Since I don't always think the way I'm supposed to

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

10/29/2008 03:13:16 PM · #1

clarification......since you shouldn't use duck decoys in rubber duck comps, not consider a studio as being any place you use as a work space.............Mirrors...........would have to actually be a piece of glass that has a mirrored finish and not some other item that is mirrorlike? And smoke must be something that comes from fire not fog or smog..........? Thanks for your participation and help

smudgeSMJ

Apple iPhone 6

10/29/2008 03:14:28 PM · #2

I was wondering the same thing.

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

10/29/2008 03:17:17 PM · #3

well whatever I do do the exact opposite and you may be safe!

Yo_Spiff

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

10/29/2008 03:19:01 PM · #4

Well, we had lots of buildings with reflections in "reflections without mirrors", so technically, something that fit into that challenge would be DNMC for this one. However buildings do have mirrored glass, so is it a mirror or not?

smudgeSMJ

Apple iPhone 6

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

10/29/2008 03:21:21 PM · #5

Well, I just decided that I'm going to do whatever I want and leave myself to the mercy of the voters. It's not like trying to follow the descriptions word-for-word has gotten me anywhere, anyway. I'm diving in! *deep breath*

K3Master

Pentax K-3

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

10/29/2008 03:22:22 PM · #6

Anything that provides a reflection is a "mirror".

Anything that looks enough like smoke to fool the voter is "smoke."

No more of this trying to be as anal as we can please, it's destroying creativity on this site like there's no tomorrow.

10/29/2008 03:22:34 PM · #7

that is what I do every week and someday it will work lol

10/29/2008 03:23:15 PM · #8

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

AMEN!!! A free thinker! I never thought I'd find those but it appears I have WOOOOOOOOOOP WOOP!!

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

10/29/2008 03:58:29 PM · #9

You're not required to follow the letter of the law when it comes to challenge topics. In fact, you don't even have to come close if enough voters like your photo. Of course there's always going to be a number of narrow-minded challenge lawyers with preconceived ideas of what meets the challenge and what doesn't. You might as well forget about them though because, unless you can read their tiny little pea brains and see the picture they have in mind, you're never going to satisfy them. You'll do better if you concentrate on making a good photo, even if it doesn't exactly meet the challenge criteria. If you want to win a ribbon, then you should concentrate on pleasing the masses.

Citadel

Nikon D7500

10/29/2008 04:13:51 PM · #10

Originally posted by Mick:

If you want to win a ribbon, then you should concentrate on pleasing the masses.

We masses do like to be pleased. And if not? Pitchforks and torches are a lot of fun. :)

That aside: I think that with the volume of images we look through, you have to hit the viewer over the head with your picture's relevance to the challenge. If I take 10 seconds to roughly appraise your image, less than 1 second of that should be used to decide if it fits or not. (10 seconds of course is an arbitrary number and for myself, I actually spend a bit longer looking at an image.)

I don't think voters are dumb (though some might be) but why not make it easy for the voter? Make them spend more of their time appreciating your image and less time trying to figure if your shot meets the challenge. Hit them over the head with your shot. Make it obvious!

Message edited by author 2008-10-29 16:22:07.

10/29/2008 04:14:08 PM · #11

thanks Mick (and good name by the way) I'm not really interested in pleasing the masses mostly learning more about what works and what does not and these challenges can be very frustrating but in the end I'm sure I've learned a thing or two........

10/29/2008 09:39:30 PM · #12

Originally posted by Citadel:

Originally posted by Mick:
If you want to win a ribbon, then you should concentrate on pleasing the masses.

We masses do like to be pleased. And if not? Pitchforks and torches are a lot of fun. :)

That aside: I think that with the volume of images we look through, you have to hit the viewer over the head with your picture's relevance to the challenge. If I take 10 seconds to roughly appraise your image, less than 1 second of that should be used to decide if it fits or not. (10 seconds of course is an arbitrary number and for myself, I actually spend a bit longer looking at an image.)

I don't think voters are dumb (though some might be) but why not make it easy for the voter? Make them spend more of their time appreciating your image and less time trying to figure if your shot meets the challenge. Hit them over the head with your shot. Make it obvious!

So, you think nailing the challenge criteria is more important than WOW factor? If so, then I'm afraid I have to disagree. In my opinion, it's much more important to grab the viewer's attention with a well composed, artistic, and technically sound image with an interesting subject. An uninspired dull photo that nails the challenge criteria isnâ��t going to cut itâ�¦ usually anyway.

Iâ��ll use one of my photos as an example:

My photo arguably has less relevance to the subject of chemistry than many of the other photos in that challenge (see hahn23â��s comment). However, it still won a ribbon. And if you look through the challenge history, you should find several other examples.

10/29/2008 09:47:45 PM · #13

Originally posted by Pikkel:

thanks Mick (and good name by the way)

Good name...? Please, tell me more.

Originally posted by Pikkel:

I'm not really interested in pleasing the masses mostly learning more about what works and what does not and these challenges can be very frustrating but in the end I'm sure I've learned a thing or two........

As long as you're having fun... :D

10/29/2008 10:20:26 PM · #14

spoouses name and it appears you are from the west coast just as cool. Love the bridge was it the Golden I didn't look as close as I should.

Fun........sometimes frustration mostly lol

10/30/2008 12:17:53 AM · #15

Originally posted by Pikkel:

spoouses name and it appears you are from the west coast just as cool.

Cool! Is it Mick or Michael? I'm both, and definitely a west coaster.

Originally posted by Pikkel:

Love the bridge was it the Golden I didn't look as close as I should.

It's the St. John's bridge in Portland.

Originally posted by Pikkel:

Fun........sometimes frustration mostly lol

Keep at it, and good luck!