| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/12/2002 02:27:57 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by Arachnophilia:
and don't give things a low vote because they're abstract. or because they are low quality jpeg-wise.
those can be VERY interesting aspects of digital photography. if i wanted something that looks like it was taken by a manual anolog camera, i'd use a manual analog camera, and scan it in. use the medium for what it is, and don't give things low votes because the medium is apparent.
When low quality jpeg ruins image detail and sharpness you will get a comment and I will knock of one or two points (unless you are at the 150k limit; certain shots need the highest quality and still don't have enough). It is just not necessary. I don't like to watch blocky images littered with artifacts and detail-loss that hurt the eyes.
Jpeg artifacts are definitely not a very interesting aspect of digital photography. Jpeg compression ruins detail, sharpness, color, crispness, etc. If it wasn't so slow and memory-demanding I would shoot TIFF's only.
Watching a print is the same thing. A photo printed on plain inkjet paper looks very bad, details washed out etc. I don't like to look at it and I would never ever pay to watch that in a gallery for example. A print on photo paper is soooo much better (I use a Epson 790 with Epson ink and Epson Matte Paper).
The medium is important. |
|
|
|
11/12/2002 07:50:34 AM · #52 |
... and some of us didn't get the right photo uploaded so we got hit hard because of artifacts.
Crossed should have been the one that I uploaded, but alas, I've learned from it... this week I double and triple checked my upload to make sure the clearest one made it online.
-crabappl3
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Originally posted by Arachnophilia:
[i]
and don't give things a low vote because they're abstract. or because they are low quality jpeg-wise.
those can be VERY interesting aspects of digital photography. if i wanted something that looks like it was taken by a manual anolog camera, i'd use a manual analog camera, and scan it in. use the medium for what it is, and don't give things low votes because the medium is apparent.
When low quality jpeg ruins image detail and sharpness you will get a comment and I will knock of one or two points (unless you are at the 150k limit; certain shots need the highest quality and still don't have enough). It is just not necessary. I don't like to watch blocky images littered with artifacts and detail-loss that hurt the eyes.
Jpeg artifacts are definitely not a very interesting aspect of digital photography. Jpeg compression ruins detail, sharpness, color, crispness, etc. If it wasn't so slow and memory-demanding I would shoot TIFF's only.
Watching a print is the same thing. A photo printed on plain inkjet paper looks very bad, details washed out etc. I don't like to look at it and I would never ever pay to watch that in a gallery for example. A print on photo paper is soooo much better (I use a Epson 790 with Epson ink and Epson Matte Paper).
The medium is important.[/i]
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 08:19:48 AM · #53 |
| Just do you own thing. Shoot what makes you happy, and if you score low ( like Im doing right now ) so what as long as you like your work, that is all that really counts. Hang in there.... |
|
|
|
11/12/2002 08:36:24 AM · #54 |
hehe...I got frustrated too with my first couple of entries. From reading the forum posts, I learned not to worry about it too much, and developed an attitude of "WHO CARES".
BigSmiles, even if your score ends up being 4.5 (like a couple of my submissions), IGNORE IT!! What I now look at is how many people voted 8 and higher. A score of 4.5 with 20 people voting 8 and higher is a winner to me, because whatever I saw in that photo that I liked and made me submit, 20 other people saw it as well, and that's a win in my books.
Capiche? :) This site is for a LOT of fun, and a BIT of learning...school is the other way around ;)
z |
|
|
|
11/12/2002 08:55:38 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by crabappl3:
... and some of us didn't get the right photo uploaded so we got hit hard because of artifacts.
Crossed should have been the one that I uploaded, but alas, I've learned from it... this week I double and triple checked my upload to make sure the clearest one made it online.
When I see it and it disturbes me, I tell people what to do.
To avoid uploading the wrong picture, I would recommend make a TIFF copy of your shot, work on that, save the TIFF again after that and save as several grades of jpeg (I am usually between 98 and 92%) and save each jpeg with the compression level in its name. No problem picking the right one when you do that.
Example: 0001_92 / 0001_93
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 09:36:35 AM · #56 |
That's basically what I did for this weeks challenge... it's all about learning, right?
-crabappl3
Originally posted by Azrifel:
When I see it and it disturbes me, I tell people what to do.
To avoid uploading the wrong picture, I would recommend make a TIFF copy of your shot, work on that, save the TIFF again after that and save as several grades of jpeg (I am usually between 98 and 92%) and save each jpeg with the compression level in its name. No problem picking the right one when you do that.
Example: 0001_92 / 0001_93
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 12:14:48 PM · #57 |
There are two issues to consider:
1. the simple fact that at 640x480, and with a resolution of about 72 pixels PER inch, you're not going to get any decent resolving power in terms of resolution. It's not the same as a printed photo which typically have 300 pixels/inch or better (at least you should have it). If you take a photo of a forest, chances are, your leaves will appear blurred on the monitor but printed out 8x10 @ 300 pixels/inch, it'll look fine. Thus, if you submit things with a lot of details, people might not get it or they'll think it's blurry even though the PRINTED result is not. I think we all shoot for the print, not what's on the monitor. But, this setup here is based on the monitor, so you have to consider that.
2. All the complaints about camera equipment and JPEG artifacts. It's a non issue if you work around it. Sure some folks' camera is just not up to par to create a decent image, but with decent equipment, JPEG artifacts wouldn't be an issue. Most people on here have decent digital cameras that are capable of producing photographs that are of good quality. So don't blame the equipment. Sure, most prosumer cameras have el-cheapo lenses which ends up distorting or eliminating the resolving power of the CCD, but that's life.
BigSmiles: you have a Minolta DiMage 7 which means you have a decent camera and thus #2 wouldn't apply to you at all.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 12:19:07 PM · #58 |
The worst way, I think, to gauge improvement is by your scores on DPC. I am not a scientist or mathematician, but it seems to me that for scores to be an accurate indication of "growth," week to week would have to be consistent. As it is, there are simply too many variables (voters, number of voters, challenges, number of entries, etc). The only way you can know if you are improving is to look at your earlier work, compare it to your later work adn see if there is growth. If you depend on DPC voters (bless our hearts)to affirm your worth, you will indeed be a frustrated puppy. :-)
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 01:50:11 PM · #59 |
i think, this week, just for fun, grins, and giggles, im going to do my challenge entry with my wife's $200 powershot a10.
1.3 mega pixels of pure power, baybeeee!
: ) : )
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 02:45:14 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
i think, this week, just for fun, grins, and giggles, im going to do my challenge entry with my wife's $200 powershot a10.
1.3 mega pixels of pure power, baybeeee!
: ) : )
Heh, go for it!
I sold my old 2mp point-n-clicky thing to a friend and he's out-scored my flashy S602Z twice - in 2 attempts (okay, that may mean I'm cr*p (or that he doesn't enter when I've got a killer shot), but I'm gonna beat him this week dammit!!!)
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/12/2002 4:48:10 PM. |
|
|
|
11/12/2002 03:05:23 PM · #61 |
OK Mag, you're on. I have a $99.00 Aiptek 1.3 Megapixel point and pray. Wanna make it a technology challenged technology challenge?
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/12/2002 3:48:33 PM. |
|
|
|
11/12/2002 03:21:20 PM · #62 |
Choices choices, do I use my .9Mb HP C20, or my new 2Mp Konica ?....
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 03:36:00 PM · #63 |
The only thing you can be fair in the equipment factor is to have challenges gets judged based on equipment too :)
1. The low end cameras (These includes some of the 4 megapixel Kodak cameras that look like crap)
2. The middle end cameras (Canon PowerShot G2, Sony F707, etc.)
3. The higher end cameras (Digital SLR's with interchangeable lenses)
There is no doubt that #3 will have an advantage over #1 but less apparent between #2 and #3.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 03:54:48 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Choices choices, do I use my .9Mb HP C20, or my new 2Mp Konica ?....
Gordon, you have to use both! Average the two shots together so you get a 1.45 Megapixel so you're close to Mag's and my 1.3 Megapixels.
Pag, Not necessarily so. I think it would be fun to have a 1.3 photo outperform a 6 Meg digital SLR. Equipment matters but the mind behind the equipment matters more. . .
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/12/2002 3:54:26 PM. |
|
|
|
11/12/2002 03:57:20 PM · #65 |
sounds like an illegal edit to me ;)
Originally posted by Seeker:
Average the two shots together so you get a 1.45 Megapixel so you're close to Mag's and my 1.3 Megapixels.
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/12/2002 3:55:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 04:02:38 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by gr8photos:
sounds like an illegal edit to me ;)
Originally posted by Seeker:
[i]Average the two shots together so you get a 1.45 Megapixel so you're close to Mag's and my 1.3 Megapixels.[/i]
Nah, Gordon's good, he'll figure out a legal way to do it. Maybe shoot with the 2 Meg, print it and shoot that with the .9. . . |
|
|
|
11/12/2002 04:17:57 PM · #67 |
I am assuming the same person using the same camera :)
it's rare for a 1.3 megapixel camera to beat someone with a 6 megapixel SLR if both are competent photographers and shoots similar subjects.
in fact, a 3 megapixel camera (Canon D30) will easily outperform a 5 megapixel Nikon Coolpix or Minolta Dimage, simply because it has a better lower noise CCD and much better lenses.
Lenses makes a huge difference too, cheaper cameras tend to have el-cheapo lenses :)
But you're right, if the person taking the photos isn't that good of a photographer, then it's a moot point. Someone with a Minolta DiImage as the thread starter of this whining thread has, should not blame equipment for his failures :) I would only comment that i'd prefer a D60 for the MACRO challenge because then i can set F16 and get a much better depth of field... but hey i am not gonna bitch and moan about it :)
Originally posted by Seeker:
Originally posted by Gordon:
[i]Choices choices, do I use my .9Mb HP C20, or my new 2Mp Konica ?....
Gordon, you have to use both! Average the two shots together so you get a 1.45 Megapixel so you're close to Mag's and my 1.3 Megapixels.
Pag, Not necessarily so. I think it would be fun to have a 1.3 photo outperform a 6 Meg digital SLR. Equipment matters but the mind behind the equipment matters more. . .
[/i]
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/12/2002 4:15:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 07:47:18 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by BigSmiles:
Like seriously guys. Is my photography that bad? I can't seem to break 4.5 lately. This week though I was actually pleased with my submission.. hoping to make it to 5.5..... nope 4.0.
Am I kidding myself here? I'd like to know what about my image makes it worth a 4?!?!??!?! I'm trying to make this my livelihood and I can't even break 4.5!
Excuse me for being completely baffled/frustrated!
Excuse me. When I finally got it to load on the 7th day I gave you a 10. What was wrong with that score. I think I gave you a ten.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 08:06:25 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by BigSmiles:
Doesn't change the fact that if I'd like to do portraits and things like that for a living in the future... the person/people I"m shooting for have to be pleased with the results. And it's important for me that people here appreciate my photography even a little!
.... SNIP FOR BREVITY....
And apparently nobody's ever heard of the ace of spades being the "death card"
In Vietnam, the locals held the Ace of Spaces to be bad luck. Aces and Eights were supposed to be the dead man's hand of American old west lore. Personally I wasn't familiar with the ACE of spades being a death card. In the challenge we were warned that some legends/superstitions were not universal. Perhaps this was part of your problem. On the other hand, on two different machines, the little finger of the right hand is almost a tomato red. The colors look over saturated to me. (Was also in my comment during the challenge.) And yes, I was one of those who gave the picture a 4.
Entering here and the photography you plan to do are light years apart. As is the assignment you plan to do. The judges here are the public. Most of whom are not trained professionals. This is strictly people's choice award. The reviewers of your assignment are hopefully more trained. As to your desire for the future, the good news is that you have the opportunity to discuss with your clients what they have in mind before hand.
Yes pretty scores well here, but if it makes you feel any better my current entry has no flowers, no girls, no cute kids, and is currently running 6+. (Which is certainly not on track to win, but top 100 will do, top 50 would be nice, top 25 great, top 10 beyond my wildest dreams, and top 3 heaven.)
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 08:38:19 PM · #70 |
Paganini, isn't the sensor in the D60 larger then the sensors in prosumer cameras like the F707 or Dimage7? And aren't all things relative? My point is can't an F8 on the F707 produce roughly the same DOF as F16 on the D60? The F-stops are only relative to the individual cameras. I also wouldn't say that the D30 EASILY beats the prosumer cameras that have 5mp sensors. There are definite advantages to the D30 including speed and interchangeable lenses but I wouldn't say that the actual quality of the photos is as wide a margin as you suggest. I'm not a technical expert on these cameras. This is just based on studying photos and reading up on the various cameras.
T
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/12/2002 8:36:27 PM.
|
|
|
|
11/12/2002 11:19:33 PM · #71 |
Mag, Seeker, Gordon - I can't wait to see what you guys achieve with those cameras!! I've been enjoying the break I've taken from submitting here... taking those photos with my little Polaroid every week was really getting frustrating!
|
|
|
|
11/13/2002 11:30:10 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by lisae:
Mag, Seeker, Gordon - I can't wait to see what you guys achieve with those cameras!! I've been enjoying the break I've taken from submitting here... taking those photos with my little Polaroid every week was really getting frustrating!
Its been pretty fun/ challenging so far. Quite freeing to not have anything other than exposure comp to play with. Fixed focus, point and shoot, no shutter/aperture control, no white balance, no macro modes.
And I can fit about 3900 shots on one compact flash card... |
|
|
|
11/13/2002 11:36:03 AM · #73 |
Exposure comp? We doan need no steekin' exposure comp. . . <grin>
I don't even have that on the Aiptek. Looks like Photoshop levels and colors is gonna get a workout on my shot. Think Mag is gonna play?
* This message has been edited by the author on 11/13/2002 12:04:32 PM. |
|
|
|
11/13/2002 11:54:46 AM · #74 |
yep, already started messing around ; ) ..
im loving the irony, too : ) : ) |
|
|
|
11/13/2002 11:58:57 AM · #75 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
yep, already started messing around ; ) ..
im loving the irony, too : ) : )
Could you do some shirts for me ?
So - are you finding it easier or harder to get good shots ? |
|
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: 08/27/2025 12:17:15 AM EDT.
