| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/28/2003 11:17:08 PM · #126 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Well, actually, no. Some repositioning and lighting changes. Of course if you had rather do it in the computer I guess thats OK too. Just don't enter it in one of the dpc contests unless it is one of the special ones where such editing is allowed. ;) |
Well that will have to wait for my next visit! But if I was going to be doing a formal portrait sitting I probably would leave the toy out ...
The duotone version is already DPC-illegal. |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 12:34:14 AM · #127 |
Hello? Has anyone heard of Kim Anderson? He has made a fortune photographing kids!
And to complain about pet photos is just simply ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with a pet photo if it is technically good. Although I am starting to believe most people here don't know what technically good photos are, unless of course they are those stale sterile studio shots that are all over the place.
Excuse me! I would much rather see a snapshot of someone's child than a stale sterile studio shot at least the kid has a personality!!!! |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 08:49:12 AM · #128 |
to elaborate, i like the duotone because it's a nice perspective. and reducing it to monochrome takes away alot of the 'visual noise' introduced by the riotous colors in the original and reduces it to a sort of 'window in the inner life of this baby'.
Real nice shot.
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by David Ey:
Well, actually, no. Some repositioning and lighting changes. Of course if you had rather do it in the computer I guess thats OK too. Just don't enter it in one of the dpc contests unless it is one of the special ones where such editing is allowed. ;) |
Well that will have to wait for my next visit! But if I was going to be doing a formal portrait sitting I probably would leave the toy out ...
The duotone version is already DPC-illegal. |
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 08:56:49 AM · #129 |
Yes... Kim Anderson and others have made a fortune photographing kids, but they have either been done at a level where they reach a wider audience, or only have deep meaning to the families and people who know them. Nothing wrong with snapshots.. but I think the original post here was to point out that very difference.
Bug? Flowers? They actually have a wider audience.
This is what I think John meant by the original post.
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 09:02:57 AM · #130 |
| The original rant was just a bit to off centre to safisfy most tastes by the look of it. Finding balance is definitely a challenge. Perhaps, some folks just outgrow a site like DPC? |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 09:18:52 AM · #131 |
The rant is... is you do kids and pets make them more than just a snapshot Same for ANY photo you use in a contest or challenge. I think most (notice I didn't say all) use DPC to learn photography and to grow. I for one agree...snapshots are taking over the challanges. Kid and pet photos CAN be great. I think THIS photo and THIS and THIS and THIS one of her son is for sure awesome.
If you take the time to read the orignal post and check out his comments on pet and kid photos...there are plenty of great comments on them. What's being said is...if you read the post is that it's about doing them right and not just a snapshot. If you're going to take photos of a basket of kitten clean up the cat shit first ~shrug~
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 09:20:56 AM · #132 |
speaking of kittens in a basket:
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 10:12:34 AM · #133 |
| What makes you think I wanted to see that snapshot? |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 10:28:15 AM · #134 |
what makes you think it's a snapshot?
Originally posted by robsmith:
What makes you think I wanted to see that snapshot? |
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 10:39:54 AM · #135 |
| Because everyone knows you can't train a cat |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 10:40:34 AM · #136 |
no, but you *can* drug them ; )
Originally posted by robsmith:
Because everyone knows you can't train a cat |
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 10:47:58 AM · #137 |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 01:03:10 PM · #138 |
One of my kids flying yesterday. Could it has been something for the Flight Challenge? Probably not bacause many people round here know that my twin boys have been models a lot on this site. And they are KIDS! But the truth is that I didn´t choose this picture because of all the things that have been said in this thread during the week. The shot was planned very carefully. I knew where to stand and they knew where to land. But para-gliding isn´t that easy so it took about three hours to get it right. And finally I chose another shot for the challenge and it had nothing to do with para-gliding.
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 02:10:04 PM · #139 |
i took this yesterday, trying to get some experience photographing kids.
 |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 02:11:02 PM · #140 |
looks like the drugs worked!! :)
Originally posted by achiral:
i took this yesterday, trying to get some experience photographing kids.
|
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 02:12:47 PM · #141 |
| i didn't do it...i swear!! |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 02:18:58 PM · #142 |
Emotional attachment is what will make one person call an image a photograph while another calls it a snapshot. Having a child (I have no 'kids' cause I don't live on a farm), I have an emotional attachment to photos of children. Not just my child, all children. Cat lovers will see great artistic value in images I will find crude and snapshotish (yep, it's a word... I just made it up). It's because of their emotional attachment and my lack of it.
My disagreement with this thread is that it signals out two subjects as being more prone to snapshotity (another new word) than other subjects. And yet we see in the weekly recurring threads (this being one) that flags, flowers, bugs, and virtually everything else has the same characteristic... Some folks find emotional value in them, some don't.
John may have a point when he says we should all try to be more artistic in the shots of subjects to which we have an emotional attachment. The disservice comes in the assumption that parents and pet-owners (PETents?) are guilty of seeing value in images that the offspring challenged find boring. I live in the USA and have a flag fetish... I know this... I have taken flag shots that I have found very stirring... But someone from Singapore would find little value in the same image. Does that make it a snapshot?
It's way to late to make a long story short, but I will make a potentially much longer story shorter by paraphrasing the old adage...
"Snapshot is in the eye of the beholder..."
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 02:20:29 PM · #143 |
Originally posted by achiral:
i took this yesterday, trying to get some experience photographing kids. |
I know one word comments are frowned upon, but "Wow" is all I can think of...
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 03:09:49 PM · #144 |
Originally posted by achiral:
i took this yesterday, trying to get some experience photographing kids.
|
I think this is an excellent shot with good DOF and strong angles. I really like the person furthest out of focus flashing the "peace" sign. It just adds something subtle that I really enjoy.
Anyway.... |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 03:58:30 PM · #145 |
Originally posted by achiral:
i took this yesterday, trying to get some experience photographing kids.
|
I like the really strong layering that you've created, with a clear foreground, two middle layers and a background. This is something I'm increasingly seeing as a part of what get considered strong images, good landscapes have that same fore, mid and background layering, with good DoF control to highlight the relationship, its obvious in your shot and it also an element in a lot of the stronger portrait images.
I'm not triyng to make a blanket statement that 'thou must have layers and depth' but it certainly is a feature that often distinquishes images that I find to be more successful. This is also where appropriate use of DoF can make or break an image too.
nb appropriate doesn't always mean as little as possible DoF
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 04:23:57 PM · #146 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by achiral:
i took this yesterday, trying to get some experience photographing kids.
|
I like the really strong layering that you've created, with a clear foreground, two middle layers and a background. This is something I'm increasingly seeing as a part of what get considered strong images, good landscapes have that same fore, mid and background layering, with good DoF control to highlight the relationship, its obvious in your shot and it also an element in a lot of the stronger portrait images.
|
Where do I best locate the in-focus layer. I have two recent (macro) shots where I was finally able to get a shallow DOF, but the in-focus part is 1/2 - 2/3 of the way back. While a few people seem to like it, others are quite negative about having so much foreground OOF.
Here's the one for which voting is finished.
And I thought the "fully edited" version of the baby Ariel photo was an attempt at layering as well, yet the in-focus part is, of necessity, at the back.
Message edited by author 2003-09-29 16:26:31. |
|
|
|
09/29/2003 05:45:06 PM · #147 |
There are some really good tips in here and some really good pictures. I loved the kitten in the basket and so did my 3 year old..kittens seem to draw a smile from alot of people and others can take them or leave them. Me I love them. However the only problem I have on this subject of kids and pets is I (and this is just my opinion) think that nudity in some of the kids shots is inappropriate especially showing the genitals..there are too many perverts out there that would love to see that ..and that really bothers me...IMO....thanks for listening..:)
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 06:36:53 PM · #148 |
Just voted on a swarm of 'at rest' shots. Got agree with John on this one :-( Seen one really good children portrait, one really good pet portrait, and mountains of pretty unintersting stuff.
Ed
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 06:41:06 PM · #149 |
Originally posted by e301:
Just voted on a swarm of 'at rest' shots. Got agree with John on this one :-( Seen one really good children portrait, one really good pet portrait, and mountains of pretty unintersting stuff.
Ed |
Ed, take a look at flight... There's an awful lot of uninteresting birds and planes there... It isn't about the subject matter.
|
|
|
|
09/29/2003 06:49:07 PM · #150 |
Originally posted by myqyl:
Originally posted by e301:
Just voted on a swarm of 'at rest' shots. Got agree with John on this one :-( Seen one really good children portrait, one really good pet portrait, and mountains of pretty unintersting stuff.
Ed |
Ed, take a look at flight... There's an awful lot of uninteresting birds and planes there... It isn't about the subject matter. |
AMEN!!!! Flight was actually a very bad challenge. How many dang snapshots do we have to look at of birds and planes. What has happened where is the creative minds? Being held back cause this site has become so studio sterile? |
|
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: 08/02/2025 03:48:19 PM EDT.
