| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/01/2006 02:50:38 AM · #26 |
Wrong game indeed but this is par for the course. Voters has and always will prefer the prettiest photos. The challenge theme/description comes a distant second every time. As for the DNMC police they were probably apprending the wrong people as usual. :P
Message edited by author 2006-11-01 03:20:11.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 07:45:32 AM · #27 |
I think the most depressing thing about these challenges are the retentives who just aren't willing to cut any slack in the challenge description to allow for creative interpretation. The photography by numbers brigade.
What do you guys do when there's an open challenge - go cold turkey for a month? |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 08:02:25 AM · #28 |
I'm not that much of a hard liner on the entry description. In fact the  was my highest voted shot.
IMHO: it's really the artist interpretation.
Message edited by author 2006-11-01 08:02:46. |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 08:03:48 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by Traff:
I think the most depressing thing about these challenges are the retentives who just aren't willing to cut any slack in the challenge description to allow for creative interpretation. The photography by numbers brigade.
What do you guys do when there's an open challenge - go cold turkey for a month? |
Get the DT's....dut..dut....dut.......dut.....dut-t-t-t-t-t-t!!!
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 08:34:21 AM · #30 |
"Your challenge this week is deceptively simple: photograph a sporting venue after the game is over and the players and people have gone home"
I still don't see how that can be interpreted any other way than to shoot an empty stadium, field, court, etc. Oh well, at least I know to enter a challenge, descriptions don't have to be interpreted literally. But, even then, you're taking the risk of having 50 'DNMC' comments and votes....like, as Bear mentioned, his 'self portrait' shot.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 08:35:47 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by Traff:
I think the most depressing thing about these challenges are the retentives who just aren't willing to cut any slack in the challenge description to allow for creative interpretation. The photography by numbers brigade.
What do you guys do when there's an open challenge - go cold turkey for a month? |
I'm not sure. Judging from the score that my free study is currently pulling it I think a few are voting DNMC 1s on that. ;) |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 08:45:10 AM · #32 |
What I find quite odd, is that ONLY BASEBALL photos were selected for top 3. Is this an All American site? hehehehe...
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 08:47:00 AM · #33 |
Just to further nitpick the description to death, it says to photograph them after they have gone HOME. What if they went to another game or a after-game party? You should have jotted down everyone's phone number, wait til after the game and called each and every one of them to make sure they were home before taking your shot.
Didn't you read the description?
:) |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 08:50:26 AM · #34 |
| How many pictures submitted showed a player standing around? No one interpreted 'the players' to mean 'most of the players'? How odd. |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 09:15:51 AM · #35 |
maybe these venues are home for the people still in the photos. Which would mean they went home and the photo meets the challenge. Just another way to look at it. ....
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 09:18:05 AM · #36 |
again, I just want to point out what clubjuggle said earlier.
This is exactly why we don't dq based on meeting the challenge description. What appears cut and dried to some, does indeed, have some latitude to many others. . . |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 09:26:07 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
IMO there should be some type of penalty. But how do you implement it? |
From a voters perspective, right now we only have DNMC vote (score). So, you can give them a 1 (since there is no 0), but believe me, those 1's tank your average score given and then you are tagged as an "ill willed voter".
It's a lose lose situation. I'm in total agreement on the many entries that in my opinion did not follow the challenge details. But as someone pointed out, there were TONS of voters who did not read it close enough to notice, IMO.
Edit: corrected spelling.
Message edited by author 2006-11-01 09:27:02.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 09:31:27 AM · #38 |
and then there were some that *did* read it and had a different interpretation than y'all.
Geesh, for months I've read threads that people need to open up their minds and allow a little room for interpretation. Now that some have done that, some you exact same people are railing those that had a different, but explainable AND legitimate, different interpretation. What the heck do you (general populace) want exactly?
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 09:58:09 AM · #39 |
| I voted those pictures a little lower because of dnmc. Probably only a point, but a point is a huge difference in placement. These photos got a lot of dnmc dings and still placed as high as they did... probably because dpc loves to see people in photos. The photographers took a calculated risk, and it paid off. I don't see a problem here. |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 11:40:24 AM · #40 |
I may have been "Descriptionally-Challenged" by the "Challenge Descriptions" and the interpretations / requirements", just as many others have.
THANKS, Karmat. ...for clearing things up. You've stated things quite well! Your statements have helped me. I sure hope it's also stated that well in the "House Rules". That way newbies here won't have to go through the "School of hard knocks". HAVE REQUESTED THIS in other forums.
Yes, I also, fully understand the "music of the bear", his point/angle/DOF, in his statements. My career, writing software and being a part time nerd, has increased my "retentive" viewpoint at times. In software code
I'd suggest to all, relating to "Challenge-Descriptions". "Be creative, with caution", the entreprenurial attitude, a "calculated risk taker".
I had some great photos with just one specatator, my wife, who didn't understand my hand signals to move. And some with just the cleanup-crew. These I should have entered instead. I know I have some Super-photos that haven't been seen here. I may solicit opinions on other websites. The challenge results only position the photo I entered, which in many cases were not my best picks. I know what's WOW and appealing, and I'm learning, refining my photographic skills. If the the timings right, I will eventually get a ribbon. |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 11:49:23 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by justine:
I'm not that much of a hard liner on the entry description. In fact the was my highest voted shot. |
I think this photo actually does a better job of showing an empty stadium 'after the game' than a similar shot without the person.
"Your challenge this week is deceptively simple: photograph a sporting venue after the game is over and the players and people have gone home :-)"
Stadiums are often unused for long periods of time between events. If your photo only shows an empty stadium, how do you convey the 'after the game' aspect of the challenge? The ribbon winners all chose to use sporting equipment left behind. Having a lingering spectator or two, or perhaps a cleanup crew, in your shot is yet another way.
Originally posted by justine:
IMHO: it's really the artist interpretation. |
Exactly. After all, what's more important, encouraging good, artistic photography, or blind adherence to the exact letter of a challenge description? Have you ever heard of the term artistic license?
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 12:03:11 PM · #42 |
My shot was really on the fence as to whether or not it met the challenge literally...I took it both after and before a game. The 7th grade "A" football team had just lost their game, and were clearing the field while waiting for the "B" team to play their game. There were people everywhere, but luckily not in the endzone area where I was standing to watch the band (my oldest is a percussionist and it was their first football game performance, hence the reason I was there anyway). If you look closely in the bottom left, you see the shadows of some people who were standing on the track. I don't feel bad about submitting it, though, even if it didn't technically meet the challenge all the way...it at least gives the illusion of meeting the challenge. Besides, I'll take a top 5 score any day of the week with the bummer year I've had, photographically speaking. ;)
 |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 12:04:45 PM · #43 |
There is a difference between artistic license and just not following the challenge criteria. This has been brought up amny times in the past, people feeling that some voters can't "think outside the box"
Not following the challenge assigment does not equal creativity.
What makes these contests difficult is the challenge of being creative in a restrictive environment. Pushing the envelope is one thing, not adhering to the challenge is another.
If you feel too boxed in in this arena there is now a Free Study every month and many many other POTD sites out there. If you can't handle the challenge format, then don't enter, or at least don't be surprised when you voted down for not meeting the challenge criteria.
Rant over.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 12:12:48 PM · #44 |
the worst thing about dpc is the constant threads since the site's inception about this kind of thing. why do we need to have challenge descriptions? allow the photographer's and viewer's mind to go a little bit!
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 12:34:20 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by achiral:
the worst thing about dpc is the constant threads since the site's inception about this kind of thing. why do we need to have challenge descriptions? allow the photographer's and viewer's mind to go a little bit! |
"What makes these contests difficult is the challenge of being creative in a restrictive environment." From Scarbrd's post
Well said. Plus, without challenge descriptions, we wouldn't have entertaining threads like these. ;)
|
|
|
|
11/01/2006 12:41:46 PM · #46 |
I don't know if I've entered/voted/forumed enough yet for anyone to care about my opinion (been hammered for this before in other threads), but I can't help wonder if there doesn't need to be a way for voters to flag an image as DNMC w/o resorting to lowering the score. Maybe a DNMC checkbox or something and then some rule about DQ if 2/3 of the voters check the DNMC box. Perhaps something like that would allow the score to be a reflection of the quality/impact of the photo, but also allow a way to separate out images that clearly didn't meet the challenge requirements.
For me, I think this would help me figure out why my scores are low. On this challenge, I admit that I liberally interpreted the subject, and am actually rather pleased with my score, but I'd really like to know if the 43 ones, twos, and threes were because the voters thought my image sucked or because they thought it DNMC. |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 12:43:01 PM · #47 |
| Just change the site name to dpsubmitwhateveryoulike.com and let's all go grab a beer. |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 12:46:18 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by fracman:
I don't know if I've entered/voted/forumed enough yet for anyone to care about my opinion (been hammered for this before in other threads), but I can't help wonder if there doesn't need to be a way for voters to flag an image as DNMC w/o resorting to lowering the score. Maybe a DNMC checkbox or something and then some rule about DQ if 2/3 of the voters check the DNMC box. Perhaps something like that would allow the score to be a reflection of the quality/impact of the photo, but also allow a way to separate out images that clearly didn't meet the challenge requirements. |
I'll take a low score over a DQ any day. |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 01:08:41 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by mist:
Dragging this back to the point, here's one shot I felt totally under-rated -
 |
This was a boderline entry. The players (aka people) have left but there are players (aka ducks) on the table. The photographer took a risk with regard to the challenge description and in this case it didn't pay off. This is a good exmaple of "pushing the envelope" of the description. I personally thought it would score above those photos with people in them.
As for voters being flexible with challenge descriptions - they don't seem to be with my images ;-) |
|
|
|
11/01/2006 01:19:38 PM · #50 |
I think of it like I do Halloween candy.
10/31 - I have a bag of candy.
10/31 - I go to sleep and my boyfriend stays awake unattended with my candy.
11/1 - I wake up and there's one piece of candy in the bag.
The bastard ate ALL my candy!
Even though there's still one piece of candy left the vast majority of it is gone so therefore it's all gone. One person left in a stadium that holds hundreds or thousands is clearly an empty stadium to me. |
|
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: 08/02/2025 06:44:12 PM EDT.
