| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/07/2006 04:56:03 AM · #1 |
The original from the abstract macro challenge..
My reshoot...
Cleaner? Better?
|
|
|
|
10/07/2006 05:01:51 AM · #2 |
| This must be one of those love it or loath it shots. I think that the reshoot is great, it really has impact because it's seems to be coming out of the page, whereas the original was closing in to the page. |
|
|
|
10/07/2006 06:22:45 AM · #3 |
| Definately like swirl two. I left comments with Swirl two on why. Great job. |
|
|
|
10/07/2006 06:34:19 AM · #4 |
The technicals of the reshoot are superior to the challenge submission.
The sworl has better, smoother tonality with less transitional banding. The shape of the sworl has more geometric purity. It is a little larger than the original which gives it more eye appeal without giving up much negative space. And, it has better sharpness and definition.
In other words, everything appealing about the original image is done better in the second.
The strength of the original is its simplicity. It was viewed by voters as the best B&W in a challenge topic perfect for that mode of expression. Couple this with its minimalism and uniqueness and that is what garnered it a high placing in the challenge. None of that was lost in the retake. In fact, quite the opposite, those features were enhanced.
This begs the question: If the retake is better then would it have ribboned?
The order of placement of images at and near the top is determined as much by concept and voter emotion as it is technical merit. At that level all the images are good so the top individual images are more closely compared by voters when finalizing their top scores.
So even though it is a better picture it still might not have placed higher. The unique qualities and emotional appeal of the others above it still may have been enough to keep them in their places. Its possible this image was an overachiever in the first place. Improved technicals might only have solidified how voters felt about placing it where they did.
But that is all pure speculation. It is very close to Labuda's fine entry so the improved technicals may have been enough to get it over the top. But, alas, we will never know. ;)
Message edited by author 2006-10-07 06:43:16.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2006 09:40:00 AM · #5 |
Steve is correct that this is technically superior to the entry. However, to my eye the entry is more "mysterious" and engaging. This is largely due to the presence of the dark "hole" at the bottom of the vortex shape, which draws me in. Mist likes the new one because it is "coming out of the page"; I prefer the original because it is sucking me into the page.
Robt. |
|
|
|
10/07/2006 09:47:34 AM · #6 |
| the original image has more impact...the second shot has too much paper showing, thus losing the evanescent feel. |
|
|
|
10/07/2006 09:54:59 AM · #7 |
Too me number two is definately better that number one - more based on a "gut feeling" than anything else. It's just more appealing to me.
I believe I would have given it a 7 in the challenge - which is one higher than I gave your entry. But, as other comments show, others might have given it a lower rating than they did, so if it would have given you a ribbon: I dont know, but I doubt it... |
|
|
|
10/07/2006 06:32:39 PM · #8 |
Thanks for the comments everyone. I like number two because of the clean lines of it, but I feel the same about the first one sucking you in. I still don't think it would have ribboned. It's unique but doesn't really have a lot of emotional appeal. Thanks again....Dave
|
|
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: 10/15/2025 09:43:41 AM EDT.
