| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/24/2010 03:37:54 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Consequently a coastal shot should be OK??
Opinions please. (Should I duck now?) |
It sure as hell better be; I've got nothing BUT coast here... Seriously, "landscape" is an uber-category, and seascapes, skyscapes, cityscapes, all are part of the genre. I have not seen anything to indicate people are gonna vote down for presence of water. In fact, I think our highest-scoring DPC landscapes mostly DO have water in 'em...
R. |
|
|
|
04/24/2010 11:46:07 PM · #102 |
So, I know how people like to debate the fine details of the meaning of the challenge details......so don't jump all over me..... :)
Would anyone think that adding a "touch" of sepia to the photo would be against the "black and white" portion? |
|
|
|
04/24/2010 11:50:43 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by glockguy:
So, I know how people like to debate the fine details of the meaning of the challenge details......so don't jump all over me..... :)
Would anyone think that adding a "touch" of sepia to the photo would be against the "black and white" portion? |
Yous plays your cards and takes yous chances. :) |
|
|
|
04/24/2010 11:57:04 PM · #104 |
fair enough.....
But if I get one comment that says, "would have looked better a tad sepia...." ;) |
|
|
|
04/24/2010 11:59:48 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by glockguy:
So, I know how people like to debate the fine details of the meaning of the challenge details......so don't jump all over me..... :)
Would anyone think that adding a "touch" of sepia to the photo would be against the "black and white" portion? |
My current entry actually has a hint of warmish, sepia toning to it. But I am thinking of changing that, to be safe :-(
R. |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 12:03:14 AM · #106 |
yup....
My current one doesn't have any, but the one sitting in my CS4 window does.....
I think I will leave it as is. No point in having the "double/triple/multiple exposure" argument over "black and white v. Sepia"!
LOL |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 12:19:25 AM · #107 |
| What you might think of as a "tad of sepia" is going to stand out like a sore thumb after someone votes on 75 true B&W shots in a row. Most would likely let it go, but there will be some 4- scores just on that alone. |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 12:20:55 AM · #108 |
| Ah, salvation! I can tone mine then blame the score on that! Thank you!!! |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 12:59:16 AM · #109 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Ah, salvation! I can tone mine then blame the score on that! Thank you!!! |
Is this positive thinking, or what? |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 02:31:10 AM · #110 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Most would likely let it go, but there will be some 4- scores just on that alone. |
Yep, that'd be a DNMC vote from me - speia just ain't the same as B&W in these parts of the world :) |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 02:58:01 AM · #111 |
| For what it's worth, sepia in the way most think of it, is a long ways from a slightly warm tone. I wouldn't consider sepia to be BW but I definitely will not mark down a slightly toned image because it isn't "true" BW. But, I'm just one voice among hundreds. :) |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 09:38:03 AM · #112 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by Melethia:
Ah, salvation! I can tone mine then blame the score on that! Thank you!!! |
Is this positive thinking, or what? |
From the owner of two sub-5/barely-5 DPL scores at the moment, yeah, that is positive thinking! :-) |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 09:47:28 AM · #113 |
I have to concur - no "other" tones in BW. Here's what not to do: 
At the time I wasn't even thinking it would be a problem, but it was. Lesson learned.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2010 11:48:36 AM · #114 |
Oh no I can't advance edit. :)
Looks like some people are relying to much on software, instead of their ability to take a good photo.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2010 12:05:08 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by whiteflyer:
Oh no I can't advance edit. :)
Looks like some people are relying to much on software, instead of their ability to take a good photo. |
It's not POSSIBLE to take a B/W digital photo without relying on software.
In the meanwhile, B/W photography, and *especially* B/W landscape photography, is a venerable tradition with its own set of accepted aesthetic guidelines; we tend to be "looking for" certain things when we view B/W landscape photos. And a lot of those things we are looking for come from an extension of a very specific set of B/W darkroom techniques; which, unfortunately or otherwise, the administrators have chosen not to allow for this challenge.
So it's understandable people are feeling the frustration. I certainly am. I have spent more time processing my entry for this challenge, or at least my possible entries, than I have for any other challenge in a long, long time. Is this a good exercise for me? Very possibly, and I am undertaking it in good spirits. But it is nevertheless frustrating, and it feels a little absurd, because it has nothing to do with the real world of photography that I live in...
R. |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 12:36:06 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
set of B/W darkroom techniques; which, unfortunately or otherwise, the administrators have chosen not to allow for this challenge. |
Just to make it truly challenging is my assumption. It's certainly resulted in some throwaways that I could have had nice shots with under advanced. |
|
|
|
04/25/2010 03:06:19 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
What you might think of as a "tad of sepia" is going to stand out like a sore thumb after someone votes on 75 true B&W shots in a row. Most would likely let it go, but there will be some 4- scores just on that alone. |
Sweet! Thanks for the tip. Would give me a boost. |
|
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: 10/30/2025 09:53:32 PM EDT.
