |
|
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: 08/16/2025 05:35:11 AM EDT.
