| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/13/2005 03:49:59 PM · #26 |
Just something to think about: if there was a challenge that stated "use sunlight to create the impact of your photo" would we all be expected to take a photo of the sun?
This reminds me of the abandoned building challenge where some people thought only photos of entire buildings (i.e. not just a couple walls) should score high. Yet I'm sure that at least some of them scored photos of just heads/torsos high in the people challenge. So if half a building is not a building, why is half a person considered a person?
However, you do have to realize that there are people who are awestruck by nearly every image and run around giving out tens to everything, so it balances out. It's unlikely that your photo will bomb due to a few DNMC "nazis."
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 03:53:05 PM · #27 |
P.S. Sorry about the ettiquette mistake. It won't happen again. Forget it ever happened:)
Thanks for the welcome.
Justin |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 03:53:09 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by permapier:
Rose,
I mean my second time to enter a contest. I am a newcomer. Just curious about what constitutes a great photo and how I can do better.
Justin |
Oh, ok. I was a bit perplexed there. LOL....
I set my own personal goals (which at the moment I am miserably failing at with my candlelight) in challenges and try to meet those more than thinking about what is good or isn't good for scores. I would think a 5.3 is good. It depends a lot on the number of entries and on some other threads you will see that others post their scores too, and they can be higher or lower to your own.
Anyway, welcome to the site and my best to you in the challenges to come!!!
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 03:56:17 PM · #29 |
"Just something to think about: if there was a challenge that stated "use sunlight to create the impact of your photo" would we all be expected to take a photo of the sun?"
Jpeters, I think this is unfortunately a bad analogy. The sun spans the entire planet ...LOL..so to compare it to a candle or candlelight is a bit understated. However, if it was sunlight, I would expect to see sunlight and not a photo with little to no light in it at all, yes. As for abandoned buildings and using walls? Not sure on that one. I would prefer to see the whole building myself, since it was about abandoned building and not broken down walls. I guess it will always be to each his/her own.
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 03:58:31 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by A1275:
Permapier, you aren't supposed to reveal your challenge entry during voting. This is really more a matter of site etiquette; you may wish to edit your post to remove the title of your entry.
A score of 5.3 is not really a bad score, especially for a second entry. |
Ditto...
5.3 is about average on this site. So that is pretty good..if 250 people vote on it then at least 125 people thought it was a good attempt!
The biggest hurdles any photo have to overcome here are basic technical faults.
Make sure the exposure, the focus and the contrast and color are correct and you will usually stay out of the cellar.
On the other hand..mess with any of the above..even on purpose..and you will get slapped down hard.
Many photos I vote low are simply not appealing. They are very "snap shot like" meaning..constrast is low, the photo is cluttered, there is no compelling element or subject. Basically it looks like a hurried photo done with a very cheap point and shoot with no post processing.
I have a photo in one challenge that is perfect in all technical aspects and it is around a 6....I don't really care for it but a 6 is pretty good.
I have another photo that I plan on having printed to poster size (16" x 24") and it is at a 5.25 score. In my opinion, It is superior in creativity, color and "out of the box" thinking compared to the photo being score above a 6. The scores of these two photo's should be reversed..but that ain't the way this site works..and I am cool with that.
Message edited by author 2005-12-13 16:02:40. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 03:58:55 PM · #31 |
P.S. "fallen candles is not the name of my entry to be exact. But in the future, I will make no refrence to the fact.
Thanks for all of the help.
Justin |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:03:48 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by jpeters:
Just something to think about: if there was a challenge that stated "use sunlight to create the impact of your photo" would we all be expected to take a photo of the sun?
|
I think this is a great analogy. The light source does not need to be in the frame to have an overall impact on the image. Same with the "Single Light Source" challenges.
Perhaps those voters who originally voted with such a strict interpretation could broaden their horizons a bit and go adjust their votes accordingly. Why not come from a positive point of view and give the photographer the benefit of the doubt that the light source was indeed a candle?
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:05:29 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Well, you know? It is all semantics really. This can be argued till the cows come home (utoh, another good pun to use! :)
|
That is my point really. Why vote based on the sematics of the challenge description? If one votes on each photo in this challenge, and finds that in all cases where no candle is visible the photo would have been improved by including it, by all means, that's fine. However, to simply vote down any image without a candle without judging it on its own merits (and whether the addition of the candle itself would have a positive or negative impact, or none at all), is essentially saying that that interpretation of the description is... Wrong?! I think you'd agree that that is not the case, even if you do feel that in most cases the inclusion of a flame strengthens the photo.
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Someone voted mine down too. Not for the candle. Not for the flame. Not for the composition, the focus, lighting, or anything else that should have been taken into consideration. But because they simply didn't understand why I used the background I did. |
I don't really see anything wrong with that honestly (in theory anyway--without seeing the photo or the comment). If they examined your photo, and found that the background was distracting/detracted from it/seemed out of place/etc then that is valid. It's an opinion. Similarly, if they don't understand it, sure, maybe they didn't take the time to consider it (though if they commented it suggests this is not the case), or maybe they just... dont' get it. Sometimes that happens. To me, it is still a valid comment and may be a valid reason to vote something lower than you otherwise would--perhaps the purpose of the background truly isn't clear. Anyway, all I'm trying to say is that there is a difference between misunderstanding/not getting a single entry and applying a universal penalty to a large group of entrys. Note that I'm not accusing you of doing so either, it's just that that is how it sounded from the way you phrased it. Could be just semantics. ;)
Originally posted by hokie:
You know what my biggest thrill is here? To see that idea that I didn't think of but wished I did. All of a sudden...my horizons expand...my creative juices flow |
Agreed. Even more so for challenges I didn't enter, either because I thought the subject was boring or because I couldn't think of anything. In either case, there are always more than a few images that manage to blow me away.
Message edited by author 2005-12-13 16:09:57. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:08:30 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
The sun spans the entire planet ...LOL..so to compare it to a candle or candlelight is a bit understated. However, if it was sunlight, I would expect to see sunlight and not a photo with little to no light in it at all, yes.
Rose |
I'm not sure I understand - are you saying that the sun can't be compared with candelight because one is big and the other small? What about a dramatic sunset - certainly sunlight would have created the impact of the photo, yet might not be visible in the frame. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:11:29 PM · #35 |
| what is a elongated shadow if not impact from the sun without the sun being in the picture. Very good example jduffett provided us with if you ask me. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:15:12 PM · #36 |
this whole concept of "voting down" is very much like punishment.
You didn't do what I wanted so now I will punish you.
Wouldn't it be better to "vote up" a picture and reward the people who are doing what you want them to? |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:16:45 PM · #37 |
Like I said, it is ALL semantics. We all make sense in what we are saying, but it is never going to change the votes.
By the way, my background was not really a chosen one for this challenge, but since the capture is unique and a one-time shot, and according to the editing rules I really couldn't change the entire background, I had no choice but to let it stay and just enter it and see what happens. It was really just a fluke of a shot, and not at all what I had in mind to enter. I may post the first idea later on though. In any case, the background isn't distracting at all, but you can't capture a moment and contrive the shot at the same time. However, the voters don't know that cause all they have to go by is a title and what they see (or don't see or know), so its all good. I accept that fact of life in these challenges.
To A1275, I think a sunset would have been a wonderful entry for a sun light challenge, and no, I am not saying that it is because one is big and one is small. Surely you can tell the big difference between sunlight and candlelight? Candlelight is not easy to photograph and keep all the technical elements that is mostly demanded be kept at this site. However, anyone can step out their door and go to the nearest park and get great shots during sunlight hours. That is the difference to me. Both equally challenging, as sunlight also produces a lot of glare, but if used correctly, just about ANY shot can be great with it. With candlelight it is a huge difference technically, and much more work to make impactful.
OH and let me add that sunset is obviously caused by the sun. Therefore, yes, impactful. You can't have a sunset with a candle, and that is the difference between the two challenges. LOW light conditions can be recreated with software. Take the shot with the candle and it becomes more impactful to me personally.
Rose
Message edited by author 2005-12-13 16:23:29.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:18:19 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
this whole concept of "voting down" is very much like punishment.
You didn't do what I wanted so now I will punish you.
Wouldn't it be better to "vote up" a picture and reward the people who are doing what you want them to? |
If you are asking me, I totally agree.
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:19:36 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by mesmeraj:
what is a elongated shadow if not impact from the sun without the sun being in the picture. Very good example jduffett provided us with if you ask me. |
I think a shadow from the sunlight would be a great entry, sure. That is a good example. Just the other day I was at a pond and took some outside shots when I saw the shadows of those feeding ducks in the shot. I thought it was cool, so yeah, I agree with you there.
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:26:30 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Well, you know? It is all semantics really. This can be argued till the cows come home (utoh, another good pun to use! :)
|
Just so you know, 'till the cows come home' is not a pun. Not to be picky, just thinking that there are going to be a WHOLE LOT of people making similar mistakes -- which will of course bring up a whole new thread for that challenge about what meets challenge and what doesn't. Goody. :)
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:27:58 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
To A1275, I think a sunset would have been a wonderful entry for a sun light challenge, and no, I am not saying that it is because one is big and one is small. Surely you can tell the big difference between sunlight and candlelight? Candlelight is not easy to photograph and keep all the technical elements that is mostly demanded be kept at this site. However, anyone can step out their door and go to the nearest park and get great shots during sunlight hours. That is the difference to me. Both equally challenging, as sunlight also produces a lot of glare, but if used correctly, just about ANY shot can be great with it. With candlelight it is a huge difference technically, and much more work to make impactful.
Rose |
Thank you for clarifying. While your explanation appears well thought-out, I'm afraid we must agree to disagree when it comes to the conclusions drawn from your premises. I've seen plenty of shots with natural sunlight where exposure is a huge problem. A good example of this is a person shot with the sun behind them - generally results in underexposure of the face or harsh shadows under the eyes/nose, unless a fill flash or reflector is used.
IMHO, it is not at all easy to get a great shot out-of-doors with natural sunlight. Time of day is a huge factor when using sunlight as a light source. The angle and intensity of any light source must be taken into account when composing your image.
In addition, there was no restriction on the number of candles or the amount of candlelight to be used to create impact. Those challenge entrants with cameras that don't perform well in low light could always have used more than one candle to create an interesting visual effect. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:33:40 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by hokie:
I have a photo in one challenge that is perfect in all technical aspects and it is around a 6....I don't really care for it but a 6 is pretty good.
I have another photo that I plan on having printed to poster size (16" x 24") and it is at a 5.25 score. In my opinion, It is superior in creativity, color and "out of the box" thinking compared to the photo being score above a 6. The scores of these two photo's should be reversed..but that ain't the way this site works..and I am cool with that. |
I've been here for a bit over a month and I've definitely fallen into a comfortable state of not caring a whole heck of a lot about scores. Not that I wouldn't be glad to place highly -- but the fun of the site for me is the kick in the pants it gives to my creativity. I've learned a lot here, like I knew I would, and I've learned that I don't have to enter every single challenge if doing so would mean that I was just setting up a picture that I thought voters would like. This, to me, is far more important than scores. Most of what scores teach you is what we've been talking about here -- how to please the masses and avoid getting smacked down for thinking out of the box. (although getting smacked down for actual lack of photographic know-how, which has definitely happened to me and will again I'm sure -- can be quite a learning experience, painful as it is). |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:37:39 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
We, the voters, cannot see the lighting as actually being candle if it isn't seen in the shot. Especially when there is so much that can be manipulated with software and lighting, I think the candle and its lighting should be in the shot, or I know I voted them down.
Rose |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
It's not an assumption, but a fact. The challenge was called "Candlelight". I want to see the flicker, the candle, the light from it. I don't want to see something possibly photoshopped to a harsh yellow/orange/red and a portrait of someone in it (for example).
Rose |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Originally posted by megatherian:
this whole concept of "voting down" is very much like punishment.
You didn't do what I wanted so now I will punish you.
Wouldn't it be better to "vote up" a picture and reward the people who are doing what you want them to? |
If you are asking me, I totally agree.
Rose |
Rose, I'm sorry, but these posts seem contradictory. Did you mean that you are voting people down for not having an actual candle and flame in the shot, or not? If you are (in fact) voting people down, certainly that is within the realm of your perogative; however, it doesn't seem to square with your subsequent statement that you are in agreement that voting people down for not doing what you wanted them to do is wrong.
Can you clarify? |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:38:36 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by rachelellen:
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Well, you know? It is all semantics really. This can be argued till the cows come home (utoh, another good pun to use! :)
|
Just so you know, 'till the cows come home' is not a pun. Not to be picky, just thinking that there are going to be a WHOLE LOT of people making similar mistakes -- which will of course bring up a whole new thread for that challenge about what meets challenge and what doesn't. Goody. :) |
Well, that is true. Something like HOLY COW would be though. It was one of my first thoughts as well, but I went with something different. But someone could make a house with cows coming out of it and use it as a pun of "and the cows come home" or "till the cows come home". Puns are virtually everywhere if you really think about the literal sense that can come from almost any phrase. I think it is going to be one interesting challenge because of that, not to mention a lot of comments like "I don't get it". LOL...
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:47:23 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by A1275:
Originally posted by Rose8699:
We, the voters, cannot see the lighting as actually being candle if it isn't seen in the shot. Especially when there is so much that can be manipulated with software and lighting, I think the candle and its lighting should be in the shot, or I know I voted them down.
Rose |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
It's not an assumption, but a fact. The challenge was called "Candlelight". I want to see the flicker, the candle, the light from it. I don't want to see something possibly photoshopped to a harsh yellow/orange/red and a portrait of someone in it (for example).
Rose |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Originally posted by megatherian:
this whole concept of "voting down" is very much like punishment.
You didn't do what I wanted so now I will punish you.
Wouldn't it be better to "vote up" a picture and reward the people who are doing what you want them to? |
If you are asking me, I totally agree.
Rose |
Rose, I'm sorry, but these posts seem contradictory. Did you mean that you are voting people down for not having an actual candle and flame in the shot, or not? If you are (in fact) voting people down, certainly that is within the realm of your perogative; however, it doesn't seem to square with your subsequent statement that you are in agreement that voting people down for not doing what you wanted them to do is wrong.
Can you clarify? |
You know what? I'm not much for mensa. Can you tell? LOL..I'm having a bit of trouble understanding your own statments. It's like trying to figure out a mensa puzzle in doing so.
In anycase, it really doesn't matter what or how I score personally, and why you ask me directly is irrelevant, not to mention impertanent. Let's just say that "I" "personally" find those shots with more of the candle or "obvious" candlelight in them deserving of higher scores.
However, what I was agreeing to is in this manner as it refers to ALL challenges, not just candlelight:
"this whole concept of "voting down" is very much like punishment."
I agree as it happens to me as well. I just don't complain about it cause I set my own personal goals.
You didn't do what I wanted so now I will punish you.
It seems that some of my own entries are voted down with this premise, so I agree again
Wouldn't it be better to "vote up" a picture and reward the people who are doing what you want them to?
And I agree again. People should vote up pictures and reward those for "doing what you want them to" (in and with the challenge)
Rose
Message edited by author 2005-12-13 16:52:17.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:49:38 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
However, anyone can step out their door and go to the nearest park and get great shots during sunlight hours. That is the difference to me. |
Uh, sorry Ansel we'll have to take back all your accolades, apparently anyone could of done what you did.
Mr. Bearmusic and Mr. NShapiro, samething, obviously no skill required in going outside and taking a great photo. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:54:24 PM · #47 |
| mensa means stupid in spanish. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:55:37 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by pekesty:
Originally posted by Rose8699:
However, anyone can step out their door and go to the nearest park and get great shots during sunlight hours. That is the difference to me. |
Uh, sorry Ansel we'll have to take back all your accolades, apparently anyone could of done what you did.
Mr. Bearmusic and Mr. NShapiro, samething, obviously no skill required in going outside and taking a great photo. |
You DO know how to twist things don't you. I'm NOT talking about P&S and boom, done. I'm talking about taking some nice, thought out, and skillfully produced photos IN sunlight. Did the word "anyone" excite you?
GEEEZ, some of you guys are really on planet tunnel-vision and sit on a high pedestal called out-of-context.
AND don't talk about my nrshapiro like that. He is one of my FAV's and who I consider a photograph buddy and very skillful! Ansel, I like his too! *tee hee*
Rose
Message edited by author 2005-12-13 16:56:22.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:56:27 PM · #49 |
| ok guys... i can't wait for this challenge to be over as i seem to have been downgraded because i have more than candlelight in my image. technically, it's a difficult shot but i managed to get it right. however, by the looks of my scores, under 5, people are missing something. this will definitely be something to vent upon when everything is over. |
|
|
|
12/13/2005 04:57:08 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by megatherian:
mensa means stupid in spanish. |
BAWAWAHHHH, well, there ya go!
Rose
|
|
