| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/05/2002 01:46:42 AM · #26 |
JohnSeltzer, I think the solution would probably be in the voting. When we have so many people that vote 1's for all pictures they don't think fit *their* definition of the challenge, it's no wonder that there are 50 pictures of lakes in the "Reflections Without Mirrors" challenge. It just gets boring. Even the good pictures for this challenge--the ones I have rated highly, and will probably rank in the top 10--have very similar pictures also in the challenge. It just doesn't show a lot of creativity, in my opinion. Technical expertise, yes. Creativity, no.
* This message has been edited by an administrator (lisae) on 10/5/2002 2:00:05 AM - To head off a personal exchange of words :). |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 02:54:43 AM · #27 |
The literal inturpretation, being the most difficult to meet astheticly, is most easily avoided thru clever linguistics. Meet the challange or avoid it claiming poetic liscense. Take the score you get. For all of the rules, this one seems the clearest.
By the way,while I have a fair score on this weeks challange, I am being busted for my creativity. 1/3 of comments are telling me not to do what the other 2/3 are giving me good scores for having done. Good thing I like to laugh!
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/5/2002 2:57:42 AM. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 10:55:12 AM · #28 |
the thing is, there are many many people who pay lip service to the idea of creative interpretations of a challenge, yet when it comes down to taking a public stand in favor of that, few step up to the mic :).
some do, though, and i applaud those people. you rock : )....
the only way it's going to ever change is from the grass roots.
if every single person takes responsibility for their share of it, and goes against the grain and against their fear of getting a bad score (it's not like your dpc score is going to affect your bank account or frequent flyer miles or anything tangible :)), and decides to consciously open their minds to other's ideas (done well, i agree), then there can be a change. otherwise, it's gonna stay status quo.
it also wouldnt hurt, since so few people actually read the forums, if the challenge description contained the exhortation: "Be as creative and open minded as possible in your shooting AND your voting". :) |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 10:56:06 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by Journey:
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
[i]Originally posted by Journey:
[i] The US apparently wasn't worth the bother of investing in a restaurant guide and they reported on their trip to San Francisco as it being a "hamburger town" :)
bwahahaha .. San Francisco has more restaurants per capita than any other city in North America ..
|
|
|
|
10/05/2002 10:57:15 AM · #30 |
why do you think that is?
Originally posted by lina:
This site scares off anyone creative (in a non-literal sense), don't you know?
*edited to add the paratheses
|
|
|
|
10/05/2002 12:52:47 PM · #31 |
Well, lets see here. I'm sure to get "boo'ed" off the stage, but with all the Lineary/Literal-mind people here who have consistently voted my taking artistic liberties as worthy of 1's, 2's and 3's, I for one will hold you all to way I'm being judged and will be looking for trash, garbage, waste in a very literal way.
(This message is bound to cause a landslide of flaming. Good thing I'm only joking.) |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 02:02:05 PM · #32 |
Let me be just a bit clearer: Creative "inturpritation" is just a way to avoid meeting the challange, allowing you to submit any thing you want and congratulating yourself for being clever. You miss out on the intellectual exercise offered by the challange. But that is yours to choose.
Most of us can turn a phrase better than we can take a picture. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 02:36:00 PM · #33 |
If somebody can take a picture of trash, garbage or waste, in a literal way, and make it look good, is a much better photographer than somebody getting "creative", imo.
It's garbage! This is not beautiful landscapes, or flowers or whatever.
We are talking garbage. It would be much easier to take an artsy, or emotional picture of some homeless guy, than say, coffee grounds. If you can make coffee grounds appealling, now that's creativity. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 02:42:52 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by lina:
This site scares off anyone creative (in a non-literal sense), don't you know?
I disagree with you Lina... I think most folks that take creative license with the challenges aren't scared all that easily.
I think the solution here is for the non-literal folks to take pride in the 1 2 & 3s they receive from the literal folks... If you want to buck the system, that's fine... But it doesn't make sense to think the system will enjoy it :)
Dare to be different, then accept the different score. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 02:50:32 PM · #35 |
| myqyl- I think your logic is ridiculous. You are only saying this because you are one of the people that give bad scores for not "meeting" the challenge (to your definition of the challenge). Maybe if you feel the need to justify your voting, you aren't doing it the right way. Just a suggestion. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 03:15:29 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by lina:
myqyl- I think your logic is ridiculous. You are only saying this because you are one of the people that give bad scores for not "meeting" the challenge (to your definition of the challenge). Maybe if you feel the need to justify your voting, you aren't doing it the right way. Just a suggestion.
What do you base this on? Actually I have given extra points for creatively not meeting the challenge. Can you give me an example of when I've voted down a shot for not meeting my definition of a challenge? Now that you have discovered this shortcoming of mine, I eagerly await examples (as I'm certain you wouldn't just 'say' this without some reason to believe it's true).
Or were you just being 'creative' with the truth? :) If so I'll give your post a couple of extra points for a unique and creative interpretation of reality :)
Edit : It just occurred to me that you can't see what I've scored shots, so if you'd like to give an example of a well shot photo that didn't stick to the literal wording of the challenge but took a creative approach, and that you believe (for some unknown reason) that I had voted down, I'd be glad to reply with my vote and a reason for that vote. Obviously any photo with the exception of this weeks entries or any challenge before City Life, since that's when I started here.
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/5/2002 3:21:32 PM. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 04:01:35 PM · #37 |
there are some challenges where i believe this true. in my mind there seem to be 'concept' challenges, like this one, red, fear, childhood, etc, and 'technical' challenges, like 'night', 'macro', 'reflections' transparency, etc. .
i think if you dont follow the technical challenge, then you are missing the point of the challenge. someone who turns in a landscape shot to a 'macro' challenge and titles it 'macrocosm.' that's kind of weak.
but there are lots of interpretations of garbage that are really meaningfully related to the concept of the trash and throwing away.
i think that the 'concept' challenges have a wider range of interpretation simply because who is one person to say to another that their interpretation of the challenge is wrong? these should be the challenges where the wide range of creativity can be exhibited :). i submit to you that by not considering the wider implications of a concept, you in fact are the one missing out on the intellectual exercise. for example thinking you have to take a picture of something in your trash can when you could be making a much larger statement about the world.
yes, many people can turn a phrase, but just because you have a clever concept does not mean you can take a photograph to do that phrase justice :). not to mention the phrase still has to be relevant.
yeah, it's hard to take a good picture of coffee grounds. that's why few do .. i'd rather see more interesting pictures with thought put into them, then a whole pile of boring pictures with no deeper meaning, literally plucked out of someone's garbage can :).
Originally posted by rapsiii3:
Let me be just a bit clearer: Creative "inturpritation" is just a way to avoid meeting the challange, allowing you to submit any thing you want and congratulating yourself for being clever. You miss out on the intellectual exercise offered by the challange. But that is yours to choose.
Most of us can turn a phrase better than we can take a picture.
|
|
|
|
10/05/2002 04:58:25 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
i'd rather see more interesting pictures with thought put into them, then a whole pile of boring pictures with no deeper meaning, literally plucked out of someone's garbage can :).
That appears to be the real challenge! Produce a non-boring picture of "garbage", what ever that means to you. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 06:00:29 PM · #39 |
Edit : It just occurred to me that you can't see what I've scored shots, so if you'd like to give an example of a well shot photo that didn't stick to the literal wording of the challenge but took a creative approach, and that you believe (for some unknown reason) that I had voted down, I'd be glad to reply with my vote and a reason for that vote. Obviously any photo with the exception of this weeks entries or any challenge before City Life, since that's when I started here
I'm just basing this on the comment you left for my photo, but of course I don't know what you actually scored it. So I wasn't *just* being creative. |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 06:46:22 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by lina:
I'm just basing this on the comment you left for my photo, but of course I don't know what you actually scored it. So I wasn't *just* being creative.
Since that relates to this challenge, it's probably best if we wait till Monday morning to be more specific :) I'll strive to explain my comment then :) |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 08:13:33 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by rapsiii3:
Most of us can turn a phrase better than we can take a picture.
I'm sure I can -- I've had much more practice. However, I'd be prepared to submit my current entry (Reflections...) untitled and defend it against any claim regarding meeting the challenge either literally or figuratively. Anyone who voted it down for technical grounds or just didn't "grab" them I am fine with, but I get the impression that there are some folks who will vote down a "creative interpretation" even if it meets the letter of the challenge... |
|
|
|
10/05/2002 08:27:46 PM · #42 |
| For this garbage challange my submission contains three distinct intrupretations, literal, philosophical, and semantic. I am not in the least offended by creative intrupretation. However, unless the challange is meet as intended by the author, a clever title is just a cover up for failure. Some challanges are suited to a wide range of inturpretation. Childhood, red, ect. But this one rather stinks, in fact must stink, or at least hold the threat. I'll give some latitude in my voteing. A picture of some old hobo picking a hamburger up off of the street might work, but a picture of some old hobo just walking down the street would go well beyond the challange intentions (as I see them). |
|
|
|
10/06/2002 11:19:59 PM · #43 |
Apart from just Garbage, we have the whole open concept of "waste". There are so many possibilities here! I spent the week shooting plain old garbage, then realised that this was a waste of time! I totally welcome any different interpretations!
* This message has been edited by the author on 10/6/2002 11:21:45 PM. |
|
|
|
10/06/2002 11:26:54 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by MarkRob:
Back before Chex Mix was bagged and marketed as such, my family used to call it "Trash". I hope people get it :) Just kidding... I am no fool, I am going with GeneralE on this one :)
I would have gotten it. When I was in college, I worked at a bookstore. We always kept a bag of stuff like that in the back and called it trash. I thought about it -- at least one person would have gotten it!
|
|
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: 07/31/2025 03:45:10 PM EDT.
