| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/22/2004 02:30:15 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
For me, this is one challenge where I'm am going to weigh the emotive aspect of the photograph much heavier than the technical aspect. In that regard, in my first run through, I don't see so many really low scores as some others have observed. |
So if i can prove to you i love my _____ that i took a pic of for a challenge, you will ignroe the technical and compositional mertis or lack there of and score me higher?
Why should the 'rules' change because of the subject matter in the photograph?
I love my child, but I'll not pay for a bad portrait of him, nor hang it on the wall. The snaps of me as a child my parents took may bring back memories to me and them, but you don't really want to see them, do you? Lots of love in them...i bet they're all 10s!
I saw too many snap shots - just a pic of the pet regardless of the lighting, composition or what crap is in the background. I see very little effort or thought in many of the entries. I just cannot give a better than below average score to a below average entry.
i'd love to comment on them all as to what could be done to improve them...but if the photographer cannot see how far off the mark they are my comments will be wasted.
Love is blind. Apparently it blinded the photographers. Let's not have it blind the voters too!
|
|
|
|
12/22/2004 02:47:11 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
So if i can prove to you i love my _____ that i took a pic of for a challenge, you will ignroe the technical and compositional mertis or lack there of and score me higher?
|
You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say. I said nothing of "ignoring" anything. What I said was that I'll weigh the emotive aspect of the image heavier than the technical detail.
Now I ask you, how do you think the linked photo by henri cartier-bresson (one of his signature images) would have done here at DPC? My guess is not better than low 5's.
Now I'm not asking you to like Bresson's work, just trying to illustrate a point - that there is more to the art of photography than the flaws that are "easy" to see. I'm not without guilt here either.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2004 02:50:23 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Pat: those are both touching pictures with a strong emotional connection. I would have rated either of them highly in the challenge.
Dogs are amazing creatures, and I'm glad that Geordie is there for you. |
Thank you Eddy. I appreciate your comments. I love him to bits. And he loves me. And I know he misses my husband. Incredible animals so I will think more of the emotive quality of the photos in this challenge when I'm voting. Guess it's just that I'm close to it at this time.
Geordie
Now I will leave. Geordie and I are going Christmas shopping. LOL
Merry Christmas Everyone!
|
|
|
|
12/22/2004 03:27:45 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
In this respect, I wonder how the works of Henri Cartier-Bresson would have played here. Comments would be image is not tack sharp, distracting backgrounds, to dark, blown highlights etc. All valid for a lot of his work - but the emotive nature of his eye is what made him stand apart, not the techical detail.
I think we vote things too technically here and don't step back and look at what the image is actually saying.
//www.henricartierbresson.org/hcb/home_fr.htm |
HCB was a hack. His "decisive moment" style of "street photography" wears on me like nails on a chalkboard. Yes, I'm commiting heresy with my opinion and if I could judge him in this forum I'd most likely score his poorly exposed, out-of-focus shots low. I find nothing interesting or endearing in 99% of his images.
P. |
|
|
|
12/22/2004 03:39:29 PM · #30 |
When I took my dogs photo, it was not properly lit, nor proper composition, focus could have been better but it was KC being KC, and everything else be dammed!
This subject should be judged more on the impact of what the image shows rather than following all the rules.
Try and get a dog to pose like KC did and make it look like he is having fun... good luck!
|
|
|
|
12/22/2004 03:48:13 PM · #31 |
To cut those photographers who entered a little slack, I would suggest that this challenge topic begged for the field of entries we got. I'll be curious to see how many entries came from the more "accomplished" photographers on the site. Based on the low number of entries, I'm guessing a lot of them chose to sit this one out.
It is possible to do a great shot that meets this topic, and this could have been seen as an opportunity to really stretch to achieve something beautiful. As a masters/invitational challenge, I would have loved to see what some of the better photographers here would have come up with. But as an open challenge, it sort of sat out there as a "show us your pet" thread.
This whole challenge reminded me of John Setzler's Your Kids and Your Pets "rant" last summer. I didn't notice, but if a link to this thread wasn't brought up during the last week, it should have been. It might have spurred people to be more creative and better aware of the need to present shots that are technically well done as well as emotive. |
|
|
|
12/22/2004 03:51:49 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by SNAP1:
When I took my dogs photo, it was not properly lit, nor proper composition, focus could have been better but it was KC being KC, and everything else be dammed!
This subject should be judged more on the impact of what the image shows rather than following all the rules.
Try and get a dog to pose like KC did and make it look like he is having fun... good luck! |
Sorry, but the point of these competitions is to create good photographs, not show off the cool pose your dog was in. If you accomplish both, excellent. If the photo looks bad, so....? Was the challenge to get dogs to strike cool poses, or to take good photos? The latter is always the foremost point. |
|
|
|
12/22/2004 04:10:08 PM · #33 |
I am afraid that many people peek at the collection of photos in this challenge, see the depressing monotony of many entries, and decide not to vote. So it seems that most of the people voting in this challenge (so far, at least) are the ones who entered in this contest.
I would like to encourage more sensible members to get out and vote. This is a photography competition, and not pet beauty pagent, so if it is a poor photo, it should be marked as such, even if the dog (cat, hamster,...) is cute.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2004 04:39:33 PM · #34 |
I guess we are all different...
Being a pet lover, I have to say that I never enjoyed browsing through the pictures of a challenge before as much as this one.
While I agree that there are some that might not be very artistically strong, I still loved seeing the bond and emotions captured, and there were a few that were more than just an average snapshot, maybe you didn't look close enough.
Sure I didn't score everything high, but I have never given this many high scores before!
I want to say this,
Good Job to everyone that entered! And good luck :) |
|
|
|
12/22/2004 04:40:17 PM · #35 |
| I didn't enter this challenge, Tucker wasn't feeling particularly photogenic :) But I'm looking forward to voting in it just as I do other challenges. I look at voting as another learning opportunity. I did a quick look through and saw several that caught my eye right away. |
|
|
|
12/22/2004 04:46:50 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Gatorguy:
For me, this is one challenge where I'm am going to weigh the emotive aspect of the photograph much heavier than the technical aspect. In that regard, in my first run through, I don't see so many really low scores as some others have observed.
In this respect, I wonder how the works of Henri Cartier-Bresson would have played here. Comments would be image is not tack sharp, distracting backgrounds, to dark, blown highlights etc. All valid for a lot of his work - but the emotive nature of his eye is what made him stand apart, not the techical detail.
I think we vote things too technically here and don't step back and look at what the image is actually saying.
//www.henricartierbresson.org/hcb/home_fr.htm |
Some people have missed the entire point of my post, particularily the fact that emotion is a great thing in photography.
My point is that the challenge is to capture the emotion at the scene on film (or sensor).
Just because there's something neat or emotional going on doesn't mean it's a good photograph. I can't vote something good because I've been able to "step into the photographer's shoes" with the knowledge that he/she loves pooky and then evaluate the image. Show the sentiment to me photographically...then you've done well.
That's the challenge, I think.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2004 05:30:04 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Originally posted by cloudsme:
Look on the brite side....there are no woody shots :) |
Oooh, woody IS a non-electronic mechanical man though! |
oh no. Now that challenge is endangered :)
|
|
|
|
12/24/2004 02:34:30 AM · #38 |
Votes: 196
Views: 277
Avg Vote: 4.4133
Comments: 5
Favorites: 0
This score is just about where I thought it would be.
My voting for this challenge:
10 - 1
09 - 2
08 - 4
07 - 8
06 - 16
Message edited by author 2004-12-24 02:36:47. |
|
|
|
12/24/2004 04:45:40 AM · #39 |
This is the first challenge I've participated in so I'm pretty happy with my very average rating so far :)
Votes: 186
Views: 231
Avg Vote: 5.1559
Comments: 3
Favorites: 0
I actually expected a lower score since the photo I submitted was a spur of the moment *snapshot* :) |
|
|
|
12/26/2004 04:34:35 PM · #40 |
"Capture the affectionate relationships that exist between pets and their owners" - from the challenge description.
So, what's your view on the photos that only visually show a pet without a person, or vice versa? I feel that even if a person or pet is "missing" from the photo, but the photo clearly shows such a relationship, then it fits the challenge. But the comments I'm getting suggest otherwise.... |
|
|
|
12/26/2004 04:49:36 PM · #41 |
Depends if the relationship is obvious, if its not then ...
In my marking scheme, if I can see a relationship, or if there's both a pet and a person, then the mark HAS to be above 5.
If I can't spot the link, then 5 is tha maximum, no matter how good the image.
Thats just my view - I'm sure there are alrernative views, equally valid. |
|
|
|
12/27/2004 11:56:02 AM · #42 |
Votes: 262
Views: 334
Avg Vote: 5.1985
Comments: 9
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 12/27/04 11:00 am
I didnt think my entry was very good...and I am used to competing against all of you wonderful photographers, but this whole challenge just has some bad photo's in it. I will be the first to say, I didnt do as much technically as I could, so I expected to score low, but what I am wondering is...Where are all the real photographers in this challange? |
|
|
|
12/27/2004 12:57:44 PM · #43 |
| Waaayyyy too many snapshot-esque photos to be an interesting challenge. Feelings-schmeelings I say! In the new challenge (Candid II) the SC's actually have to point out to keep good photographic practices in mind when shooting. LOL. That should tell us all a lot. |
|
|
|
12/27/2004 12:59:05 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by sibeling:
...I feel that even if a person or pet is "missing" from the photo, but the photo clearly shows such a relationship, then it fits the challenge. But the comments I'm getting suggest otherwise.... |
It's not that people don't get or like the concept, just that they don't get or like your particular attempt at it. |
|
|
|
12/27/2004 02:25:24 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
Waaayyyy too many snapshot-esque photos to be an interesting challenge. Feelings-schmeelings I say! In the new challenge (Candid II) the SC's actually have to point out to keep good photographic practices in mind when shooting. LOL. That should tell us all a lot. |
If you look at the previous Candid Challenge, you will see that they pointed out to keep good photographic practices in mind during that challenge too so either they can predict the future or they feel it needs to be said for that particular challenge.
In other words their wording has no bearing on the current Pet challenge. |
|
|
|
12/27/2004 02:26:41 PM · #46 |
Well I entered this one, I'm a sucker for animals and forgot the old theatre dictum regarding children and animals (Shudders) I will agree the heart has ruled the head rather than the camera in this shallenge.
Mind you animals can be as bloody minded and uncooperative as humans as I found when shooting this one 1 1/2 hours and I got a couple of half decent ones to choose from, so it isnt the lack of trying for some. |
|
|
|
12/27/2004 03:06:36 PM · #47 |
I'm not seeing very high scores posted in this thread. Is it possible that this will be the lowest scoring winner ever? (If so, I might not be in too bad shape.) :-}
|
|
|
|
12/27/2004 03:37:23 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Paige:
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
Waaayyyy too many snapshot-esque photos to be an interesting challenge. Feelings-schmeelings I say! In the new challenge (Candid II) the SC's actually have to point out to keep good photographic practices in mind when shooting. LOL. That should tell us all a lot. |
If you look at the previous Candid Challenge, you will see that they pointed out to keep good photographic practices in mind during that challenge too so either they can predict the future or they feel it needs to be said for that particular challenge.
In other words their wording has no bearing on the current Pet challenge. |
It's still really funny if you look at it that way.
|
|
|
|
12/27/2004 04:06:54 PM · #49 |
| I think they all suck, and we need to tell whoever wins, hey congrats you lucky son-of-a-gun: yours sucked the least. |
|
|
|
12/27/2004 04:16:12 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by sprite777:
I think they all suck, and we need to tell whoever wins, hey congrats you lucky son-of-a-gun: yours sucked the least. |
hehe...you're not a politician, are you?
|
|
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 05:34:28 PM EDT.
