| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/17/2008 08:32:08 AM · #26 |
Some great comments posted. I would consider them to be very beneficial...
My opinion is the same as JMart's. "I probably would have given this a 5 considering all of the good aspects pointed out above, but the slanted feeling in combination with an ordinary subject would not inspire me to go any higher." |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 08:34:08 AM · #27 |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 08:45:59 AM · #28 |
And here's the same image I posted before but with the waterline leveled, the green dot cloned out, and some dramatic vignetting applied:
before:  after: 
R |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 08:50:52 AM · #29 |
Very nicely done Robert. But this still leaves this image with the unfortunate problem of lack of clear and crisp subject. Yes the sun is the subject, but it seems to lack a bit of the dimentionality and imaginative view that many of the higher scoring images were able to deliver.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
And here's the same image I posted before but with the waterline leveled, the green dot cloned out, and some dramatic vignetting applied:
before: after:
R |
|
|
|
|
04/17/2008 08:53:53 AM · #30 |
my thoughts exactly. You need more than an average picture and fancy processing to win. Still, a good improvement Rob, but i'd expect nothing less ;)
|
|
|
|
04/17/2008 08:56:26 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
and some dramatic vignetting applied |
Just a reminder to all that adding a vignette is not permitted in Basic Editing (which the 'Centered' challenge was)...
|
|
|
|
04/17/2008 09:01:37 AM · #32 |
| Can't add too much to what has already been said. I would have probably given it a 6 had it come up for me, certainly not lower than a 5. If the highlights on the water were any finer, it would have been too busy for the small image size. The slightly tilted horizon is exaggerated by the slope of the mountains. I think many of us rate sunsets/sunrises a little harder, because it is so easy to get a nice looking shot, that it really has to be unique to get a high score. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 09:34:57 AM · #33 |
Sometimes the voters screw ya over. Dont take this place too seriously, or it takes the fun out of it.
I was really proud of this shot. Is it a perfect photo? No, but a 4.6, and when ya look at the images it placed next too, its really discouraging. I was thinking, cmon! Look at the details in the feathers.... Its a wild bird, not a zoo shot.. I was annoyed!
My next challange scored a 7+ and fourth place.
Just shoot what you like, and have fun. If it scores well, COOL! If not, so what!? Enter another one :)
|
|
|
|
04/17/2008 09:49:47 AM · #34 |
Does this photo deserve a sub-5 average?
Yes. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 10:00:55 AM · #35 |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 10:03:14 AM · #36 |
Like others have said, its got no WOW. You can break every rule, thats why photography is an art, but you can never get away from the subject of your photo, and you have to take that photo in a way to draw out the subject. In a competition where others have a subject that pops out at you, a landscape with the sun as the subject is unfortunately going to be average. The green flare, the slight uneven horizon, are then going to drop the score a tad more. It doesn't make it a bad photograph, just below average in this particular challenge. Also, the sun tends to be a feature in a photo, that brings out the wow, or emphasizes other subjects. It's rarely a great subject in itself. How many photos of studio lights or flashes have won challenges?
FocusPoint - I think the reason your photo scored low is for a totally different reason. Its a warm challenge, yet the trees are dark, thus you have more cold in your warm photo then you do warm. Your sun is also subdued in the photo, so its not emphasized enough. Would have been perfect if the sun was shining thru the trees more, so it seemed like the warmth was more powerful than the cold trees, but it seems like the cold is overwhelming the warmth. I know how cold our Jersey has been, so the warmth is definitely not strong right now lol.
SouthCoastOr3gon - While your redtail might not deserve a 4.6, the photo lacks sharpness. The subject is great, the capture is unique, but at first glance at the photo, the eyes don't seem to be the main focus point, and even the log seems to lack sharpness and detail. Its also a free study, which is always a tough challenge to score well. Here at DPC, sharpness, detail and clarity win out over subject in the free studies. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 10:43:30 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by wsl:
FocusPoint - I think the reason your photo scored low is for a totally different reason. Its a warm challenge, yet the trees are dark, thus you have more cold in your warm photo then you do warm. |
This concept is what also lowered my score in the same challenge. Although I had a good entry that met the topic of warm colors, many voters were looking for a conveyance of warmth. Other than the comments that did not see the relevance to the topic, I got some very positive feedback on it, and I think it would have done well in an animal themed challenge.
That, and a squirrel is not a terribly exciting animal.
One of the things I am learning is that to score high, the relevance to the theme must fit differing interpretations of the topic, and that theme must hit the viewer in the face. I suppose this is where the pre-challenge discussions and earlier challenges come in handy. Stay tuned for my similar post to this one, once the water challenge is over.
Message edited by author 2008-04-17 10:44:37. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 11:51:57 AM · #38 |
WOW. I didn't expect to get this much help with this, so I'm overwhelmed. Very very helpful everyone! Thanks.
All of this has been mentioned already. Just summarizing what I felt was very useful:
Regarding the horizon:
I did  Jac's suggestion of scrolling the photo up until the water line reaches the top of the browser; and yeah, the horizon is tilted. Although I think the bigger culprit is the mountain range further accentuating the tilt.
On choice of subject:
I think  Bear_Music made a good point when he said "you're not going to get a decent score with an image that doesn't naturally WANT to be centered." I suppose it was a poor choice of subject. Although having said that, I still find it to be a good shot with everything considered equal. Although in the context of the challenge, I guess I could have chosen a much better subject to shoot.
"WOW" factor:
 sulamk said it best with the comment he made on my photo during the competition: "A nicely exposed very boring sunrise." Harsh, but I see the point, and almost everyone here seems to agree as well that the shot extremely lacks a WOW factor.
Aside from these, a lot more points such as having a focus point... improving the post-processing... etc, etc... I read all of them and they have been very enlightening.
Me personally, I still like the shot, and had it not been my shot, I would have given it a 5 or a 6 - probably because my method of scoring is based on how the photo as a whole immediately affects me. This may cause me not to be overly critical of the smaller details such as a slightly tilted horizon and the like.
Although I think the photo is pretty in the most basic sense, it's not "wow amazing" beautiful. And I guess that, coupled with everything you guys have mentioned, put the image below a 5-rating.
Thanks for all the comments!
Hope I do much better on the Even/Odd challenge =p
Message edited by author 2008-04-17 11:52:22. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 12:36:20 PM · #39 |
Many useful observations and some re-makes regarding the shot(s) posted have been left here already. I'd only like to add something about what so many call the "wow factor". What, really, does it mean -that those who can't think of anything else to say are impressed by it; is the apparent "surprise" based on comparisons to a wealth of many images available to anyone with an interest or on a very limited exposure to such an array? Does it mean that a shot is remarkable (fit for study) or is it just very "cool" like swan shades, "awesome" like a diamond-studded tooth or is it "sweet" like a scene out of block-buster movie with a non-existing plot but full of special effects? Is the image inspiring, does it cause restlessness, reflection, thought, wonder, curiosity? Does the addition of an image make anyone's world richer for it or does it merely "fall" on impressionable minds for a short spell?
When I hear someone say "wow" in a comment under the shot here, I'm reminded of a young man who told every second girl he met that he loved her. We know, of course, that sooner or later, he'll meet one who'd want to know "why".
Message edited by author 2008-04-17 12:37:30. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 12:47:34 PM · #40 |
Falling in love is easy...True love involves having the person that you love, love you just as much in return.
So the wow factor isn't true love lol, and its definitely one of those things that are hard to explain. It can have many meanings to alot of people, but I think it can be summarized like this:
A WOW photo, is one that keeps drawing you back to look at it again. Whether its looking back at it to admire the subject, curiosity how they accomplished the shot, or even sometimes at the opposite side of the spectrum, WTF were they thinking...
WOW can be from the extreme best, to the extreme worst. And like many things, most remember those that come in first, and those that come in last, the most. We know the Giants won the Superbowl, and we know the Dolphins were the worst team in the NFL this past season. How many even know who the most mediocre team was?
WOW is also, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 12:56:57 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by wsl:
...WOW is also, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. |
Even when it makes a fist?
Beauty, someone once told me, is "aptness to purpose". If this holds, doesn't as much depend on the eyes who do the beholding as it does on the beheld? |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 02:03:11 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by quiapz:
WOW. I didn't expect to get this much help with this, so I'm overwhelmed. Very very helpful everyone! Thanks.
Regarding the horizon:
I did Jac's suggestion of scrolling the photo up until the water line reaches the top of the browser; and yeah, the horizon is tilted. Although I think the bigger culprit is the mountain range further accentuating the tilt. |
I'm not so sure ... I looked at the light on the wave tops, the direction/angles of the sun rays, and scrolled through the gradients in the sky, and found the original was probably shot with the camera level. I think the slant is (at least mostly) an illusion caused by a receding shoreline to the left and taller topography to the right. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 02:20:40 PM · #43 |
| I also scrolled it up to the top of my browser window, and it was slightly skewed. |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 02:31:05 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by wsl:
...WOW is also, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. |
Even when it makes a fist?
Beauty, someone once told me, is "aptness to purpose". If this holds, doesn't as much depend on the eyes who do the beholding as it does on the beheld? |
Hmmm. Someone told me, that was the definition of "quality". |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 02:32:21 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by yospiff:
I also scrolled it up to the top of my browser window, and it was slightly skewed. |
I understand what GeneralE is saying...the shoreline can be a smidge closer on one end and that will make it seem to be tilted.
Two examples:
I struggled with this one. Was tempted to try and align the bridge but then it didn't "feel" right. The bridge is closer to my position on the left and farther away where it meets the right bank. Just slightly, making it appear the bridge is tilted. Rec'd a couple of comments to that effect (tilted) as well.
Similar here with the piers angling out just slightly it seems that the horizon could be tilted.
 |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 02:43:20 PM · #46 |
| I'm tempted to include a plumb-bob in every shot, especially if I can clone it out later as a "minor imperfection." ;-) |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 03:51:03 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by wsl:
...WOW is also, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. |
Even when it makes a fist?
Beauty, someone once told me, is "aptness to purpose". If this holds, doesn't as much depend on the eyes who do the beholding as it does on the beheld? |
Hmmm. Someone told me, that was the definition of "quality". |
"One definition of beauty is: aptness to purpose." -Ezra Pound ABC of Reading (New Directions 1960). |
|
|
|
04/17/2008 05:36:12 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by quiapz:
WOW. I didn't expect to get this much help with this, so I'm overwhelmed. Very very helpful everyone! Thanks.
Regarding the horizon:
I did Jac's suggestion of scrolling the photo up until the water line reaches the top of the browser; and yeah, the horizon is tilted. Although I think the bigger culprit is the mountain range further accentuating the tilt. |
I'm not so sure ... I looked at the light on the wave tops, the direction/angles of the sun rays, and scrolled through the gradients in the sky, and found the original was probably shot with the camera level. I think the slant is (at least mostly) an illusion caused by a receding shoreline to the left and taller topography to the right. |
I would add that, regardless of the reality of the situation, it is the perception of the viewer that matters most. So the facts of the matter here don't really matter as much as what could be done about it. Rather than just adjusting the existing image to counter percption I wonder (in this and some of the other examples added to this thread) if there was a better place to take the shot from. Would it have improved the appearance to move higher, lower, left, right, closer or further? If viewers are complaining about an unleveled appearance and you want to avoid those complaints in the future, I think these things have to be in consideration before hitting the shutter IMHO. |
|
|
|
04/18/2008 02:18:41 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by wsl:
...WOW is also, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. |
Even when it makes a fist?
Beauty, someone once told me, is "aptness to purpose". If this holds, doesn't as much depend on the eyes who do the beholding as it does on the beheld? |
Hmmm. Someone told me, that was the definition of "quality". |
"One definition of beauty is: aptness to purpose." -Ezra Pound ABC of Reading (New Directions 1960). |
I don't suppose the two are mutually exclusive. |
|
|
|
04/18/2008 11:37:16 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by wsl:
...WOW is also, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. |
Even when it makes a fist?
Beauty, someone once told me, is "aptness to purpose". If this holds, doesn't as much depend on the eyes who do the beholding as it does on the beheld? |
Hmmm. Someone told me, that was the definition of "quality". |
"One definition of beauty is: aptness to purpose." -Ezra Pound ABC of Reading (New Directions 1960). |
I don't suppose the two are mutually exclusive. |
Agreed. |
|
