Feet and Inches: Please help me improve

08/17/2004 01:02:05 PM · #1

This was my entry for the Feet challenge, which scored a 4.851 and finished in 106th place. I had expected to score a bit better than this, and was disappointed with my finish.

I'd like to hear from any of the 34 people who scored this a 3 or lower; I'm looking for some insight as to why you felt this was such an uninspiring photograph. Please call it like you see it; I promise I'm not out on a witch hunt. I just want to know what I could do better next time.

Thanks,
Terry

Kavey

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

08/17/2004 01:06:21 PM · #2

I gave you a 7 so you probably don't want to hear from me but...

I suspect a lot of rather anal voters didn't like what they considered to be a smart-alec interpretation of the challenge. They wanted to see the kind of feet we walk on and weren't open to other ideas.

In terms of image itself I think it would be nicer not to have more text upside down than you have the right way up, especially since the text that is right way up isn't particularly more dominant than the rest.

Just a thought.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

08/17/2004 01:08:50 PM · #3

Thanks for the comments, and I do truly appreciate them. You are right though in that I do want to hear primarily from the voters in the 1-3 range. Again, not a witch hunt, I'm just looking for some insight.

-Terry

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

08/17/2004 01:17:52 PM · #4

I gave you a 5, hopefully I'll able to explain why:

Because there's no gradual decrease in focus, the image has essentially been split into 2 pieces right across the center. Since the bottom 1/2 is what's in focus, the top 1/2 just seems like it's there by accident and the bright white out of focus strip is distracting (like a flashlight being shined on my face while I'm trying to look at something else, know what i mean?).

I like the "smart-alec" interpretation, and I like what you tried to accomplish, but perhaps this fell into the "just an average shot" for me ... thus, the 5.

Hope this helps.

KaDi

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

08/17/2004 01:21:58 PM · #5

Impulsively gave you a 6 while voting, mostly because of your "smart-alec interpretation" of the challenge (as Kavey puts it). On the critical side, it seems to lack a true subject--you've got two instances of 1ft and one of 100ft. It's not metric which may make the "feet" part opaque to many voters. Also, technically, your subject show "inches" just at the ft mark. Compositionally, there doesn't seem to be a rhythm to the color scheme, the image is split in half (not thirds) by the d.o.f. you chose, and the main element that draws the eye (my eye) is the "1 FT 1" on the vinyl tape measure but it seems to suffer from fuzziness or light flare.

All that said (and it's probably more than you asked for), I still wouldn't have given you a 3. It clearly meets the challenge (2), there are some technical issues with the image (1), it's very creative and original (2), it made me laugh (1) = (6) [Thanks to "colda" whose system I find helpful to improving my objectivity.]

Kavey

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

08/17/2004 01:22:33 PM · #6

Originally posted by hopper:

I like the "smart-alec" interpretation...

Me too BTW.

smokeditor

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

08/17/2004 01:26:15 PM · #7

This photo which is along the same lines as yours. I thought this one was great but it still place like 80th.

People were just being real picky, I got marked down for having one foot as opposed to 2 feet. People take the challenges very literally and dont like interperations on a theme.

colda

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

08/17/2004 02:22:54 PM · #8

Originally posted by KaDi:

[Thanks to "colda" whose system I find helpful to improving my objectivity.]

*takes a bow*

I didn't vote on this challenge, I'll be upgrading to full membership at the end of the month. I decided not to vote on member challenges until I'd paid up (the only reason for this was to encourage myself to join sooner)

I would have also given the pic a 6 (2+1+2+1), much the same as hopper said, there is a definite half and half split, also I really do feel that there should have been a bias against upside-down text.

Node

Nikon D300

Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical IF for Nikon

08/17/2004 03:35:05 PM · #9

I gave your photo a 6. Met the challenge Plus showed some originality with nothing deducted for technical faults. As already said the change in focus seemed very abrupt due to the placment of the subject.

I actually add +1 for originality in photo's, it was a good photo but didn't have that wow factor for me. It deserved better than 4.8 that's for sure!

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

08/17/2004 05:01:34 PM · #10

Thanks everyone for your insight so far. I did not want to make the easy assumption that the problem was the voters and not me. I truly appreciate the constructive criticism and helpful suggestions offered so far. When I get back from vacation I may try to reshoot this to see if I can improve this.

Any more suggestions, or comments (especially from those who scored this from 1 to 3) are welcome.

Thanks!
-Terry

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/17/2004 05:08:43 PM · #11

What is the point of the shot. Where is the interest. What is the structure. (I mean these as rhetorical questions)

You have a pun/ ironic twist on the challenge theme, so that is good.

After that it is just a jumble of straight lines - the bottom half in focus, the top half out of focus, split almost straight through the middle.

In comparision, the shot you compared it to as inspiration has strong design going for it. The colour palette is restricted, while your shot has reds, yellows, whites jumbled together, with no clear reason.

Some tapes are the right way up, others are upside down - again apparently for no reason.

The shot you referred to uses wavy lines to create visual interest and motion. The gaps between the tape define the structures, the red and white tones almost evoke roses. It is strongly designed and composed. IN comparison your entry appears haphazard and accidental, while the parallel, straight lines are harsh and lead the eye shooting out of either side of the image.

My suggestions would be to spend a bit of time learning about compositional and design principles, particularly the emotional effects of lines, the impact of colours and so on.

Message edited by author 2004-08-17 17:09:18.

Prime_Time

Nikon D80

08/17/2004 05:12:41 PM · #12

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

I gave you a 6....I am trying to comment more...when I have more time to do so...wish I could get the same...

annasense

Olympus E-500 EVOLT

Olympus 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Digital ED

08/17/2004 06:01:31 PM · #13

I apologize in advance, I was a 3-er. I was reminded of this blue-ribbon winner when I saw yours (I had just read the "how to" on it). I have to say, that image stuck in my mind, and I didn't think your execution had that "wow" factor. I didn't like the upside down text, and it just looked unorganized. I would have liked it better, too, had everything been in focus. Because the concept was similar to the thumbnail I posted, I didn't fell that your idea was that original... but come to think of it, that's a pretty big assumption on my part, assuming you've seen (and remember) the same picture I did. From now on, I'll keep that in mind, but I know that doesn't help your score out this time. So, I apologize for the 3... but for the record... I didn't mind at all that it wasn't actual human feet, I didn't make any judgments based on that.