| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/17/2009 02:57:38 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Why can't we just appreciate the many ways people will choose to interpret and depict the topic? Ouf of focus, blurred, motion blur -- what difference does it make, really |
The difference is that motion blur and focus blur are two different things. We have had motion blur challenges before, and people know how to use it effectively. OOF is different and when it is done, it often comes in at the bottom of a challenge, because it is perceived as flawed. Using it effectively is the challenge this week.
If there are a huge amount of motion blur entries, I may have to assume my definition is the one in error and sit out on voting rather than be a troll. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 03:04:48 PM · #77 |
| I think the "essence" of the challenge is to have a picture where the main subject is blurry ... I appreciate the difference between motion blur (subject moving too fast for the selected shutter speed) and focus blur (shallow DOF with the focal plane missing the subject), and have potential entries in both categories, but I think the "spirit" of the challenge allows for both techniques. I might consider the latter style to "better" fit the challenge and get higher overall votes, but a good image using the former should still get a decent vote. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 03:10:05 PM · #78 |
| I'm happy with my entry and think it will do fairly well. This is one of only a couple of my entries that I'll like no matter the score! Personal fav. Can't wait to see all entries. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 03:43:49 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think the "spirit" of the challenge allows for both techniques. |
I still have a hard time seeing motion blur as fitting the spirit of the challenge, based on the description and title. If the challenge was "blurry", that would be different. I will give the idea some consideration, however. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 03:46:11 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Why can't we just appreciate the many ways people will choose to interpret and depict the topic? |
That would be nice BUT that's not how the voting goes down, as I've experienced it in my days here. I've had my butt handed to me enough times to know. I was just suggesting that if you want a Challenge that's wide and open to anything...simply say so because. It's easy enough to make clear. As many people that you have going wide open on the interpretation, there will be many who get boxed in.
The way you've specified "Motion Blur" in Challenges and things worked out well...specify this as a "Focus Blur". I think we know there will be a bit of confusion in the voting but I agree "wide open" would be cool. I love and use both often but as I see it, they're two different skills.
I'm might enter something where my subject is only partially blurred. Yikes! The Challenge didn't specify, exactly how blurred or to what degree the subject must be soft or anything specific like that but I'll probably get my ass handed to me for not completely placing my subject 100% OOF. In other words....I'm screwing my self in a completely different direction heheheheh.
Am I crazy? (Don't answer that)
eta: Some people don't care at all about low scores...some do. Ah'm just sayin.
Message edited by author 2009-09-17 16:01:44. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 03:49:29 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Why can't we just appreciate the many ways people will choose to interpret and depict the topic? Ouf of focus, blurred, motion blur -- what difference does it make, really ... this very thread proves that all of those are "valid" interpretations of the challenge topic. What remains is to decide whether the photographer effectively created an interesting, compelling, beautiful (or whatever characteristics you value) photo. |
AMEN, brother!
R. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 04:06:58 PM · #82 |
| yup! But experience tells us that people are narrow minded at times. And it's better to find that out in advance. I've had a few challenges that I knew the definition could be narrowed significantly and I pushed the limits. The problem is, you never know whether it's because of the definition or because your photo stinks. We've all seen wonderful pictures that fared very poorly because they didn't meet the challenge in the majority of the voter's minds. That's why when my husband and I disagree, I'm curious whether this feeling is shared by many. If my photo is going to tank, I'd really like to know why. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 04:11:33 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
If my photo is going to tank, I'd really like to know why. |
I'd say...who cares... go for it!
You have plenty of Ribbons and a nice average. Not much more to prove at this point, so be creative. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 06:35:55 PM · #84 |
| we'll see! This one was an accident, but a pretty cool accident. I might go and do something on purpose :D |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 06:58:02 PM · #85 |
Yikes ! the majority of my photos fall into this category....
|
|
|
|
09/17/2009 07:24:02 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think the "spirit" of the challenge allows for both techniques. |
I still have a hard time seeing motion blur as fitting the spirit of the challenge, based on the description and title. If the challenge was "blurry", that would be different. I will give the idea some consideration, however. |
Yeah, what Steve  yo_spiff said, motion blur is not necessarily out of focus, old example of mine below
You'll note the car has motion "blur", but is actually "in focus"
"out of focus" is a different subject IMHO, and my submission will reflect this. If done well, it can create some very abstract, ethereal and esoteric imagery, which in my experience does not score well here.......
Message edited by author 2009-09-17 19:25:09. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 10:35:03 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
we'll see! This one was an accident, but a pretty cool accident. I might go and do something on purpose :D |
Wendy, if you have a car...hit the gas.
You be Thelma, I'll be Louise (we'll both go midriff at roll-over)...holding hands, whooppin cus there's no turnin back.
I'm in, if you are. |
|
|
|
09/17/2009 11:14:06 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by vawendy:
we'll see! This one was an accident, but a pretty cool accident. I might go and do something on purpose :D |
Wendy, if you have a car...hit the gas.
You be Thelma, I'll be Louise (we'll both go midriff at roll-over)...holding hands, whooppin cus there's no turnin back.
I'm in, if you are. |
I'll definitely be in with something! I have a fun idea that I want to try, but I need certain conditions for it to happen. But it would be so cool if it worked out! If not, I'll go with my lucky shot. It's more fun to get something on purpose, even though the best things usually happen by accident!
:D
Message edited by author 2009-09-17 23:15:56. |
|
|
|
09/19/2009 01:20:45 AM · #89 |
I am going for this one, wish me luck.
I have a subject in focus, as the action is in the back round, enough to tell what's happening though. I missed the action, I missed the focus. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 09:31:39 AM · #90 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Why can't we just appreciate the many ways people will choose to interpret and depict the topic? Ouf of focus, blurred, motion blur -- what difference does it make, really |
The difference is that motion blur and focus blur are two different things. We have had motion blur challenges before, and people know how to use it effectively. OOF is different and when it is done, it often comes in at the bottom of a challenge, because it is perceived as flawed. Using it effectively is the challenge this week.
If there are a huge amount of motion blur entries, I may have to assume my definition is the one in error and sit out on voting rather than be a troll. |
I have to agree entirely with Yo_Spiff here. There is a distinct technical difference between motion blur and OOF in my opinion as well. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 09:52:37 AM · #91 |
I have 2 shots. I cant decide!! AAaaaaaaaaaaaahhh!
|
|
|
|
09/20/2009 12:44:42 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think the "spirit" of the challenge allows for both techniques. |
I still have a hard time seeing motion blur as fitting the spirit of the challenge, based on the description and title. If the challenge was "blurry", that would be different. I will give the idea some consideration, however. |
If I stay here for 10 more years I'll never understand this desire for widely interpreting challenges. Free Studies are completely open - no possiblity of DMNC. Other challenges have specific topics/subjects and folks want to bend the topic/subject so that any person's own interpreation somehow meets the challenge, esentially creating more Free Studies.
"Missed Focus" (to me) means that the focus ring is in the wrong place ("missed") and is thus not focused properly on the subject. Motion blur and camera movement create blur but they do not do so by "missing the focus".
Anyway just one man's opinion and personal voting guidlines. I am sure many will disagree and while I respect that, I'll probably never fully understand it. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 12:49:12 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by bobnospum:
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think the "spirit" of the challenge allows for both techniques. |
I still have a hard time seeing motion blur as fitting the spirit of the challenge, based on the description and title. If the challenge was "blurry", that would be different. I will give the idea some consideration, however. |
If I stay here for 10 more years I'll never understand this desire for widely interpreting challenges. Free Studies are completely open - no possiblity of DMNC. Other challenges have specific topics/subjects and folks want to bend the topic/subject so that any person's own interpreation somehow meets the challenge, esentially creating more Free Studies.
"Missed Focus" (to me) means that the focus ring is in the wrong place ("missed") and is thus not focused properly on the subject. Motion blur and camera movement create blur but they do not do so by "missing the focus".
Anyway just one man's opinion and personal voting guidlines. I am sure many will disagree and while I respect that, I'll probably never fully understand it. |
but the titles aren't the challenge -- veggie tales wasn't veggie tales, it was fruit and veggies. The challenge description is the important part, and it says nothing about "missed" it simply states "oof". motion blur, camera shake, incorrectly focuses, all create an out of focus shot. If it's blurry, you really can't say it's in focus. It's not that anyone is trying to turn it into a free study, it's trying to understand what the heck people are thinking when it seems open to interpretation. When something is this open and controversial, it's helpful to get people's definitions before the challenges starts. Why sit back with your own ideas, enter something you really like, only to have it completely bashed because you didn't understand the rules? If you are entering a competition other places, don't you do the research first to see how it works? This is simply research.
Message edited by author 2009-09-20 12:58:00. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 12:58:31 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
but the titles aren't the challenge -- veggie tales wasn't veggie tales, it was fruit and veggies. The challenge description is the important part, and it says nothing about "missed" it simply states "oof". motion blur, camera shake, incorrectly focuses, all create an out of focus shot. If it's blurry, you really can't say it's in focus. |
That's how I see it, too. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 02:25:08 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
it simply states "oof". motion blur, camera shake, incorrectly focuses, all create an out of focus shot. If it's blurry, you really can't say it's in focus. |
Technically speaking, I believe when you talk about focus it relates to the focusing ring on your camera. For example, you can focus perfectly on your subject and if your subject moves it will blur. So, I actually don't consider motion blur and camera shake to be out of focus. They all do create blur but it doesn't make them one in the same.
As for the Challenge title and the description being in conflict or unclear they should go to great lengths to make them match up the best they can. I've gotten plenty of crappy score due to those conflicts and it zaps all the fun out things. I think the wide interpretation thing is baloney. You can still achieve a wide variety by setting parameters. There have been "Yellow" and "Apple" Challenges without folks feeling suffocated and variety in the entries.
I don't think there's any conflict between the title and the description in this case but some folks see the focus thing to include blur coming in other ways. Technically speaking I don't think they are correct and may get knocked around for it. I entered but I probably won't vote.
"If it's blurry, you really can't say it's in focus."
I agree with that BUT does it mean you missed the focus?
I know many of us sound pedantic but my only point is that they should make it clear what's cool and what might not fly. It's easy enough to do and it wouldn't kill anyone. If all methods of achieving blur are acceptable just say so.
Message edited by author 2009-09-20 14:33:13. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 02:32:33 PM · #96 |
| Well, I'm in with an out of focus shot however, by deliberately de-focussing it would appear as if I also have motion blur - should be interesting to read the comments lol. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 02:52:40 PM · #97 |
| stupid focus blur, I have motion blur, slow blur, flat blur, wonky blur, bird blur, naked child blur, swimming dog blur. And not one thing I can use |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 03:04:39 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
veggie tales wasn't veggie tales, it was fruit and veggies. |
Only because many entrants loosely interpreted the description. I gave higher votes to those that made scenes with the veggies. I did not give better than a 5 to even the most outstanding still life.
Originally posted by vawendy:
motion blur, camera shake, incorrectly focuses, all create an out of focus shot. |
Only the bolded characteristic makes an out of focus shot. The others are different forms of blur. Sorry, but I am going to have to be anal on the description of this one. It is clearcut. Motion blur has nothing to do with focus.
Originally posted by vawendy:
If it's blurry, you really can't say it's in focus. |
Perhaps in some cases, but if the surrounding scene is focused, then it is clear that it is strictly motion blur. The challenge description is "Use an out of focused subject in a compelling way." Making motion blurred shot and just figuring people won't be able to tell, is not using the OOF trait in a compelling way.
I shot this last night. Would you say this fits the topic?
Message edited by author 2009-09-20 15:06:57. |
|
|
|
09/20/2009 03:07:55 PM · #99 |
I say get rid of the description and just have a topic--for all challenges.
|
|
|
|
09/20/2009 03:16:16 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by AperturePriority:
I say get rid of the description and just have a topic--for all challenges. |
Why not the opposite -- a description without a "clever" title to confuse people ...
People are always going on about how the challenges should be like an "assignment" -- would an editor ask for a photo by title, or would they describe the content of the shot they want? For that reason, I apply the description when voting, not just the title ... |
|
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: 07/30/2025 05:00:36 AM EDT.
