|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/28/2003 06:50:52 PM · #1 |
I'll try not to be too whiney... ;-)
I was fairly disappointed in my results in the Matrix challenge. (I know, what's new, someone's always disappointed...) I put quite a bit of work into getting the composition and lighting just (what I thought was) right, I thought I did a pretty good job of meeting the challenge, which is to say I actually attempted to answer the question with my shot. I even broke down at the last minute and put some gratuitous Matrix imagery into the shot. It wasn't an overly fancy effects shot, so I didn't expect to really wow anyone. But it ran steady all week at around 4.3. (It got some miraculous bump at the end to 4.5)
But what was more frustrating than the score was that I got only three comments, and (no offense to those who at least took a few seconds to tap something out on their keyboard, but...) one was sarcastic, one was the ubiquitous "nice job", and one was a modified "nice job" that at least indicated that the reviewer got the point of the shot (thanks MattW). Not a single critique or explaination of what was good, bad, rotten or irrelevant about it. Did people not get the connection to the challenge? Did people not like the composition, the lighting, or some other technical aspect? Did people not get the connection to the challenge (read the description in the photographer's comments)? Or do people just hate my haircut???
Anyway, if anyone has a minute or two to take a look at my shot and let me know what it was you didn't like about it, I'd appreciate it. Of course, any possitive comments will be warmly received as well! :-)
TIA.
//dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=22226 |
|
|
|
05/28/2003 07:45:36 PM · #2 |
| I think the score you got and the lack of comments are very related. You didn't get the comments about "good, bad, rotten" because there wasn't anything that stuck out as "good, bad, rotten." It, like mine, was just a very typical, predictable shot. I got very few comments as well. Only difference is ... I think I expected my score to be as low as it was. |
|
|
|
05/28/2003 07:52:16 PM · #3 |
For what it's worth, I find the back of your head totally overwhelms the picture and distracts from what was intended to be the main focus - the television.
But I didn't cause your low score because I didn't quite get around to voting! |
|
|
|
05/28/2003 08:56:51 PM · #4 |
I agree with hawkida in that the bulk of the photo is the back of a head, which isnt all that interesting. Also already noted, is the fact that you can easily assume this is a computer monitor (I did)instead of of a television.
If television what what you wanted to represent the matrix, THAT should have been more the focus. Instead of shooting behind the head, how about from the side, and you could see some couch potato slumped permanently into a chair, hand fixed to a remote, eyes bloodshot from the glare of the tube. You could go even further, and with some imagination, find a way to put the television on top of a guy's shoulders, implying his head is a TV, thus he is the TV, today's matrix.
I was going to work some verion of this for the Home Sweet Home challenge, implying that TV has become the home. I knew it'd take more work than I had time for.
In short, the concept was not necessarily poor, just the execution. Staring at the back of a head is generally boring. ;)
|
|
|
|
05/29/2003 12:22:08 PM · #5 |
My two cents: I think the problem was that you had a great idea but it didn't convey in the photo. I agree with the others -- I thought it was a computer screen. And I couldn't tell if the border around that was wall, or plastic, or what. The focus of the photo was the back of a head, which wasn't very visually interesting to me. It was maybe 50% of the area of the photo, and *that* part didn't say "Matrix" to me at all. I felt like a person looking at a person looking at the subject. This is all just emotional responses to the picture, though. Technically, the top edge is a bit blown out and the composition is quite formal for the subject, but it's fine, IMO. Not something I'd buy for myself, but not bad.
Now that I know what you were going for, that changes my impression of the shot. Only problem is that we can't always explain what we were going for to the viewer. Note: the description in the photographer's comments doesn't appear to the viewer until after all voting is over, unfortunately! Mine scored lower than I thought it would as well, because I couldn't tell people what I meant until it was too late. But that's fair, I think -- we don't generally get that opportunity in other situations.
I'm sure with your ideas you'll have no problem getting scores up higher in the coming weeks! :)
|
|
|
|
05/30/2003 01:59:39 PM · #6 |
Thanks everyone! I appreciate the feedback.
The comment about the "size" of my head in the frame, I guess, seems to be the overriding issue. This was a difficult thing to work out. For one thing, as photographer and model, I was running back and forth between the camera and sitting in front of the TV. I ended up with all kinds of different proportions and positions. This one was on the bigger side. On the one hand, I thought the head did need to be prominent, since the idea is the "matrix" (i.e. the TV) getting into and controlling our minds, on the other hand, yes, it should probably be much more imposing and dominating in the shot.
My original concept was to have news coverage on the TV, not a matrix-specific image. In my best shot of that idea, my head was much smaller. The comment that I got from my wife was that the image on the TV was too busy and took focus from my head - I guess that would have been a good thing! Should have gone with my instincts! Also, because the matrix image was a last-minute idea, I only ended up with a couple usable shots with the matrix letters, and they were pretty much the same composition.
As far as the suggestions on different angles or compositions, the back-of-the-head shot was the idea that formed in my head, and the one I wanted to go for - the one that resonated with me. Some of those other ideas may have worked (even better), but they never occured to me because I don't think they quite fit with the vision I had of the TV overpowering and engulfing the mind. The different angles also wouldn't have worked with the location of the shot because the layout of the area where the TV is, and the TV-as-head idea was probably beyond the realm of what I have time to work on. But they are good ideas.
Anyway, thanks again. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/06/2025 03:34:46 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: 08/06/2025 03:34:46 AM EDT.
|
