| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/09/2007 12:54:59 AM · #1 |
OK..first of all, I am not complaining here..and There is no doubt that the higher scoring image here is well deserved and certainly better...but 2 full points??
Now, I know its not the same challenge, and I know there is not accounting for the voters and how we vote...I am just curious...
I think it is the lack of sharpness in the eyes, but holy cow 2 points!!?!
  |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:10:09 AM · #2 |
If the challenge were "Cats," I honestly like the first one better because of the tighter crop, though they are both very well done and superb pictures with individual merits. If pressed to score them, I would probably give them roughly the same score.
They both meet their respective challenges very well, so I suspect you just got the "tired of seeing cat's faces" lower votes, maybe? |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:14:28 AM · #3 |
I voted both entries exactly the same.
However, in a straight head to head.
If the challenge was "Pet Portrait" I would give yours a slight nod.
If the challenge was "Fill the Frame", I would give yanko the win.
Funny huh.
Very similiar images, styles a bit different along with composition. However, it really comes down to being different challenge topics more than anything. |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:16:01 AM · #4 |
Actually I think it is funny...Yanko's image must have stuck in my sub conscious from the Pet Portrait challenge. I shot Audrey for Fill the Frame and noticed the similarities after the fact...But sheesh Yanko's cat got 7.5 and wee adorable Audrey only 5.6...just thought it was a huge difference..
But it also tells me the just cause DPC doesn't like an image doesn't mean it is a bad image :)) |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:20:29 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
Kitty A
Kitty B
|
Okay, I am far from a critic but I can tell you what I see different that may have affected the votes. Keep in mind that I am just one person of many round here :)
Kitty A has soft catchlights in it's eyes
Kitty B has well defined catchlights
Kitty A's whiskers seem to blend in with the background
Kitty B's are MUCH more prominent
Kitty A looks complaicent
Kitty B has attitude
Kitty A has a mottled, undefined pattern
Kitty B has sharp lines between colours
Kitty A's eyes seem to be liquidy
Kitty B's eyes are a very defined and prominent colour
That is what I see... someone else may see something different. IMHO, those are enough to give it a 2 pt difference. You should be proud that you got a 5.6707 on an animal pic! That is pretty good! AND, you placed in the top half. 84th is real good out of 210 entries. I offer pats on the back for that!
Jojo
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:24:19 AM · #6 |
| ok..Audrey has wimpy whiskers...We know, we just don't talk about it, it embarrasses her :)) |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:30:58 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
ok..Audrey has wimpy whiskers...We know, we just don't talk about it, it embarrasses her :)) |
poor kitty. . .
:) |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:31:11 AM · #8 |
Yanko's shot is absolutely flawless, technically, and the voters responded to that. It is also compositionally more interesting, more dynamic, with the eyes at the 1/3 line and the chin at the 1/3 line. Yanko's shot also avoids an issue that is present in Rae-Ann's shot: Kitty B's nose line is broken by a pattern, where Kitty A shows a prominent, vertical line that bisects the image. Since Kitty A's eyes are smack dab in the vertical center of the frame and her nose is right down the horizontal center, the result is a relatively static composition of cruciform, centered weights.
And there's one aspect nobody else has mentioned: When Yanko's shot ribboned, it's like a LOT of people thought "Wow! We can win with cat shots!" and we were swept by a flood of close up, in-your-face cat portraits. I think your shot is bearing some backlash from that, Rae-Ann.
What others have remarked here re: the specific technical details is all spot on as well, IMO.
R.
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:33:17 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
ok..Audrey has wimpy whiskers...We know, we just don't talk about it, it embarrasses her :)) |
Well, don't tell her I said that! I would hate to wake up to an angry kitty on my lawn! :)
Giver a kiss for me and tell her she is beautiful! |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 01:39:04 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
And there's one aspect nobody else has mentioned: When Yanko's shot ribboned, it's like a LOT of people thought "Wow! We can win with cat shots!" and we were swept by a flood of close up, in-your-face cat portraits. I think your shot is bearing some backlash from that, Rae-Ann.
|
Actually, it was mentioned, you just used bigger words. :)
Originally posted by karmat:
. . . .so I suspect you just got the "tired of seeing cat's faces" lower votes, maybe? |
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 02:00:37 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Actually, it was mentioned, you just used bigger words. :)
Originally posted by karmat:
. . . .so I suspect you just got the "tired of seeing cat's faces" lower votes, maybe? |
|
I missed that, sowwy :-(
R.
ETA: actually I don't think my words are any bigger, I just used a lot more of them :-)
Message edited by author 2007-02-09 02:01:18.
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 02:25:23 AM · #12 |
Kitty B - by a long shot - Technically and compositionally and the balance in colour - I could easily see a 2 point difference.
Jeff |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 03:12:37 AM · #13 |
While I do think that for my taste, Kitty B seems a little too processed (read: less natural looking to me) I think it is a little better compositionally, as was pointed out earlier, but even if the two pictures had the same composition and processing, Kitty B is much more interesting due to the expression on the face and the squint of the eyes. Kitty A is a nice picture of a cat but it has no feeling. Kitty B is giving you the stare down which catches the viewers eyes. It is all about the eyes here.
[/url] |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 03:27:55 AM · #14 |
| I would say agree with everything BearMusic said. Also IMO Kitty A has quite abit of noise and the hairs aren't as sharp. Those along with the composition things that Bear said would easily cover the point difference. |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 03:33:42 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
... There is no doubt that the higher scoring image here is well deserved and certainly better...but 2 full points??
|
There are a couple things about your image I like better than Yanko's. My view is a little different from Bear_Music's. I like your closeup composition better and I think it is leveled better than his. His needs a little more counterclockwise rotation to my eye.
However, Yanko's image is head and shoulders superior to your entry. From least important to most important it scored higher for these reasons:
1-Challenge Topic:
His is a pet in a pet challenge. Pets in other challenges generally do not do as well.
2-Cat with Attitude:
That is an element of Yanko's composition that has more visual appeal than the more sedate pose of your cat.
3-Post Processing:
This is where his image really shines. It is near perfect. The treatment makes his much more than 1 full point better than yours in my opinion.
Message edited by author 2007-02-09 03:36:12.
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 03:35:30 AM · #16 |
One thing I have learned is that success at photography is very subtle. What makes an image great is found in the summation of every detail. One day I was out at sunset and found this tree as the sun was setting...a perfect scene. I took a bunch of shots, one turned out well enough that it has been accepted into a juried contest. I have also sold several copies.
Now....I have returned to that same exact spot many times at sunset and stood for hours taking more shots of that scene. I have never taken another picture of that scene that I have even taken past previewing it. When all the things come together in an image, the background, the lighting, the pose, the expression, etc. It can be a winner. A moment before and a moment after just doesn't work. Sometimes we can't even explicitly say what makes something work or not....it is just so subtle.
All that said, this is what makes me passionate about photography. I keep waiting for that special moment in time that gives me something I end up capturing something special. The more I shoot the better chance I have of that!
spizzer (jeff) |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 07:32:11 AM · #17 |
There is one very specific thing that makes yanko's kitty stand out for me. And it's a lesson I keep trying to "remind myself to learn" (meaning, I know it's important, but I keep failing to remember it in my own photography) and this is it (and the way I say it to myself): It's the light, stupid! (the "stupid" part because I keep forgetting)
As I walk around galleries of paintings, I try to identify what makes one painting better than the other. And it always comes back to the same reason: It's the light, stupid!
When I look at yanko's picture, I am immediately mesmerized by the kitty's eyes, but it doesn't happen when I look at the other kitty's eyes. It's the light that does it. That triangular shaped light leading up to the eyes. That piercing look within the eyes. I'm drawn to it and I can't turn away.
It's the light, Rae-Ann! (notice I didn't say stupid, that's only when talking to myself)
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 07:34:45 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
OK..first of all, I am not complaining here..and There is no doubt that the higher scoring image here is well deserved and certainly better...but 2 full points??
Now, I know its not the same challenge, and I know there is not accounting for the voters and how we vote...I am just curious...
I think it is the lack of sharpness in the eyes, but holy cow 2 points!!?!
|
The challenge of the high scoring image was specifically "Cats." Your entry was in "Fill the Frame." While you have filled the frame, you have done so with a subject that is grossly overused here.
Find something more creative next time and you will score higher. |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 08:33:38 AM · #19 |
I think that the light on each of the images is good, but that it is the beautifully rendered detail in yanko's image that lifts it from the humdrum.
As well as agreeing with many of the comments here, I think that there may be some technical limitations at play. Yanko's low 100 ISO shot at 1/100 on the excellent 20D +70-200 f4 has captured a sharp image with plenty of detail. Unfortunately, an ISO of 400 and shutter of 1/10 on the Fujifilm FinePix S9000 have resulted in less detail being captured. A stopped down aperture, faster shutter speed and lower ISO (each necessitating lots more light) would all help overcome the limitations of the S9000 (IMO).
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 08:33:55 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by tooohip:
... While you have filled the frame, you have done so with a subject that is grossly overused here.
Find something more creative next time and you will score higher. |
I respectfully disagree. I thought I would get hammered for this in the same challenge for the same reasons...
..but I loved Richards shot so much I wanted to try it, unfortunately being a 6 week old puppy it wouldn't stay still and while I did my best with the PP it is grossly missing the 'eye' thing so I thought it would crash & burn.
When it finished with 6.2 I was ecstatic! |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 10:06:34 AM · #21 |
| I think the 2nd one is 2 points better. |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 10:42:13 AM · #22 |
Rae-Ann, rather than repeat what others have said, I'll just agree with Bear-Music and TCGuru.
Oh, and Matthew's point about sharpness and detail.
That said, had I voted on these, I probably would've given Yanko's a 7 and yours a 6, but his would've been borderline 8 and yours would've been borderline 5. So there's the 2 points. :)
And THAT said, remember that 5.6 is a perfectly respectable score. More importantly, YOUR shot is of YOUR cat, and if YOU like it, be happy. :)
|
|
|
|
02/09/2007 11:44:52 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by Spizzer:
One thing I have learned is that success at photography is very subtle. What makes an image great is found in the summation of every detail. One day I was out at sunset and found this tree as the sun was setting...a perfect scene. I took a bunch of shots, one turned out well enough that it has been accepted into a juried contest. I have also sold several copies.
Now....I have returned to that same exact spot many times at sunset and stood for hours taking more shots of that scene. I have never taken another picture of that scene that I have even taken past previewing it. When all the things come together in an image, the background, the lighting, the pose, the expression, etc. It can be a winner. A moment before and a moment after just doesn't work. Sometimes we can't even explicitly say what makes something work or not....it is just so subtle.
All that said, this is what makes me passionate about photography. I keep waiting for that special moment in time that gives me something I end up capturing something special. The more I shoot the better chance I have of that!
spizzer (jeff) |
Jeff that is soo well put..I have done the same thing myself. I am still learning the intricicies of light and have only had my fuji for a few weeks. SO it is all part of the learning curve.
I appreciate all your comments...Matthew Thank You for the tips, I have to work on adjusting my ISO.
AS far as my subject not being creative enough...well I am biting my tongue. For me, I think the most mundane of topics can make an interesting shot, if executed correctly ( Not that this shot is! haha)
I'll leave it at that ;) |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 11:46:54 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Yanko's shot is absolutely flawless, technically, and the voters responded to that. It is also compositionally more interesting, more dynamic, with the eyes at the 1/3 line and the chin at the 1/3 line. Yanko's shot also avoids an issue that is present in Rae-Ann's shot: Kitty B's nose line is broken by a pattern, where Kitty A shows a prominent, vertical line that bisects the image. Since Kitty A's eyes are smack dab in the vertical center of the frame and her nose is right down the horizontal center, the result is a relatively static composition of cruciform, centered weights.
And there's one aspect nobody else has mentioned: When Yanko's shot ribboned, it's like a LOT of people thought "Wow! We can win with cat shots!" and we were swept by a flood of close up, in-your-face cat portraits. I think your shot is bearing some backlash from that, Rae-Ann.
What others have remarked here re: the specific technical details is all spot on as well, IMO.
R. |
Awesome tips on the balance of the image Bear...I will keep these things in mind Thank You |
|
|
|
02/09/2007 11:49:30 AM · #25 |
The thing that immediately struck me between the two is the quality of the fur. In the higher scoring image, the fur is fine, detailed, carefully sharpened and exquisite. In the lower scoring image, the fur is blocky, out of focus, noisy and not so subtly sharpened.
The eye quality isn't there between the two, either. Compositionally they are the same, subject wise they are the same, but it is the technical quality that really sets them apart and probably is reasonably worth a 2 point different.
The treatment of the golden eyes and also the general colour contrast between those and the fur also make that image stand out more.
|
|
