| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/02/2012 01:59:25 AM · #1 |
Can you say "Rose"? Ok, can you say "Lipstick?" hmmmm... how about, can you say "Vampire?"
It'll be a good one. |
|
|
|
01/04/2012 12:30:27 PM · #2 |
| Took my shots last night, it wasn't roses or lipstick or vampires. I just didn't want to see you hanging here with no replies :-) |
|
|
|
01/04/2012 12:54:52 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Can you say "Rose"? |
Aaaaagh! You said that name!
|
|
|
|
01/04/2012 01:34:04 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Can you say "Rose"? |
Aaaaagh! You said that name! |
 Kirbic! Is your cape still at the cleaners?
:) |
|
|
|
01/04/2012 05:35:46 PM · #5 |
So, correct me if I am wrong. Shallow depth of field, IMO, is very relative. If one is looking at a macro image, the DoF can be miniscule, whereas if one is taking an image of a bird in flight, the DoF is much larger.
Both would be valid entries in this challenge, but in different manners. Wonder if folks will be expecting the macro-esque DoF in this challenge and not "accepting" the other kinds of DoF?
|
|
|
|
01/04/2012 06:01:45 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by gcoulson:
So, correct me if I am wrong. Shallow depth of field, IMO, is very relative. If one is looking at a macro image, the DoF can be miniscule, whereas if one is taking an image of a bird in flight, the DoF is much larger.
Both would be valid entries in this challenge, but in different manners. Wonder if folks will be expecting the macro-esque DoF in this challenge and not "accepting" the other kinds of DoF? |
I think it can go either way, no problem. You just gotta have a shot where both foreground AND background are OOF. Hey, wait a minute? Didn't we just DO this, with tilt/shift? Another example of synchronized challenges :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
01/06/2012 04:10:56 PM · #7 |
| Ahhhhh, this seems like such a fun challenge, but I can't think of a single idea that I am happy with. I have a complete photographer's block |
|
|
|
01/06/2012 04:21:37 PM · #8 |
| I have an idea!!! now i must go and shoot... we'll see how it turns out... |
|
|
|
01/06/2012 05:22:37 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I think it can go either way, no problem. You just gotta have a shot where both foreground AND background are OOF. Hey, wait a minute? Didn't we just DO this, with tilt/shift? Another example of synchronized challenges :-)
R. |
IMHO, this was not just done because tilt/shift is a LOT more than just miniturization-effect selective blurring. There were no true perspective shift images in the entire challenge, and not one actual TS lens used. I was surprised, because there are a few members who possess those ridiculously expensive things and I figured I would finally see them in action! PP will never properly simulate a true TS lens. FG/BG OOF is bound to produce some lovely boket images, as well as some creative focusing that doesn't center on the subject (I hope!). In this case, I would also hope that the "relative" nature of shallow DOF will be rendered moot by people intentionally using wide aperatures or long lenses in an attempt to OBVIOUSLY meet the challenge. Darn, that's two "hopes" in the same post. I'm doomed to be disappointed :) |
|
|
|
01/08/2012 02:12:55 PM · #10 |
so.... are people interpreting "...while using red as your primary color" as
1) the WHOLE image should be filled primarily with red tones
OR
2) the main subject(s) (that which is in and out of focus) should be red, but allowing incidental surrounding areas to be some other color
-mefnj |
|
|
|
01/08/2012 03:07:25 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by mefnj:
so.... are people interpreting "...while using red as your primary color" as
1) the WHOLE image should be filled primarily with red tones
OR
2) the main subject(s) (that which is in and out of focus) should be red, but allowing incidental surrounding areas to be some other color
-mefnj |
Option 2 |
|
|
|
01/08/2012 03:22:43 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by mefnj:
the main subject(s) (that which is in and out of focus) should be red... |
That's strangely worded. It suggests you feel that in order to meet the challenge, the shallow DOF should be expressed across the subject itself: in other words, a shot at the bird feeder (for example) where an entire bird is in focus but the foreground and background are blurred would NOT meet the challenge? I'm not sure that's what you're implying, but if it is, then I don't agree.
R.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2012 03:27:36 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by mefnj:
the main subject(s) (that which is in and out of focus) should be red... |
That's strangely worded. It suggests you feel that in order to meet the challenge, the shallow DOF should be expressed across the subject itself: in other words, a shot at the bird feeder (for example) where an entire bird is in focus but the foreground and background are blurred would NOT meet the challenge? I'm not sure that's what you're implying, but if it is, then I don't agree.
R. |
ok, so from your description, the main in-focus subject should be red, and everything else is whatever.
i guess i was thinking of FocusPoint's first post... a rose would be mostly red, both in and out of focus if you focused on a single rose in a bunch or a single petal, etc. |
|
|
|
01/08/2012 03:38:35 PM · #14 |
Well, the "red" part is ambiguous. The point I'm making is that the "shallow DOF" part can be satisfied by having only part of the subject in focus (a face at f/1.8, for example, might have only lips and eyes in focus, with a rapid dropoff) or by isolating a subject with an extreme telephoto, with the entire subject sharp as a tack but rapid DOF dropoff in front and behind.
How the voters are going to interpret the statement "using red as your primary color" I have no clue. Semantically, for example, this would include the case of a green crayon sitting on a large sheet of red paper; the red could be by far the dominant color, and yet NOT be the subject. But I doubt the voters would see it this way :-)
R.
Message edited by author 2012-01-08 15:44:35.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2012 03:40:08 PM · #15 |
There is nothing in the description that specifies what has to be in focus or what has to be out of focus. It simply states your main subject/object should be primarily red and the photo itself must demonstrate a shallow depth of field.
Dave
Message edited by author 2012-01-08 15:41:38. |
|
|
|
01/08/2012 08:04:35 PM · #16 |
I'm all ready to go with my shot, it's sitting waiting to be uploaded, I just can't think of a title! I hate it when that happens.
|
|
|
|
01/08/2012 08:29:19 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by DCNUTTER:
It simply states your main subject/object should be primarily red... |
It doesn't even say THAT:
Originally posted by Challenge Description:
...while using red as your primary color... |
R.
|
|
|
|
01/09/2012 12:51:33 AM · #18 |
| There were some REALLY great images in this challenge. Including one really similar to what I submitted, so of course I had to vote that one down a bit! ;) (Just kidding!) Good luck to everyone who entered. |
|
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 05:47:09 PM EDT.
