| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/07/2010 11:13:21 PM · #101 |
I don't think so Judi, but I could be wrong.
I really should click unsubmit, but I'm a sucker for punishment. |
|
|
|
03/07/2010 11:15:14 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Without reading the whole thread...do I need to add my name to the list to have my entry considered for this? |
No, you don't have to do a thing but enter as usual. |
|
|
|
03/07/2010 11:21:50 PM · #103 |
| OK, I'm in for better or worse. Did have fun thinking about this one though. |
|
|
|
03/07/2010 11:26:13 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Without reading the whole thread...do I need to add my name to the list to have my entry considered for this? |
NO. All entries are in the running.
R. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 12:12:42 AM · #105 |
wow! what a bunch of brilliant images.. and that's judging from the thumbs. ima take my time voting for this challenge..
|
|
|
|
03/08/2010 12:20:52 AM · #106 |
| I agree! Many thanks to our judges for their time and effort to make this an interesting and learning challenge for everyone...thought I'd better say it while I'm still in a good mood. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 12:23:02 AM · #107 |
| I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 12:27:56 AM · #108 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
not me. but it's killing my score. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 12:28:14 AM · #109 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
Mine's modern, I only took the shot this week ;) |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 12:35:28 AM · #110 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
not me. but it's killing my score. |
same. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:17:16 AM · #111 |
Originally posted by Nuzzer:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
Mine's modern, I only took the shot this week ;) |
which would make it contemporary. If you took it 1860 to 1970 -modern. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:22:26 AM · #112 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by Nuzzer:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
Mine's modern, I only took the shot this week ;) |
which would make it contemporary. If you took it 1860 to 1970 -modern. |
See, I clearly don't have a clue what I'm doing. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 04:58:41 AM · #113 |
Votes: 20
Views: 53
Avg Vote: 4.3500
Comments: 1
mmm, what is the point, maybe I should pack up and start playing golf or something, instead of taking photo's :) |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 05:38:01 AM · #114 |
| Sheesh, anyone notice the volume of dead and dying flowers in this challenge? |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 09:13:54 AM · #115 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
That's what I struggled mightily with. I hated my photo that really fit the modern category, but I had other photos where I tried to take something recognizable and change up the angle or the lighting, etc. Bear pointed out Ursula's photos to me awhile ago, and I love her stuff. Many of her photos take objects and really make them a piece of art. I tried that, and I think I'm one of the ones many people think aren't modern or contemporary.
edited because, oops, I didn't view the challenge entries first.
Message edited by author 2010-03-08 20:56:39.
|
|
|
|
03/08/2010 09:23:28 AM · #116 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by Nuzzer:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think a lot of people may have missed the "contemporary" or "modern" description... |
Mine's modern, I only took the shot this week ;) |
which would make it contemporary. If you took it 1860 to 1970 -modern. |
I agree contemporary is the more precise term, but by some definitions today's art can still be deemed modern. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 11:52:43 AM · #117 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
My husband thought I should look at Andy Warhol's stuff. But I told him that it wouldn't work if I took a picture of a Campbell's soup can, yet it worked for him. |
As we discussed a description suggestion I think we almost all agreed that none at all might be better but we still collectively gave it our best shot. No matter what you do people get hung up on the words in both directions however, "contemporary" or "modern" both leave wide, wide open doors and shouldn't have been restrictive if you think about it. Those two words are pretty nurturing compared to some language that we've seen used.
To the Warhol point; I thought a lot of people would pictures and make them look like paintings or mimic those themes with a photograph and I don't think I've seen any in the Challenge. I'm happy about that. I'm glad that you didn't take a picture that looked like and Andy Warhol painting.
Personally, I think the whole point of FA is that it's mostly photocentric at the core. Like I see the camera itself as being the paintbrush or as tool at the heart of the expression. So, I generally prefer images where the photo artist doesn't rely too, too heavily on pre or post production. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 12:52:13 PM · #118 |
Well I just voted on all of the entries and I have to say that I wouldn't want to be one of the jury judges for this challenge. I look forward to seeing their analysis of the entries, however.
I might be responsible for a dip in scores this morning but at least it's fair in that I voted on all of the images. I started to comment but I decided against it out of concern about all of the "hate mail" that I would probably end up receiving. Apparently I have a lot to learn and I hope that I do when I see the results of the voting and the judging.
While viewing the entries, I got the strong feeling that many participants were trying too hard to emulate what they must think are the characteristics of fine art: grain (gawd, there was a lot of grain), blur, black and white or duotone (why so much of it?!?), dead flowers, etc. It seemed like a lot of the entries might have been good but that there was some sort of need to degrade the quality for them to "qualify" to be called Fine Art.
There were several images that I saw that I thought would have been fantastic if they had not been converted to duotone or black and white. I hope to see the color versions of those images after the challenge is over.
I was really looking forward to entering this challenge and I was planning to work on it this weekend. I didn't enter however, because in the middle of the week I was asked to exhibit my work at a gallery where there was an art show in the street out front. I spent the rest of the week preparing and the whole weekend showing and selling my work. I was very disappointed that I didn't enter but my entry probably would have stood out like a sore thumb and probably would have tanked. That sums up how differently I apparently think of fine art and also fits well with how I have been questioning my judgement regarding photographic art over the last six months or so.
So please don't get upset with me for admitting that I scored this challenge very low. I kept it fair by voting on all of the entries. I just wanted to express how much I apparently don't understand the concept of fine art as interpreted by others and how much this lack of understanding concerns me. I'm paying attention this week and I hope to learn a lot.
|
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:15:19 PM · #119 |
Look, for the most part, in this site at least, we tend to take pictures that make people happy, see? Pretty pictures. There's a subset of us that's heavily into marketability as well, but that's also a mass-appeal thing. So0 when this "fine arts" challenge came along, there's a natural tendency for people to think, "Well, if all our pretty pictures are NOT fine art, then bleak and miserable must be the way to go!" I think that's what's happening.
And the modern art world actually tends to reflect that; we more or less live in a time of post-apocalyptic art, is the way I see it.
BTW, my image appears to be B/W but it actually isn't; no desaturation whatsoever, so there :-)
R. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:18:14 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Look, for the most part, in this site at least, we tend to take pictures that make people happy, see? Pretty pictures. There's a subset of us that's heavily into marketability as well, but that's also a mass-appeal thing. So0 when this "fine arts" challenge came along, there's a natural tendency for people to think, "Well, if all our pretty pictures are NOT fine art, then bleak and miserable must be the way to go!" I think that's what's happening.
And the modern art world actually tends to reflect that; we more or less live in a time of post-apocalyptic art, is the way I see it.
BTW, my image appears to be B/W but it actually isn't; no desaturation whatsoever, so there :-)
R. |
I think there was a large portion of people who thought to themselves, well, if I take any object and shoot it with blur or at a weird angle it becomes Fine Art(TM)... ;P
Not to say there aren't a number of well thought through, well executed shots that push outside the typical DPC boundaries. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:23:38 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I think there was a large portion of people who thought to themselves, well, if I take any object and shoot it with blur or at a weird angle it becomes Fine Art(TM)... ;P
Not to say there aren't a number of well thought through, well executed shots that push outside the typical DPC boundaries. |
Make sure num lock is ON, hold down alt key, and type 0153 to get this: ΓΆ„ΒΆ
jejeje.
R. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:26:26 PM · #122 |
I agree with both of your responses.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
BTW, my image appears to be B/W but it actually isn't; no desaturation whatsoever, so there :-)
R. |
That is too funny! Now I have to go back and take another look. I'm sure that I'll be going back to reconsider time and time again throughout the week. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:29:37 PM · #123 |
| my eyes, if it's wierd then its fine arts :P |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 01:55:33 PM · #124 |
I wish a Fine Art challenge could happen at least one a month. It's visible the significant amount of great images compared to a regular challenge. Congrats to all, especially for these pushing the boring DPC boundaries to a new and much more interesting dimension.
You have rated 194 of 194 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 1 images (1%) in this challenge.
You have given an average score of 5.9381.
(yes, I only gave one 10)
Message edited by author 2010-03-08 14:05:43. |
|
|
|
03/08/2010 07:27:52 PM · #125 |
Originally posted by De Sousa:
I wish a Fine Art challenge could happen at least one a month. It's visible the significant amount of great images compared to a regular challenge. Congrats to all, especially for these pushing the boring DPC boundaries to a new and much more interesting dimension.
You have rated 194 of 194 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 1 images (1%) in this challenge.
You have given an average score of 5.9381.
(yes, I only gave one 10) |
Sousa, I couldn't agree more... I really liked the idea of this challenge... It allowed me to take a shot, without giving a single thought as to how it would be voted on... To me, its art for art's sake, and I love that freedom... Of course, my image is hovering just above 5.. but I'm fine with that, because if this had been a regular challenge, I'd probably be looking at a low 4 :) |
|
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: 08/03/2025 01:48:46 PM EDT.
