| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/14/2004 05:22:02 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
My feeling on this subject is that first it is not worth even the energy devoted to it.
VOTER BEWARE ! ! ! I suggest you follow the advise of voting as if the image were legal. The DPC team will catch it at one point and it will certainly not earn a ribbon.
There are many tricks that can be done to a camera lens so as to fool the viewer. Most neophites are must suspect because they use their cameras to record rather than to create. Many oustanding effects can be achieved under basic editing. I suggest you look at port after port. Get outside of yourself and see how others use the camera to create illusions and special effects. |
I don't understand how this comment pertains to the discussion about folks who seem to have deliberatey ignored the challenge guidelines. I think, perhaps, you are confusing meeting the challenge with following editing rules. They are two different things. Failing to meet the challenge is not a reason for disqualification.
The challenge guidelines for Words were, "Take a photograph where complete words -- not just individual letters -- play a creative role in your composition."
Entering a photograph that contains no words or even letters is blatently ignoring the challenge.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2004 05:25:13 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by melismatica:
I generally don't bother with discussions about how well the population of entries did on meeting the challenge because I allow a decent amount of leeway in interpreting the challenges.
However, in this case after voting on 141 images I counted 12 that have quite blatently ingnored the challenge guidelines by not containing any words or even letters.That is just plain irritating. Surely this is an oddity worth mentioning. |
One reason this is frustrating to me is that this "discussion" would be more fruitful (and maybe educational) if there could be some discussion of the actual photos, i.e. done AFTER the voting.
I think the whole time schedule here is kind of skewed ... we should discuss this challenge after the voting's over when we can -- but by then everyone's too busy with complaining about the next challenge and outing people's ideas before they get to submit them.
I find there's way too much anticipatory discussion, and a rampant deficit of analytical discussion. We analyze and define and complain about the challenges during the shooting and voting, and then when the results are in the top few pictures and the occasional controversial one get further discussion; the rest of the photos might as well be tossed in a drawer.
I'd rather see us all keep our own counsel about upcoming or current challenges, and devote all the time spent complaining to discussing the just-completed challenges ... more threads on "I think this was under-rated/over-rated because ..." and less about "what are/were you thinking?" |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 05:28:51 PM · #28 |
| Thank you Melissa for unthreading my threads. lol |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 05:35:58 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Thank you Melissa for unthreading my threads. lol |
No problem! Unthreading is one of my lesser talents. Maybe because I'm so good at creating a tangle in the first place! :-D
I totally agree with you in regards to the kind of illusions that can be created in camera at the time of the shot. People who reccommend photos for disqualification are encouraged to vote on a shot as if it has already been validated. A nice idea in theory but it probably doesn't work practically. The best bet is to submit a request for validation if you have any concerns.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2004 05:36:38 PM · #30 |
OUCH! I am getting Killed... (4.1 - 100 votes) for something I did as a creative test... Ah well, at least I get to read a whole bunch of "You should have done..." comments.
Message edited by author 2004-07-14 17:39:26. |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 05:38:43 PM · #31 |
huh? There are only a handful without any words but most have words in them. Maybe on word but still a word.
By & by, I'm getting killed as well.. not bc I diont have words, three in fact, but for other reasons... only one comment so I can only venture a guess.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2004 05:48:46 PM · #32 |
If I can't see how something meets the challenge, I always leave a comment, if only because I would want to know if nobody understood my picture (which happens). I think if more people left an explanation of why they thought it didn't meet the challenge, then maybe constructive conversations would be more common.
Just because I couldn't find the word doesn't mean it isn't there, it might not be visible to me because I'm from a different culture, or age group, or gender than the photographer. It's worth letting the person know that you didn't get it, so they can expand your horizons.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2004 06:39:39 PM · #33 |
I'll admit, I was the guy who submitted a picture of my dog for the Portait challenge but at least it was a portrait. And no, I didn't submit it because "dogs are people too," I took the picture casually then remembered the portait challenge. I submitted it then realised that it was supposed to be a person. But I left it anyway.
But to not have any words in the picture for the Words challenge is a bit too out of the box for me. The viewer/voter should have to sit there an figure out where the words are. I'm sorry but you'll be getting low scores from me. Not 1's, but as low as I prefer to vote.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2004 07:02:36 PM · #34 |
| I think there must be a handful of people that just submit their best photo of the week and hope it meets the challenge. That or there is a language barrior and "words" means something else in another language??? |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 08:12:47 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by louddog:
I think there must be a handful of people that just submit their best photo of the week and hope it meets the challenge. That or there is a language barrior and "words" means something else in another language??? |
LOL!!! Maybe "words" means "flower" in some Slavonic languages?? :D
I didn't enter the challenge, because I didn't had any time, but I would have entered this one
(it is called: "the rest of the world is just around the corner" since I took this photo in the Netherlands and I have absolutely no idea why the word CHINA was written on the wall..I do know that there was a matrass two metres away from it with used needles around it. That combined with the fact that the word CHINESE is Dutch slang (in the translation) for using drugs makes sense..or am I being too creative here?)
if it wasn't shot about one month too early :P
Message edited by author 2004-07-14 20:13:39.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2004 08:41:59 PM · #36 |
| Well, I didn't think of it (in time), and I don't think anyone else did either, but a photo of two people yelling at each other would clearly depict "Having Words" where the "words" are the over-riding element in determining the emotional content and composition of the photo, but would not be rendered in visible type. |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 08:51:50 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Well, I didn't think of it (in time), and I don't think anyone else did either, but a photo of two people yelling at each other would clearly depict "Having Words" where the "words" are the over-riding element in determining the emotional content and composition of the photo, but would not be rendered in visible type. |
That is a bit of an esoteric reach in my opinion, and misses the point of the challenge. Why stretch the boundaries so far? What is the purpose in that? I understand taking a creative approach but why do so in such an obtuse manner? Is it so hard to create a photo that actually uses words in a tangible sense and saitisfies your need to be different? I think the challenges allow plenty of room for creativity without purposely making it difficult for the viewer. The approach you suggest smacks of deliberate provocation. I know I will receive flak for my perceived inability to 'think outside the box' , to use a much belaboured term on DPC, but I think this idea takes that notion to ridiculous extremes and expects too much tolerance and good will on voter's part.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2004 08:53:20 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Well, I didn't think of it (in time), and I don't think anyone else did either, but a photo of two people yelling at each other would clearly depict "Having Words" where the "words" are the over-riding element in determining the emotional content and composition of the photo, but would not be rendered in visible type. |
GeneralE:
I think you are technically correct, but I also think that the voters would hammer the image, and you would find yourself right where I am: hitting the update button just to see if you are going to finish in the top half of the field.
But, at least it would be entertaining. Having a score of x.76-(X.24+1) is fun, x.25-x.75 isn't generally as interesting.
Best
Edited to get the math correct
Message edited by author 2004-07-14 21:02:02. |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 09:15:26 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by melismatica:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Well, I didn't think of it (in time), and I don't think anyone else did either, but a photo of two people yelling at each other would clearly depict "Having Words" where the "words" are the over-riding element in determining the emotional content and composition of the photo, but would not be rendered in visible type. |
That is a bit of an esoteric reach in my opinion, and misses the point of the challenge. Why stretch the boundaries so far? What is the purpose in that? I understand taking a creative approach but why do so in such an obtuse manner? |
That is the purpose ...
Please explain the logic of trying to place boundaries on creativity -- they seem completely conflicting concepts to me.
You seemed to have no problem understanding what my picture was about from that simple description, well enough to fire off an extended response a mere ten minutes later. I don't thint it could have been that obtuse.
That doesn't mean it would be a great picture -- I have plenty of good ideas which I never quite pulled off. But as for "meeting the challenge" it would if anything get "bonus points" specifically for the originality and creativity, instead of taking a picture of another sign or scrawled message.
That, however, is my preference -- not a law. If you prefer photos which stick closely to the most literal or classic interpretation of the challenge topic, that is fine by me. I only ask that people apply whatever criteria they use consistently to all photos. |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 09:19:25 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by bill_hk2002:
GeneralE:
I think you are technically correct, but I also think that the voters would hammer the image, and you would find yourself right where I am: hitting the update button just to see if you are going to finish in the top half of the field. |
I haven't seen the top half of a challenge in some time :)
But then, I have a photo right now with six comments saying essentially "clever idea and well-lit; good composition" and a score a 4.9 :( |
|
|
|
07/14/2004 10:01:55 PM · #41 |
Well, to complete divert this thread...I just got an awesome comment...
The only part of my submission that are in focus are words, and I just got a comment that it doesn't meet the challenge :)
At least the commenter let me know WHY they think the image doesn't meet the challenge, and although I obviously don't agree with them (since I submited the image), I apreciate the explanation! I think it might be my first official 'doesn't meet challenge' comment!
I'm honored!! :)
|
|
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: 08/03/2025 01:53:16 PM EDT.
