| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/26/2004 01:24:48 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by BradP:
This has been a tough one to vote on.
Sometimes multiple lighting can be so subtle, you really have to look for the signs (like reflections in the eyes).
On a side note, I was going to use this one for the challenge:
Multi-Light Bubble Frenzy
but my neighbor talked me out of it. (Hope he was right. currently with 71 votes, my other one is only coming in at 5.1690)
Thoughts? |
Well I think he might have been right to talk you out of it, could be better if there was some subject there ..
|
|
|
|
05/26/2004 01:45:01 PM · #52 |
In the time since I last posted on this thread I've gotten three more comments to the effect of, "I don't see multiple light sources". And your's was one of them, BradP (she says gnashing her teeth and pulling her hair---;-D)
Still, like my photo but I'm going to get a bit tired of reading that comment. :D
I was wishing that somehow my Centered challenge would be magically DQd so I wouldn't have to keep reading, 'could be focused better'. That has been pattern with the comments on nearly all my entries (the exception is Opposites which got nearly all positive comments of appreciation and various minor suggestions). The people commenting all notice the same thing. In the case of Centered, I completely agreed. In the case of the Habits entry, I politely disagreed, and in this challenge the comments are really based on the challenge guidelines. In other words, it could be a good photo but it doesn't meet the challenge, which I can live with.
I guess what I'm getting at is that when the majority of comments focus on a single aspect of a photo, it is pretty easy to decide how to use that information for the future.
I'm having a tough time voting on the more subtle photos in this challenge. In some photos it may be obvious to the very experienced eye that a multiple light source was used but most people would not notice. In other's, an intelligent viewer can figure out how a multiple light source was used even if there is no actual light source in the photo. I've decided to count the latter as meeting the challenge and not the former. I consider any photo that actually shows one light source in it as valid to the challenge since I'm assuming the photographer used other light sources to aid in the capture of the light source in the photo. I noticed some folks actually titled their shots with the equipment they used which seems a bit unfair to me. |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 01:49:11 PM · #53 |
Okay, this is strictly my opinion and nothing else but I went and cleaned my monitor, TWICE because I thought for sure it had to have been dirty for the amount of out of focus shots I saw in this challenge. I don't have an entry in this challenge so I have nothing at stake here but I have voted on 83% of the entries and I'm afraid to look at the other 17% but I will because I just know there has to be something you all are raving about! There have been a few that have really gotten to me but not many at all. I'll try to make comments later this week but no promises, have MILLIONS of errands to run, part of my business and all :)
Deannda
Thank God for Road Runner Internet Service :) |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:29:14 PM · #54 |
I noticed a lot of blurry shots also. I think a lot of them were due to camera shake during long exposures instead of mis-focusing.
Greg
Originally posted by Neuferland:
Okay, this is strictly my opinion and nothing else but I went and cleaned my monitor, TWICE because I thought for sure it had to have been dirty for the amount of out of focus shots I saw in this challenge. I don't have an entry in this challenge so I have nothing at stake here but I have voted on 83% of the entries and I'm afraid to look at the other 17% but I will because I just know there has to be something you all are raving about! There have been a few that have really gotten to me but not many at all. I'll try to make comments later this week but no promises, have MILLIONS of errands to run, part of my business and all :)
Deannda
Thank God for Road Runner Internet Service :) |
|
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:30:35 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
The "intention" of this challenge has been previously discussed in this thread. My personal interpretation would be that this is a "technique" challenge, meant to familiarize photographers on working with multiple light sources to illuminate their subject -- not to photograph an image with multiple lights in the scene. The key words "obvious use of" in the details make this pretty clear (at least to me). But that's just my opinion. (n.b., I just searched the Challenge Suggestions forum, and it was suggested by Kavey in the Technique Based Challenges thread. =]) |
Just clarify this for me please......
If I photo an Xmas tree covered in 100 lights and use them as the only illumination for the scene where would that stand in your logic? |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:33:47 PM · #56 |
This is the "multiple light source" challenge. Not the "multiple lights" challenge. Big difference. The challenge description talks about lighting being an important aspect of photography and challenges you to use more then one source in your photo. It does not say or imply that you should simply take a picture with multiple lights in it. That's easy. Where is the challenge in that?
In my interpretation of the description, photos that meet the challenge must obviously have more then one source of light and, the lighting is a key aspect to the photograph. I haven't seen many of those yet.
PS: I'm down to a 5.2 with 6 comments saying great shot and great interpretation of the challenge. I really wish the people that are voting low would say why they voted low! |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:37:07 PM · #57 |
But my "theoretical" Xmas tree would be lit by multiple light sources surely?
edit:typo
Message edited by author 2004-05-26 14:38:31. |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:39:26 PM · #58 |
You had I both. I would really like to know what it is that people don't like about my picture. The lighting in my shot is what really makes the picture and certainly multiple light sources were needed for it so I don't think it is that people don't think I met the challenge.
Greg
Originally posted by louddog:
PS: I'm down to a 5.2 with 6 comments saying great shot and great interpretation of the challenge. I really wish the people that are voting low would say why they voted low! |
|
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:39:44 PM · #59 |
If you submited a shot of a christmas tree I'd DQ request it. No one should have a christmas tree up in May.
The subject being the light source is a little different then using a light source on a subject. Even if you do consider taking a picture of multiple light sources using multiple light sources, it would score low on creativity in my book. There is so much you can do with multiple light sources. |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:42:15 PM · #60 |
| I don't like to vote on challenges I enter anymore, but if I do vote, I promise to comment on everything I score under a 4 and over a 6 (as I usually do). |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:42:44 PM · #61 |
I think it would be, especially if the tree lights are the only source of light in the picture.
Greg
Originally posted by Tallbloke:
But my "theoretical" Xmas tree would be lit by multiple light sources surely?
edit:typo |
|
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:43:56 PM · #62 |
| Judging by the votes I've received so far, people are expecting to see lights in the photo. My interpretation was to use multiple lights as sources to illuminate your subject. While it's well lit, there are no visable lights in my entry. It is a studio shot, designed to minimize shadows. The only thing being minimized right now is my score. It's in focus, has great lighting and color so I can only assume that voters don't feel that it meets the challenge. |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:45:40 PM · #63 |
I love open challenges. :)
Clara
|
|
|
|
05/26/2004 02:48:28 PM · #64 |
Based on everything I've read in this thread, we should all avoid reading any rationality into the scores we receive, because there are so many interpretations of what the challenge means -- use lights? show lights? conceal lights? etc. Some of the voters are voting images DOWN for the very same reason others are voting them UP. I think a 5.000 is probably the true best in show!
Anyway, let's all repeat, one more time. It's just a challenge. It's all for fun. It's a learning experience. The ribbon doesn't really exist. Again: It's just a challenge. It's all for fun. It's a learning experience. The ribbon doesn't really exist. Again: (etc.) |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 03:13:46 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by boomer:
Some of the voters are voting images DOWN for the very same reason others are voting them UP. I think a 5.000 is probably the true best in show!
|
Well, my entry started out with a solid 6 and has been steadily declining toward a 5 with 80 votes and 1 comment. So I conclude the following:
1. I'm rapidly closing in on perfection.
2. Y'all need to get out of the forums and go comment on my photo.
;-} |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 03:17:14 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by louddog:
PS: I'm down to a 5.2 with 6 comments saying great shot and great interpretation of the challenge. I really wish the people that are voting low would say why they voted low! |
It's very early - many folks vote first and then go back and comment later after they've seen all the photos.
I don't have that many comments yet either and my score has been falling pretty steadily since early this morning (about .1 per hour). But I figure until there are about 200 votes in, it's really not a good gauge of where you'll end up anyway.
I think the photos for this challenge are great. Even the ones that don't appear to meet the challenge are well done otherwise and that's great to see. |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 03:21:47 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by e301:
I have Ben. And not the stunning photo (in my eyes at least). Though I may just have had that one come up :-)
That makes my first twelve votes average around 4 with two DQ requests. I am Nemesis, today.
E |
Please DQ my shot. So far my score is the lowest I've ever had by at least 1/2 point. If you DQ it for me I will lose the original.
Puleeeeese?
drg |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 03:23:04 PM · #68 |
well since my photo entry isnt doing that well either, i guess i'll reply here. i made the mistake i guess of not showing my light sources distinctly. i used a low wattage lamp to create a slight yellowish glow on my picture, sunlight was used to brighten up the picture a bit, and a low power flash was used to create some reflection marks, but i guess to someone just quickly passing by my photo while making votes would not see all that. also i figured using my main subject would of counted as a source of light. i just think my picture would of looked like crap if i had to shove my lamp into the picture to prove im using another light source.
Votes: 76
Avg Vote: 3.8816
Message edited by author 2004-05-26 15:48:26. |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 03:40:20 PM · #69 |
| i guess the more creative a try to be the less i get! next time i'll take just a simple foto of three lights maybe i'll get more votes!! People seem to just like plane simple things, Not saying that the ones who won reabbons are simple fotos, and there are a bunch of great fotos, i'm in anyway saying that there are just simple fotos, but the more creative i try to be the less i get, so maybe i'll stick with simple things next time, then i don't need to use lots of neurons to get a creative foto!! thats what i think!! |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 04:18:59 PM · #70 |
OK, here is an idea for a challenge -- Take a picture of a mature elm tree, and only a tree in a neatly mown yard in front of a 2 story colonial white house with black shutters. Take the picture between noon and 1 pm. from due west at exactly 38.7 ft away. Frame the tree to the left third of the photo with the house to the right. Crop to a 1/4 in border of space around edge. Set your iso and speed to...etc. etc.
C'MON PEOPLE!Do we have to be so nit-picky? Are we just looking for justification to cast low votes and gripe? Would you rather be a creative artist, or a tekkie automaton?
I strongly agree that the technical aspect of photography is very important, but I feel it should collaborate with creativity and imagination to create something that has some kind of impact on people.
Maybe sometimes it is rather blatant, like putting a shot of a cat in a dog challenge, but it is not always (not usually) so black and white. One person's opinion is probably not the only "right" opinion.
It's just like, some people might get weary of every challenge seeing the flower shots, or the bug shots, or the child shots, etc. but hey, people like those things as their subjects, they are expressing themselves, and...KUDOS to them for finding creative ways to fit them in to the challenge.
Everyone's entitled to their opinions, but no need to go bashing on people 'cause they don't think the same way you do. |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 04:27:32 PM · #71 |
Granted, this is the first time I've posted to the forums, but after having scored half the entries in this one, I'm just downright confused. I've only been around a little while, but I think I've caught on quickly enough with Habits & Opposites. To me, each challenge carries a different "blatantness" rating with it. I saw Opposites as having obvious contrasts between multiple subjects. In Habits, I wanted to see actions caught, as a "habit" to me (and most dictionaries) is a pattern of repeated actions. I still see those definitions as leaving plenty of room for creativity.
Here in Multiple Lights, it comes back to "what should be blatant about the shot". Taking a picture of a lightbulb that may have had a soft box off to the left to bring out the highlights of the lamp base leaves most folks wondering. Part of me is actually regretting this competition being brought up, since I think I've gone through a number of shots already that I think are some of the best I've seen to date, but in my mind, they don't come even close to defining the challenge to me. I'm seeing this as more of a technical challenge than the others, where having the work be a little heavy-handed and a bit more blantant than we'd normally go for isn't a bad thing.
I would certainly hope that those of you that are taking such fantastic shots, but are more to the subtle side, keep posting, since I LOVE looking through your work! It's great stuff, and there are a number of downright gallery-worthy shots here. And I'm almost afraid to say it, but I've been handing out some 3's to otherwise fantastic shots that I just don't think work for the subject.
On the flipside, though... Anyone take a look at the top scorers for Habits? They're only averaging 6-6.5's for the most part! There are always folks that will average-score low, and those that will average-score high. And then you combine those with the folks that think you've met the challenge and those that don't. That's precisely WHY the numbers work out. There are simply so many numbers submitted to average together that it effectively washes out the flukes.
I guess my only criticism, in the end, is that I know I'd love to see more comments made overall, and more USEFUL comments at that.
In closing, I think this competition is arguably the widest ranging challenge I've seen to date (ignore the fact that I've only browsed a handful... ::grin:: ). |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 04:44:34 PM · #72 |
Hi-ho all.
I'm finding that I'm giving lots of shots in this challenge 4-5-6 ratings.
I've got through 130 images so far, with one DQ, 3 8's, 16 7's 5 3's, and a 2, with all the rest in the middle range. That's probably a good spread? I'll have to go back and check that I've not done any one a injustice when I get through them all and go back for comments.
What's interesting for me is that my own shot has multiple lights in it, and I'm scoring higher for the shots using multiple light sources, so my interpretation is changing as I score.. Good thing I'm not marking my own shot!
I'll also second the comments about commenting. The reason I joined this site is that on another photography site I was getting a huge range of scores (median to low) for my photos, but no feedback. Skimming through this site over the last couple of weeks I've seen a good range of feedback for average photos, which is more helpful in my opinion than a high score. Unless of course you always finish in the top 10, in which case the score is probably more important.
In any case, isn't it a bit early in the voting for folks to be getting worried about their scores though? There are six days to go. And I suppose I should get to work. (It's 8:40am here BTW)
|
|
|
|
05/26/2004 04:55:18 PM · #73 |
| I started out with the highest score I ever had here, got a Great comment on my photo, now I'm down almost a point and no one else has commented. I feel like that is unfair. If all these people voted so low as to knock my score down a whole point, surely someone has 1 little comment or critique to help me in the future.... get out of the forum, stop beating around the bush in here and go show us exactly which photos you are talking about by commenting on them individually! |
|
|
|
05/26/2004 04:58:45 PM · #74 |
I don't think anyone is being nit-picky. Meeting the challenge is equally important to taking a good photograph. If that is not true, then we should just have weekly open challenges.
I think the wording of the challenge description is crystal clear:
"Lighting is the most important element in photography."
Note it does not say having lights in your picture is most important. How the subject is lighted is most important. I will conceed that a subject can provide the light in a shot.
"Make the obvious use of multiple light sources a key factor in your composition this week."
Thus, the lighting you use on your subject should come from multiple sources, I should be able to look at the photo and instantly see that there was more then one source of light used (obvious), and the use of multiple light sources should be important to the photo (key factor).
"As always, use your imagination and be creative!"
Simply taking a picture of multiple lights may technically meet the challenge, but it's far from creative in my opinion.
This is a more difficult challenge then most of the others but there are a lot of possibilities to get creative, try new things, and maybe learn something from this challenge.
|
|
|
|
05/26/2004 06:09:40 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by louddog:
I don't think anyone is being nit-picky. Meeting the challenge is equally important to taking a good photograph. If that is not true, then we should just have weekly open challenges. |
I agree. It is hard sometimes to meet a challenge, and meeting those more difficult criteria may make the photo tricky, or limit what you can take. In effect you may not enter the best photo you have taken for the week as it does not meet the challenge, and end up entering something not as good because that does meet the challenge.
How would it then be fair to judge person A, with their 10th best photo of the week but it nicely meets the challenge, against person B who has just entered their best photo of the week.
Trying to meet the challenge can disadvantage someone unless the challenge is taken into consideration when voting .... which a lot of people, probably most, do (as we are asked to when voting).
|
|
