| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/09/2003 09:40:59 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by RiderGal:
Originally posted by Diversq:
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
Nothing you see in photography is original! Someone has already done it, somewhere, at sometime. |
I disagree, no one has ever taken a photo of me jumping into a lake naked before so it would in this case be original. |
So far as you know ;-) hehehehe |
Well so much for that little secret ;-)
|
|
|
|
07/09/2003 09:41:05 PM · #27 |
| I too was suprised by some good prints scoring low--- BUT my suprises did not include those listed at the top of this thread. So lets all join together, and repeat "Its completely subjective, its a matter of opinion". Now repeat it, until you really understand what that means, and its not just a polite acknowledgement. The ones I voted at the top came down below 20. (was happy with my own though!) |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 02:58:46 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by jbruno1397:
I gave it a one are you gonna ban me?
"where books burn people burn" |
Since you spoke up, I'd also like to know what your reason was behind your vote on Ballistic. And, no, I don't want to see you banned, and I don't think Jon did either... I hope. I'm just curious if you just don't like it, there was a technical reason, or what. |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:08:15 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by Jacko:
Looks like you think your technique was the most badass, since all your top pics look like yours. I feel the first set of pictures portraits speed better. Crazy lights does not convey speed in my mind. |
Not so actually (and none of those shots look like mine, they simply feature an element of light and I can count hundreds of those), but I'd like to hear how you think those first shots better portray speed. Come on, let's here it! ;)
As I said before I love the top three and many of the top scorers.
By the way, your description 'Crazy Lights' itself denotes action and speed - it's all subliminal you know!
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:28:20 AM · #30 |
Let's see, you didn't think a guy running, a speeding train, speeding cars, a super fast internet connection, or a portrayal of a drug called "speed" fit the speed challenge, but your blurred lights, some more blurred lights, some more blurred lights, and a rolling marble, does?
With the exception of the marble (ballistic), I would've scored all of the shots you listed as "better" low, because of image quality, no matter what the challenge (except of course if the challenge had been to take photos of blurred lights). I don't like singling shots out like this, and I dont mean to offend the photographers of the shots mentioned above, but I'm trying to illustrate the point that to most people blurred light is just blurred light, no matter how well you photograph it.
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:37:34 AM · #31 |
In response to Jon's (and other's) responses to my response to his criticism (huh???):
Here's what you (Jon) posted in the other thread:
Originally posted by Jon Lucas:
This is pretty much how I feel, although I've seen much better shots than mine. A vast majority of the Speed shots are either off-brief, dull, unoriginal or just plain boring so I'm a bit confused that mine is scoring quite so low (around 4.5). That said, mine is a bit abstract/creative (and a bit hurried too!) and there is a pattern on this site of going for the stark-bleedin'-obvious-cliche shot as a preference to my kind of approach. I've had some good comments though, so there are still people out there with taste! ;) |
So, I had gone back and looked at your entry, and wow, your comments were just sooooo totally out of whack with it.
To hit the highlights of your criticism:
- Off-brief - I think you at least intended to convey speed in some abstract sense, I just don't think it was effective. It didn't say speed to me. At least the train as a subject which I can look at and say "it's a train, probably going fast". OK, it wasn't portrayed well that way, and I voted accordingly. But I got speed more out of that picture than out of yours. I think I gave the syringe the similar score to what I gave yours - you got an extra point cause I could at least guess that you intended to convey speed, but technically, the syringe was a better shot, so it edged you out.
- Dull - In the end, all your shot consists of is colored lines on a black background. That's pretty dull.
- Unoriginal - the internet is littered with these dancing lights shots. Most seem to usually be the results of the first night out drinking with the new camera - the point being they're either accidental or the result of impared motor skills - not a lot of effort involved. OK, so maybe your new to digital photography. (I'm just guessing, but then I'm relatively new and have seen more than enough of them!) That still doesn't make it original.
- Just plain boring - You say a picture doesn't have to have a subject. Let me put it a different way: there's nothing interesting to catch my attention in your entry. Or, if you want to say the lights are the subject, then they're a boring subject.
So, I guess what I'm trying to get across, without getting too long winded (oops, just added more above... too late!), is that most or all of your critiques and criticisms made both hear and especially in that other post pretty much all find a target in your own entry! Of course, this is all in my view, opinion, experience, etc., etc.... It just all came across as the pot calling the kettle black - and pretty funny to boot.
And, of course, I was just kidding with the drug remark. I think you got that, right? :-) |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:45:15 AM · #32 |
| Hey, I just went and looked at your portfolio. You should have entered one of your light-at-speed shots, or something like them. I think you would have had a much better ranking. They're much more interesting than your warp factor shot. Were they not done during the speed challenge week? |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:46:35 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Martus:
... to most people blurred light is just blurred light, no matter how well you photograph it. |
On what statistical fact are you basing this presumption then?
I have already agreed about image quality (and my shot in particular) but no, the drug one doesn't fit - read the brief, and the ethernet plug is just an average shot used as a fairly weak metaphor for speed (surely you must loathe blurred backgrounds too?).
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:59:10 AM · #34 |
| Well, I would guess that since all of the blurred lights scored below average, that would be enough statistical proof for me. The blurred background with the ethernet plug (which by the way was one of my favourite shots this week), really added to the feeling of speed. I agree the drug was pushing the theme (although it was one of the first things that came to my mind when I saw the challenge title), but it was well photographed, which always carries a lot of weight here. |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 04:02:48 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by Jon Lucas:
Originally posted by Martus:
... to most people blurred light is just blurred light, no matter how well you photograph it. |
On what statistical fact are you basing this presumption then? |
It's all subjective. These shots might appeal to some, but their lower scores show they didn't appeal to the majority. |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 04:11:08 AM · #36 |
I think that photography being an art form consists of more then just mere creativity. You could take a picture of something never done before, but if it looks like crap, I'm going to think it's crap. I rate the photos based on my idea of what I find to be mixtures of creativity, composition, quality of picture, and the effectiveness of the messege it is portraying. If any one or more of these features is lacking, the photo will show it.
I don't always agree with the ratings that photos get, I expected mine to be rated much lower, but to say that we just go, "ooh - a nice picture - have a '10'!" is berating the members of DP Challenge. I give serious thought to my ratings and why I rate them the way I do, and I expect the other members are doing the same.
Message edited by author 2003-07-10 04:13:13. |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 04:18:29 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by Liquidchains:
but to say that we just go, "ooh - a nice picture - have a '10'!" is berating the members of DP Challenge. I give serious thought to my ratings and why I rate them the way I do, and I expect the other members are doing the same. |
Don't expect too hard. I have long ago noticed that many DPC'ers are a bit like crows when it comes to voting. If it shines and/or looks pretty it scores high. |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 05:17:42 AM · #38 |
Aplologies for the 'ooh - a nice pic' comment - meant to be lighthearted! :)
Originally posted by ozdick:
It's all subjective. These shots might appeal to some, but their lower scores show they didn't appeal to the majority. |
To wit, shots ranked 4 and 5 are based around light interaction and both are instantly captivating - more so than standard subject matter.
Originally posted by Martus:
Well, I would guess that since all of the blurred lights scored below average, that would be enough statistical proof for me. The blurred background with the ethernet plug (which by the way was one of my favourite shots this week), really added to the feeling of speed. I agree the drug was pushing the theme (although it was one of the first things that came to my mind when I saw the challenge title), but it was well photographed, which always carries a lot of weight here. |
Disagree with enthernet plug - it's tones are not attractive, and it's a gloomy shot. It's a bit like saying 'I want to show the speed of the internet/networks but I can't so I'll whizz the cable past a background instead'. That said, it did suggest speed at least.
As always in these forums people say that if you go for votes - go for the obvious, crystal clear or sentimental subject matter, but it's not why I'm here. I'm learning a lot from this - it's great - but I still like to do things that I'd hang on my wall. The 4th and 5th place do that for me (so does the duck, ozdick's 2nd place and the hoverfly, plus quite a few more). With a bit of editing (or reshooting) I might hang mine on my wall too.
BTW originality was not the issue for me. It's true that, unless you're locked in a room from birth and then are let loose with a camera (if you knew how to use it of course!), nothing will be truly original.
My point was relevance to the the challenge, and using imagination to tackle the brief.
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 05:25:00 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Hey, I just went and looked at your portfolio. You should have entered one of your light-at-speed shots, or something like them. I think you would have had a much better ranking. They're much more interesting than your warp factor shot. Were they not done during the speed challenge week? |
Thanks Scott.
They were done for the Speed challenge and I was going to use this one:
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=27016
but my Mac has a brighter screen than a PC, so I thought this may drop out too much and I didn't want to blow the tonal range. Which one do you prefer out of interest?
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=27016
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=27014
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=27013
Message edited by author 2003-07-10 14:32:40.
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 01:30:34 PM · #40 |
| All on its own, I think I like light-at-speed-3 the best. For the speed challenge, I think I'd pick light-at-speed, just because the trail off to the left give more a sense of movement. So, how did you do these? |
|
|
|
07/10/2003 02:48:31 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
All on its own, I think I like light-at-speed-3 the best. For the speed challenge, I think I'd pick light-at-speed, just because the trail off to the left give more a sense of movement. So, how did you do these? |
I used a spinning spiral of metallic, glossy material which reflected a source of mobile strip light. I spun the object on its vertical axis while tilting it through the field of vision, creating a strobing effect over approx 2 secs.
This gave a feeling of progress over distance, despite the lack of a distinct physical object, while the short exposure ensured a dark background.
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 02:58:47 PM · #42 |
interesting ...
every week it's the same. and i dont say this out of any desire to control people's behavior - people can and should feel free to post threads about whatever they want (in the appropriate forums of course ;) - I just want to amusedly point out this recurring pattern.
every week, one or more people, disgruntled with their low score, perhaps disbelieving of or not understanding how their perceptions of their 'masterpiece' could be so at odds with everyone else, posts a thread trying to understand 'what happened', and 99% of the time, the people who comment in those threads reinforce what occurred during the voting.
then, one of 2 things usually happens:
a) person takes criticism, listens to it, tries to wrap their mind around the fact that the perspective from outside of themselves is different from the internal one. and that and maybe they can use the opportunity that people are willing to actually bother with them on a one-to-one basis to learn ... or ...
b) person insists that everyone else is wrong, in effect implying that they are connected to some "higher state of perception" that the rest of are not.
I think it's interesting to watch whether people take track a) or b). In my experience, those that take track (a) do show more likelihood of improvement. Those that can critically, brutally self-evaluate will be more likely to grow, but unfortunately it's never that easy ...
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:33:31 PM · #43 |
Mag - i think you have hit the nail on the head....
|
|
|
|
07/10/2003 03:33:42 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
interesting ...
every week it's the same. and i dont say this out of any desire to control people's behavior - people can and should feel free to post threads about whatever they want (in the appropriate forums of course ;) - I just want to amusedly point out this recurring pattern.
every week, one or more people, disgruntled with their low score, perhaps disbelieving of or not understanding how their perceptions of their 'masterpiece' could be so at odds with everyone else, posts a thread trying to understand 'what happened', and 99% of the time, the people who comment in those threads reinforce what occurred during the voting. |
I agree with some points above - people do stand in dismay at their results - but that's all part of the challenge element of the site. They try to make sense not only of their entry but how others have perceived it (me included). It's as much a psychological challenge as a photographic one, all the while trying to retain creative integrity .
However, there may be too much emphasis on a 'disgruntled voter' or 'sour grapes' thing than the genuine issues people raise. It [the challenge relevance thing] recurrs because the 'problem' still exists, and new members come on board and notice it!
When people see images with tenuous links to a challenge people will raise the issue yet again. Simple as that.
Someone stated that this thread is 'getting old' and 'let's just concentrate on having fun and learning'. I agree but this is primarily a challenge site (and more fun for it) and we all learn in that process.
Great portfolio by the way, Kollin! I'll listen to your tunes later.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2003 11:27:15 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
I notice all the photos you picked in your second list (implying they were better than the first) were related to light. I think the problem is, yes, we can appreciate light moves fast, but conceptually light has no movement at all, it's either there it is isn't. For this reason I think although the light submissions were good in their own right, they certainly are not examples of "convey[ing] the illusion or feeling of speed". |
They were also all blurry (though the first squiggly one less so than the rest). Speaking personally, I could have graded the pinwheel much higher if *anything in the frame* were actually in focus.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2003 01:10:13 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Originally posted by jbruno1397:
I gave it a one are you gonna ban me?
"where books burn people burn" |
Since you spoke up, I'd also like to know what your reason was behind your vote on Ballistic. And, no, I don't want to see you banned, and I don't think Jon did either... I hope. I'm just curious if you just don't like it, there was a technical reason, or what. |
I want to suggest the possibility that the one truly 'great' shot we have had the fortune to find in this context, may have been entirely missed or misunderstood by some of us. Perhaps, my comment on this image ["Ballistic"] will do nothing to change this fact:
"Comment:
What a delight!
I cannot imagine another photograph that conveys so much within the narrow limits of this challenge. It is so searingly 'modern', it should render anyone's critical faculties obsolete...
The balance, especially top to bottom > black vs. lighted, is immaculaty 'tuned' as if dictated by the piece itself, as opposed to any rules derived from the outside... (in lieu of words). >10"
|
|
|
|
07/16/2003 06:51:46 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by ScottK:
Originally posted by jbruno1397:
I gave it a one are you gonna ban me?
"where books burn people burn" |
Since you spoke up, I'd also like to know what your reason was behind your vote on Ballistic. And, no, I don't want to see you banned, and I don't think Jon did either... I hope. I'm just curious if you just don't like it, there was a technical reason, or what. |
I want to suggest the possibility that the one truly 'great' shot we have had the fortune to find in this context, may have been entirely missed or misunderstood by some of us. Perhaps, my comment on this image ["Ballistic"] will do nothing to change this fact:
"Comment:
What a delight!
I cannot imagine another photograph that conveys so much within the narrow limits of this challenge. It is so searingly 'modern', it should render anyone's critical faculties obsolete...
The balance, especially top to bottom > black vs. lighted, is immaculaty 'tuned' as if dictated by the piece itself, as opposed to any rules derived from the outside... (in lieu of words). >10" |
Poetry! (if you can actually keep up with the above)
|
|
