DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Everyday Objects
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 59, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/21/2004 04:28:45 AM · #1
Finally a challenge where all those people that only submit flower shots will not be marked down for not meeting the challenge. Floodgates are open for cats and kids too.
 07/21/2004 04:48:52 AM · #2
just wondering, are calendars too obvious?
 07/21/2004 08:09:44 AM · #3
Depends on what you're doing with it. As an every day object it sure fits but the question is can you make it interesting.
 07/21/2004 09:15:41 AM · #4
This is like the "Mundane" challenge we had a couple of months ago. There we had to "take the ordinary and make it look extraordinary". Here I guess we take the ordinary and just try to leave it that way...?

07/21/2004 09:17:25 AM · #5
I gotta get me some weapons of mass destruction. Next flight to the axis of evil, dudes.
 07/21/2004 09:19:43 AM · #6
Originally posted by Jacko:
I gotta get me some weapons of mass destruction. Next flight to the axis of evil, dudes.

Hmmm.. So WMDs have become everyday objects, eh?
07/21/2004 09:23:07 AM · #7
Everyday object?

From the description, I take it as something that is most everyone, or a large number of people, actively use each day.

Is that an incorrect assumption?

Flowers are nice to look at, but I don't know if I would say that they are something people 'use' everyday.
 07/21/2004 09:27:15 AM · #8
Originally posted by Nelzie:
Everyday object?

From the description, I take it as something that is most everyone, or a large number of people, actively use each day.

Is that an incorrect assumption?

Flowers are nice to look at, but I don't know if I would say that they are something people 'use' everyday.

I don't think the object has to be "used" in order to be 'everyday'.
07/21/2004 09:27:28 AM · #9
"everyday object that most anybody would recognize"

"recognize", not "use"

Originally posted by Nelzie:
Everyday object?

From the description, I take it as something that is most everyone, or a large number of people, actively use each day.

Is that an incorrect assumption?

Flowers are nice to look at, but I don't know if I would say that they are something people 'use' everyday.


Message edited by author 2004-07-21 09:28:08.
 07/21/2004 09:28:46 AM · #10
Originally posted by Nelzie:
Everyday object?

Flowers are nice to look at, but I don't know if I would say that they are something people 'use' everyday.


I reckon that would depend on whether they are DPC'ers or not ;-)

Message edited by author 2004-07-21 09:29:03.
 07/21/2004 09:59:45 AM · #11
Originally posted by hopper:
"everyday object that most anybody would recognize"

"recognize", not "use"



I still can't see Flowers as fitting into 'Everyday Object'. When I think of 'Everyday Object', I think of things that are used on a daily basis. Things like, books, magazines, newspapers, keys, doors, plates, coffe pots, silverware, bathrooms and such...

The 'reconizable' part seems like a strong 'No Macro' shot suggestion. In order to allow the viewers to actually see what the object in question is...
 07/21/2004 09:59:49 AM · #12
I can't say flowers are an everyday object for me, an object most everyone will recognize yes, but they are seasonal.

Calenders could, probably won't, but could take a hit from those who use a different calender system than photographed.

My first thought was of comman utensils, such as a spoon or fork, but some places use chopsticks.

It may turn into a challenge in itself to find an object that is for the most part culturally, seasonally and geographically neutral.

A bowl would probably fit well, but it is a bit too obvious for my liking, so I am still thinking and looking.

David
Then to be creative with the object ...
 07/21/2004 10:03:36 AM · #13
I don't see where macro is ruled out for this challenge. To me a macro is a way of isolating an object, everyday or otherwise, within the overall composition.


07/21/2004 10:11:16 AM · #14
Try to think of "everyday" as the opposite of "unusual". Flowers are certainly not unusual - even in winter (my wife has them all over the house, some artificial, some purchased from the grocer or florist during winter...).

Macros, on the other hand, give an unusual perspective, ...albeit on everyday things. I'd hesitate to submit a macro (assuming I want a high score ;-))

07/21/2004 10:12:59 AM · #15
I agree, it might be a way of picking out an interesting detail of an everyday object
 07/21/2004 10:18:58 AM · #16
Pretty sure I'll be voting as if this is an open theme.

(hoping this is enough to coax Dr. Jones into submitting :)
 07/21/2004 10:26:43 AM · #17
A flower maybe, when it's placed in a vase and set on the table it's an object. I still don't think a flower would score well in this challenge.
I don't know if I'd call any animal or person an object either.
 07/21/2004 10:34:24 AM · #18
well i live in new york city, land of concrete, and im lucky if i see a flower once a day. i gotta hunt for them to find one usually
 07/21/2004 11:34:58 AM · #19
can we give each other the benefit of the doubt with this one? Why are you topic sticklers so set on your own opinions about a subject meeting a challenge.... a flower is not an everday object, give me a break... this is sooo ridiculous. Once in a while at least can't you open up your minds to a wider point of view. This is a fairly open topic, cut people some slack already.
 07/21/2004 11:36:21 AM · #20
Originally posted by longlivenyhc:
well i live in new york city, land of concrete, and im lucky if i see a flower once a day. i gotta hunt for them to find one usually


...that's funny, out here in the country I have to hunt for concrete! LOL ;o)
 07/21/2004 11:59:19 AM · #21
Originally posted by ellamay:
can we give each other the benefit of the doubt with this one? Why are you topic sticklers so set on your own opinions about a subject meeting a challenge.... a flower is not an everday object, give me a break... this is sooo ridiculous. Once in a while at least can't you open up your minds to a wider point of view. This is a fairly open topic, cut people some slack already.


I am just looking for clarification. This topic is quite loose.

While I don't mind a loose topic, it's good to know what some others might be thinking so that I can plan my shot to meet at least a few expectations without treading on what some people may see as 'thin ice'.

Sure, you might think, "Well, you are only boxing yourself in!" That's exactly true. That's what these challenges are about, boxing ourselves in while simultaneously stretching the limits of the box.

If the box isn't well defined, how do you know what/where you can stretch it to? That's all this thread is about.
 07/21/2004 12:08:16 PM · #22
Originally posted by Nelzie:
I am just looking for clarification. This topic is quite loose.

While I don't mind a loose topic, it's good to know what some others might be thinking so that I can plan my shot to meet at least a few expectations without treading on what some people may see as 'thin ice'.

Sure, you might think, "Well, you are only boxing yourself in!" That's exactly true. That's what these challenges are about, boxing ourselves in while simultaneously stretching the limits of the box.

If the box isn't well defined, how do you know what/where you can stretch it to? That's all this thread is about.


Oftentimes threads like this can also negatively influence people's opinions about challenges. All it takes is for two people to say 'Flowers arent everyday objects and I will vote them low because they dont meet the challenge' and other people will begin to think the same way. Instead of defining the box it can often lead to throwing ideas out of the box that some people dont like in hopes that they wont have to vote on them. It is almost a threat to people who like to take flower shots that they will not score highly if they do submit one.
 07/21/2004 12:20:52 PM · #23
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
This is like the "Mundane" challenge we had a couple of months ago. There we had to "take the ordinary and make it look extraordinary". Here I guess we take the ordinary and just try to leave it that way...?


Why would we have to leave them looking "ordinary"? I have an Amphoto book called Home Photography, by Andrew Sanderson, that has some wonderful pictures of everyday things around the home. This guy makes art out of so many things that I never noticed. ISBN 0-8174-3989-7
 07/21/2004 01:47:17 PM · #24
I think I am pretty clear on what an everyday object is but what I'm wondering is are we being asked to celebrate it's normalcy? At any rate I think that is the direction I woud like to go, rather than like the "Mundane" challenge, using angles and lighting to lift it out of it's normal context. Keep an everyday object in it's everyday setting and still make an extraordinary shot out of it.

P.S. my prediction is a whole lot of "did not meet the challenge " comments.
 07/21/2004 02:02:14 PM · #25
I'm not sure that kids or pets would fit here -- I'm thinking more along the lines of inanimate objects. I think a flower shot could work, but it probably wouldn't earn the creative "wow" points from me.

However, sometimes it's hard to know what does and doesn't fit the challenge beforehand. People do some very creative stuff that really makes me see things in a different way, even though I never would've thought it would work. As long as it's a good shot that communicates the theme somehow, I'm happy. :)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 04:44:42 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 08/02/2025 04:44:42 AM EDT.