| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/27/2011 03:57:41 PM · #26 |
If anyone says my butt looks big I will cry ;)
I have 2 shots, cannot decide between them!! aAAAAAaaaaaaaaahhhhhh |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 04:01:22 PM · #27 |
It will be fun to see who finesses the challenge, after all who knows what is really a self portrait until after the voting is done? A bit like the 2 second exposure or the year you were born, as a voter, you have no clue if the challenge was adhered to, or if liberties were taken. All you can do is vote how well the image seems to fulfill the requirements.
Message edited by author 2011-09-27 16:02:03. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 04:02:19 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 04:19:22 PM · #29 |
| But how would you interpret it? . . . . . . . . . . . ;) |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 04:28:27 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by yakatme:
But how would you interpret it? . . . . . . . . . . . ;) |
As I always do, in the manner that best benefits my submission ;) |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 04:33:01 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
I wrote the description and I tried to ensure that anybody/everybody would be able to do it. No access to another model/person, pose with a pet; no pet - use your own reflection. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 04:41:37 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
although there is a legal statutory interpretation rule that says, in essentially, that "once you list a few specifics in a group, you have limited the group to only those very specific items listed."
But here- I don't think it is limited to you + either 1. another person
2. an animal
3. your reflection
I think these are suggestions not limits. No, I am sure they are suggestions, not limits. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 04:47:44 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
although there is a legal statutory interpretation rule that says, in essentially, that "once you list a few specifics in a group, you have limited the group to only those very specific items listed."
But here- I don't think it is limited to you + either 1. another person
2. an animal
3. your reflection
I think these are suggestions not limits. No, I am sure they are suggestions, not limits. |
Good luck with that. Let me know how your score turns out. ;-) |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 05:08:33 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
although there is a legal statutory interpretation rule that says, in essentially, that "once you list a few specifics in a group, you have limited the group to only those very specific items listed."
But here- I don't think it is limited to you + either 1. another person
2. an animal
3. your reflection
I think these are suggestions not limits. No, I am sure they are suggestions, not limits. |
Good luck with that. Let me know how your score turns out. ;-) |
FML! |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 05:11:46 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
I wrote the description and I tried to ensure that anybody/everybody would be able to do it. No access to another model/person, pose with a pet; no pet - use your own reflection. |
I disagree that the description is specific, which is why I asked for clarification.
I think it's the word "company" I'm getting hung up on. You can be in someone else's company while having your portrait done, but their presence in the photo wouldn't necessarily make it a portrait of two people.
I think it can be interpreted as:
1. A portrait of two people.
2. A portrait of one person with a second person also included somewhere in the frame.
So I was wondering if people were interpreting it as one, the other, or both. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 05:29:43 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by geinafets:
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
I wrote the description and I tried to ensure that anybody/everybody would be able to do it. No access to another model/person, pose with a pet; no pet - use your own reflection. |
I disagree that the description is specific, which is why I asked for clarification.
I think it's the word "company" I'm getting hung up on. You can be in someone else's company while having your portrait done, but their presence in the photo wouldn't necessarily make it a portrait of two people.
I think it can be interpreted as:
1. A portrait of two people.
2. A portrait of one person with a second person also included somewhere in the frame.
So I was wondering if people were interpreting it as one, the other, or both. |
 geinafets, it may be that your multilingual abilities are getting in the way here.
Because the title is "You + 1" that would mean "Self-portrait + one other item, described in the challenge description as another person, an animal or your own reflection."
So, I guess you could be in the company of a multitude of people or animals, but one of them should be on camera with you.
Does that make sense? |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 05:41:12 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Because the title is "You + 1" that would mean "Self-portrait + one other item, described in the challenge description as another person, an animal or your own reflection."
So, I guess you could be in the company of a multitude of people or animals, but one of them should be on camera with you.
Does that make sense? |
It has to make sense? |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 05:48:28 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by raish:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Because the title is "You + 1" that would mean "Self-portrait + one other item, described in the challenge description as another person, an animal or your own reflection."
So, I guess you could be in the company of a multitude of people or animals, but one of them should be on camera with you.
Does that make sense? |
It has to make sense? |
Sense or Cents or Scents. It's all in the perception - oh, and language.
:) |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 06:02:22 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
I wrote the description and I tried to ensure that anybody/everybody would be able to do it. No access to another model/person, pose with a pet; no pet - use your own reflection. |
I disagree that the description is specific, which is why I asked for clarification.
I think it's the word "company" I'm getting hung up on. You can be in someone else's company while having your portrait done, but their presence in the photo wouldn't necessarily make it a portrait of two people.
I think it can be interpreted as:
1. A portrait of two people.
2. A portrait of one person with a second person also included somewhere in the frame.
So I was wondering if people were interpreting it as one, the other, or both. |
geinafets, it may be that your multilingual abilities are getting in the way here.
Because the title is "You + 1" that would mean "Self-portrait + one other item, described in the challenge description as another person, an animal or your own reflection."
So, I guess you could be in the company of a multitude of people or animals, but one of them should be on camera with you.
Does that make sense? |
I've read your response several times, but I'm still uncertain.
Does that mean there has to be two portraits in the image, meaning a self-portrait of the photog and a portrait of the +1 at the same time within the image?
Or can the +1 be a random out-of-focus dude standing prominently in the background? I think that would count as being "in the company" of the photog during the SP or being in the presence of the photog during the SP, but I'm not sure if others agree with that interpretation.
Thanks for being patient with me. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 06:06:47 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by geinafets:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by geinafets:
How are you guys interpreting this description? As a portrait of two people, one of whom has to be you? As a self-portrait with someone else somewhere in the frame? Something else entirely? |
Actually, for this Challenge, the description is pretty specific:
Shoot a self portrait - but with the company of another person, an animal, or just your own reflection. |
I wrote the description and I tried to ensure that anybody/everybody would be able to do it. No access to another model/person, pose with a pet; no pet - use your own reflection. |
I disagree that the description is specific, which is why I asked for clarification.
I think it's the word "company" I'm getting hung up on. You can be in someone else's company while having your portrait done, but their presence in the photo wouldn't necessarily make it a portrait of two people.
I think it can be interpreted as:
1. A portrait of two people.
2. A portrait of one person with a second person also included somewhere in the frame.
So I was wondering if people were interpreting it as one, the other, or both. |
geinafets, it may be that your multilingual abilities are getting in the way here.
Because the title is "You + 1" that would mean "Self-portrait + one other item, described in the challenge description as another person, an animal or your own reflection."
So, I guess you could be in the company of a multitude of people or animals, but one of them should be on camera with you.
Does that make sense? |
I've read your response several times, but I'm still uncertain.
Does that mean there has to be two portraits in the image, meaning a self-portrait of the photog and a portrait of the +1 at the same time within the image?
Or can the +1 be a random out-of-focus dude standing prominently in the background? I think that would count as being "in the company" of the photog during the SP or being in the presence of the photog during the SP, but I'm not sure if others agree with that interpretation.
Thanks for being patient with me. |
Think of it as a wedding invitation for a single person. It generally says +1 on it to allow that person to bring a companion. So really, the challenge is asking for a portrait of two consisting of yourself along with either another person, animal or reflection. I would think some random person in the background wouldn't really fit. Of course, this is only my opinion. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 06:25:54 PM · #41 |
This is a two person portrait challenge, right? That's what I get from the description.
Not a portrait of a person with/holding a... thing right?
Just checking - have withdrawn my submission due to it consisting of one person and a thing, but need to get a third opinion on the matter.
|
|
|
|
09/27/2011 06:36:12 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
This is a two person portrait challenge, right? That's what I get from the description.
Not a portrait of a person with/holding a... thing right?
Just checking - have withdrawn my submission due to it consisting of one person and a thing, but need to get a third opinion on the matter. |
If the "thing" is reflective and shows self/animal/other person that would be a pretty interesting take on the challenge (to me, anyway). But I'm only one voter ;-) |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 06:46:32 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by MaryO:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
This is a two person portrait challenge, right? That's what I get from the description.
Not a portrait of a person with/holding a... thing right?
Just checking - have withdrawn my submission due to it consisting of one person and a thing, but need to get a third opinion on the matter. |
If the "thing" is reflective and shows self/animal/other person that would be a pretty interesting take on the challenge (to me, anyway). But I'm only one voter ;-) |
Alas the only thing it reflected in the image is poor understanding on my part before re-reading the challenge after the shoot, edit and initial submission.
Learnt some lighting tricks so wasn't all useless.
|
|
|
|
09/27/2011 06:52:01 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Originally posted by MaryO:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
This is a two person portrait challenge, right? That's what I get from the description.
Not a portrait of a person with/holding a... thing right?
Just checking - have withdrawn my submission due to it consisting of one person and a thing, but need to get a third opinion on the matter. |
If the "thing" is reflective and shows self/animal/other person that would be a pretty interesting take on the challenge (to me, anyway). But I'm only one voter ;-) |
Alas the only thing it reflected in the image is poor understanding on my part before re-reading the challenge after the shoot, edit and initial submission.
Learnt some lighting tricks so wasn't all useless. |
So a photo of say you, and another picture of you is hanging in the background- does that meet challenge?
How about you and an alien -either a costumed person or manikin?
how about you and a sculpture?
you and a robot?
what say you? |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 06:54:43 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Originally posted by MaryO:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
This is a two person portrait challenge, right? That's what I get from the description.
Not a portrait of a person with/holding a... thing right?
Just checking - have withdrawn my submission due to it consisting of one person and a thing, but need to get a third opinion on the matter. |
If the "thing" is reflective and shows self/animal/other person that would be a pretty interesting take on the challenge (to me, anyway). But I'm only one voter ;-) |
Alas the only thing it reflected in the image is poor understanding on my part before re-reading the challenge after the shoot, edit and initial submission.
Learnt some lighting tricks so wasn't all useless. |
So a photo of say you, and another picture of you is hanging in the background- does that meet challenge?
How about you and an alien -either a costumed person or manikin?
how about you and a sculpture?
you and a robot?
what say you? |
Dude! You have a robot? Awesome! I'd vote it high. Now the alien would have to be real. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 07:05:16 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Originally posted by MaryO:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
This is a two person portrait challenge, right? That's what I get from the description.
Not a portrait of a person with/holding a... thing right?
Just checking - have withdrawn my submission due to it consisting of one person and a thing, but need to get a third opinion on the matter. |
If the "thing" is reflective and shows self/animal/other person that would be a pretty interesting take on the challenge (to me, anyway). But I'm only one voter ;-) |
Alas the only thing it reflected in the image is poor understanding on my part before re-reading the challenge after the shoot, edit and initial submission.
Learnt some lighting tricks so wasn't all useless. |
So a photo of say you, and another picture of you is hanging in the background- does that meet challenge?
How about you and an alien -either a costumed person or manikin?
how about you and a sculpture?
you and a robot?
what say you? |
Heh. I was just asking a question. It being whether an inanimate object with no semblance to humanity/robotics/sculpture/art would fit in the challenge. I have no desire to enter something because of a misinterpretation of the description.
|
|
|
|
09/27/2011 08:26:18 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Heh. I was just asking a question. It being whether an inanimate object with no semblance to humanity/robotics/sculpture/art would fit in the challenge. I have no desire to enter something because of a misinterpretation of the description. |
Was it a rubber chicken? 'Fess up! |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 08:31:47 PM · #48 |
I shot! I am not entering! (See, DPC *CAN* be a learning experience - I've learned not to enter!)
Good luck to all - a very fun challenge and I look forward to voting on it. |
|
|
|
09/27/2011 08:40:03 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by MaryO:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Heh. I was just asking a question. It being whether an inanimate object with no semblance to humanity/robotics/sculpture/art would fit in the challenge. I have no desire to enter something because of a misinterpretation of the description. |
Was it a rubber chicken? 'Fess up! |
come to think of it a side profile drinking a Guinness* might have been a nice entry. Albeit not challenge meeting as per my reading of the description.
* beamish would be my stout of choice, but nobody here knows that particular delight
|
|
|
|
09/27/2011 08:44:52 PM · #50 |
On another note...
I ask that voters not vote entries down because it seems like an image could not have possibly been a self portrait. Mine fits that category, but I assure you that it is an image taken by me. |
|
