| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/04/2012 10:45:52 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
LALALALALALA...*hands over ears* Are they done fighting yet? No? OK...LALALALALALALALALAAAA...
Seriously though, I am very glad that my workplace is extremely haunted. Inexplicable incidents too numerous to relate have taken place since I've been there and my employer has printed photos of phenonemon that cannot be explained. She also has a sense of humour, I'm sure she'll let me have access to certain areas to go shoot during my days off.
And fwiw...I plan to do as much with photos as I can and as little pp as I can. Provided I get my damn camera back from Nikon. *sigh*... |
Hey, no fair. That's against the Rules! No photographing real ghosts. |
|
|
|
05/04/2012 10:49:10 PM · #52 |
| I REFUSE to enter to this challenge for a very good reason... |
|
|
|
05/04/2012 10:54:22 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
I REFUSE to enter to this challenge for a very good reason... |
Do tell... We want to know the reason...
R.
|
|
|
|
05/04/2012 11:16:34 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
I REFUSE to enter to this challenge for a very good reason... |
Do tell... We want to know the reason...
R. |
Because he would have to "expose" his ghosts! ;D |
|
|
|
05/04/2012 11:52:56 PM · #55 |
| I have in the past done fine with an advanced edit in a expert challenge so I have no problem with that, my problem is that the photos entered in a challenge like this will be totally different from what I believe the initial suggestion thread was all about, we've gone from realistic to cartoon. |
|
|
|
05/04/2012 11:56:18 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
I REFUSE to enter to this challenge for a very good reason... |
Do tell... We want to know the reason...
R. |
members only... |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 01:01:34 AM · #57 |
So...from some of you guys I'm definitely expecting totally realistic, unedited photographic evidence of actual ghosts. And if they are not real ghosts, photographic in nature, I plan to vote accordingly. P.S. don't use your flash, that can temporarily blind a ghost resulting in unpredictable reactions--plus the intense light washes them out. Expert editing is so you can add the circles and arrows, pointing out where is the ghost in your photograph. Orb photographs are definitely DNMC. IR photography is the way to go, to get the most detail. Real, serious ghost photographers always use film.
From the rest of you, I'm expecting Casper-the-Friendly type ghosts. You know, cartoons.
Message edited by author 2012-05-05 01:23:25. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 01:29:07 AM · #58 |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 02:51:21 AM · #59 |
I'm not anti nor support expert editing. Expert Editing (manupulation) are started to gain popularity everywhere nowadays. Why not on DPC?
Today is my first time to read experts rules set and try to understand it.
[...] apply a full range of editing tools [...]
[...] combine multiple photographs [...]
[...] photographs must be taken by you [...]
[...] use images that do not meet the source or date requirements as textures [...]
[...] Images that could be mistaken for real objects in the scene may also be included [...]
So the main subject.... should be ghost or ghosts either manipulated or manufactured must be the prominent subject taken after the challenge is announced.
So the sky, foggy background, lightning, fire, smoke, maybe light opacity of birds flying here and there, bloods or anything not prominent could be manufactured or treat as texture? Anyone can advise on this?
|
|
|
|
05/05/2012 03:19:26 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by jagar:
These could be useful . |
I like it! ;)
It is amazing how the same people repeat the same stuff each time the same thing happens (like Expert Editing in this case). GET A LIFE!! You don't have to enter every challenge! Get out and go shooting! Just STOP whinging FFS!
I don't enter Expert Editing challenges myself but I love voting on them and I am always REALLY looking forward to Christophe's entry. He has an incredible imagination and amazing technical skills. His handling of light is mind blowing. He has progressed tremendously since he came to DPC and he only enters Extreme Editing challenges. It would be a great pity if we did not have these... And I guess some people are just jealous. Sad. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 04:11:03 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by jagar:
I have in the past done fine with an advanced edit in a expert challenge so I have no problem with that, my problem is that the photos entered in a challenge like this will be totally different from what I believe the initial suggestion thread was all about, we've gone from realistic to cartoon. |
That is true John; it was my suggestion and 'Advanced Editing' was part of that. I had thought through the possible (wide) range of techniques that could be used and the artsy, nuanced images that may emerge from that rule set. There's no doubt that running under 'Expert Editing' is a very different challenge.
However, to all who are frustrated (and I don't include John in this) - this is DP Challenge and so having to come up with stuff outside of comfort zones is what it's all about. I do have empathy for people who don't have the time to commit to an expert Expert submission, I'm frustrated about that too - my Photoshop skills are extremely limited and it takes me an age to produce something mediocre. However, it is the only Expert challenge up at the moment (either to shoot for or to vote on), though I wish the Abstract had been Expert and this one Advanced. So, a challenge (and a shame) it is. So be it.
For me, I may choose a middle way - go for the subtle and nuanced but feel free to use a full range of techniques with impunity. Perhaps that's what I'll reward in my voting too... |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 08:12:19 AM · #62 |
I enjoy being creeped out...loves it....and it seems to me that more often than not its' a non-expert type of image that really gets me. I suspect that the creepy photos elicit vague memories from a lifetime of nightmares, and I don't dream in cartoon.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2012 08:27:24 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Perhaps people should just vote on the resulting image and not how well they used or didn't use the limitations or freedoms of the ruleset in question. |
Isn't that what 'we' do? That's what I do anyway.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2012 08:48:38 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
So...from some of you guys I'm definitely expecting totally realistic, unedited photographic evidence of actual ghosts. And if they are not real ghosts, photographic in nature, I plan to vote accordingly. P.S. don't use your flash, that can temporarily blind a ghost resulting in unpredictable reactions--plus the intense light washes them out. Expert editing is so you can add the circles and arrows, pointing out where is the ghost in your photograph. Orb photographs are definitely DNMC. IR photography is the way to go, to get the most detail. Real, serious ghost photographers always use film.... |
WTF?! Why the bias against glowing orbs? That's the house specialty!! :-/ |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 10:01:50 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by pixelpig:
So...from some of you guys I'm definitely expecting totally realistic, unedited photographic evidence of actual ghosts. And if they are not real ghosts, photographic in nature, I plan to vote accordingly. P.S. don't use your flash, that can temporarily blind a ghost resulting in unpredictable reactions--plus the intense light washes them out. Expert editing is so you can add the circles and arrows, pointing out where is the ghost in your photograph. Orb photographs are definitely DNMC. IR photography is the way to go, to get the most detail. Real, serious ghost photographers always use film.... |
WTF?! Why the bias against glowing orbs? That's the house specialty!! :-/ |
"D
well, you asked!...orbs mainly appear in photographs where flash has been used, so you can understand how that creates doubt. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 10:18:10 AM · #66 |
I've seen photos of glowing orbs taken inside the restaurant, shot at different times with different cameras. Yes, they used flashes on what were probably p&s and disposables. But I've also seen a sequence of photos that show orbs, taken outside the restaurant, showing them in motion.
Sadly most of the activities that take place are done by unseen hands - things falling or moving. For example a neighbour recently told me that during the first meal there with their family, a full bottle of wine slid across the table. The waitress saw it too. About Xmas, late into the evening when I was working alone, a metal coffee filter atop the coffee machine flew off the top and landed on the floor some 4 feet away from it. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The owner of the restaurant has turned down producers from TV shows who want to come and record paranormal activity.
And when I was shooting Pauper's feast, my camera was on a tripod and I was using a remote release. I was alone on the most haunted floor, the third, and definitely heard footsteps behind me and sensed that I was being watched, but not by a hostile presence. That's also the shoot when my camera settings somehow got changed from RAW to RAW and jpg basic. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 10:30:57 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
I've seen photos of glowing orbs taken inside the restaurant, shot at different times with different cameras. Yes, they used flashes on what were probably p&s and disposables. But I've also seen a sequence of photos that show orbs, taken outside the restaurant, showing them in motion.
Sadly most of the activities that take place are done by unseen hands - things falling or moving. For example a neighbour recently told me that during the first meal there with their family, a full bottle of wine slid across the table. The waitress saw it too. About Xmas, late into the evening when I was working alone, a metal coffee filter atop the coffee machine flew off the top and landed on the floor some 4 feet away from it. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The owner of the restaurant has turned down producers from TV shows who want to come and record paranormal activity.
And when I was shooting Pauper's feast, my camera was on a tripod and I was using a remote release. I was alone on the most haunted floor, the third, and definitely heard footsteps behind me and sensed that I was being watched, but not by a hostile presence. That's also the shoot when my camera settings somehow got changed from RAW to RAW and jpg basic. |
 snaffles !!!!!! Are you kin to one of our long lost relatives from Betelgeuse? |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 11:00:38 AM · #68 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
That's also the shoot when my camera settings somehow got changed from RAW to RAW and jpg basic. |
I just realized that ghosts are ruining my DPC scores. They change my camera settings. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 11:48:14 AM · #69 |
I love ghost stories! I've experienced a few, myself, all in the same house.
Late one night, I was alone at home & up to my chin in a bubble bath when I heard someone come slowly walking up the stairs. I clearly heard their feet on the carpeting. I was listening alertly when I heard the bathroom doorknob turn. I jumped up out of the tub, & searched the house. Nobody but me.
In that same house, same bathroom, I get up one morning & was sitting there on the potty when I got this feeling that something wasn't quite right. It took me a little bit to wake up enough to see that the glass on the bathtub shower door was broken. It looked like it'd been kicked in from outside the bath tub, most of the glass was in the tub. The same thing happened to the little glass panels on the front door--broken from inside the house--and those were only about 3 in wide, not easy to break without a crowbar. None of us had heard a thing, & that would've made enough noise to wake us all up.
Wierd, no?
In a couple of places I've lived, I've clearly heard people moving around in rooms that didn't exist.
But I've never actually seen a ghost. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 02:50:10 PM · #70 |
No negative input intended here. I'm not a superstitious type. Few years back, I came across some beautiful photoshop creepy ghost graveyard images. So, I'm trying to search for his work to get some idea for entering this expect challenge. But I found that he deleted almost all of it, maybe before he passed away. Now I'm trying to figure out why and I may skip capturing graveyard scene for this one. Here are some of his HDR work.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2012 03:08:43 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by MargaretN:
And I guess some people are just jealous. Sad. |
not jealous, i think intimidated.
you don't see me afraid to go up against superior photographers... |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 04:35:22 PM · #72 |
I don't have "expert" tools so I don't enter "expert" challenges. As an artist, I admire Christophe's work.. things sure have come a long way since '66 when I graduated with a degree in Graphic Art. It's mind-boggling.
It's interesting to see how far they've come and we've just touched the tip of the iceberg. Who knows where all this is headed??
I'm sure Christophe employs some amazing skills when he creates his works of art.. maybe we can all learn a few things from him. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 06:06:02 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by sfalice:
Originally posted by snaffles:
I've seen photos of glowing orbs taken inside the restaurant, shot at different times with different cameras. Yes, they used flashes on what were probably p&s and disposables. But I've also seen a sequence of photos that show orbs, taken outside the restaurant, showing them in motion.
Sadly most of the activities that take place are done by unseen hands - things falling or moving. For example a neighbour recently told me that during the first meal there with their family, a full bottle of wine slid across the table. The waitress saw it too. About Xmas, late into the evening when I was working alone, a metal coffee filter atop the coffee machine flew off the top and landed on the floor some 4 feet away from it. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The owner of the restaurant has turned down producers from TV shows who want to come and record paranormal activity.
And when I was shooting Pauper's feast, my camera was on a tripod and I was using a remote release. I was alone on the most haunted floor, the third, and definitely heard footsteps behind me and sensed that I was being watched, but not by a hostile presence. That's also the shoot when my camera settings somehow got changed from RAW to RAW and jpg basic. |
snaffles !!!!!! Are you kin to one of our long lost relatives from Betelgeuse? |
Soetimes I think I must be. Haunted workplace, I even live in a haunted house (former one-room schoolhouse). Hear and sense things all the time pretty much, and see occasional poltergeisty activity. Never actually seen any of the ghosts at least to mu knowledge. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 07:35:37 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by MargaretN:
And I guess some people are just jealous. Sad. |
not jealous, i think intimidated.
you don't see me afraid to go up against superior photographers... |
C'mon man. Not jealous. Not intimidated. Respectful of Christophe's talent.
Expert editing is a different ballgame. I respect your decision to be a specialist in Expert Edit. You should respect my decision to choose to avoid CGI. I simply prefer the elegance of documentary, traditional photography. Sorry....But, I should not apologize. I renewed my membership here for the 6th year because it's a great photography site. That said, times change and technology is in transition. So, if this site becomes dominated by DeviantArt-like images, while squeezing out photography.... well, the die may have been cast. I bought my first slr camera in 1971 and have been a "photographer" ever since. In retrospect, the technology advances have been breathtaking. The old saying is,
The only constant is change, continuing change, inevitable change, that is the dominant factor in society today. No sensible decision can be made any longer without taking into account not only the world as it is, but the world as it will be.
ΓΆ€” Isaac Asimov
I have found this to be especially true in photography and computer technology. I view the manipulation of pixels as a fad. But, that's just me. In the long run, I think what will be valued will be pixels which document reality. Ahead of the game are the the news agencies which already demand unaltered image captures. So, artistic efforts may go one direction. Documentary photography may go another. There are always choices to be made. |
|
|
|
05/05/2012 09:25:50 PM · #75 |
.... artistic efforts may go one direction. Documentary photography may go another. There are always choices to be made. [/quote]
I applaud DPC for catering to the diversity.
|
|
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: 07/22/2025 04:09:30 AM EDT.
