| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/19/2010 06:42:36 PM · #476 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by tanguera:
Originally posted by Neat:
 Roz I have read the rules, but somehow in my crazy reasoning I thought that you could for this challenge, anyway I've deleted my entry and added a new one. |
Don't forget that you can use "found" filters. As long as the filter is part of the image that you capture, like a dusty window, or a screen door. It's just adding a layer over it that isn't legal.
Or at least that is how I understand it... |
Can't you do what some do, where they make a picture and either print it or put it on the monitor, and then take a picture of that adding something else (like a screen or whatever). I suppose if you did it carefully you could almost replicate working with textures. If I understand those site rules correctly, that base picture doesn't have to be from the week of the challenge. Not my cup of tea though. |
Not any more. In the old days, but no longer. Someone got in trouble for having another image in his image, using that concept.
In the rules it says: You May Not add graphics, clip art, computer-rendered images or parts of other photographs to your entry or its border during editing (except for combining photos as allowed by the multiple capture rules above...... |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 07:53:26 PM · #477 |
Originally posted by Jutilda:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by tanguera:
Originally posted by Neat:
Roz I have read the rules, but somehow in my crazy reasoning I thought that you could for this challenge, anyway I've deleted my entry and added a new one. |
Don't forget that you can use "found" filters. As long as the filter is part of the image that you capture, like a dusty window, or a screen door. It's just adding a layer over it that isn't legal.
Or at least that is how I understand it... |
Can't you do what some do, where they make a picture and either print it or put it on the monitor, and then take a picture of that adding something else (like a screen or whatever). I suppose if you did it carefully you could almost replicate working with textures. If I understand those site rules correctly, that base picture doesn't have to be from the week of the challenge. Not my cup of tea though. |
Not any more. In the old days, but no longer. Someone got in trouble for having another image in his image, using that concept.
In the rules it says: You May Not add graphics, clip art, computer-rendered images or parts of other photographs to your entry or its border during editing (except for combining photos as allowed by the multiple capture rules above...... |
Ahh, alright. I haven't looked at the challenge rules for ages! :) |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 08:54:14 PM · #478 |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 09:43:56 PM · #479 |
It is so unfortunate, that we can't combine 2 images for the purpose of creating an overlay. It is meant, I think, to prevent adding compositional elements that are not in the original with the purpose of improving it, or creating a lie. Like adding a wild BG to a zoo shot of a tiger. In the case of a textured overlay, though, the compositional element added is emotion. And if you ask me, that is something else that is discouraged in traditional documentary photography--emotion. You're supposed to capture what you saw, not how your felt about what you saw. Just sayin'. Art is forbidden in photography, and photography is forbidden in art. And that makes the ground we're walking on in this SC very interesting & exciting. I know I'm having a great time. "D |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 09:50:34 PM · #480 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
It is meant, I think, to prevent adding compositional elements that are not in the original with the purpose of improving it, or creating a lie. Like adding a wild BG to a zoo shot of a tiger. In the case of a textured overlay, though, the compositional element added is emotion. And if you ask me, that is something else that is discouraged in traditional documentary photography--emotion. You're supposed to capture what you saw, not how your felt about what you saw. Just sayin'. Art is forbidden in photography, and photography is forbidden in art. And that makes the ground we're walking on in this SC very interesting & exciting. I know I'm having a great time. "D |
Shouldn't improving your image/s be at the core of all you do with your photos, and at the core of what any "learning" site would encourage? It has never made any sense to me to limit the amount of learning that can go on, or to shape learning into a specific way of doing things, or to discourage good practices towards good end-results, but instead often allow dubious work-arounds.
All photos are a lie, at least to some extent. The rules are simply limits for a particular site, or contest, but they make sense only when you consider them as part of a very delimited place/challenge/competition/whatever. Outside of that they do not make much sense. DPChallenge is not traditional documentary photography by any stretch of the imagination, so rules that apply to that kind of work do not apply to the works here. BTW, you can capture how you felt about what you saw in one picture very effectively, and to the reverse, to think that making only one photo is somehow more akin to what you actually saw is a fallacy. Art is not forbidden in photography, neither is photography in art. The rules here are what they are, same as anywhere else ... they work most of the time for the challenges, but outside of the challenges they do not make much sense.
BTW #2, adding a texture or combining two or more images does not make art. A straight documentary, totally unedited capture can be art, as can be a highly edited, layered, processed, multi-image composition. To me (just my own way of looking at it), a photo becomes art when it touches me either with a great story, or a fantastic visual experience, or an outstanding mood, or any combination of those three. The "best" pictures, the best art photographs, seem to have a lot of all those three things in them.
And all of that is purely opinion on my part :)
RANT OVER
I'm tempted to delete it, whenever I read over what I write, it sounds so pompous and stupid to me. But then Wendy would yell at me again :-(
Message edited by author 2010-11-19 22:07:03. |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:10:08 PM · #481 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by pixelpig:
It is meant, I think, to prevent adding compositional elements that are not in the original with the purpose of improving it, or creating a lie. Like adding a wild BG to a zoo shot of a tiger. In the case of a textured overlay, though, the compositional element added is emotion. And if you ask me, that is something else that is discouraged in traditional documentary photography--emotion. You're supposed to capture what you saw, not how your felt about what you saw. Just sayin'. Art is forbidden in photography, and photography is forbidden in art. And that makes the ground we're walking on in this SC very interesting & exciting. I know I'm having a great time. "D |
All photos are a lie, at least to some extent. The rules are simply limits for a particular site, or contest, but they make sense only when you consider them as part of a very delimited place/challenge/competition/whatever. Outside of that they do not make much sense. DPChallenge is not traditional documentary photography by any stretch of the imagination, so rules that apply to that kind of work do not apply to the works here. BTW, you can capture how you felt about what you saw in one picture very effectively, and to the reverse, to think that making only one photo is somehow more akin to what you actually saw is a fallacy. Art is not forbidden in photography, neither is photography in art. The rules here are what they are, same as anywhere else ... they work most of the time for the challenges, but outside of the challenges they do not make much sense.
And all of that is purely opinion on my part :) |
Opinion is all I have so I respect the right of others to have differing opinions. And I tend to see things in black & white so I have a bad habit of using polarizing vocabulary. Please forgive me if I seemed out of line. Rules are useful, & necessary. In school, my teachers said that photography is not one of the fine arts. In the books of art history, photography is not included other than to note that photography took over the purpose of documetation, & artists were free to move on into other genres. Photographers in general, including on this site, place a high value on good technicals--correct exposure, good sharpness, realistic color--I think because the main use to which photography is put is documtary in nature. Trying to avoid polarizing vocabulary here. But I do disagree with your statement "all photos are a lie, at least to some extent" because I think of photography as an arbitrary, selective process of abstraction, of choice. In the choosing, a creative intelligence makes itself apparent. As we can see in your beautifully creative work.
[eta] oh no! don't delete your 'rant.' It is very interesting. To be an artist, opinions are necessary, I think. I greatly respect you and your work, & am always interested in an outlook that doesn't agree w/mine.
Message edited by author 2010-11-19 22:22:43. |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:17:25 PM · #482 |
All photos are a lie in the sense that what you see in that little rectangle is a cutout of reality, it's a kind of abstraction of reality, but it is not reality. You choose the lens, the focal length, colour or B/W, speed to either freeze the action or let it flow, all those things that you do when you make a photo. If you were to think of reality as truth, then all photos are lies. And yet, in many ways it could also be said that all photos are much more true than reality, they are the real truth, they are so much more than just what you saw at one moment in time. So then they are anything but a lie.
Talk about confusing :) I've been accused of being too intense, and taking things too seriously ... that's probably the case here too. I care a lot about what I do with my pictures. I know that the fine arts do not like to include photography. Well, so be it. It is, in my view, their loss, not mine.
For myself, I like to think of my photos as "my reality". Often the photos do not look anything like the real thing, and yet they are what I see and feel and think, put into pictures. So they are true, even though they are a lie. I suspect it is like that for many of us. Something like that :)
Originally posted by pixelpig:
Photographers in general, including on this site, place a high value on good technicals--correct exposure, good sharpness, realistic color--I think because the main use to which photography is put is documtary in nature. |
Which makes it very funny to think that so many "traditional" photographer insist on black and white :)
Message edited by author 2010-11-19 22:30:17. |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:30:13 PM · #483 |
| I can agree with what you say. When I pick up my camera, after I make my technical choices, the capture is more about what I don't include in the frame. I spend a lot more creative energy framing the shot than I do deciding on the technicals & gear. So if a photo is a lie, then it is a lie of omission. Maybe the truth, for me, is more about honesty, about honestly being me when I make my choices and not the product of my teachers & critics. Always a tricky objective. My opinion, of course. |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:35:22 PM · #484 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
I can agree with what you say. When I pick up my camera, after I make my technical choices, the capture is more about what I don't include in the frame. I spend a lot more creative energy framing the shot than I do deciding on the technicals & gear. So if a photo is a lie, then it is a lie of omission. Maybe the truth, for me, is more about honesty, about honestly being me when I make my choices and not the product of my teachers & critics. Always a tricky objective. My opinion, of course. |
I can go with that. Thinking along that way, it would be good to say that photography is not just what a few have said it is, or what a few expect it to be.
How often have you heard/seen people here at DPC and at other sites say things like, "This is what photography is all about!" It is usually in reference to a narrow topic, done in a particular way. One of the first things that comes to my mind when I see that is, well, if we all made only pictures of the same subject and made those pictures the same way, what a boring world it would be! I think this happens in other art forms as well. I am not saying that in any art form anything goes, and everything that anyone does is art just because they say it is. No, not at all. It's got to be more than that. But to limit things in photography, or in art in general, to only certain subjects done a certain way simply makes no sense to me. The final goal, to me, should always be to do the best job possible with whatever means you have available. So many big pronouncements, oyyyyyy!
Message edited by author 2010-11-19 22:36:44. |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:35:48 PM · #485 |
| Wow! Such deep conversation going on here. LOL! Me? I push the button then play till I like it. Art? Probably not in most people's eyes, but it still makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I think that's what counts the most. I think I have more failures than successes, but the process soothes me. I can lose myself, forget my worries, ignore the whining of family to do ever more for them, and express myself in the process. It's better than a psychiatrist! |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:38:41 PM · #486 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
Wow! Such deep conversation going on here. LOL! Me? I push the button then play till I like it. Art? Probably not in most people's eyes, but it still makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I think that's what counts the most. I think I have more failures than successes, but the process soothes me. I can lose myself, forget my worries, ignore the whining of family to do ever more for them, and express myself in the process. It's better than a psychiatrist! |
Yeah! In that note, I should go make some pictures instead of sitting around here pretending knowledge with way too many words :) |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:40:38 PM · #487 |
| There's a "posthumous ribbon" challenge going on? I hadn't noticed that. Interesting. Anyway. |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:42:06 PM · #488 |
Originally posted by ursula:
There's a "posthumous ribbon" challenge going on? I hadn't noticed that. Interesting. Anyway. |
I went out shooting for it today. I think it's one of those things that just has to happen though. Nothing I got was suitable. |
|
|
|
11/19/2010 10:49:41 PM · #489 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
Originally posted by ursula:
There's a "posthumous ribbon" challenge going on? I hadn't noticed that. Interesting. Anyway. |
I went out shooting for it today. I think it's one of those things that just has to happen though. Nothing I got was suitable. |
You got six more days :)
That's what's been killing me here at DPC ... you actually have to go out there and shoot for a challenge. I hadn't thought that way for such a long time (until the DPL happened) and that whole thing of "having to shoot for a particular challenge" was just so frustrating! Oh well.
Message edited by author 2010-11-19 22:51:13. |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 01:20:27 AM · #490 |
Originally posted by ursula:
That's what's been killing me here at DPC ... you actually have to go out there and shoot for a challenge. I hadn't thought that way for such a long time (until the DPL happened) and that whole thing of "having to shoot for a particular challenge" was just so frustrating! Oh well. |
LOL! That's what actually gets my wheels turning and my butt out of the chair!
But I did want to say that I love the Deep Discussion going on here regarding photography and its relationship to life/art/truth. It is artificial in that it captures a moment in time, which otherwise would not exist. But it is also a moment out of context. I don't think photography can be defined in this way. It is a relatively new "art", and it is easy and fast (i.e. when compared to a Da Vinci). But its immediacy is also part of its uniqueness, and how we each "see" things through our viewfinders, and the technical and processing choices we make towards finalizing the image are what make this "art", and "unique" to the individual.
"How" we see things is also a defining influence. El Greco's elongated works were the result of his astigmatism; Cézanne's blur may have been due to his myopia; Monet had cataracts, which caused his greens to become more yellow, his blues more purple; Constable may not have realized how brown his trees appeared to normal vision because he was colorblind. Yet all these conditions are still ruled by the artist's inner eye.
Anyway as Ursula says, way too many words. Let's go take pictures. |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 01:43:20 AM · #491 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
... way too many words. Let's go take pictures. |
Hehe, I did, pulled out my trusty Pirex pan, filled it with water, got the camera on the tripod, shot away. I was thinking, posthumous, posthumous, posthumous, man, I want a picture now, not after I'm dead. The overlay is the same one I've been using now a couple times, I kinda like that one.
 |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 07:21:34 AM · #492 |
Hi all,
thanks for all the replies to my Q on Layers for the Vintage challenge.
Great pics by all, this is real fun.
Here are two of my hubby, when we went to NZ,in July for our 20 th anniversary. I have a lot of photos of him from behind, because he's not one bit interested in photography, and hates posing for the camera, so I would take these secretly .
He is very supportive mind you.
 |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 07:29:52 AM · #493 |
Ok I couldn't help myself , here's one more, I love jettys.
Message edited by author 2010-11-20 07:30:10. |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 07:43:32 AM · #494 |
 going away this weekend so commenting will be difficult, will catch up on Monday |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 08:46:07 AM · #495 |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 09:01:28 AM · #496 |
Message edited by author 2010-11-20 09:09:23. |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 09:08:36 AM · #497 |
Originally posted by ursula:
There's a "posthumous ribbon" challenge going on? I hadn't noticed that. Interesting. Anyway. |
WOW - glad you pointed that out. I might have just gone on and not noticed. Not to say I'll enter, but at least I know that it's out there. It'll be a real crap shoot to see who wins, as the voting public usually does not think as he does. :) |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 09:17:51 AM · #498 |
As the month closes in, I may be throwing in a few more per day, as I've had such fun during the editing process. This one is particularly for cgino :)
 |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 10:45:32 AM · #499 |
|
|
|
11/20/2010 11:20:42 AM · #500 |
Just getting caught up with all the discussion on this site. Some very interesting comments. I agree that the rules do limit creativity, but on the other hand they are necessary to keep things equal.
This is my solution, have at least 1 challenge a month(or more) be expert editing, so that we can express our creativity more often! Maybe if we start a thread to discuss this very thing, we will get site councils attention and we can make it happen.
~jenn~
|
|
