Author | Thread |
|
09/29/2004 02:43:08 PM · #1 |
What went wrong here?
I got some comment that this didn´t fit the challenge but i´m littel bit confuised about that.
I know it´s not the best photo but wasn´t it clear that the green color in the back was the northern lights?
hmmmm... Maby i just need alot of practies ;)
 |
|
|
09/29/2004 02:53:13 PM · #2 |
It's not the quality of the picture that's in question, but the fact that it had nothing to do with "touch", as in what you feel when you touch something. It wasn't a metephorical question, as in what your title suggested, a "Touch of Faith". Yes, it was clear that it was the Northern Lights in the background, but you can't TOUCH the Northern Lights. It doesn't "FEEL" like anything. |
|
|
09/29/2004 02:55:21 PM · #3 |
To be honest, I don't see how it fits the challenge either. But it is a beautiful shot.
|
|
|
09/29/2004 03:05:25 PM · #4 |
This brings back the discussion of On topic Off topic...
It's a great picture, it's beautiful... but like I said when I scored you...I don't see where this meets with the "sense of touch"...
If a challenge asks for something (like the sense of touch) the shot should have a liason with the Topic, or else it would be called Free Study.
It does not make your image a bad one...it makes your image the "wrong" one....and when I was looking for the "sense of touch"...I did not find it.
Perhaps you want to explain how it meets with the topic?
Message edited by author 2004-09-29 15:06:27.
|
|
|
09/29/2004 03:09:09 PM · #5 |
Could you post your original? I would just like to see the editing that was done on this so I can learn from it...This is a beautiful photo! |
|
|
09/29/2004 03:56:17 PM · #6 |
Literalists... oy.
I gave you a 6, I saw a creative take on the challenge. It's always a risk submitting something that cannot be very literally linked to the challenge, that is, the MOST direct possible interpretation (in this case physical touch).
I ran afoul of this in the "mirrors" challenge, and knew going in that I was at risk, but still was amazed at just how far down I was voted. I dearly wish I'd saved the image for the Masters. |
|
|
09/29/2004 03:59:40 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by kirbic: Literalists... oy.
I gave you a 6, I saw a creative take on the challenge. It's always a risk submitting something that cannot be very literally linked to the challenge, that is, the MOST direct possible interpretation (in this case physical touch).
I ran afoul of this in the "mirrors" challenge, and knew going in that I was at risk, but still was amazed at just how far down I was voted. I dearly wish I'd saved the image for the Masters. |
Aren't the literalists the ones who had to explain "Touch" in a very literal way when writing the challenge description?
Edit:
Message edited by author 2004-09-29 16:00:29. |
|
|
09/29/2004 04:07:55 PM · #8 |
I´m no profi in ps so I doubt there is anything I can teach.
Once I had my photo I just start in ps and I´m not 100 % sure what I did but mainly this
Sharpen,Level adjustment , Contrast and brightnes, Hue/saturation and burning (the chirch)
Then I run the photo trough neat image.
Usally i don´t mess so much with my photos in ps
Physical touch was the case... Ok now i know
Whish i could take the picture back.
|
|
|
09/29/2004 04:11:54 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by kirbic: Literalists... oy.
I gave you a 6, I saw a creative take on the challenge. It's always a risk submitting something that cannot be very literally linked to the challenge, that is, the MOST direct possible interpretation (in this case physical touch).
I ran afoul of this in the "mirrors" challenge, and knew going in that I was at risk, but still was amazed at just how far down I was voted. I dearly wish I'd saved the image for the Masters. |
Well I said "liason" because I did not try to look for specific "touching".. but I pondered, "where can I see the sense of touch in this conceptualy"...and I could not find it. It's not that I was a literalist, but I just couldn't find any linkage.
|
|
|
09/29/2004 04:34:17 PM · #10 |
|
|
09/29/2004 04:38:11 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by kirbic: Literalists... oy.
I gave you a 6, I saw a creative take on the challenge. It's always a risk submitting something that cannot be very literally linked to the challenge, that is, the MOST direct possible interpretation (in this case physical touch).
I ran afoul of this in the "mirrors" challenge, and knew going in that I was at risk, but still was amazed at just how far down I was voted. I dearly wish I'd saved the image for the Masters. |
Well.. personally, I think that you *HAVE* to be a *little* literal in the challenges.. voting and submitting.. otherwise, why have specific topics? We could just go to free studies all the time, and be just like every other contest website out there :)
As for this photo, I agree completely with Gil_P. It didn't represent "touch" in *any* way to me.. literally or non-literally. It was the northern lights over a church. I guess maybe you have to be spiritual to even get the "emotional" connection to touch, but I certainly didn't.
|
|
|
09/29/2004 05:29:16 PM · #12 |
I liked it and gave it a 7. To me it`s meets the challenge as it shows solar particles touching the earths atmosphere, but it`s pushing it a bit :)
|
|
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: 10/16/2025 11:28:06 AM EDT.