| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/28/2005 03:18:31 AM · #1 |
The Challenges asked - Photograph anything relating to the number 3.
This is where my dimness starts.
I see the key words being "relating to".
So for me a good entry would be a
Tri- dent
Tri-Star
Tri-cycle
Tri -ludan (he he)
In fact any Tri-something or other
3 Blind Mice
3 Wise Men
3 Stooges. Etc.
I do not necessarily see grouping 3 random objects together as relating to 3.
So am are being very narrow in my thoughts â€Â¦..
Am I being Dim.....
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 03:25:12 AM · #2 |
Since you asked.... yes you are being dim.
the challenge said "Photograph anything relating to the number 3"
I cannot possible see how a grouping of 3 objects does not satisfy the challenge. Anything called a tri-something is called that because it has to do with the number 3. Tri-cycle has 3 tires... Guess what a group of three is called? A tri-o... Now go back and revote on the images :-)
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 05:00:52 AM · #3 |
Yes, I agree any photo with 3 of anything, or a single object with three elements, the number 3, the word 'three', in fact its an open challenge, so long as there is some relationship to '3'.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 05:10:50 AM · #4 |
Dim? yes. Pedantic? yes.
3 objects patently relates to the number three. how much more obvious can you get? |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 05:27:32 AM · #5 |
you said.
So am are being very narrow in my thoughts â€Â¦..
my answer.
sadly enough, yes. We seems to have alot of these thoughts, not just you don't worry. People are to narrow minded when it comes to challenge and take all of the description too literally. The challenges are suppose to be fun. People are going to deap in the description and are forgetting the main goal of the challenge. it's 3, can't be simpler than that.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 06:02:17 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
Dim? yes. Pedantic? yes.
3 objects patently relates to the number three. how much more obvious can you get? |
Dim - Probably
Pedantic - If asking about ones understanding of a challenge is pedantic then I'm guilty, however this is normally associated with a trivial issue. Stating one initial perceptions of the scope of a challenge would not normally be considered trivial.
The purpose of this was to clarrify things for me, as having had a cursory scan of the images I felt that my initial interpretation may be off the mark, and I wanted to bounce the idea about.
So thanks all for your feedback.
Looks like any three will do.
Three of a kind, ménage àtrios, or three cows in a field.. |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 02:25:20 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Artan:
Originally posted by Pedro:
Dim? yes. Pedantic? yes.
3 objects patently relates to the number three. how much more obvious can you get? |
Dim - Probably
Pedantic - If asking about ones understanding of a challenge is pedantic then I'm guilty, however this is normally associated with a trivial issue. Stating one initial perceptions of the scope of a challenge would not normally be considered trivial.
The purpose of this was to clarrify things for me, as having had a cursory scan of the images I felt that my initial interpretation may be off the mark, and I wanted to bounce the idea about.
So thanks all for your feedback.
Looks like any three will do.
Three of a kind, ménage àtrios, or three cows in a field.. |
Apologies Ian - I was maybe a little bitchy when I responded to your post last night. I get frustrated by the semantic debates that invariably arise to anal-yze the minutiae in the wording of each challenge. I recognise now that you were just throwing it out there for debate to help you form your opinion.
so ignore the bitchy part, and extract my opinion from the above statement :) Essentially I think broad strokes are acceptable for this challenge (and most others truth be known).
The topics are meant to inspire creativity, not contain it.
Peace
P-ness
Message edited by author 2005-01-28 14:53:06. |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 02:30:19 PM · #8 |
Also, there is an important element missing for this discussion regarding "3".
I have learned in several different photography classes that when compossing objects, ALWAYS stick with odd numbers. When given the choice of taking a shot with two of something, or moving a little and taking the same shot with three of something, always take the three.
The reason for this is flow. Your eye will naturally follow a path through the three objects. However, if there are only two, you will most likely bounce back and forth and this makes for an uncomfortable composition.
My three cents....for what it's worth.
Message edited by author 2005-01-28 14:31:09.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 02:36:14 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Kneeforu:
Your eye will naturally follow a path through the three objects. However, if there are only two, you will most likely bounce back and forth and this makes for an uncomfortable composition.
|
Well this helps explain why my eyes dart back and forth when I see a photo of a topless woman.
Sorry, that was rather pathetic. |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 02:54:26 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by rscorp:
Originally posted by Kneeforu:
Your eye will naturally follow a path through the three objects. However, if there are only two, you will most likely bounce back and forth and this makes for an uncomfortable composition.
|
Well this helps explain why my eyes dart back and forth when I see a photo of a topless woman.
Sorry, that was rather pathetic. |
you're right. the flow would be much more natural if she were bottomless too. |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 03:11:18 PM · #11 |
I agree - and I would post an objection about the way mine is being voted on, but it would give it away as it was the only one done in that manner.
Oh well, I like it, and others not on this site went "WOW", so....
On to the next challenge!
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 03:11:48 PM · #12 |
i'd hate to see what happens when you actually 'see' a topless woman...
Originally posted by rscorp:
Well this helps explain why my eyes dart back and forth when I see a photo of a topless woman. |
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 03:21:37 PM · #13 |
I was surprised I didn't see:
1. Tripod
2. Tricycle
3. Blue-Red-Yellow Ribbon
4. Three leaf clover
Message edited by author 2005-01-28 15:22:42. |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 03:26:31 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by SDW65:
I was surprised I didn't see:
1. Tripod
2. Tricycle
3. Blue-Red-Yellow Ribbon
4. Three leaf clover |
you're just not looking closely enough :) |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 03:37:06 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
Originally posted by SDW65:
I was surprised I didn't see:
1. Tripod
2. Tricycle
3. Blue-Red-Yellow Ribbon
4. Three leaf clover |
you're just not looking closely enough :) |
Sorry went back trough and did not see any of the above. I seen Blue-Red-Yellow colors but not ribbons. My eyes must be bad today. I need to wait to tomorrow to vote if they are there and I can't see them. :)
I guess the tripod not being there surprised me the most
Message edited by author 2005-01-28 15:38:57. |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 03:55:59 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by SDW65:
Sorry went back trough and did not see any of the above. I seen Blue-Red-Yellow colors but not ribbons. My eyes must be bad today. I need to wait to tomorrow to vote if they are there and I can't see them. :)
I guess the tripod not being there surprised me the most |
Look still harder (re: 3-leaf clover)
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 04:01:10 PM · #17 |
Tripod not being seen is probably due to the fact that it's already under the camera!
|
|
|
|
01/28/2005 04:07:17 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by atsxus:
Originally posted by SDW65:
Sorry went back trough and did not see any of the above. I seen Blue-Red-Yellow colors but not ribbons. My eyes must be bad today. I need to wait to tomorrow to vote if they are there and I can't see them. :)
I guess the tripod not being there surprised me the most |
Look still harder (re: 3-leaf clover) |
Found it! Thanks [ Like I said, I know I will wait to vote tomorrow. My eyes are not seeing clearly today I guess]. |
|
|
|
01/28/2005 04:14:43 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
Originally posted by rscorp:
Originally posted by Kneeforu:
Your eye will naturally follow a path through the three objects. However, if there are only two, you will most likely bounce back and forth and this makes for an uncomfortable composition. |
Well this helps explain why my eyes dart back and forth when I see a photo of a topless woman. |
you're right. the flow would be much more natural if she were bottomless too. |
Very true :)
As to the OP, I'm a bit disappointed after a quick glace through submissions. I didn't enter, because I only got one good idea and I couldn't find the right subject. Couple of days ago there was a car parked on the roadside close to me with a broken axle and only three wheels still under it, I even had the title down pat (sometimes three ain't good enough, or three out of four or even 3/4 not to be confused with 4/3)
I think for this kind of challenge things that are three-fold are the best, like tricycle rather than a bunch of 3 unrelated wheels. A tripod rather than 3 monopods (unless in an irony/humor way, of course).
So I kinda agree with Artan.
|
|
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 03:25:09 AM EDT.
