Posthumous Ribbons of the Week - DPChallenge Forums

02/29/2008 09:30:57 AM · #826

Don (posthumous), I think you're losing it!

Bear_Music's image was great, but I think

charliebaker was trying to expand his brown portfolio.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

02/29/2008 09:58:43 AM · #827

Originally posted by citymars:

Don (posthumous), I think you're losing it! Bear_Music's image was great, but I think charliebaker was trying to expand his brown portfolio.

I lost it long ago. That's one of my best qualities. I don't know what Charlie was trying to do. I only know what he did: a poem about dying as flying into light.

tate

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

02/29/2008 10:44:03 AM · #828

I love this thread. Your point is well taken and it's great to have this alternative place for alternative RIBBONS! â�¦ Sometimes technique, effort, and philosophy clash and sometimes they mesh. I scored the images the you ribboned very well 9,7 and 8 respectively if I remember, but for some reason, they don't show up as being voted on - I thought for sure I voted on more than 20%.

Anyway, to reiterate: This is a great thread to take a second look at some interesting perspectives.

Originally posted by posthumous:

Brown Deja Vu
Photos that were vivid and human were turned into stale DPC monotonies. But it forced people, including myself, to look at Browns. They lie within the heart of this site, near its center.

02/29/2008 11:11:12 AM · #829

Yee Haw! I can die happy! My most-desired goal in this place we call "home" has been to be deemed worthy of a Posthumous Blue. There's nothing left to accomplish for me :-) Thanks,

posthumous!

R.

02/29/2008 11:18:36 AM · #830

Originally posted by posthumous:

I don't know what Charlie was trying to do. I only know what he did: a poem about dying as flying into light.

Yes. And then he put it in the Humorous gallery.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

02/29/2008 11:27:17 AM · #831

Originally posted by citymars:

Originally posted by posthumous:
I don't know what Charlie was trying to do. I only know what he did: a poem about dying as flying into light.

Yes. And then he put it in the Humorous gallery.

Does the photographer get to decide what everyone has to see in their image, or does the viewer get a say, too ?

tate

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

02/29/2008 11:34:10 AM · #832

some day ... some day :<

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Yee Haw! I can die happy! My most-desired goal in this place we call "home" has been to be deemed worthy of a Posthumous Blue. There's nothing left to accomplish for me :-) Thanks, posthumous!

R.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

02/29/2008 12:01:09 PM · #833

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by citymars:

Originally posted by posthumous:
I don't know what Charlie was trying to do. I only know what he did: a poem about dying as flying into light.

Yes. And then he put it in the Humorous gallery.

Does the photographer get to decide what everyone has to see in their image, or does the viewer get a say, too ?

Wow, you sure are combatative. Of course the viewer is entitled to see what he sees. Don't I also get to say when I think an image is crap, especially when it's pretty clear the photographer intended it to be crap? Charlie has a history of intentionally going for the brown, and it's pretty clear this was one of those times. Btw, I generally admire Posthumous's take on photography, and his insistence on seeing beauty and meaning in photos that many voters overlook.

pointandshoot

Canon EOS-10D

02/29/2008 12:02:24 PM · #834

Originally posted by citymars:

Originally posted by posthumous:
I don't know what Charlie was trying to do. I only know what he did: a poem about dying as flying into light.

Yes. And then he put it in the Humorous gallery.

Sometimes, in spite of our best efforts, we create something wonderful.

02/29/2008 12:04:51 PM · #835

Originally posted by pointandshoot:

Sometimes, in spite of our best efforts, we create something wonderful.

Agreed! :-)

02/29/2008 12:13:13 PM · #836

Originally posted by citymars:

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by citymars:

Originally posted by posthumous:
I don't know what Charlie was trying to do. I only know what he did: a poem about dying as flying into light.

Yes. And then he put it in the Humorous gallery.

Does the photographer get to decide what everyone has to see in their image, or does the viewer get a say, too ?

Wow, you sure are combatative. Of course the viewer is entitled to see what he sees. Don't I also get to say when I think an image is crap, especially when it's pretty clear the photographer intended it to be crap? Charlie has a history of intentionally going for the brown, and it's pretty clear this was one of those times. Btw, I generally admire Posthumous's take on photography, and his insistence on seeing beauty and meaning in photos that many voters overlook.

I donno... Sure you get the right to say what you think, no problem. But for the image at hand, I'm with Posthumous; I think Charlie did a brilliant thing. And I've met Charlie, I know him well enough to know that (all his "going for the brown" posturing notwithstanding) there's usually a germ of "philosophy", a distinctly focused subtext if you will, to every image he submits. And I love this dead seagull shot, I love how it relates to the original shot, I love the whole gestalt of the thing.

In fact, from my perspective he deserves to be where I am in the standings more than I do. From my perspective, this entry actually creates an extended dialogue between two of the most enigmatic members of DPC, using as its "language" an absolutely dnmc-by-average-DPC-standards image-and-response-image.

Think about it! The Whiterook original is DNMC, that's why it got hammered, right? But he justified it: "You can buy anything on e-bay" he said, and he is right of course. Now, Charlie's "challenge" was basically to show a "better" way of doing the image, right? And by DPC standards he didn't do that, by those standards Charlie's image is probably worse, not better. So it's in its own way totally DNMC for THIS challenge, right?

But put the two images together, really look at them, see the relationship between them and what they "say" to each other, and you're in a whole new country, pilgrim...

And that's all I have to say on that :-)

R.

02/29/2008 12:30:35 PM · #837

Originally posted by citymars:

Originally posted by Gordon:
Does the photographer get to decide what everyone has to see in their image, or does the viewer get a say, too ?

Wow, you sure are combative. Of course the viewer is entitled to see what he sees. Don't I also get to say when I think an image is crap, especially when it's pretty clear the photographer intended it to be crap? Charlie has a history of intentionally going for the brown, and it's pretty clear this was one of those times. Btw, I generally admire Posthumous's take on photography, and his insistence on seeing beauty and meaning in photos that many voters overlook.

Any combative feel to the question is in your head. When did philosophical questions become combat ?

If you think it is crap and the photographer thinks it is crap, does that make it crap to everyone ?

Message edited by author 2008-02-29 12:36:39.

02/29/2008 12:43:36 PM · #838

Originally posted by Gordon:

Any combative feel to the question is in your head.

Probably, it wouldn't be the first time!

Originally posted by Gordon:

When did philosophical questions become combat ?

Maybe the word is challenging, not combatative. And before you ask, yes, you are allowed to be challenging.

Originally posted by Gordon:

If you think it is crap and the photographer thinks it is crap, does that make it crap to everyone ?

Clearly not.

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

02/29/2008 01:13:41 PM · #839

Hey, I'm perfectly willing to admit that my ribbon choices are highly subjective. I rarely regret them, though. :)

Yo_Spiff

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

02/29/2008 01:25:19 PM · #840

Originally posted by posthumous:

Hey, I'm perfectly willing to admit that my ribbon choices are highly subjective. I rarely regret them, though. :)

Very subjective, as well as interpretive. You read a lot more out of my "Peace" entry than what I had intended on conveying. I didn't know I was that deep. :-}

02/29/2008 01:27:00 PM · #841

Originally posted by yospiff:

Originally posted by posthumous:
Hey, I'm perfectly willing to admit that my ribbon choices are highly subjective. I rarely regret them, though. :)

Very subjective, as well as interpretive. You read a lot more out of my "Peace" entry than what I had intended on conveying. I didn't know I was that deep. :-}

My belief is that we all have depths that go beyond our own understanding.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

02/29/2008 01:32:25 PM · #842

Originally posted by posthumous:

My belief is that we all have depths that go beyond our own understanding.

man, that's deep...

raish

Olympus C-2500L

02/29/2008 01:47:29 PM · #843

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by citymars:

Originally posted by Gordon:
Does the photographer get to decide what everyone has to see in their image, or does the viewer get a say, too ?

Wow, you sure are combative. Of course the viewer is entitled to see what he sees. Don't I also get to say when I think an image is crap, especially when it's pretty clear the photographer intended it to be crap? Charlie has a history of intentionally going for the brown, and it's pretty clear this was one of those times. Btw, I generally admire Posthumous's take on photography, and his insistence on seeing beauty and meaning in photos that many voters overlook.

Any combative feel to the question is in your head. When did philosophical questions become combat ?

If you think it is crap and the photographer thinks it is crap, does that make it crap to everyone ?

Only if it's carved in the bark of a tree that falls when nobody's around to stop it crushing a box so we'll never know if the cat in the box was alive or not before the accident. It had to make a noise, right?

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/29/2008 02:06:56 PM · #844

Wasn't it a German guy who put the cat in the box? Or was that some chick named Pandora? Different box? Can we think outside of either of them?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

02/29/2008 02:17:39 PM · #845

Originally posted by posthumous:

My belief is that we all have depths that go beyond our own understanding.

Isaac Asimov tells of a time he heard that one of his stories was going to be the subject of a college class, and decided to attend. After the class, he joined the small group gathered around the professor to dispute some point which had been made during the lecture. Finally he played what he thought was his trump card, "After all, I wrote the story."

The professor responded rather disdainfully, "That's all very well, Dr. Asimov, but just because you wrote the story, what makes you think you know anything at all about it?"

02/29/2008 02:20:17 PM · #846

Originally posted by Melethia:

Wasn't it a German guy who put the cat in the box?

I'm uncertain about that.

Originally posted by Melethia:

Or was that some chick named Pandora? Different box? Can we think outside of either of them?

Hope so

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

02/29/2008 02:28:49 PM · #847

Originally posted by Melethia:

Wasn't it a German guy who put the cat in the box? Or was that some chick named Pandora? Different box? Can we think outside of either of them?

Well, by one way of interpreting Schrodinger, basically there IS no "outside the box" (he's the German cat in the box guy). As for Pandora, when she opened HER box she more or less let the cat out of the bag, and when she did that, of course, there is no longer a box, since the box was defined in terms of what it contained, and absent content it is not a box.

Oy vey!

R.

Message edited by author 2008-02-29 14:29:15.

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

02/29/2008 02:34:41 PM · #848

Originally posted by Melethia:

Wasn't it a German guy who put the cat in the box?

Yes, it was "SchrÃ¶dinger"

02/29/2008 02:39:52 PM · #849

Originally posted by eyewave:

Originally posted by Melethia:
Wasn't it a German guy who put the cat in the box?

Yes, it was "SchrÃ¶dinger"

You can take yer umlaut and shove it where... Oh, never mind... I was too lazy to click up my character map thingie :-)

R.