| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/18/2006 01:49:41 PM · #26 |
Rose - I don't disagree with the diversity of photographers to pay tribute to. That's quite a hefty list you've posted. My point is - who is going to know who KOUDELKA is? If you title your image with KOUDELKA are most (emphasis on MOST) voters going to look at your entry and say "ah, yes - well done emulating Koudelka"? No, they are going to look at the image and decide for themselves if they like the image or not and vote accordingly.
Actually, you're probably better off picking some obscure photographer than a well known one...
That's JMO.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 01:50:15 PM · #27 |
| Jim Zuckermann Although it's hard to pin down on his "style", as he does SO much stuff... |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 01:51:54 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by macpapas:
Jim Zuckermann Although it's hard to pin down on his "style", as he does SO much stuff... |
I'm reading a book by him as we speak, cool guy :) |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 01:52:44 PM · #29 |
Edward Steichen is from Luxembourg :)
Maybe I'll find something that fits his style.
I'm probably gonna be killed for mentioning her, and I don't plan to enter anything like her work but - what about Anne Geddes?
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 01:55:06 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Rose - I don't disagree with the diversity of photographers to pay tribute to. That's quite a hefty list you've posted. My point is - who is going to know who KOUDELKA is? If you title your image with KOUDELKA are most (emphasis on MOST) voters going to look at your entry and say "ah, yes - well done emulating Koudelka"? No, they are going to look at the image and decide for themselves if they like the image or not and vote accordingly.
Actually, you're probably better off picking some obscure photographer than a well known one...
That's JMO. |
This is an interesting point. If you did use a more obscure photographer, do you think it would be acceptable to put a link to his/her work in the title? |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 01:55:50 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by gloda:
I'm probably gonna be killed for mentioning her, and I don't plan to enter anything like her work but - what about Anne Geddes? |
Oh oh oh....now I just have to find a sleepy cooperative cute kid and put it in a vegetable....or a basket...maybe a giant martini glass? :) |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 01:59:45 PM · #32 |
Just wanted to say THANKS for helping us out with a list! I was stumped, too.
Carry on...don't let me kill this thread...Arbus info
Message edited by author 2006-01-18 14:03:11. |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:03:14 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Rose - I don't disagree with the diversity of photographers to pay tribute to. That's quite a hefty list you've posted. My point is - who is going to know who KOUDELKA is? If you title your image with KOUDELKA are most (emphasis on MOST) voters going to look at your entry and say "ah, yes - well done emulating Koudelka"? No, they are going to look at the image and decide for themselves if they like the image or not and vote accordingly.
Actually, you're probably better off picking some obscure photographer than a well known one...
That's JMO. |
I totally see your point, but on the other hand, how am I or anyone else to know WHO the voters will know? As you can see, on this very thread a lot of different photographers are being named. I don't know many myself but those four I mentioned previously. BUT, how is anyone to really know that a voter will look at anyone's photo and say "ahh yes, nice emulation of a Kabooseewhats"? LOL....We simply don't know what the voters will or won't know for famous photographers OR even all of the depictions. I could take any landscape and turn it into a b/w and call it an Adams. So whats the point?
For that matter, if no one puts the photographers name in the title, or at least the subject matter title from that photographer, and its another flower shot named "flower tribute", are we as voters just supposed to know who the photographer tribute is too? There are dozens of famous flower photograhers with SO many different styles, that anything would go. Yup, looks like a free study coming on.
Geeez, I'm having second thoughts now. On the wildlife thread it is now being discussed that as long as a fence or post can't be seen in a "zoo" shot, it will and is pretty much acceptable. Kind of makes me think now that I wouldn't feel so bad winning a ribbon, if such a thing happened, if my deer shot, for example, just "looks" like a natural environment setting.
Seeing how both of these challenges are really pretty pointless given what I have read in each thread I think it may be best to just again, shoot what I love and the heck with definitions. :)
Rose |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:05:14 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by eqsite:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Rose - I don't disagree with the diversity of photographers to pay tribute to. That's quite a hefty list you've posted. My point is - who is going to know who KOUDELKA is? If you title your image with KOUDELKA are most (emphasis on MOST) voters going to look at your entry and say "ah, yes - well done emulating Koudelka"? No, they are going to look at the image and decide for themselves if they like the image or not and vote accordingly.
Actually, you're probably better off picking some obscure photographer than a well known one...
That's JMO. |
This is an interesting point. If you did use a more obscure photographer, do you think it would be acceptable to put a link to his/her work in the title? |
Based on what is being said though, although I don't see why it wouldn't be acceptable, others may not take the time to go to the link. SOOOoooo, best to only enter what is a well known photograher. IF you can figure out who that is to each voter and read minds! LOL
Rose |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:07:34 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
I could take any landscape and turn it into a b/w and call it an Adams. |
But it likely wouldn't "look like" an Ansel Adams.
I think that ideally you want to come up with an image that, when the viewer sees it, he/she thinks, "That looks like an .....!" And I said ideally ....
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:10:33 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by Rose8699:
I could take any landscape and turn it into a b/w and call it an Adams. |
But it likely wouldn't "look like" an Ansel Adams.
I think that ideally you want to come up with an image that, when the viewer sees it, he/she thinks, "That looks like an .....!" And I said ideally .... |
I agree, and I can do that too. The problem is you are discussing voters and viewers as if they will know each and every Ansel shot ever known to man. Let's say there are 100 entries and 250 voters. Who is to say that 150 of those voters will actually be able to identify an Adams? How many will actually know to say "that looks like an... !!" Ideally is the magic word. And when you can't know that the voter will know your emulation, then it seems a bit pointless, even if it is an Adams or a Warhol. |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:13:27 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by Rose8699:
I could take any landscape and turn it into a b/w and call it an Adams. |
But it likely wouldn't "look like" an Ansel Adams.
I think that ideally you want to come up with an image that, when the viewer sees it, he/she thinks, "That looks like an .....!" And I said ideally .... |
I agree, and I can do that too. The problem is you are discussing voters and viewers as if they will know each and every Ansel shot ever known to man. Let's say there are 100 entries and 250 voters. Who is to say that 150 of those voters will actually be able to identify an Adams? How many will actually know to say "that looks like an... !!" Ideally is the magic word. And when you can't know that the voter will know your emulation, then it seems a bit pointless, even if it is an Adams or a Warhol. |
I think people will be looking for images that "look like ...."
I also think the important part of the challenge is for you to study a well known master's work. It's not trying to make the voters study every master so they'll be able to vote on your image, but for you to study someone's work and try to emulate the style.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:17:25 PM · #38 |
duplicate post due to lag
Message edited by author 2006-01-18 14:19:31. |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:17:44 PM · #39 |
For more B+W landscapes, there's always Fay Godwin
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:18:39 PM · #40 |
The more I think about it, the more I think it doesn't matter WHO you are emulating. Noplace int he challenge description does it say we need to title with the emulated photographer, nor does it say we need to judge based on faithfulness to the emulated photographer.
In fact, it says almost the opposite:
Study the work of a well-known photographer and take an image inspired by his/ her work. The image should not be a copy but should seek to convey your chosen photographer's style, subject matter and/ or techniques.
The more I think about it, the more I believe the images should be judged, as always, on photographic merit. And here's soemthing else; I don't see how it's POSSIBLE to have a dnmtc in this one. It's basically a free study with a "start button" installed on it to get you thinking on a specific road.
Lawd knows, if we DO have the challenge nazis out in force they are gonna run foursquare up against the majority who will make NO effort to seek out the "original" work and then "judge against it" based on dealty to...
I don't see the challenge as "being faithful to"; I see it as being "inspired by". And that can open a lot of doors. Besides which, given that this is basic editing, there's a HELL of a lot you cannot do that might be needed for a literal rendition. The Geddes-lovers, for example, are in trouble because we NEVER allow that kind of cloning work.
IMO, Do this one to please yourself, and let the votes fall where they may.
R. |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:22:56 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I don't see the challenge as "being faithful to"; I see it as being "inspired by". And that can open a lot of doors. Besides which, given that this is basic editing, there's a HELL of a lot you cannot do that might be needed for a literal rendition. The Geddes-lovers, for example, are in trouble because we NEVER allow that kind of cloning work.
IMO, Do this one to please yourself, and let the votes fall where they may.
R. |
Yes! What I was trying to say. The challenge is for you to study a master, for you to learn. From that point of view it's about as good as challenges get.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:23:24 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by gloda:
Edward Steichen is from Luxembourg :)
Maybe I'll find something that fits his style.
I'm probably gonna be killed for mentioning her, and I don't plan to enter anything like her work but - what about Anne Geddes? |
There are quite a few people on this site who think her work is high art. It is way too cute for me. It is my opinion that Anne Geddes will not be counted for much in the long run. Although she is popular at the moment to I believe she will go the way of Beanie Babies.
For an indicator of lasting power go to a reputable book search and type in Ane Geddes to see how many of her books are currently being offered for $1.
By comparison type in Cindy Sherman.
IMO Anne Geddes is to photographic art what McDonald's is to culinary art.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:25:05 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
duplicate post due to lag |
Oooo, getting lag here now.
Ok, well, I agree with Bear_Music. This is really just a free study more than anything else. Let's face it. We here, or most of us, already know of many artists works, etc. To have a challenge just so us, the photographers can study a well known artist, is more like a school assignment then a challenge where voting takes place. Sorry Ursula, but that is my take on it. I've done this type of challenge before, and have done studying on famous photographers. At that time I picked Jim Brandenburg as my muse, but had to DQ myself due to over editing - not understanding editing rules at that time. Another problem I agree with Bear_Music on.
However, in a challenge, the idea is to get votes and hopefully win a ribbon by successfully meeting the theme to the best of your ability and that will appeal to the voters. This is a free study, in my opinion, so basically anything goes and an "untiled" title is sufficiant, IF I want to go that route.
In Wildlife, again, we have a free study with animals. Just don't show a fence or post, or anything that will throw the voter to think "hmm, this isn't a natural environment", and you are pretty much good to go.
So basically the choice is this. An open free study, or a wildlife free study. LOL....I'm going back to wildlife. I much rather take photos of animals then soup cans. :)
Rose
Message edited by author 2006-01-18 14:30:06. |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:27:01 PM · #44 |
Joseph Scaylea //www.seattlegallery.com/
Galen Rowell //www.mountainlight.com/
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:31:29 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
I much rather take photos of animals then soup cans. :)
Rose |
And I thought most of Warhol's photos weren't of soupcans :)
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:39:21 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by Rose8699:
I much rather take photos of animals then soup cans. :)
Rose |
And I thought most of Warhol's photos weren't of soupcans :) |
Seems a lot of them are to me! LOL....personally, I really don't like his style. I find it a bit warped. But I think anyone who sees a Campbells label will automatically think Warhol. Much more than Ansel. Ansel takes anything from a b/w farm house with a white picket fence, to wide open mountainous regions in color. So I think any soup can will definately be recognized in this challenge, much more than many others I would imagine.
Rose
|
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:42:13 PM · #47 |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:54:34 PM · #48 |
michael kenna //www.michaelkenna.net
one of my newest favorites. |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 02:55:45 PM · #49 |
I see the same discussion over and aover.
..."I am gonna do what I wanna do and if the 'Does Not Meet Challenge' nazi's mark me down...there is gonna be hell to pay"...
Then if someone comes back and warns, in advance "You know, I really want to see such and such, etc, etc, Balh, blah or I am gonna mark it down"....then all kinds of moaning about how they are narrow minded, the challenge doesn't say that, etc.
You come to DP Challenge, you enter the challenge, you take what you get.
I mean, if you don't respect, care, or basically are disagreeable with what voters think...why even post photos here? You know how it goes...there is no mystery to it.
If some voters want to see a name of the artist in the title...I guess I can oblige...Something like "Endless Summer" inspired by H Lorenz
Heck, if my goal is to get a higher score I will be more successful meeting the voters expectations than trying to change their expectations.
Anyway, just my take on it.
And I ain't mentioning any freaking names..I already have my photographer and you can't have him/her :-P
Post Edit...I won't vote someone down if they don't have their inspiration in their title..but it sure would be interesting for me as I vote to see how successful you were at capturing their style/feel. :-)
Message edited by author 2006-01-18 15:03:45. |
|
|
|
01/18/2006 03:07:42 PM · #50 |
Without a doubt, the finest photographer of the modern era is...
this guy
Not only is he a great photographer, he's also a swell guy, and modest to a fault.
|
|
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: 08/15/2025 03:27:05 AM EDT.
