| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/18/2005 05:21:29 PM · #176 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I see it's been 5 months or so since you've entered a challenge. Is it time for us to be inspired by your photography skills and challenge interpretations? |
Yes... you are right... it has been something like 5 months since I've entered a challenge... as a senior at an Ivy League university, I have been extremely busy concentrating on work, school, and what I will do in the "real world" next year. My photography, when I've found time for it, has been limited mostly to the photojournalism work that I tend to excel in... which also tend to be images that rarely do well here (although I might mention I've entered both wide angle and reflections here this week).
My photography for this site was much more prolific when I was a freshman - I started taking pictures on this site before there were paying members and when there were a lot less photos to judge. While my time is short, that is not the only reason I stopped coming to this site for a long time. Another reason were the sheer number of photos entered just because they wanted to be in the challenge...
I'm not trying to interpret the challenge necessarily... but I am trying to get people to think about what technique they are being asked to employ. Throughout the last 3 years I have seen way too many challenges go up and then people enter a shot within the next few hours.. and I find that there may be something wrong with that. I think that in the spirit of the site, so that we may all improve and learn, and not just have to sift through photos entered just because.
I feel that there are a lot of challenges on here that are easy to enter and don't employ as much thinking (for instance the rubber duck challenge). However, I believe that what D&L are trying to get us to do with the members only challenges is to think about specific photography techniques and advance our skills by enhancing our pictures with them. Otherwise why call them challenges? why not just call them pretty pictures.
Message edited by Manic - quote fixed. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 05:41:17 PM · #177 |
Originally posted by RiderGal:
My photography for this site was much more prolific when I was a freshman - I started taking pictures on this site before there were paying members and when there were a lot less photos to judge. While my time is short, that is not the only reason I stopped coming to this site for a long time. Another reason were the sheer number of photos entered just because they wanted to be in the challenge...
I'm not trying to interpret the challenge necessarily... but I am trying to get people to think about what technique they are being asked to employ. Throughout the last 3 years I have seen way too many challenges go up and then people enter a shot within the next few hours.. and I find that there may be something wrong with that. I think that in the spirit of the site, so that we may all improve and learn, and not just have to sift through photos entered just because.
I feel that there are a lot of challenges on here that are easy to enter and don't employ as much thinking (for instance the rubber duck challenge). However, I believe that what D&L are trying to get us to do with the members only challenges is to think about specific photography techniques and advance our skills by enhancing our pictures with them. Otherwise why call them challenges? why not just call them pretty pictures. |
I agree with most of this I was sick of seeing good entries get swallowed up in huge a challenge and not scoring as well as they should. This has now been rectified with split of non-member challenges which was a great idea.
But I still try and concentrate on the member challenges as I found them much more challenging and this current one "grain" is a great example. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 09:39:14 PM · #178 |
Originally posted by gaurawa:
I had done a few sometime back...
  |
both of those are fabulous! i especially like the 2nd one... i would give that a 10 in a challenge!
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 09:42:57 PM · #179 |
I was flattered to notice my image used as an example here... Thank you.
Just to let you know... the grain WAS added in post processing to help with the feel.
I tend to agree with the general opinion here that grain should be used to enhance a mood and not simply to add a new editing technique.
Rd |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 09:43:53 PM · #180 |
Sorry... :)
never tried to post an image here before.
Rd. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 09:57:55 PM · #181 |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 10:01:50 PM · #182 |
Ok UncleBro... aka... showoff... :)
What I did is cut and paste the url to the post page... what went wrong?
thx
Rd |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 10:17:41 PM · #183 |
if you open your image up, there will be an id number at the end of the url.
That one was 232374.
Then you click the right hand icon in the reply window and enter the id number when prompted.
I always hit preview before I post to make sure :-)
I hope I explained that ok?
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 10:19:08 PM · #184 |
Thank you Unclebro... I really appreciate the help... :)
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 11:15:33 PM · #185 |
Grain! :P
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 11:54:41 PM · #186 |
How is this? Grain/Noise?
|
|
|
|
10/19/2005 03:06:33 PM · #187 |
Originally posted by jrtodd:
I can see some of the comments now, "Looks like you took this with your cell phone". |
Who bought you a camera phone ?? |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 02:11:35 PM · #188 |
I'm hoping to see alot more grain than the last few photos posted here.
This should be an interesting challenge. Can one have too much grain? Not enough? Will be interesting on how grain is applied and wether or not the photo was actually enhanced by adding grain. |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 02:17:43 PM · #189 |
!! Double post?
Steve
Message edited by author 2005-10-20 14:19:20. |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 02:18:15 PM · #190 |
Enough grain?
Steve |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 02:21:09 PM · #191 |
| Yes, I like it nice and gritty. ;) |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 02:23:38 PM · #192 |
Originally posted by CalliopeKel:
I'm hoping to see alot more grain than the last few photos posted here.
This should be an interesting challenge. Can one have too much grain? Not enough? Will be interesting on how grain is applied and wether or not the photo was actually enhanced by adding grain. |
I'm still salivating at this one (especially since my reflections entry is heading south rather than north). Somehow I've managed 3 10's out of you Calliope in the last few challenges (at least ones where you have commented), can I make it 4? |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 02:28:15 PM · #193 |
I've probably given you more....I would need to research that. I try to always comment on all photos I give 9s and 10s to.
I expect you might DrAchoo. I must love your work. |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 02:40:23 PM · #194 |
There is a lot more to "grain" than just "Filter > Noise > Add Noise"...
Compare these three photos, for example... the original, noisy grain, and grainy grain...
  
Although I much prefer the original, if I had to choose between the two "grainy" versions, I definitely would pick the non-noise one... Just my 2¢! |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 03:16:14 PM · #195 |
I've been messing around like crazy here. See below an example of a dune-and-skyscape that I like very much except I'm not in love with the extreme blowout where the sun is. Next to it, an experiment at doing some serious grain work :-)
 
For whatever that's worth. And don't ask me how I did it; I'm either not telling or I'm not too sure myself :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2005 03:24:05 PM · #196 |
People don't like grain. Or maybe they just didn't like me:
I prefer to think it was the grain ;)
|
|
|
|
10/20/2005 03:25:49 PM · #197 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
People don't like grain. Or maybe they just didn't like me:
I prefer to think it was the grain ;) |
C'mon, get REAL. You could neat image that face to a fare-thee-well and STILL scare small children into nightmares :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2005 04:11:35 PM · #198 |
If you have the $179 to shell out for the grain plugin you mean?
start earlier post...
Originally posted by EddyG:
Originally posted by alexsaberi:
so are we all adding the noise via photoshop then? |
I'd highly recommend it.
For best results, look into using something like Grain Surgery that simulates actual film grain from real film stock instead of Filter > Noise > Add Noise. Noise is too "predictable" and "digital" looking; grain is "natural" and "analog" looking. |
end earlier post...
I took a look at your three example pics. The "grainy grain" almost appears to be snowing. I think the second one could get closer without the expensive plugin by boosting the contrast some, darken the shadows a bit, add a layer of thin (.5) gaussian blur, and use the gaussian blur option (at least in Paint Shop Pro 9 I have 3 "noise" choices - one being gaussian). JMO. ;^)
|
|
|
|
10/20/2005 04:20:13 PM · #199 |
"Create an image where image grain or "noise" is an integral part of the message of your photo".
I don't think it is about the amount of grain added but whether the effect is an integral part of the message.
Some of the examples I have seen in this thread seem to be just adding noise for the sake of it. Nothing to compliment the image message. |
|
|
|
10/20/2005 04:34:13 PM · #200 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
"Create an image where image grain or "noise" is an integral part of the message of your photo".
I don't think it is about the amount of grain added but whether the effect is an integral part of the message.
Some of the examples I have seen in this thread seem to be just adding noise for the sake of it. Nothing to compliment the image message. |
No question about it, BUT these are just for the purpose of asking technique questions. There's two components here; one is "How do I GET grain, what are my options, what's 'enough' grain, etc?" and the other, rightfully not being addressed in this thread, is "What sort of an image would effectively use grain as an 'integral part of the message'?"
To deal witht hat question would be seen by many as an attempt to "steer" the voters/submitters in certain directions, but I got no problem with people discussing grain techniques int he abstract, since this is new territory for a lot of people.
Robt.
|
|
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 11:28:11 PM EDT.
