| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/12/2006 07:20:12 PM · #101 |
Interesting discussion. A number of elements seem to hold true to most people's definition: human subject, unaware of the photographer - as in not posing (but then think of what you would mean by a 'wedding candid' and you get a different sense of awareness of the photographer); however, for me (and I'm not really using this as a basis for judgement), the kind of long-lens portrait that fits this general definition is also unsatisfactory; perhaps because I just don't 'get' portraits as a genre (don't see the point, the interest, the attraction: I can sit on a train and look at as many faces as I want, thanks), but I want some sense of environment, of interaction, of story, of imaginary worlds - I don't mean an unreal world (far from it), but of a situation that requires me to conjure up the story, the history. A portrait, be it a candid portrait or otherwise, is a lot like a first impression, but the true character doesn't come out until you get something that hints at a deeper life, a more meaningful world. That's what I hoped to see here, and I've been pretty disappointed so far.
It's all very well to speak of the 'technicals' like they're some magic spell that can be cast with the expenditure of enough money, or experience, or forethought, but it's an idea that masks the real point. The difficulty is to allow yourself to be shown a story, an insight into a private world, and to have the skill and the reactions to capture it. People are quite cheerfully mad enough to provide an infinity of these situations, and do so with far more imagination and creativity than can be conjured up in even the most fertile studio. The trick is relaxing with it, removing preconceptions of what you might see, and great patience. And aim high.
Meanwhile, I've had some really nice comments - real thoughts, rather than simple compliments, and that's most gratifying. |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 07:20:25 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by Di:
WHAT you mean you guys didnt Scream at the people in the background to move??? or chop down signs, trees.. or other things that might look out of place in a CANDID photo ??? |
I don't do a lot of candids but maybe some of those rice bags that people use to steady the camera could be used as a get out of the way please thing when thrown at high speed - although a chainsaw would be a multiple use instrument for most of your list. :-)) |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 08:13:42 PM · #103 |
Here come the low trolls...went from a 6.01 to
Votes: 75
Views: 141
Avg Vote: 5.9733
Comments: 4
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 04/12/06 08:12 pm
....in 3 votes!!! ARghhhhhhhhhhhhh |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 08:16:35 PM · #104 |
I thought it would be interesting to note the actual definition of "candid":
candid
adj 1: characterized by disconcerting directness in manner or
speech; without subtlety or evasion; "blunt talking
and straight shooting"; "a blunt New England farmer";
"I gave them my candid opinion"; "forthright
criticism"; "a forthright approach to the problem";
"tell me what you think--and you may just as well be
frank"; "it is possible to be outspoken without being
rude"; "plainspoken and to the point"; "a point-blank
accusation" [syn: blunt, forthright, frank, free-spoken,
outspoken, plainspoken, point-blank]
2: informal or natural; especially caught off guard or
unprepared; "a candid photograph"; "a candid interview"
3: openly straightforward and direct without reserve or
secretiveness; "his candid eyes"; "an open and trusting
nature" [syn: open]
4: starkly realistic; "I have never lacked candid critics in my
own ranks"-Clement Atlee
I believe candid photography shows truth or at least the perception of truth. I don't care if you know your subjects or if you are photographing strangers. I do not think candid photography should disallow movement. Movement can be natural, informal, spontaneous, etc. and can certainly show a moment of reality caught in time. I expect candid photographs to be a little raw, or a little soft, and maybe to ignore the rule of thirds. However, if you can connect with me on a "gut level", or with my heart in this challenge, you will get a high score from me. |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 08:38:56 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by CzechMan:
I turned off my scores, but received 1 comment already. Ironically, it told me to do the exactly what I meant to do before submitting.....but I forgot. :(
I still have a long way to go before I even reach the rookie level on this site!!
:) |
exact same thing happened to me. My first comment was exactly what I forgot to do. Oh well always next time.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 08:45:58 PM · #106 |
Sigh..... I'm definitely on a downward slope after my Toys shot tanked at a 5.1 knocking me out of the MS tournament. My Jump is sitting at 5.2 and alas, my Candid is down from a 5.4 to a 5.2895 and dropping.
Perhaps it's time for a break or maybe just try to knock one out of the park in Color portrait to get back on track. Decisions, decisions... :-)
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 08:48:43 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Here come the low trolls...went from a 6.01 to
Votes: 75
Views: 141
Avg Vote: 5.9733
Comments: 4
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 04/12/06 08:12 pm
....in 3 votes!!! ARghhhhhhhhhhhhh |
If your photo was of a building, a landscape, a flower, the moon, (well you get the idea) or was seriously too small, too dark, too sharpened, or gratuitously out of focus (well you get the idea) then my vote probably lowered your average. Call me a troll if you want, but I gave more 10s than 1s. And I vote lower scores to photos that exhibit poor technical execution or fail to meet the challenge.
When I commit these sins, my photos get hammered. As they should!
If none of the above apply, well, then, in the words of a favorite comedienne, "nevermind." |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:01:17 PM · #108 |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:02:44 PM · #109 |
My score!
Votes: 88
Views: 166
Avg Vote: 6.7273
Comments: 17
Favorites: 1
Wish Lists: 0
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:04:42 PM · #110 |
Good score...your best yet....good luck.
Originally posted by letuananh:
My score!
Votes: 88
Views: 166
Avg Vote: 6.7273
Comments: 17
Favorites: 1
Wish Lists: 0 |
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:05:57 PM · #111 |
Well it wasn't any of those things you mentioned so I may be one of your 6+ scores...
KS
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Here come the low trolls...went from a 6.01 to
Votes: 75
Views: 141
Avg Vote: 5.9733
Comments: 4
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 04/12/06 08:12 pm
....in 3 votes!!! ARghhhhhhhhhhhhh |
If your photo was of a building, a landscape, a flower, the moon, (well you get the idea) or was seriously too small, too dark, too sharpened, or gratuitously out of focus (well you get the idea) then my vote probably lowered your average. Call me a troll if you want, but I gave more 10s than 1s. And I vote lower scores to photos that exhibit poor technical execution or fail to meet the challenge.
When I commit these sins, my photos get hammered. As they should!
If none of the above apply, well, then, in the words of a favorite comedienne, "nevermind." |
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:09:02 PM · #112 |
Hey Jen...you may be in a slight slump but you have some really good 6 shots in your portfolio! It is people like me who need you guys to falter once in a while! It allows my somewhat good shot to beat one of your somewhat "not so good" shot!
If it wasn't this way....there would be about 10 people placing in every challenge!
Good Luck!
KS
Originally posted by jenesis:
Sigh..... I'm definitely on a downward slope after my Toys shot tanked at a 5.1 knocking me out of the MS tournament. My Jump is sitting at 5.2 and alas, my Candid is down from a 5.4 to a 5.2895 and dropping.
Perhaps it's time for a break or maybe just try to knock one out of the park in Color portrait to get back on track. Decisions, decisions... :-) |
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:16:57 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
1st vote is a 5.
I'm doomed, I tell you.
Doomed!
~Terry |
At least it's not a 4.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:18:03 PM · #114 |
Somebody please help me. I have no foggy clue what IMO means.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:18:21 PM · #115 |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:42:48 PM · #116 |
Hey Thanks Kenskid! It's feels kinda cool to be lumped into that "you guys" catagory. :-) Slumps are good, they just make me try harder. My problem usually is entering something that I really like without taking into consideration what "DPC" really likes. :-) Sometimes I hit, most times I'm a little (or alot) off target. No biggie though, life is good and I'm doing what I love. :-)
Good luck to you too! :-D
|
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:46:54 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by jenesis:
Sigh..... I'm definitely on a downward slope after my Toys shot tanked at a 5.1 knocking me out of the MS tournament. My Jump is sitting at 5.2 and alas, my Candid is down from a 5.4 to a 5.2895 and dropping.
Perhaps it's time for a break or maybe just try to knock one out of the park in Color portrait to get back on track. Decisions, decisions... :-) |
Knock one out of the park in Colour Portait Jen! You do fantastic work! |
|
|
|
04/12/2006 09:59:34 PM · #118 |
The ability to catch a moment of 'real life' on film with the subject 'matter' being unawares and unprovoked is generally fairly easy (not!). Just not this week.
I, in fear of getting my bottom kicked, leaned cowardly towards a snapshot of an acquaintance caught off guard. Sure, I am getting hammered (ok, ok, just a few negative "this is sooo posed" type comments). That's fine, and I am sure they are on the 'sniff-out-the-set-up' trail with the whole 398 submissions and don't think I have been singled out- its seems like a good many of us are getting a good dose of the ole 'IMO' - wouldn't want it any other way.
Loved the rice-bags/chainsaw suggestions made earlier in the forum. I also thought if I had a dancing naked person somewhere off-side to me, nobody would of even noticed my camera pointing in the opposite direction. Man-oh-man, that would of been candid heaven.
Votes: 75
Views: 148
Avg Vote: 5.3067
|
|
|
|
04/13/2006 01:00:58 AM · #119 |
LOL - Some idiot (I call the person an idiot (coward) gave a snotty comment about moral values on my submission. LOL - This person also decided not to reveal his/her name during voting. Obviously this idiot voted my submission down (must be troll).
If only this person was aware of the real fact - exactly the opposite was happening when I took the shot than what this person thought.
Do you guys think it is wrong to vote an entry down due to "moral values"? This idiot even got the whole moral value thing in the photo exactly the opposite than what it was.
Luckily my score was climbing since I last looked.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2006 01:14:21 AM · #120 |
Sure most of you saw this - but if not, you have to see dolphnz8 candid shot taken today. Too bad it wasn't in time for this challenge.
Just Another Day
Since this thread is about the scores, here is the thread about this image if you want to make comments on it. |
|
|
|
04/13/2006 01:22:54 AM · #121 |
Originally posted by marcellieb:
LOL - Some idiot (I call the person an idiot (coward) gave a snotty comment about moral values on my submission. LOL - This person also decided not to reveal his/her name during voting. Obviously this idiot voted my submission down (must be troll).
If only this person was aware of the real fact - exactly the opposite was happening when I took the shot than what this person thought.
Do you guys think it is wrong to vote an entry down due to "moral values"? This idiot even got the whole moral value thing in the photo exactly the opposite than what it was.
Luckily my score was climbing since I last looked. |
IMO voting down due to moral issues is lame. But unfortantly it will happen, and there is little you can do to stop it. Infact even though I try to vote impartial I am sure it is impossible to be compleatly unbiased. There is nothing you can really do other than consider this fact before you submit a photo.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2006 03:31:25 AM · #122 |
Originally posted by e301:
Interesting discussion. A number of elements seem to hold true to most people's definition: human subject, unaware of the photographer - as in not posing (but then think of what you would mean by a 'wedding candid' and you get a different sense of awareness of the photographer); however, for me (and I'm not really using this as a basis for judgement), the kind of long-lens portrait that fits this general definition is also unsatisfactory; perhaps because I just don't 'get' portraits as a genre (don't see the point, the interest, the attraction: I can sit on a train and look at as many faces as I want, thanks), but I want some sense of environment, of interaction, of story, of imaginary worlds - I don't mean an unreal world (far from it), but of a situation that requires me to conjure up the story, the history. A portrait, be it a candid portrait or otherwise, is a lot like a first impression, but the true character doesn't come out until you get something that hints at a deeper life, a more meaningful world. That's what I hoped to see here, and I've been pretty disappointed so far.
It's all very well to speak of the 'technicals' like they're some magic spell that can be cast with the expenditure of enough money, or experience, or forethought, but it's an idea that masks the real point. The difficulty is to allow yourself to be shown a story, an insight into a private world, and to have the skill and the reactions to capture it. People are quite cheerfully mad enough to provide an infinity of these situations, and do so with far more imagination and creativity than can be conjured up in even the most fertile studio. The trick is relaxing with it, removing preconceptions of what you might see, and great patience. And aim high.
Meanwhile, I've had some really nice comments - real thoughts, rather than simple compliments, and that's most gratifying. |
I really like this thought... I was torn between entering a photo that portrays this exact idea and the image I ended up entering. I will be interested in seeing some of the outtakes after the challenge is over.
Votes: 81
Views: 106
Avg Vote: 6.0370
Comments: 3
Not a bad current score, but I think maybe my "storytelling" image would have scored higher.
Message edited by author 2006-04-13 03:33:15. |
|
|
|
04/13/2006 04:19:18 AM · #123 |
| An honest inquiry.... Who took it upon themselves to create the "extra" condition in this challenge that candid images can only be valid if taken of human beings? I don't read that in the challenge description. |
|
|
|
04/13/2006 06:11:58 AM · #124 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
An honest inquiry.... Who took it upon themselves to create the "extra" condition in this challenge that candid images can only be valid if taken of human beings? I don't read that in the challenge description. |
I too belive animals can be quite candid. Dogs can have dorky faces, cats can fall off things, but I think in order to do well in a competition the animals have to incite emotion. They can't just sit there and be boring.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2006 06:15:32 AM · #125 |
Originally posted by angelfire:
Originally posted by hahn23:
An honest inquiry.... Who took it upon themselves to create the "extra" condition in this challenge that candid images can only be valid if taken of human beings? I don't read that in the challenge description. |
I too belive animals can be quite candid. Dogs can have dorky faces, cats can fall off things, but I think in order to do well in a competition the animals have to incite emotion. They can't just sit there and be boring. |
Sit, there...boring...? If I had gotten this a day earlier THIS would have been my candid entry!!
|
|
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: 09/14/2025 07:28:58 PM EDT.
