|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/11/2006 06:58:14 PM · #76 |
I'm not nearly as articulate as I wish I was - but zueszen - he can talk good - look what I found...
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Limiting potentially immeasurable choices to a defined subject or a chosen category of photography, really, should stimulate creativity, not hamper it. Topics, IMO, are or should be there for the benefit of the photographer, not for the untaxed glee of some voters swinging a bat.
I do not penalize entries for failing to meet the challenge. I may award a higher score to a unique interpretation or to a finesse I recognize, but I cannot, in good conscience, penalize something or someone for a fault that may lie within me and not with a picture.
I have seen and continue to see perfectly good photographs here penalized for exceeding the appreciative capacity of voters to recognize an entry for the poignant topicality it may demonstrate. If I consider the photo remarkable (artistically very interesting), I may just decide to award the highest mark possible in the faint hope to compensate for a predictably overall devaluation. |
If I wasn't a fan of zueszen before (and believe me I was) I would be now. If only every person that signs up for DPC had to read this, and comprehend it first -
Thank you for stating what I've felt and been unable to express.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 07:27:57 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by digitalknight:
I'm not nearly as articulate as I wish I was - but zueszen - he can talk good - look what I found...
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Limiting potentially immeasurable choices to a defined subject or a chosen category of photography, really, should stimulate creativity, not hamper it. Topics, IMO, are or should be there for the benefit of the photographer, not for the untaxed glee of some voters swinging a bat.
I do not penalize entries for failing to meet the challenge. I may award a higher score to a unique interpretation or to a finesse I recognize, but I cannot, in good conscience, penalize something or someone for a fault that may lie within me and not with a picture.
I have seen and continue to see perfectly good photographs here penalized for exceeding the appreciative capacity of voters to recognize an entry for the poignant topicality it may demonstrate. If I consider the photo remarkable (artistically very interesting), I may just decide to award the highest mark possible in the faint hope to compensate for a predictably overall devaluation. |
If I wasn't a fan of zueszen before (and believe me I was) I would be now. If only every person that signs up for DPC had to read this, and comprehend it first -
Thank you for stating what I've felt and been unable to express. |
I agree Digitalknight... should be a box upon membership entry that must be checked stating that you've read this comment...
Honestly, it shocks me every time I see these threads debating the challenge description and disecting it's meaning during the voting period. I have no doubt that whoever words the description goes to great lengths to make sure that there is as little controversy as possible. Just don't know how much further it can be taken. Perhaps the whole idea is to interpret in the way you feel fits and allow voters to vote in the way they feel fits and somewhere in the middle we'll all meet.
I still stand by my previous comments that voters... particularily newer members who are perhaps looking for a little direction, could be and in some cases probably are swayed during the voting period. Of course it can't be proven but if even one single vote is influenced based on agressive postings of interpretation, the damage in my opinion is done. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 07:58:58 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by Qart:
Originally posted by digitalknight:
I'm not nearly as articulate as I wish I was - but zueszen - he can talk good - look what I found...
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Limiting potentially immeasurable choices to a defined subject or a chosen category of photography, really, should stimulate creativity, not hamper it. Topics, IMO, are or should be there for the benefit of the photographer, not for the untaxed glee of some voters swinging a bat.
I do not penalize entries for failing to meet the challenge. I may award a higher score to a unique interpretation or to a finesse I recognize, but I cannot, in good conscience, penalize something or someone for a fault that may lie within me and not with a picture.
I have seen and continue to see perfectly good photographs here penalized for exceeding the appreciative capacity of voters to recognize an entry for the poignant topicality it may demonstrate. If I consider the photo remarkable (artistically very interesting), I may just decide to award the highest mark possible in the faint hope to compensate for a predictably overall devaluation. |
If I wasn't a fan of zueszen before (and believe me I was) I would be now. If only every person that signs up for DPC had to read this, and comprehend it first -
Thank you for stating what I've felt and been unable to express. |
I agree Digitalknight... should be a box upon membership entry that must be checked stating that you've read this comment...
Honestly, it shocks me every time I see these threads debating the challenge description and disecting it's meaning during the voting period. I have no doubt that whoever words the description goes to great lengths to make sure that there is as little controversy as possible. Just don't know how much further it can be taken. Perhaps the whole idea is to interpret in the way you feel fits and allow voters to vote in the way they feel fits and somewhere in the middle we'll all meet.
I still stand by my previous comments that voters... particularily newer members who are perhaps looking for a little direction, could be and in some cases probably are swayed during the voting period. Of course it can't be proven but if even one single vote is influenced based on agressive postings of interpretation, the damage in my opinion is done. |
I look at it like this (and remember this is a hobbie for me I am not a pro photog).
If someone hire a archetict to design a 1 storie building with x many rooms and y many square feet and the arc comes back with a building with x rooms but uses 2 floors to do so then the archetict failed at the request no matter how impressive the design is. To me much is the same with the challenge it states to offset your subject by using a burst of color, so if the entire shot is the subject, it is not offset even if it is a bright colorful subject. So I only really see 2 ways to this challange Have a bright burst of color background with a diffrent color subject sorrunded by that color or to have a bland or normal background with a subject that stands out dramatically from it because it is very colorful or a vivid color. If the shot does not do this then it failed to meet the challenge and should not score well no matter how nice of a shot it is. As the contest is a challenge to fit a topic or discription Hence this place is called DP Challenge, not DPtakereallyprettyphotosthatsortafitthechallenge.com I dont vote that way to be mean to people but because that is what the challenge is to do, Make a shot that is xyz and has good qualities. If it wasnt that then every one of the contest would be a freestudy. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 08:23:04 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by Qart:
Originally posted by digitalknight:
I'm not nearly as articulate as I wish I was - but zueszen - he can talk good - look what I found...
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Limiting potentially immeasurable choices to a defined subject or a chosen category of photography, really, should stimulate creativity, not hamper it. Topics, IMO, are or should be there for the benefit of the photographer, not for the untaxed glee of some voters swinging a bat.
I do not penalize entries for failing to meet the challenge. I may award a higher score to a unique interpretation or to a finesse I recognize, but I cannot, in good conscience, penalize something or someone for a fault that may lie within me and not with a picture.
I have seen and continue to see perfectly good photographs here penalized for exceeding the appreciative capacity of voters to recognize an entry for the poignant topicality it may demonstrate. If I consider the photo remarkable (artistically very interesting), I may just decide to award the highest mark possible in the faint hope to compensate for a predictably overall devaluation. |
If I wasn't a fan of zueszen before (and believe me I was) I would be now. If only every person that signs up for DPC had to read this, and comprehend it first -
Thank you for stating what I've felt and been unable to express. |
I agree Digitalknight... should be a box upon membership entry that must be checked stating that you've read this comment...
Honestly, it shocks me every time I see these threads debating the challenge description and disecting it's meaning during the voting period. I have no doubt that whoever words the description goes to great lengths to make sure that there is as little controversy as possible. Just don't know how much further it can be taken. Perhaps the whole idea is to interpret in the way you feel fits and allow voters to vote in the way they feel fits and somewhere in the middle we'll all meet.
I still stand by my previous comments that voters... particularily newer members who are perhaps looking for a little direction, could be and in some cases probably are swayed during the voting period. Of course it can't be proven but if even one single vote is influenced based on agressive postings of interpretation, the damage in my opinion is done. |
How I see it is there are threads that tear apart challenge descriptions before challenge, but what happens is a lot of people on the thread tend to brush it off. Sort of like "It's easy to understand the description" and some like "why keep harping on it"; "don't take it so seriously"; "just enter what you like", and so on. Then when challenge goes in, and the entries are seen, we get those that should have stated their actual views on challenge in the prior thread now voicing their views during voting time instead.
This is why, to me, those threads shouldn't be brushed off so easily. Why NOT tear it apart? I know I do. Why? Because I want to enter the best I can that is not a DNMC. So I want to know exactly what is meant by something, and so on. I do research, and painstakingly hit the road and go out and get the best I can with what I have - be it camera or place. To complain after the fact is a bit amazing to me, when so many threads, sometimes doubled and tripled, are on pre-challenge descriptions.
In my beginnings here, I hated those threads. I thought too many concepts were thrown around and little would be left to the imagination of entries. But it doesn't seem that is the case or the reason for the threads. I now learn from them, and yes, I certainly join in and voice by two dah-lahs worth, but in the end, to me, it is worth it.
Rose |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 08:44:43 PM · #80 |
These threads are annoying and serve no purpose.
People can read, and they have the right as voters to interprete the challenge any way they want.
These threads wont change anyones mind...and peeps who try to tell me how I need to follow their voting guidelines for a challenge can all jump in a lake.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 11:28:02 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by nemesise1977:
I look at it like this (and remember this is a hobbie for me I am not a pro photog).
If someone hire a archetict to design a 1 storie building with x many rooms and y many square feet and the arc comes back with a building with x rooms but uses 2 floors to do so then the archetict failed at the request no matter how impressive the design is. |
HUGE difference between a blueprint for exactly a building that hundreds of people are going to work on and a guideline for what kind of photo one person is going to take.
I respectfully disagree. Even a client coming to me specifies what to shoot, but they LOVE deviations based on artistic creativity. It's what makes creativity fun - photography fun, it is the spice of life.
My architectural client wanted photos of his buildings, he said just to drive by at lunch and shoot them. I showed him the first image that I set up a tripod at dusk and waited for the light levels to balance, and captured the deep blue sky of twilight, the lights on, people blurred as they walk into his building - He LOVED it! No penalties for "does not meet challenge" here, in real life. In fact I've shot over 20 buildings for him now.
His "challenge" was expanded upon, made better, by my creativity and knowledge. Please give me the same chance to all photographers in these challenges.
Challenges are not "code", they're sort of a guidline really.
Message edited by author 2006-01-11 23:30:20.
|
|
|
|
01/12/2006 12:24:29 AM · #82 |
Originally posted by digitalknight:
Challenges are not "code", they're sort of a guidline really. |
Hey, have you been watching 'Pirates of the Carribean' lately? ;-) |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 02:26:56 AM  |
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: 08/30/2025 02:26:56 AM EDT.
|
