Another robbed pattern... - DPChallenge Forums

01/04/2006 05:27:17 PM · #1

I thought this would have done better than 130th place ahhh! this really frustrated me. And to top it all off I only got three comments (all of which were good) but I need to know why this scored sooooooooo low. Criticism please.

Oh here is the link

Wada Fractal Pattern

Message edited by author 2006-01-04 17:29:17.

DjFenzl

01/04/2006 05:56:41 PM · #2

I didn't get a chance to vote on this challenge but here's my opinion...

I think the focus is sharp but due to the distortion of the light the edges blurring out isn't as appealing as the inside. Personally I think I would have prefered the shot a little better if it was zoomed in more on the center - that's where the majority of the pattern is. The further out from the center you get the more it starts to look like random blobs.

It's very difficult to take an abstract shot the voters seem to really like on this site. There are few hits and many misses.

I tend to like abstract stuff and I definately wouldn't say this is a "bad" shot by any means. It's an interesting idea I just don't think it quite hit the mark.

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko

01/04/2006 06:15:21 PM · #3

Thanks for the input ... the tricky bit with this shot was choosing the correct appearture to get the correct balance between the three sphere's in the foreground (foreground pattern) to be in focus as well as the sphere in the background (background pattern). I knew that would be the weak point in the shot. Also since the spheres are not perfect (they were just christmas tree ornaments) really caused the fractal pattern to be a little fuzzy especially around the edges.

ubique

Olympus PEN-F

01/04/2006 06:35:52 PM · #4

Well, Chad, I gave it only a 4, so I guess I'm one of the people you'd like to hear from. For me, it's a photo of nothing at all. Just a strange pattern generated by some sort of smoke and mirrors trickery. There was a similar thread earlier about a similarly pretty but ultimately pointless image in the same challenge - some sort of laser pen demonstration, I think it was. The assumption seems to be that if the image is the result of considerable effort and technical wizardry, it should be rewarded by the voters. And several of the voters agreed, in the case of both images. However, quite a lot do not agree. In fact, I'd guess that most do not agree. Most people will prefer that a photograph is about something. Photography is, in my view, an art form, but it is most comfortable, and most widely appreciated, as a documentary art form, not as a graphic art form. Now, I accept that that's just one point of view, but I think you may have to accept that it's the dominant point of view, in the DPC community and pretty much everywhere else. Look at National Geographic, for example.
In case you're wondering what sort of stuff a narrow-minded fool like me would prefer, here are two that I liked in that same challenge:

edit for typo

Message edited by author 2006-01-05 03:21:09.

hokie

Nikon D2X

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

01/04/2006 06:44:48 PM · #5

Originally posted by ubique:

...For me, it's a photo of nothing at all. Just a strange pattern generated by some sort of smoke and mirrors trickery. There was a similar thread earlier about a similarly pretty but ultimately pointless image in the same challenge - some sort of laser pen demonstration, I think it was.

Listen to Paul...I think he is a good example of the average voter here at DP Challenge.

And here is the real point that I learned and still have to remember...

Originally posted by ubique:

.... The assumption seems to be that if the image is the result of considerable effort and technical wizardry, it should be rewarded by the voters. And several of the voters agreed, in the case of both images. However, quite a lot do not agree.

And here is the real good part and could not say it better myself for scoring well here...

Originally posted by ubique:

Most people will prefer that a photograph is about something. Photography is, in my view, and art form, but it is most comfortable, and most widely appreciated, as a documentary art form, not as a graphic art form.

Anyway...just thought it helps to reiterate what I think is a good answer to a common question here by most photographers. :-)

Message edited by author 2006-01-04 18:46:05.

01/04/2006 07:04:43 PM · #6

ha ha ... I think I needed a re-fresher as well. This pattern that I photographed wasn't captured by chance. This is something that I set out capture. It is one of the only ways to capture a Fractal Pattern naturally (not computer generated) ... here is the encyclopedia defintion of what I was trying to capture:

"A fractal is a geometric object which is rough or irregular on all scales of length, and therefore appears to be 'broken up' in a radical way. Fractals can be most simply defined as images that can be divided into parts, each of which is similar to the original object. Fractals are said to possess infinite detail..."

Why did I choose this? Well I'm an Electrial Engineer and for me this image shows the complexity of nature. Fractals also happen in nature (leaves, tree branches etc..) perhaps if I choose one of those images it may have done better.

All in all I can understand now that images like this one do not belong on the DP site.

01/04/2006 07:12:16 PM · #7

Here is an out take ... perhaps might have worked better.

barndog

Canon EOS-6D Mark II