Can we have a correct LOW KEY challenge?

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/07/2007 01:37:37 PM · #26

How about this? "Classic Low Key" ?

or Low Key Lighting?

I guess the second would work, as what my description is describing a lighting technique rather than a histogram.

Message edited by author 2007-03-07 13:39:45.

kenskid

Nikon D700

03/07/2007 01:44:17 PM · #27

The best example of "non-conforming" challenge entries had to be the ...if I remember correctly the "3 second exposure" challenge. Many of the shot descriptions flat out stated that my shot was "more or less than 3 seconds" but that's ok!!! I think even one of the ribbon winners stated that the shot was not 3 seconds.

Artifacts

03/07/2007 01:47:10 PM · #28

** Warning: This post has been hidden as it may content mature content. Click here to show the post.

De Sousa

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

03/07/2007 01:48:26 PM · #29

Originally posted by kirbic:

It's up to the user to do some research if they want to present the best possible low-key image. Therein lies the challenge.
In short, the challenge description is a basic, functional description of low-key, not a complete dissertation on how to make low-key shots work.

For sure, Fritz (

kirbic)... You are correct. The description of the challenge should be basic or maybe do not exist at all and let the user to do some research if they want to present the best possible. But things here work in a different way. If you do some research, in many situations, youâ��ll find contradictions with the challenge description. And what you do in those situations? Hum... You know... Itâ��s better to close your eyes and follow the wrong way spelled in the description if you do not want to be DNMC.

That is bad!!! That kills creativity and does not support open minds! Itâ��s why I think the descriptions of the challenges should be banned.

After all who need them (the descriptions)?... Only the literal folks concerned with words and not with photography.

Message edited by author 2007-03-07 13:49:53.

AdiGri

Canon EOS-30D

03/07/2007 01:52:12 PM · #30

I was told that the histogram is the best way to tell if an image is low key or not. Here are the first 3 entries:

The blue ribbon is obviously different but still the peaks are in the left side and according to this article - //www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/histograms1.htm it is low key.

03/07/2007 01:55:32 PM · #31

I have a love/hate relationship with histograms. I love that I can shoot highkey, lowkey, whatever... check out the histogram and make sure I'm spiking where I want and not spiking where I need not be spiking.

But, I totally hate that lighting techniques are being described (and accepted) as being nothing more than histogram readings.

hanneke

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

03/07/2007 02:02:52 PM · #32

pfffff....

sometimes I wish my 1st language is English...

Anyway, gonna try.

In analogue photography (film) there was no histogram, but low / high key was there. So that's not gonna work for me. It was all about technique in lighting, playing with the light, writing light.

High and low key are vague descriptions, interpretated differently by every person. Photographed technically different by every photographer, because everybody interprets (?) the technique in a different way.

So what? Don't we all want to be unique? Do we all have to walk in the same stream? Is it wrong if someone walks to the right, or, even worse, walks the other way?

Of course not. That's the fun in photography.

You know, you can discuss this topic for ages and you still won't get an answer, or convince everybody with your own statements. It's a bit useless, because it's a vague technique and maybe an even vaguer description.

The voters have voted, the stats are there. Challenge is done, the best photo won.

:)

Message edited by author 2007-03-07 14:07:02.

777STAN

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

03/07/2007 02:09:59 PM · #33

Originally posted by pawdrix:

I've never been 100% clear on what low key is but I assume this would fit the bill?

Regardless of this Challenge or the Blue the winner I do wish the topics matched the actual definiton(s) as best as they possibly can. Between those discrepencies and voters not knowing which end is up the results can fry your brain.

Since there are less and less of these threads, compared to when I started here at DPC I assume things have improved quite a bit in that regard.

This is certainly the best visual description of Low Key that I've seen. Please, also, be aware that I consider it socially unacceptable to point out a problem without also being the one to present at least a plausible working solution to the problem as a "diving board" into good discussion.

Finally, It doesn't really matter how much extra work the tutorials or visual dictionary would be, professionalism requires doing what is necessary to maintain good communication.

I'll go you one step further in clarity. Terminology should be clarified by vote of the entire membership of DPC with a view to market balance, much like "long-term investors" in the stock market.

Create a multiple-choice question for each of 25-50 often-used photographic terms to be voted on by the entire membership of DPC for a period of four to six months (I originally considered a period of one year voting necessary for proper clarification.)

If you consider that each of our photos is judged by usually 200-300 people with varying levels of photographic knowledge/skill/expertise/experience in a period of one week with a fair amount of consistency & accuracy (i.e. same ones week after week are in the Top 100 Finishers & week after week sames ones are in the Bottom 100 Finishers, same ones middle, etcetera...ad infinitum...ad nauseum...,) then I feel confident that an extended period of voting on terminology would allow a greater number of votes as well as balancing changing opinions/consistency of opinion over time...ultimately "allowing the cream to rise to the top" (so to speak.)

In addition...since this is a photography website, why are challenges presented only verbally? Could we not have an example "qualified jpeg" from expert/average/beginner level photographers for each challenge as a beginning point for creativity?

Don't tell me it would require TOO MUCH TIME/TOO MUCH PLANNING/TOO MUCH EFFORT to make it happen! I've just given you a plan. Besides, Fortune 500 companies have a one-year, five-year, ten-year, maybe even a twenty-five-year plan in place to direct the company's "Ship of State."

Why can't DPC plan challenges a year to 18 months in advance in order to give time for voting periods of clarification on each term as well as locate jpegs on expert/average/beginner-level photographers to be used as examples.

Don't tell me that visual examples of the challenge would limit creativity!

By application & by extension of this principle, Be advised that basketball players of the caliber of Michael Jordan regularly hold basketball camps to teach beginners everything they know...because they are not afraid of being "shown up" by an average or beginning player who tries to be like them.

How many basketball players do you know who can slam a 360 lay-up? How many basketball players do you know who can slam a lay-up...period? How many basketball players in these camp will eventually make it to the pros even?

Finally, allow me to allude another forum thread. If Scalvert took me "under his wing" for six months, would he really be worried that he would start losing challenges to me?

Message edited by author 2007-03-07 14:12:06.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

03/07/2007 02:16:33 PM · #34

I think this would almost guarantee incorrect definitions. As you mentioned yourself 'If you consider that each of our photos is judged by usually 200-300 people with varying levels of photographic knowledge/skill/expertise/experience'

If you have 2 or 3 hundred people, where most of them don't understand the meaning of a technique or concept, voting on the meaning of the technique or concept, you are going to get confusion, not clarification.

Same thing that happens with the entries and voting really.

Artifacts

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

03/07/2007 02:19:36 PM · #35

Originally posted by biteme:

... [b]In analogue photography (film) there was no histogram, but low / high key was there. ...

High and low key are vague descriptions, interpretated differently by every person. Photographed technically different by every photographer, because everybody interprets (?) the technique in a different way...

Good point, but to suggest that low-key is "interpreted differently by every person" would be to suggest it has no definition at all and therefore EVERY image qualifies as low-key.

I would respectfully disagree with that assessment. Low-key is histogram related whether you could see it in your film-based camera or not. In quantitative terms, as is implied being in a 'basic' challenge at DPC, low-key - technically speaking - is subject and lighting independent.

Message edited by author 2007-03-07 14:20:09.

kashi

Nikon D60

03/07/2007 02:26:03 PM · #36

I'm even more confused now !

This was my entry :

Is it not low-key ??

What about this one - an out-take :

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

03/07/2007 02:29:35 PM · #37

Originally posted by kashi:

I'm even more confused now !

Lea, both of those fit my description of low key. As well they do fit the challenge description. Your entry is a better example of my description than is the second.

Message edited by author 2007-03-07 14:31:05.

skylercall

Canon EOS-7D

03/07/2007 02:32:44 PM · #38

I have always been disappointed by the non-descriptive descriptions we see around here in most challenges.

Artifacts

03/07/2007 02:42:24 PM · #39

Originally posted by kashi:

I'm even more confused now !

This was my entry :
Is it not low-key ??

What about this one - an out-take :

If you accept the premise that low-key is defined as an image having more pixels on the left side of the histogram than the right then your entry is low-key.

If you also accept the premise that every image - including low-key - should have a full range of tones from pure black to pure white then your outtake is both low-key and a 'better' photograph technically and therefore deserving of a higher score.

They are very similar images. Perhaps the first one has 'better' sharpening than the outtake and the outtake has better tonality than the submission. Which is 'better'? That is a matter of individual voter preference.

03/07/2007 03:07:35 PM · #40

Originally posted by stdavidson:

Originally posted by kashi:
I'm even more confused now !

This was my entry :
Is it not low-key ??

What about this one - an out-take :

If you accept the premise that low-key is defined as an image having more pixels on the left side of the histogram than the right then your entry is low-key.

If you also accept the premise that every image - including low-key - should have a full range of tones from pure black to pure white then your outtake is both low-key and a 'better' photograph technically and therefore deserving of a higher score.

They are very similar images. Perhaps the first one has 'better' sharpening than the outtake and the outtake has better tonality than the submission. Which is 'better'? That is a matter of individual voter preference.

That's where we differ. I see the first as a better example, based on the contouring of the subject's face and high key to fill ratio.

Message edited by author 2007-03-07 15:08:08.