| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/27/2007 08:36:17 PM · #101 |
| Since most challenges are opened to some kind of interpretation. Why score 1's & 2's. Is there no benifit of doubt? Even if you truely feel it DNMC with a 1% benifit of doubt, on technical and sound images, why not 4's or 5's. When the winning images are winning with a C or B- averages, don't you think the scoring is tough enough as it is? I too take in consideration if a image meets the challenge or not, it's not 100% of my analysis. My little 2 cents worth. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:36:27 PM · #102 |
reading all the controversy over filling the frame is really ruffling some feathers. JMO but when the title tells you what the subject is then please consider that there may be good reason for some of the bg in that shot. There are several faces in the challenge and at least two of them give you a title that really would not work unless you see some of the bg to give it perspective. The bg on the entries I'm thinking of is very very small (even smaller than the dog shot toward the beginning of this thread).
 jhonan you just listed previous fill the frame top tens and said you've identified what I think the subject is and that they all fail. The problem with that is that you aren't reading the title which tells you what the subject is. For instance it isn't "dome" it's "up" and it isn't "tap" its a play on filling the frame with water and that it'll get wet.... read the title and see if the bg (or portion of the shot you are considering to not fill the frame) has anything to do with the subject the photog intended and not your idea of what the subject should be. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:36:38 PM · #103 |
rugman1969 The challenge description is not as you described it stating the the subject had to fill the entire frame. The challenge description is as follows...
"Compose your photograph so that nothing but your subject is in the frame."
This is a subtle but real differentiation. A completey white or completely black background can be easily observed by the audience as 'nothing'.
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
[quote=lesgainous] [quote=rugman1969]The subject must fill the ENTIRE frame. Where's the confusion? |
How do you know it didn't fill the entire frame--the focus frame? The challenge description doesn't state which frame to fill. |
|
Message edited by author 2007-08-27 20:42:52. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:38:49 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by mpeters:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
IMO, no, this does not meet challenge description. The subject is in the center of the frame, and while it fills out the majority of the frame, there is still a white background that is in the frame.
|
Looks like the background has been obliviated either by flash or by photoshop. Either way it's gone. Only thing left is the subject.
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Let's try to look at this logically. You go buy a new car, and the salesperson says look at that car, that is what you are buying. So, in my understanding, I am buying only the car, not the background or the surroundings. Just the car(the SUBJECT). Can anyone argue this point with me? Please, when many take the time to properly post a opic that is within the requirements of the description, why should others be rewarded because they cannot follow the guidelines laid out? Why is it so complicated? The subject must fill the ENTIRE frame. Where's the confusion? |
You are talking apples and oranges. We are talking about filling something not buying something. At least my waiter example applied to the former. Can you point me to where it says entire frame in the description below?
I'm waiting a reply... ;) Carry on. |
"Compose your photograph so that nothing but your subject is in the frame." |
OK, if your waiter bring you a glass of water filled to the top, but put a dab of Pepsi in it, does that mean your glass is full of water? The same applies here. Your SUBJECT should fill the frame. Unless your subject is the background, then there should be no background in the photo.
Message edited by author 2007-08-27 20:43:46. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:40:21 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
Originally posted by kawesttex:
AHHHH! But if it does not in fact have a convex miniscus it is not carrying as much water as it can! Thus the question beckons, What is Full? Maybe the description should have been 'Fill the frame, with a concave miniscus holding 4 angels, with your subject' |
I'm sorry. I just can't let this go.... 'Water' in solid, gaseous, or liquid form? - Clarification please. And hurry, the DNMC army are on the march. |
|
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:41:56 PM · #106 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by jhonan:
Originally posted by kawesttex:
AHHHH! But if it does not in fact have a convex miniscus it is not carrying as much water as it can! Thus the question beckons, What is Full? Maybe the description should have been 'Fill the frame, with a concave miniscus holding 4 angels, with your subject' |
I'm sorry. I just can't let this go.... 'Water' in solid, gaseous, or liquid form? - Clarification please. And hurry, the DNMC army are on the march. |
|
Thanks for the laugh. I really needed that just now. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:42:23 PM · #107 |
| Hey Judi, I answered about 9 or 10 posts back, so it DMCsclmnop! :-) |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:42:53 PM · #108 |
| Hey Judi....I don't know how to post a popcorn thingy...Could you post one for me....Lol |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:43:19 PM · #109 |
filling the frame is not the same thing as being cut off by the frame
this thread sucks |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:44:23 PM · #110 |
Let me get this straight. This was a photo about a 'Big Mouth'. Now if I only had a picture of a mouth...then how could you tell if it was big or not? You couldn't. But then again..if I just had the mouth...then that means I would also have teeth in the photo..or the tongue, or the tonsils, or the area surrounding the lips. So that would still be DNMC. So how could I have feasibly taken this photo and still met the challenge according to the rules.
Go ahead and answer that one without digging a hole and bury yourself!!!
|
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:44:50 PM · #111 |
Thanks rugman ;) It's been an interesting read, but it's now dinner time in California. I'm a pretty literal thinker as is evidenced by my challenge entries but I'll have to part ways on your narrow (IMO) view.
Still, vote and comment as you wish. If you have convictions, stick to 'em. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:45:20 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by ace flyman:
Hey Judi....I don't know how to post a popcorn thingy...Could you post one for me....Lol |
Sure... 
|
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:45:34 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Let me get this straight. This was a photo about a 'Big Mouth'. Now if I only had a picture of a mouth...then how could you tell if it was big or not? You couldn't. But then again..if I just had the mouth...then that means I would also have teeth in the photo..or the tongue, or the tonsils, or the area surrounding the lips. So that would still be DNMC. So how could I have feasibly taken this photo and still met the challenge according to the rules.
Go ahead and answer that one without digging a hole and bury yourself!!! |
Can I order a 24x36 print? |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:45:44 PM · #114 |
Originally posted by kawesttex:
Hey Judi, I answered about 9 or 10 posts back, so it DMCsclmnop! :-) |
Yeah sorry...it took me a bit longer than normal to make that animation.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:46:04 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by mpeters:
Originally posted by Judi:
Let me get this straight. This was a photo about a 'Big Mouth'. Now if I only had a picture of a mouth...then how could you tell if it was big or not? You couldn't. But then again..if I just had the mouth...then that means I would also have teeth in the photo..or the tongue, or the tonsils, or the area surrounding the lips. So that would still be DNMC. So how could I have feasibly taken this photo and still met the challenge according to the rules.
Go ahead and answer that one without digging a hole and bury yourself!!! |
Can I order a 24x36 print? |
Sure....!
|
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:46:16 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Let's try to look at this logically. You go buy a new car, and the salesperson says look at that car, that is what you are buying. So, in my understanding, I am buying only the car, not the background or the surroundings. Just the car(the SUBJECT). Can anyone argue this point with me? |
Why you just proved my point!
When I go buy a car I am purchasing many things. Aesthetic (Composition), Color (Tonal Range), Performance (WOW factor) but most of all SPACE. I am buying the negative space in which to put myself. Just like in this challenge the extra space is for me and my enjoyment of the image. Just like with the car I am buying the space is what gives me comfort and a place to think about what I am seeing out the windshield. The image...
:-)
|
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:46:20 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Let me get this straight. This was a photo about a 'Big Mouth'. Now if I only had a picture of a mouth...then how could you tell if it was big or not? You couldn't. But then again..if I just had the mouth...then that means I would also have teeth in the photo..or the tongue, or the tonsils, or the area surrounding the lips. So that would still be DNMC. So how could I have feasibly taken this photo and still met the challenge according to the rules.
Go ahead and answer that one without digging a hole and bury yourself!!! |
If the mouth was the subject, then teeth, tongue, etc is part of the mouth, which I would expect to see in a mouth.
If my subject was a tire, and I took a pic of the whole car, would that meet the challenge? Didn't have a shovel! |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:48:25 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by Sheryll:
jhonan you just listed previous fill the frame top tens and said you've identified what I think the subject is and that they all fail. The problem with that is that you aren't reading the title which tells you what the subject is. For instance it isn't "dome" it's "up" and it isn't "tap" its a play on filling the frame with water and that it'll get wet.... read the title and see if the bg (or portion of the shot you are considering to not fill the frame) has anything to do with the subject the photog intended and not your idea of what the subject should be. |
I'm playing devils advocate here. ;-)
Besides, the interpretation of what the subject of a photo is is...well... subjective! - The title or photographer's description shouldn't have to come in to it. The photo should be able to stand alone. But that's for another thread. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:49:06 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Let's try to look at this logically. You go buy a new car, and the salesperson says look at that car, that is what you are buying. So, in my understanding, I am buying only the car, not the background or the surroundings. Just the car(the SUBJECT). Can anyone argue this point with me? |
Why you just proved my point!
When I go buy a car I am purchasing many things. Aesthetic (Composition), Color (Tonal Range), Performance (WOW factor) but most of all SPACE. I am buying the negative space in which to put myself. Just like in this challenge the extra space is for me and my enjoyment of the image. Just like with the car I am buying the space is what gives me comfort and a place to think about what I am seeing out the windshield. The image...
:-) |
So your telling me when you buy a car, you only want to buy the space? Man, have I got some cars to sell you.
Your not buying outside the car, you are buying the car. What you see from within the car is still not yours, unless you are parked in your driveway facing your house, and looking out only the windshield. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:50:33 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Originally posted by Judi:
Let me get this straight. This was a photo about a 'Big Mouth'. Now if I only had a picture of a mouth...then how could you tell if it was big or not? You couldn't. But then again..if I just had the mouth...then that means I would also have teeth in the photo..or the tongue, or the tonsils, or the area surrounding the lips. So that would still be DNMC. So how could I have feasibly taken this photo and still met the challenge according to the rules.
Go ahead and answer that one without digging a hole and bury yourself!!! |
If the mouth was the subject, then teeth, tongue, etc is part of the mouth, which I would expect to see in a mouth.
If my subject was a tire, and I took a pic of the whole car, would that meet the challenge? Didn't have a shovel! |
Well guess what...that was your undoing. I photographed a big mouth...and with that big mouth comes the person which emphasises the big mouth. So the person is a part of that big mouth...I expect that person to come with that big mouth. So even your explanation is DNMC!
|
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:52:40 PM · #121 |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:52:48 PM · #122 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Well guess what...that was your undoing. I photographed a big mouth...and with that big mouth comes the person which emphasises the big mouth. So the person is a part of that big mouth...I expect that person to come with that big mouth. So even your explanation is DNMC! |
You'll need to find someone with a square head the next time. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:53:03 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
[quote=rugman1969] Let's try to look at this logically. You go buy a new car, and the salesperson says look at that car, that is what you are buying. So, in my understanding, I am buying only the car, not the background or the surroundings. Just the car(the SUBJECT). Can anyone argue this point with me? |
Why you just proved my point!
When I go buy a car I am purchasing many things. Aesthetic (Composition), Color (Tonal Range), Performance (WOW factor) but most of all SPACE. I am buying the negative space in which to put myself. Just like in this challenge the extra space is for me and my enjoyment of the image. Just like with the car I am buying the space is what gives me comfort and a place to think about what I am seeing out the windshield. The image...
:-) |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
So your telling me when you buy a car, you only want to buy the space? |
I repeat
"When I go buy a car I am purchasing many things. Aesthetic (Composition), Color (Tonal Range), Performance (WOW factor) but most of all SPACE."
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Your not buying outside the car, you are buying the car.
|
Yes that is correct I am buy the photogs image as presented.
Originally posted by rugman1969:
What you see from within the car is still not yours, unless you are parked in your driveway facing your house, and looking out only the windshield. |
Yes that is correct I am buy the photogs image as presented. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:53:15 PM · #124 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Originally posted by Judi:
Let me get this straight. This was a photo about a 'Big Mouth'. Now if I only had a picture of a mouth...then how could you tell if it was big or not? You couldn't. But then again..if I just had the mouth...then that means I would also have teeth in the photo..or the tongue, or the tonsils, or the area surrounding the lips. So that would still be DNMC. So how could I have feasibly taken this photo and still met the challenge according to the rules.
Go ahead and answer that one without digging a hole and bury yourself!!! |
If the mouth was the subject, then teeth, tongue, etc is part of the mouth, which I would expect to see in a mouth.
.
If my subject was a tire, and I took a pic of the whole car, would that meet the challenge? Didn't have a shovel! |
Well guess what...that was your undoing. I photographed a big mouth...and with that big mouth comes the person which emphasises the big mouth. So the person is a part of that big mouth...I expect that person to come with that big mouth. So even your explanation is DNMC! |
So if I photograph a car seat, and because it is part of the car, does that mean if I photograph the whole car, that is ok if my subject is the seat?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I think not!
I have to leave. I will resume this when I get home
Message edited by author 2007-08-27 20:54:14. |
|
|
|
08/27/2007 08:54:38 PM · #125 |
| I'm still waiting for the 'full' pail of water! |
|
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: 08/19/2025 11:39:23 PM EDT.
