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

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Wildlife: Why so many 5s?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 39, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/11/2004 01:04:00 AM · #1
My entry:

I really like this photo... and I am confounded by the number of "5" votes I received. That's below average-- is this really a below-average shot? I mean, if so many people feel this way, I'd like to know how to improve this as a photo to at least bump it to "6" (above average) status. Any advice?
 10/11/2004 01:06:35 AM · #2
Originally posted by annasense:
My entry:

I really like this photo... and I am confounded by the number of "5" votes I received. That's below average-- is this really a below-average shot? I mean, if so many people feel this way, I'd like to know how to improve this as a photo to at least bump it to "6" (above average) status. Any advice?


I can guarantee this entry recieved so many low scores because of it's obvious connection to being in a zoo.
You just happened to fall victim to the "Doesn't meet the challenge in my eyes, even if it is a nice shot" syndrome.
 10/11/2004 01:08:11 AM · #3
I would have given it an 8. Great Photograph.
 10/11/2004 01:08:28 AM · #4
As a few others commented, it feels a little too oversaturated for me. The tigers are almost neon looking. Other than that, it was a good shot.
 10/11/2004 01:11:25 AM · #5
maybe its the third tiger in the background. It may have looked better with just the 2 in front?

But yes it may be just the "zoo" thing also.
 10/11/2004 01:16:46 AM · #6
Hmmmm... the saturation thing, I admit, I bumped it a lot, but it looks fine on the 2 macs and 1 pc that I checked it on... it makes them stand out, which is what I was trying to do, because that one rock almost looked black-and-white, and it seemed for the tiger in the front that it was a sort of natural selective desaturation.

And it cracks me up when people tell me how to arrange the tigers differently... if I could have, I would have.

But, even given those two factors, is it really worthy of a 5? If so, then I must be voting people too high.
10/11/2004 01:23:53 AM · #7
There's no place for your eyes to settle onto. That seems to be a really big drawback. I think the colors are wonderful.
 10/11/2004 01:24:03 AM · #8
I also got an impression the saturation is too much in the picture. Probably that's the reason.
 10/11/2004 01:25:14 AM · #9
Originally posted by Artyste:

I can guarantee this entry recieved so many low scores because of it's obvious connection to being in a zoo.
You just happened to fall victim to the "Doesn't meet the challenge in my eyes, even if it is a nice shot" syndrome.


How can you make such guarantees?
 10/11/2004 01:29:42 AM · #10
Originally posted by dunces:
There's no place for your eyes to settle onto. That seems to be a really big drawback. I think the colors are wonderful.


Interesting, I haven't thought of that, although I kind of thought that the top tigers brought you into the picture and the tree brought you down to the lower tiger, which was the most interesting one, and your eyes kind of settle on that. But maybe I'm reading too much into my own shot. Thanks for giving me something else to think about!
 10/11/2004 01:30:56 AM · #11
Originally posted by mk:
As a few others commented, it feels a little too oversaturated for me. The tigers are almost neon looking. Other than that, it was a good shot.


I guess maybe I should just back off a little on saturation, knowing that monitors are obviously displaying it so differently. :)
10/11/2004 01:35:49 AM · #12
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by Artyste:

I can guarantee this entry recieved so many low scores because of it's obvious connection to being in a zoo.
You just happened to fall victim to the "Doesn't meet the challenge in my eyes, even if it is a nice shot" syndrome.


How can you make such guarantees?


I'm psychic :)
 10/11/2004 01:38:57 AM · #13
You should have submitted this!
10/11/2004 01:40:42 AM · #14
I hope you don't mind, and I know this is teeny tiny now, but I would have tried to crop to something like this:


Just my 2 cents.
 10/11/2004 01:41:29 AM · #15
Originally posted by JPR:
You should have submitted this!


I felt this was better, too, but I was talked out of it... :) Thanks for letting me know. Sigh...
 10/11/2004 01:42:52 AM · #16
Originally posted by dartompkins:
I hope you don't mind, and I know this is teeny tiny now, but I would have tried to crop to something like this:


Just my 2 cents.


I just think it draws too much attention to his blurry paw... that's why I kept the zoomed out version. It just didn't seem so noticeable in the original shot.
 10/11/2004 01:43:47 AM · #17
Lori the over saturation played a big part in your score. It looks over saturated on my Powerbook and on my G5
 10/11/2004 01:45:12 AM · #18
Originally posted by dartompkins:
I hope you don't mind, and I know this is teeny tiny now, but I would have tried to crop to something like this:


Just my 2 cents.


This would've made the composition a lot better. The viewers eyes have someplace to rest their eyes. Me likey.
 10/11/2004 01:45:29 AM · #19
Originally posted by doctornick:
Lori the over saturation played a big part in your score. It looks over saturated on my Powerbook and on my G5


I have a powerbook G4 and a G5 (with a 23" flat screen display). Can I ask what moniter settings your machines are calibrated to?
 10/11/2004 01:47:07 AM · #20
Originally posted by annasense:
Originally posted by dartompkins:
I hope you don't mind, and I know this is teeny tiny now, but I would have tried to crop to something like this:


Just my 2 cents.


I just think it draws too much attention to his blurry paw... that's why I kept the zoomed out version. It just didn't seem so noticeable in the original shot.


I agree with you on the blurry paw. It was the first thing I noticed in the cropped picture. Even though dartompkins did a good job.
 10/11/2004 01:47:54 AM · #21
Originally posted by annasense:
Originally posted by doctornick:
Lori the over saturation played a big part in your score. It looks over saturated on my Powerbook and on my G5


I have a powerbook G4 and a G5 (with a 23" flat screen display). Can I ask what moniter settings your machines are calibrated to?


I have the 20' Apple Cinema Display at the default Apple setting.
 10/11/2004 01:49:12 AM · #22
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by annasense:
Originally posted by doctornick:
Lori the over saturation played a big part in your score. It looks over saturated on my Powerbook and on my G5


I have a powerbook G4 and a G5 (with a 23" flat screen display). Can I ask what moniter settings your machines are calibrated to?


I have the 20' Apple Cinema Display at the default Apple setting.


thank you, is that just Apple RGB? and what about your powerbook? same?

Message edited by author 2004-10-11 01:50:12.
 10/11/2004 01:51:50 AM · #23
yup:)
 10/11/2004 01:52:57 AM · #24
Originally posted by doctornick:
yup:)


Cool. :) Thank you again.
10/11/2004 02:17:22 AM · #25
annasense the other day i posted somtehing like that! sometimes when you think you just got the great foto this happens. people sometimes have diferente ways to see things. i have taken shots that i really like and got really low rated, and maybe the weren't so good after all, and there is this foto that i got really high and i didn't really liked so much that foto! just keep your own thoughts about what you did. its just my opinion! but its a nice picture i like it
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/01/2025 10:51:47 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: 08/01/2025 10:51:47 AM EDT.