| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/23/2007 05:17:38 PM · #26 |
| This really is just like discussing outtakes, right? Not allowed until after voting is complete. |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:19:54 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by karmabreeze:
Originally posted by ursula:
I'd like to see more examples of what people think is "minimalism" (here at DPC).
This part of the challenge description: "... but only occupying a very small portion of the image space." has me confused (hey, what else is new). I thought minimalism was something different, basic shapes, simplification to the max, little emotion, stuff like that, but, "very small portion"? Why? |
Agreed, the challenge description seems like a more appropriate title would be "Massive Amounts of Negative Space". |
Is that the common perception of this challenge? I have an image I want to enter but it doesn't have a lot of negative space. I think it fits the letter of the challenge (strong but small subject) but I think it will get hammered due to busyness of the background.
Is everyone looking for lots of negative space on this one?
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:21:15 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Is everyone looking for lots of negative space on this one? |
Submit what you feel is your best image for the challenge and to hell with anyone on DPC who feels that it's wrong :) |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:21:38 PM · #29 |
| ^^^ but constructive criticism is always nice too! |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:21:57 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
This really is just like discussing outtakes, right? Not allowed until after voting is complete. |
IMVHO, it's not discussing outtakes. It's discussing ideas for the challenge, ways to look at the "assignment" so to say. It seems to me it would be quite sad not to be able to do that.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:23:07 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Is everyone looking for lots of negative space on this one? |
Although I don't complete agree with the challenge description ... it does seem that would be a safe route to take.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:23:34 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Is that the common perception of this challenge? I have an image I want to enter but it doesn't have a lot of negative space. I think it fits the letter of the challenge (strong but small subject) but I think it will get hammered due to busyness of the background.
Is everyone looking for lots of negative space on this one? |
I'm specifically looking for images without negative space. Negative space is kind of the "easy" way out on this one. More props to those who don't use negative space. I know you'll have a great photo, David! |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:31:57 PM · #33 |
From this man's perspective, the fact that since you are NOT entering a photo in the challenge, you ought to leave the image in place and enable members to comment on it. It is NOT an outtake and without any mention of "Minimalism", voters would be hard pressed to provide the comments you seek.
For what it's worth, I truly do not believe that the image meets the criteria of the challenge, since the subject matter does occupy a significant amount of the alloted space.
Ray
Message edited by author 2007-01-23 17:33:45. |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:40:23 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by jaysonmc:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Is that the common perception of this challenge? I have an image I want to enter but it doesn't have a lot of negative space. I think it fits the letter of the challenge (strong but small subject) but I think it will get hammered due to busyness of the background.
Is everyone looking for lots of negative space on this one? |
I'm specifically looking for images without negative space. Negative space is kind of the "easy" way out on this one. More props to those who don't use negative space. I know you'll have a great photo, David! |
I thought the challenge asked for negative space?? Or Can't I read English anymore?? |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:46:36 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by formerlee:
Originally posted by jaysonmc:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Is that the common perception of this challenge? I have an image I want to enter but it doesn't have a lot of negative space. I think it fits the letter of the challenge (strong but small subject) but I think it will get hammered due to busyness of the background.
Is everyone looking for lots of negative space on this one? |
I'm specifically looking for images without negative space. Negative space is kind of the "easy" way out on this one. More props to those who don't use negative space. I know you'll have a great photo, David! |
I thought the challenge asked for negative space?? Or Can't I read English anymore?? |
Create an image where your subject is the strong point of the image, but only occupying a very small portion of the image space.
It does not mention negative space. Only that the subject occupy a small portion of the image. |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:46:57 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by formerlee:
I thought the challenge asked for negative space?? Or Can't I read English anymore?? |
The challenge says small subject (though how small is a thing of contention). The word "negative space" isn't in there, but really it is all up to interpretation. |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:54:20 PM · #37 |
Think simplicity in idea and form and you're bound to avoid the DNMC votes at least that's what I tell myself.
ETA: Voters (and submitters) rarely read the challenge descriptions so take that part about your subject being "small" with a grain of salt. Again just my opinion though.
Message edited by author 2007-01-23 17:55:33. |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:55:31 PM · #38 |
Okay, so if the subject is minimal, but the main point of the photo, what is the rest of the space?? If it overpowers the subject, then it becomes the subject! If not, then it is negative space??
Man, this gets worse every challenge! About time people started reading english and not the gobblydigook that makes their photos fit a challenge! |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 06:12:58 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by formerlee:
Okay, so if the subject is minimal, but the main point of the photo, what is the rest of the space?? If it overpowers the subject, then it becomes the subject! If not, then it is negative space??
Man, this gets worse every challenge! About time people started reading english and not the gobblydigook that makes their photos fit a challenge! |
chill dude, you're the one that brought up the reading English thing like the words "negative space" were explicitly mentioned.
The question isn't do they or do they not read English, it is do they read the description at all?
A background can be busy without being overpowering is all I am saying. But I fear that many voters will have the same perception you have. And as they say, perception is reality.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 06:22:10 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by formerlee:
Okay, so if the subject is minimal, but the main point of the photo, what is the rest of the space?? If it overpowers the subject, then it becomes the subject! If not, then it is negative space??
Man, this gets worse every challenge! About time people started reading english and not the gobblydigook that makes their photos fit a challenge! |
chill dude, you're the one that brought up the reading English thing like the words "negative space" were explicitly mentioned.
The question isn't do they or do they not read English, it is do they read the description at all?
A background can be busy without being overpowering is all I am saying. But I fear that many voters will have the same perception you have. And as they say, perception is reality. |
I think the problem here is that the title is as much a part of the challenge description as the description itself. The title calls for minimalism, while the descriptions calls for a subject to occupy a very small portion of the canvas. If you fill the rest of the canvas with a lot of detail, no matter how obvious the subject is down in the corner (or wherever), you've lost the minimalism.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 06:28:30 PM · #41 |
There are plenty of examples of minimalist photography that fits both side of the bill in terms of the negative space debate. Minimalist photography doesn't need a subject at all in a lot of cases, but such a shot would be completely destroyed in a DPC challenge.
If you're looking to get a high score on DPC you should follow the normal DPC formula which is take a technically pleasing and conceptually/visually interesting image that fits the challenge in the way which the majority interpret it. As long as your photo's focal point clearly takes up a small amount of space on the image, you will probably score high keeping the normal DPC requirements intact.
If your image doesn't meet the challenge in the most dumbly obvious way, there will be some voters who will miss it and comment "??" "I don't get it" "I don't see minimalism" and your score will suffer from it. But chances are you will receive some amount of recognition from a few others who understand your concept, but your score will suffer inevitably. There are plenty of photographers here whose average score does not at all reflect their photographic ability but rather their ability to appeal to the DPC voting mass.
So just submit whatever you personally think fits the challenge and go from there. If you are intent on winning a ribbon then I would advise you to dumb down your image/concept as much as possible (this rule does have its exceptions admittedly) so that it receives an instant "Wow" and a quick 8,9,10 from the 5-second voter, a DPC demographic of overwhelming majority.
- Lee
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 06:47:01 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by Tranquil:
There are plenty of examples of minimalist photography that fits both side of the bill in terms of the negative space debate. Minimalist photography doesn't need a subject at all in a lot of cases, but such a shot would be completely destroyed in a DPC challenge.
If you're looking to get a high score on DPC you should follow the normal DPC formula which is take a technically pleasing and conceptually/visually interesting image that fits the challenge in the way which the majority interpret it. As long as your photo's focal point clearly takes up a small amount of space on the image, you will probably score high keeping the normal DPC requirements intact.
If your image doesn't meet the challenge in the most dumbly obvious way, there will be some voters who will miss it and comment "??" "I don't get it" "I don't see minimalism" and your score will suffer from it. But chances are you will receive some amount of recognition from a few others who understand your concept, but your score will suffer inevitably. There are plenty of photographers here whose average score does not at all reflect their photographic ability but rather their ability to appeal to the DPC voting mass.
So just submit whatever you personally think fits the challenge and go from there. If you are intent on winning a ribbon then I would advise you to dumb down your image/concept as much as possible (this rule does have its exceptions admittedly) so that it receives an instant "Wow" and a quick 8,9,10 from the 5-second voter, a DPC demographic of overwhelming majority.
- Lee |
RANT:
Oh, geez, I don't know :) I sort of agree with what you're saying, but I also am really, really tired of people so often saying that only dumbed down visual candy images win ribbons, making it sound like that is just so uncool and below all those who know so much better.
Maybe that's not what you're saying at all, but that's what it sounded like to me.
Look, the challenges are to make the best possible image to give back the topic to a general audience. It isn't high art, but it is an art in itself to be able to do that, and it is quite attractive as a concept and fun to take part in. To say that that is "dumbing down" a concept/image makes it sound like something bad, something not quite worthwhile for those that know better.
If you want to get an idea across, what's the best way to do it? Isn't it to try and present it in the clearest, most concise, and visually most attractive way possible? I don't think "dumbing down" quite fits. Sounds more like a lousy excuse to me.
END OF RANT.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:03:01 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by ursula:
If you want to get an idea across, what's the best way to do it? Isn't it to try and present it in the clearest, most concise, and visually most attractive way possible? I don't think "dumbing down" quite fits. |
If your point is to get an idea across, yes. If you are trying to create something beyond a mere conveyance of a concept in the simplest of terms, no. However I do think that what you describe is the key to scoring well in challenges. Submit images that are visually appealing and require little thought on the part of the viewer to interpret. Personally I think this sucks in a way, because if you try and put something together that isn't immediately recognizable then you get smacked pretty good (reference my battle of the sexes entry).
There is a reason that novels aren't three pages long even though they ultimately communicate one or a small number of concepts. A person should be able to place the burden of interpretation, within reason, on the reader/viewer and not have to enter with the nagging feeling that they just screwed themselves by assuming some modicum of cognitive ability in their audience. |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:08:27 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by ursula:
RANT: |
You are right, dumbing down isn't the correct phrase. It was wrong of me to say it that way.
What I meant to say is that on a general trend (and as I mentioned before there are exceptions) but generally there is a specific type of photography which DPC favors over another. You could take a world reknowned fine art photograph, stick it into a Free Study, and have it score below a 5.
By saying "dumbing down" I meant that in order to be successful on DPC you need to appeal to this wide audience of different tastes. The most metaphorical and contemporary photography like a solarized upside down photo of the inside of a squirrel's mouth (makin' that up!) will not score well here, if you know what i mean. And this ties into people's interpretations of what does and does not meet the challenge. Some, not all, people vote irrationally in that if a photograph does not completely meet the challenge they will give it a 4 or a 5 whereas in a Free Study the same image may be a 9 or a 10. I remember the professional ranter John Setzler being turned off by a similar idea.
It is just one of the flaws of DPC and if your image is by photographic and artistic standards is brilliant, it will not necessarily score well on DPC because people here in general tend to favor images which are technically spot on: being perfectly in focus, rule of thirds, etc. So all in all what I'm getting at is that DPC is a place to learn a certain type of photography along with certain essential basics and it is not a place to truly experiment and break the rules expecting to receive constructive criticism from many people. An earlier poster who said "its out of focus so I vote it a 2" is an example of (if there was a nicer word I'd say it) the ignorance of some photographers on the site. And yes, I understand what you mean by the fact that there is an art to appealing to DPC and I don't think that it is an easy thing to master, but I think that the aforementioned is just the reality of our situation here and is neither good nor bad.. it just is.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:18:48 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by chimericvisions:
This really is just like discussing outtakes, right? Not allowed until after voting is complete. |
Let's not start this again...he's not going to enter it so it's NOT an outtake. This is just like an image I was going to enter, but didn't.
Previous thread
Granted, I was a little out of line with the thread title, but the subject matter was not an outtake. If he ends up submitting it, then you can vote accordingly, but he isn't, so just take a deep breath and relax.
As for the image, I agree it wouldn't have fit the challenge and I'm not a fan of the focus although I do see what you were trying to achieve.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:30:25 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by ursula:
If you want to get an idea across, what's the best way to do it? Isn't it to try and present it in the clearest, most concise, and visually most attractive way possible? I don't think "dumbing down" quite fits. |
If your point is to get an idea across, yes. If you are trying to create something beyond a mere conveyance of a concept in the simplest of terms, no. However I do think that what you describe is the key to scoring well in challenges. Submit images that are visually appealing and require little thought on the part of the viewer to interpret. Personally I think this sucks in a way, because if you try and put something together that isn't immediately recognizable then you get smacked pretty good (reference my battle of the sexes entry).
There is a reason that novels aren't three pages long even though they ultimately communicate one or a small number of concepts. A person should be able to place the burden of interpretation, within reason, on the reader/viewer and not have to enter with the nagging feeling that they just screwed themselves by assuming some modicum of cognitive ability in their audience. |
I don't think the challenges at DPC are the place to push this. They are what they are, and for what they are they work well. In my view (or IMHO as it is usual to say) it serves no useful purpose to put the challenges down because they are not something else.
It doesn't make sense to me when people say that their images got low scores because the viewers didn't get it, or didn't take the time to think about it and appreciate it, the concept wasn't immediately recognizeable. Yes, sometimes that's true, other times it's simply that the photo wasn't all that good regardless of whether anyone had to think about it or not - but, it's missing the point of the challenges if that's the way you go.
If, when you enter an image to a challenge, you have "the nagging feeling that you just screwed yourself by assuming some modicum of cognitive ability in the audience", in other words, they won't get it or take the time to try and get it, well, don't enter that image. Why enter something that you know will not do well? What's the point? In my view, the challenges are not the right outlet for it.
Plus, in at least a few cases, it's worth thinking whether your own (and I'm not talking about YOU, routerguy666, but YOU in general) take on your own photo is all that accurate. Is it really a good photo? Is it really that deep and meaningful or is it just more pseudo-intellectual mumbling (I don't even know what that means, he, he)?
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:39:29 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Why enter something that you know will not do well? What's the point? .... Plus, in at least a few cases, it's worth thinking whether your own take on your own photo is all that accurate. Is it really a good photo? Is it really that deep and meaningful |
I agree with what you say, ursula, except with what I quoted above. This is a lot easier said from your standpoint because you are a phenomenal photographer who has found great success on DPC. But at some point, people need to submit photos that they realize aren't going to score in the top 10, or even 100. People need to throw out trial images to see the reaction -- it is the only way for people to learn. I know that I have submitted images that I know wouldn't score well (especially during my first year at DPC which was my first year of photography) and I accepted that, but I still wanted to see people's reaction. If that is wrong, then I think we are at a disagreement. I could not have learned without submitting work that I realized wouldnt do great -- it took me long enough to score above a 6, but that I didn't before then didn't make me not want to submit until I was positively sure I had that 6.
I hope I'm being clear and not sounding antagonistic. I think it is a good thing to talk these issues out.
- Lee |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:43:42 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Tranquil:
Originally posted by ursula:
RANT: |
You are right, dumbing down isn't the correct phrase. It was wrong of me to say it that way.
What I meant to say is that on a general trend (and as I mentioned before there are exceptions) but generally there is a specific type of photography which DPC favors over another. You could take a world reknowned fine art photograph, stick it into a Free Study, and have it score below a 5.
By saying "dumbing down" I meant that in order to be successful on DPC you need to appeal to this wide audience of different tastes. The most metaphorical and contemporary photography like a solarized upside down photo of the inside of a squirrel's mouth (makin' that up!) will not score well here, if you know what i mean. And this ties into people's interpretations of what does and does not meet the challenge. Some, not all, people vote irrationally in that if a photograph does not completely meet the challenge they will give it a 4 or a 5 whereas in a Free Study the same image may be a 9 or a 10. I remember the professional ranter John Setzler being turned off by a similar idea.
It is just one of the flaws of DPC and if your image is by photographic and artistic standards is brilliant, it will not necessarily score well on DPC because people here in general tend to favor images which are technically spot on: being perfectly in focus, rule of thirds, etc. So all in all what I'm getting at is that DPC is a place to learn a certain type of photography along with certain essential basics and it is not a place to truly experiment and break the rules expecting to receive constructive criticism from many people. An earlier poster who said "its out of focus so I vote it a 2" is an example of (if there was a nicer word I'd say it) the ignorance of some photographers on the site. And yes, I understand what you mean by the fact that there is an art to appealing to DPC and I don't think that it is an easy thing to master, but I think that the aforementioned is just the reality of our situation here and is neither good nor bad.. it just is. |
So I am in an argumentative mood today (bored, in other words). I disagree that what you describe above is a "flaw" of DPC - IMO it is its strength.
I also think the earlier poster who said, "oof, 2", was probably teasing, at least in part.
DPC can't be everything to everyone. IMO it's best to work with the positives rather than against them. When DPC doesn't work for me anymore, then I will stop submitting to challenges and go elsewhere. For now it works, for what it is, a fun place to challenge myself to get ideas across to a fairly large, general audience in convincing ways. It's not something that comes easily to me, but it is not a bad skill to work on, regardless of what I do after DPC. I hope to grow, and to grow out of DPC, but I want to do it from the positives, not the negatives.
------
So, getting back to the minimalism challenge, the DPC description is not what I thought minimalism was, but .... a subject that dominates and convinces using as little overall picture space as possible. It's an interesting challenge (even if it isn't really minimalism). |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:49:13 PM · #49 |
Here is a great example of minimalist photography. I ran across an article on this guy in Pop Photo and was astounded by his work:
//www.davidfokos.net/ |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 07:51:47 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by Tranquil:
Originally posted by ursula:
RANT: |
Some, not all, people vote irrationally in that if a photograph does not completely meet the challenge they will give it a 4 or a 5 whereas in a Free Study the same image may be a 9 or a 10. |
Sorry, but I just have to pipe up here. I would argue that the irrational voter is the one who leaves a comment like "doesn't meet the challenge, but it's great, so I'm voting it a 9!" Why some people think it doesn't matter whether you meet the challenge on a site called DPChallenge is beyond me.
If you want to compete regardless of subject matter, enter free studies. That's what they're for. I should know; I usually don't score as well in normal challenges, so I well appreciate how difficult it can be to meet the challenge AND come up with something good.
Message edited by author 2007-01-23 19:57:05.
|
|
