| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/19/2004 09:06:11 PM · #1 |
I have found it works great to try not to read the title of the photo and quickly scroll down so only the photo is visible. This really helps identify shots that rely solely or at least rely heavily on the title to meet the challenges. Then regardless of photo quality you can easily determine if it needs to be given a 1 or not.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:08:16 PM · #2 |
Na don't say that - my next entry relys heavely on the title :p
Message edited by author 2004-10-19 21:10:54.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:09:37 PM · #3 |
I'm one of those people who believe that a title can be an important part of the work.
Edit: This works both ways...a wreckless title can also do a great injustice to an otherwise beautiful photograph.
Message edited by author 2004-10-19 21:11:16. |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:14:08 PM · #4 |
yea but this is a photo contest not a "name that photo contest".. there's a huge difference... for me any photo that relies solely on the title and does not meet the challenge photgraphically, automatically gets a 1.
Message edited by author 2004-10-19 21:14:20.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:19:02 PM · #5 |
Example
If this was a Time Challenge this would fit it if the title was say
- a Ripple in Time
- Frozen in Time
If it was titled
- A droplet
- UntitledWaterPic
It would most likely come last for not fitting the challenge
The Title helps convey the idea behind the picture and communicate to the viewer where there coming from!
well this is my idea anyway!
Message edited by author 2004-10-19 21:48:58.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:20:36 PM · #6 |
| I agree with thatcloudthere's idea about the title and photo working together. Though, I can still empathise with Anachronite's thoughts. |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:26:23 PM · #7 |
I've seen people applying a similar technique when viewing works of art. They close their eyes, shuffle their feet and visit the giftshop. Fortunately most of these people only utter their opinion about these works only when asked.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:46:02 PM · #8 |
| saintnicholas is showing a super example of how a title and photo can work together to communicate an idea. (I think). |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:53:24 PM · #9 |
My opinion and Anachronite's opinions on titles aren't mutually exclusive...in fact, I agree with him that a photo which relies on the title (to meet the challenge or otherwise) should receive a lower score.
Still, the title can be an important part of the work...therefore, I will soak it in along with the photo as I do my viewing and voting.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:57:30 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by DianaB:
saintnicholas is showing a super example of how a title and photo can work together to communicate an idea. (I think). |
To me, that's more of an example of how the title is used to warp the image into something which fits the challenge...which is exactly what Anachronite was talking about. I agree with him that such an image is relying on the title to fit the challenge which seems to defeat the purpose...
Message edited by author 2004-10-19 21:58:04. |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 09:58:54 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Anachronite:
yea but this is a photo contest not a "name that photo contest".. there's a huge difference... for me any photo that relies solely on the title and does not meet the challenge photgraphically, automatically gets a 1. |
I hold a 1 x 1 inch cutout in a piece of cardboard up to the picture to be certain that every square inch of a picture can stand on it's own... If I can't see how it fits the challenge in every inch, then it gets a 1... I'm tired of these photos that can't stand on their own without seeing the whole image at once... Come to think of it, it's similar to your method :)
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:10:53 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
My opinion and Anachronite's opinions on titles aren't mutually exclusive...in fact, I agree with him that a photo which relies on the title (to meet the challenge or otherwise) should receive a lower score.
Still, the title can be an important part of the work...therefore, I will soak it in along with the photo as I do my viewing and voting. |
Well, yes, me too. Though I often find it interesting how an image (without its title) is interpreted by the viewer as fitting a challenge - or not. Also, how the photographer, who submits it and doesn't use something 'run of the mill' (so to speak). For me, it says so much about the photographer's and/or the viewers minds, more than anything else. (Does that make sense to you?).
I mean - although the examples that saintnicholas uses here helps to communicate the idea for a 'time challenge'. The photo would still stand alone to communicate that idea to the viewer - depending on where they are in their own mind (and if it was in tune with the photographer's).
I'd like to be able to explain more eloquently than I feel that I just have, but hope you can see where I'm coming from? |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:23:44 PM · #13 |
Yes, I do.
In fact, seen in a venue other than dpc, I would be quite okay with the waterdrop photo being simply named "time". It would suit it well, but it seems a little more trite when the photo is being taken to match a challenge description!
I usually give the photographer the benefit of the doubt when voting, however...
:0) |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:27:22 PM · #14 |
a photo can have so many meanings, the photography view may or may not be understood by the viewer
this is the reason titles are added to the picture, to try to convey the meaning to a much larger audience eg - you the viewer
Using the my example again (near the top)
If you had a picture of a dog in a time challenge and called it a ripple in time obviously you would be marked low - as the title has in no way any meaning towards the photo - only the challenge
In the case of the waterdroplet I believe such a title would apply both to the picture and the challenge - in which case it would rank higher than a picture of a dog with the same title
so in conclusion - the picture, title and challenge combined will guaratee success - else if you have a missing ingrediant you will be marked down for it
hope this makes sense and i havn't confused too many people :)
Message edited by author 2004-10-19 22:31:04.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:31:36 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I'm one of those people who believe that a title can be an important part of the work.
Edit: This works both ways...a wreckless title can also do a great injustice to an otherwise beautiful photograph. |
I agree. I've actually voted a few pics down that have had bad titles and, if I'm undecided, voted a few up, if the title is good.
If title was unimportant then we would have a lot of untitled nr 2532 etc
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:33:05 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Yes, I do.
In fact, seen in a venue other than dpc, I would be quite okay with the waterdrop photo being simply named "time". It would suit it well, but it seems a little more trite when the photo is being taken to match a challenge description!
I usually give the photographer the benefit of the doubt when voting, however...
That reminds me well of one of my submissions to a challenge! :)
:0) |
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:37:31 PM · #17 |
Ok I see this as a good example - (Real Challenge submission)
Time Challenge
Looking at the thumbnail
- how does this relate to time? yeh exactly what i thought
- but once opened you will see that the title has helped it have a good ranking
45/209
so you can agree with it or not but itz all there for you to see :)
Message edited by author 2004-10-19 22:38:52.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:39:54 PM · #18 |
| Well in a perfect world the title would not be required... but in the world that is DPC it seems that a lot of people have trouble with the concept that a challenge could be interpreted differently by different people. Thus, the title is sometimes useful in letting others in on how you have interpreted the challenge, to simply ignore the title and vote a 1 is to shut your eyes to a potentially interesting interpretation of the challenge. This kind of attitude does little but discourage imagination or originality - thus we end up with 200 pictures of telephones in a communication challenge. |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 10:46:56 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by samtrundle:
thus we end up with 200 pictures of telephones in a communication challenge. |
Good point
when I come to the same idea the forth of fifth time I'm usually sick of it and vote down and even go back to vote the first 4-5 down as well to be fair.
But sometimes someone comes up with a new angle on the same idea and that cheers me up.
N.R.Hanson once said (paraphrasing from memory): A genius is not someone who discovers new things, but someone who sees new aspects in old things.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 11:00:00 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Anachronite:
yea but this is a photo contest not a "name that photo contest".. there's a huge difference... for me any photo that relies solely on the title and does not meet the challenge photgraphically, automatically gets a 1. |
Vote it low if you think it doesn't fit the challenge but don't ignore the title. In dpc you can't submit without puting something in the title space. Here, the title is an integral part of each entry. If you choose not to look at the title you are doing a diservice to all entrants. |
|
|
|
10/19/2004 11:19:01 PM · #21 |
i put a lot of thought into the titles for my photos. it is an integral part of the full presentation of my work and gives the viewer an insight to the feelings i'm trying to portray. i would hate to think that the titles were being ignored.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2004 11:57:03 PM · #22 |
syndrome number oe billion.... hyper-analysis by dpc voters.
It's art people... it's so subjectie. It really doesnt have to be so complicated. Complex, yes... complicated... please GOd, NO!
|
|
|
|
10/20/2004 12:21:33 AM · #23 |
| I am so sick of people voting photos down to a 1 for not fitting into their personal paradigm of the topic. Seriously, I don't think I've ever given out anything less than a 3. I give consideration to the fact that the person got off their duff, went out and took a picture. Interprited the challenge, and accepted it. Then took the time to submit it. All that is at least worth a 2 to me. What is a 1? Other than a torpedo for sinking photos you don't like. If you think any of the pictures in recent challenges deserve a 1, come look at my family albums from when I was a baby. That'll redefine your opinion of a "bad photo". The talent I've seen here has been substantial, and the creativity makes the 200+ images in a challenge worth going through. I wonder what the site would be like if we took the time to really try and understand where each photographer was coming from with their take on a challenge, rather than immediately working to discredit them. |
|
|
|
10/20/2004 08:43:49 AM · #24 |
How about if we stop interpreting the challenges and just do what they ask? And what about the people that go out and work very very hard to try and acctually photograph something that meets the challenge? Don't they deserve a lot more credit than those that photograph whatever tickles their fancy and then come up with a catchy title to imply that the shot meets the challenge? If we give high grades for catchy titles, then each challenge is essentially a "free study" combined with a "name that photo" contest. I bet we could come up with a name for any photo, and imply that the shot meets the challenge. To me, that defeats the purpose of the challenge.
As for the duck and water drop shots shown as examples here, the time challenge for says, "Photograph the subject of `Time` as best you can. Good luck". The duck photo is not just an average photo, which means grading starts at a around 5, it has nothing to do with time. Yes it tooking "timing" to capture him that way. But that would mean all photos with motion in them meet the time challenge. To me that is a real stretch of the challenge. So I would give the duck photo a 1 automatically.
When considering the water drop, there are so many pics here of a droplet I would start grading at a 7 or 8 just because of the lack of originality (same goes for "water on glass over flags" shots and "two tone glasses of water" shots. As for meeting the challenge, let's look at the challenge again: "Photograph the subject of `Time". I can look at the photo forever and not see "time". However when you look up the defnition it does a better job than the duck of loosely fitting into the challenge, albeit VERY loosely. So I probably would have given it a 5.
Message edited by author 2004-10-20 08:44:46.
|
|
|
|
10/20/2004 09:08:20 AM · #25 |
I agree, the duck photo is an excellent example of a photo which fared reasonably well but was only related to the challenge through the title.
'Reasonably well' is one thing, but I don't think photos normally hit the top ten using this method, do they? |
|
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: 08/14/2025 10:40:57 PM EDT.
