| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/13/2006 02:55:29 PM · #151 |
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
because the challenges are being renamed "suggestions". If you feel like shooting it that way then more power to you, if not, no big deal."
The whole point of a 2 seconds challenge should be to creatively use the this one parameter, whether it looks like 2 seconds or not. |
Yes, lets ensure that nobody can come up with a creative approach to get around any camera limitations they might have. Anyways, it isn't like I can enter this challenge anyway ;)
btw - the challenges have always been suggestions - not meeting them has never been a reason for a DQ. |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 02:57:27 PM · #152 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
If I take a picture of the hands of a watch moving from one tick, to the next tick to the final second tick, making it look like the motion across a 2 second interval - who cares how long the shutter was actually open for ? It would be an image that showed a 2 second interval of time - it would be entirely to the spirit of the challenge, even if I took it with a 1/30s exposure. |
I couldn't disagree with you more. |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 02:59:19 PM · #153 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
I couldn't disagree with you more. |
You need to try harder then. |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:00:42 PM · #154 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
I couldn't disagree with you more. |
You need to try harder then. |
LM (sleepy) AO |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:04:29 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
I couldn't disagree with you more. |
You need to try harder then. |
that's funny |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:21:16 PM · #156 |
I didn't see anyone comment on this, but it is interesting that all entries would be DNMC under this condition!
Originally posted by PhantomEWO:
Let's have another challenge called "Cheating" and all rules of every kind are thrown out. THEN lets see how many DNMC comments there is ;) |
It probably be better if this were an exclusive open challenge paired with "anything but 2-second exposure"
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:24:40 PM · #157 |
Ok how about this? This was an extra rule set that I made for Fotoman_forever and Shutterpug in their presonal duel.
Originally posted by Rikki:
Ok guys. The rules have been sent to your email addresses.
Extra rules
Since the two of you have dSLRs, we'll make this harder. You will need to send me the EXIF data so I can verify that it is indeed a 2 second exposure. This will be grounds for a mini DQ in your personal challenge if the 2 second exposure is not met to the second ;)
Good luck!
Rikki |
Satisfied? However, I think we just discriminated against those who don't have manual settings on their P&S.
Just food for thought. |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:28:28 PM · #158 |
2/2 = 1/1
Who needs a lawyer? |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:29:18 PM · #159 |
Originally posted by Rikki:
Ok how about this? This was an extra rule set that I made for Fotoman_forever and Shutterpug in their presonal duel.
Originally posted by Rikki:
Ok guys. The rules have been sent to your email addresses.
Extra rules
Since the two of you have dSLRs, we'll make this harder. You will need to send me the EXIF data so I can verify that it is indeed a 2 second exposure. This will be grounds for a mini DQ in your personal challenge if the 2 second exposure is not met to the second ;)
Good luck!
Rikki |
Satisfied? However, I think we just discriminated against those who don't have manual settings on their P&S.
Just food for thought. |
You want all of us to send you our EXIF data? You, kind sir, are a glutton for punishment.
:-) |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:30:43 PM · #160 |
Originally posted by mattmac:
You want all of us to send you our EXIF data? You, kind sir, are a glutton for punishment.
:-) |
Oh good gawd no! This was only for their little challenge ;P |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:32:32 PM · #161 |
Originally posted by Rikki:
Since the two of you have dSLRs, we'll make this harder. You will need to send me the EXIF data so I can verify that it is indeed a 2 second exposure. This will be grounds for a mini DQ in your personal challenge if the 2 second exposure is not met to the second ;)
Good luck!
Rikki
Satisfied? However, I think we just discriminated against those who don't have manual settings on their P&S.
Just food for thought. |
Ok so how about this. The next challenge is for P&S users only. We'll call it "Shutterlag". Highest scores should be given to those images that can exemplify the "shutterlag" quality of their cameras. An example would be a moving subject that is half out of the frame. ;)
I think I have an old CP 990 around here somewhere that will be perfect for this challenge.
Message edited by author 2006-03-13 15:33:58. |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:34:46 PM · #162 |
Originally posted by Rikki:
Originally posted by mattmac:
You want all of us to send you our EXIF data? You, kind sir, are a glutton for punishment.
:-) |
Oh good gawd no! This was only for their little challenge ;P |
Nope. Too late. No talking your way out of this one...
You will receive around 400 EXIFs shortly.
:-) |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:38:29 PM · #163 |
| Note that a lot of cameras don't shoot at "exact: shutter speeds or apertures, even if set manually. I've set a camera for (for example) a 1/500-second exposure at f5.6, and the EXIF will show things like a shutter speed of 1/503 and an aperture of f5.62 ... |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:43:44 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
Ok so how about this. The next challenge is for P&S users only. We'll call it "Shutterlag". Highest scores should be given to those images that can exemplify the "shutterlag" quality of their cameras. An example would be a moving subject that is half out of the frame. ;) |
Sounds like Too Late to me.
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:43:59 PM · #165 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Note that a lot of cameras don't shoot at "exact: shutter speeds or apertures, even if set manually. I've set a camera for (for example) a 1/500-second exposure at f5.6, and the EXIF will show things like a shutter speed of 1/503 and an aperture of f5.62 ... |
Yes. It also depends on the software doing the extracting. I've managed to extract very odd speeds from my 10Ds. |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 03:47:46 PM · #166 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
Ok so how about this. The next challenge is for P&S users only. We'll call it "Shutterlag". Highest scores should be given to those images that can exemplify the "shutterlag" quality of their cameras. An example would be a moving subject that is half out of the frame. ;)
I think I have an old CP 990 around here somewhere that will be perfect for this challenge. |
LMAO... but that might also be the operator error challenge. :-)
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 04:45:19 PM · #167 |
Well as I stated above I still don't understand the significance of a two second exposure. Just doesn't make any sense. PLUS...after reading this thread I wsould have to say the side of the fence I fell on was the side that says DQ if not EXACTLY 2 seconds as the challenge states. Why reward cheaters/people who don't follow the rules? You know how many people are going to be ticked off when an image that wasn't a 2 second exposure beats theirs which was?
That being said, I think a little more attention/thought to the challenges should be payed. Just because someone submitted the challenge as they wrote it doesn't mean it is the best way to present it to the community come rollover. Does anyone look at these and read them and make a decision or anything or is it just randomly selected with no review before rollover? |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 04:54:20 PM · #168 |
Okay, back from my 2s shoot. What to do, what to do.
Shall I use my noisy 2s f/1.8 ISO1600 shot or the almost the same looking but ultraclean 30s f/2.5 ISO200 shot, they both have almost the same motion blur. According to some it seems to be ok to cheat with my 30s exposure...
Guess what, I shall use my 2s noisy ISO1600 shot (or ISO800 from earlier that evening). I would be extremely disappointed if other people use longer exposures and may even ribbon with them. What's the point of the challenge?
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 05:02:42 PM · #169 |
Originally posted by Alienyst:
Well as I stated above I still don't understand the significance of a two second exposure. Just doesn't make any sense. |
2 seconds is an interesting shutter speed. It's not long enough, for example, to allow really good blurred-tide-on-the-beach shots. It's too long, on the other hand, to permit easily-accomplished panning shots. For night shots it forces a high ISO. For day shots, it forces a very small aperture.
I suspect the "rationale" behind the number may have been that a lot of P&S cameras have a maximum exposure of 2 or 3 seconds.
I donno, though....
R.
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 05:07:02 PM · #170 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
This is going to be interesting. How are voters going to know what a 2-second exposure looks like? I'm trying to personally visualize what kind of image to take and several things come to mind. I can go with a low light situation, or medium light with ND filters, motion blur, a "ghost" shot, or an over-exposed high-key type image. So many ways to go, so I'm wondering as a voter - how will you know what is or isn't a bonafide 2-second exposure?
This has the feel of a free-study written all over it. ;^) |
Then why even bother stating a 2 second exposure rule? |
I too wonder this. I mean, I think it is just so others will learn how to use the 2 second exposure. However, I think it is too difficult for council to sift through God knows how many entries and make sure they are 2 second exposures. It is more of a learning thing by DPC and then the voters take over from there as to ribbon placements.
Look at the winner for the Shallow DOF challenge of a person in the crowd. That wasn't shallow DOF, but was still a winning shot due to the voters. I too thought it was a GREAT shot. However, I think the bottom line for what DPC puts up for challenges is just to get people out there and learning their camera skills. The rest is in the hands of the voters as to ribbons.
Council certainly can't hang around all day and sift through the cheaters or if a photo was a 1 second or a 3 second, etc. The rules are there are NO DQ's for not meeting challenge guidelines. So that tells you that you can't be DQ'ed even if you use a 1600 or 4000 shutter speed. If the voters like it, it will ribbon, but the idea is too learn about your camera settings in my opinion.
Rose |
Rose. I looked up the Shallow Depth of Field II challenge and I got this shot. 
You might be thinking of the Singled Out challenge where it said to use shallow dof to your advantage. Personally, I didn't see using it as a rule in that case so I gave it a 10. However, if that same shot was entered in the Shallow Depth of Field challenge I would've given it a much lower mark. It's not that I feel that images that DNMC should be DQ'd but it does mean that I'm not going to reward someone just because they took a great shot. If the challenge is "Blue" and someone submits a great image that is entirely red, I feel that I can't give it a great mark. Therefore, if I see a waterfall shot that isn't cotton candy or lava like, it won't get a good score. The toughies are going to be the still shots so I guess we have to assume that those have followed the 2 second shutter speed that I feel this challenge calls for. If the winner fools us then s/he probably deserved it.
I look forward to seeing the entries in this challenge. With the quality of photography here it should be another great one!
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 05:26:25 PM · #171 |
Originally posted by dudephil:
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Originally posted by Brent_Ward:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
This is going to be interesting. How are voters going to know what a 2-second exposure looks like? I'm trying to personally visualize what kind of image to take and several things come to mind. I can go with a low light situation, or medium light with ND filters, motion blur, a "ghost" shot, or an over-exposed high-key type image. So many ways to go, so I'm wondering as a voter - how will you know what is or isn't a bonafide 2-second exposure?
This has the feel of a free-study written all over it. ;^) |
Then why even bother stating a 2 second exposure rule? |
I too wonder this. I mean, I think it is just so others will learn how to use the 2 second exposure. However, I think it is too difficult for council to sift through God knows how many entries and make sure they are 2 second exposures. It is more of a learning thing by DPC and then the voters take over from there as to ribbon placements.
Look at the winner for the Shallow DOF challenge of a person in the crowd. That wasn't shallow DOF, but was still a winning shot due to the voters. I too thought it was a GREAT shot. However, I think the bottom line for what DPC puts up for challenges is just to get people out there and learning their camera skills. The rest is in the hands of the voters as to ribbons.
Council certainly can't hang around all day and sift through the cheaters or if a photo was a 1 second or a 3 second, etc. The rules are there are NO DQ's for not meeting challenge guidelines. So that tells you that you can't be DQ'ed even if you use a 1600 or 4000 shutter speed. If the voters like it, it will ribbon, but the idea is too learn about your camera settings in my opinion.
Rose |
Rose. I looked up the Shallow Depth of Field II challenge and I got this shot.
You might be thinking of the Singled Out challenge where it said to use shallow dof to your advantage. Personally, I didn't see using it as a rule in that case so I gave it a 10. However, if that same shot was entered in the Shallow Depth of Field challenge I would've given it a much lower mark. It's not that I feel that images that DNMC should be DQ'd but it does mean that I'm not going to reward someone just because they took a great shot. If the challenge is "Blue" and someone submits a great image that is entirely red, I feel that I can't give it a great mark. Therefore, if I see a waterfall shot that isn't cotton candy or lava like, it won't get a good score. The toughies are going to be the still shots so I guess we have to assume that those have followed the 2 second shutter speed that I feel this challenge calls for. If the winner fools us then s/he probably deserved it.
I look forward to seeing the entries in this challenge. With the quality of photography here it should be another great one! |
OH YES, you are correct. It was the singled out challenge where shallow dof was in the description to isolate the subject. Some people complained a little later on that the shot that won was not shallow dof, yadda yadda. Thanks for clarifying. LOVE that photo in shallow dof as well of the bird. I love flying birds anyway. :)
But in this one, Bear is right. It isn't long enough for anything really dramatic, yet isn't short enough of a speed to capture anything well that isn't completely still. So to me, I agree. It may be a tough challenge to vote on for some, but I guess we will just have to wait and see what people submit and let the chips fall.
Rose |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 05:36:29 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Alienyst:
Well as I stated above I still don't understand the significance of a two second exposure. Just doesn't make any sense. |
2 seconds is an interesting shutter speed. It's not long enough, for example, to allow really good blurred-tide-on-the-beach shots. It's too long, on the other hand, to permit easily-accomplished panning shots. For night shots it forces a high ISO. For day shots, it forces a very small aperture.
I suspect the "rationale" behind the number may have been that a lot of P&S cameras have a maximum exposure of 2 or 3 seconds.
I donno, though....
R. |
But its perfect for a day shot with a ND filter. There is always a way of achieving the requirement.
Message edited by author 2006-03-13 17:36:45.
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 06:01:35 PM · #173 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
My idea: if your camera allows for two second exposure, by all means, use this challange to do exactly 2 second exposures... LEARN!
If you don't have access to a camera that can do a 2 second exposure, do some research, find out what can be done with a 2 second exposure and fake it. LEARN!
As for me, I am being REQUIRED by Rikki to show my EXIF data for a personal challenge against ShutterPug. She is too, so you can be guarenteed that our shutters will be open for exactly 2 seconds.
BTW, these Rikki-Idric type challenges are fun. I highly reccomend personal challenges between two members.
ShutterPug vs Fotomann smack talk |
Too much logic. Must.. turn.. away. |
|
|
|
03/13/2006 06:43:21 PM · #174 |
Originally posted by Penny Lane:
I can't play. Oh well, next time. Looking forward to seeing what you guys come up with. |
I was one of the original posters on this thread. Here's a break down of my post.... " I can't play" , a simple comment stating the fact that my camera doesn't allow for manual settings. " Oh well, next time" , acceptance that I will not be in this one , however it's not the end of the world. " Looking forward to seeing what you guys come up with." , honestly looking forward to learning something from those who have the ability to meet this challenge.
After reading through this thread I've decided not to vote on this challenge. I just assumed everyone else who couldn't achieve the 2 sec shot would also sit out. In life we don't always get to play in every game. We don't always get picked for the team, we don't always have the skills, tallents, time, money or even equipment to join in yet or sometimes at all. That is life! We protect our kids from disapointment so much when they are young that when it evidently comes they don't have the skills to deal with it. If this was happening every week yes it would be discrimination, but hey having to sit out once in a while is no big deal. Accept that in real life not everyone is dealt the same hand. Put it into perspective, it's a weekly photo comp!! Is worth resorting to "cheating" just to be in it? Sit back and learn something from those that can achieve the result honestly.
More like my 50c than 2c. : )
To everyone who gives this one a go, good luck.
|
|
|
|
03/13/2006 07:15:18 PM · #175 |
Penny Lane, you have really made a great statement here. Only thing is, while you may not play, because as you say, in life we don't get to play in every game, sitting out the judging in my opinion doesn't help. When a player is injured in Australian Rules Football (our game) the player is often invited to sit in the coaches box and make suggestions and give ideas. Your judgement is good for the rest of the 'team' and also good for your continued learning.
So while you may not 'be able to play' your critique remains invaluable to the team...can I coax you, and all others who may not have the gear to pull this challeneg off, still add their value to the 'team' by critiquing the entries???
|
|
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 10:35:37 AM EDT.
