DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Shallow DOF - WOW!!!!!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 31, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 12/21/2005 09:37:52 AM · #1
I've just completed a cursory glance at the shallow DOF entries, and I have to say for the most part, they look spectacular! I expect this will be a high scoring challenge!!! Congratulations on great images to all who participated
 12/21/2005 10:54:44 AM · #2
hmmm I didn't find the entries good. they do show shallow dof, but most of them are only there for the sake of it, not much thought put into how to use shallow dof to enhance the photo.
 12/21/2005 11:01:39 AM · #3
Just because you didn't find them "Good" doesn't mean the photographer didn't put any thought into the photo. Still, I want to thank you for helping me make a decision I have been grappling with for a couple of weeks now. My membership here is up for renewal and the forum discussions (including your post above) have helped me to see that I have no interest in continuing to be a paid member here. So thank you DPC for saving me $25.

Jen
 12/21/2005 11:07:18 AM · #4
Originally posted by MrsFuzzButt:
Just because you didn't find them "Good" doesn't mean the photographer didn't put any thought into the photo. Still, I want to thank you for helping me make a decision I have been grappling with for a couple of weeks now. My membership here is up for renewal and the forum discussions (including your post above) have helped me to see that I have no interest in continuing to be a paid member here. So thank you DPC for saving me $25.

Jen

My intention was not to discourage anyone but it was a reply to the 'WOW' post. the original poster found the entries very 'WOW' and a 'high scoring challenge' and I didn't. We both shared our opinion.
 12/21/2005 11:07:20 AM · #5
I'm afraid I have to agree qaurawa. In addition, this is a cut and paste of my comment in the Shallow DOF II scores thread:

"Wow, I have looked through about 1/2 the entries and am wondering if people confused Shallow DOF with Bokeh. Yes, you need to have shallow DOF to create Bokeh, but I was expecting more delineation of the DOF in the pictures. Maybe the 2nd half of the entries I review will have more DOF represented in the pic's (at least my view of Shallow DOF).
Is anyone else seeing this, or is it just me?"

I'm hoping to get to the rest of the pictures today.
 12/21/2005 11:09:03 AM · #6
Originally posted by MrsFuzzButt:
Just because you didn't find them "Good" doesn't mean the photographer didn't put any thought into the photo. Still, I want to thank you for helping me make a decision I have been grappling with for a couple of weeks now. My membership here is up for renewal and the forum discussions (including your post above) have helped me to see that I have no interest in continuing to be a paid member here. So thank you DPC for saving me $25.

Now now, can't we all just get along. One of the great things about DPC is the ability to freely discuss differing views. We don't all have to agree, after all personal tastes will vary. This is still a great place to hone your skills as a photographer and compete against other photographers with the same goal (to improve their abilities). Membership offers you a chance to compete in more challenges as well as providing a portfolio space for others to comment on your work...

I agree, the discussion in the forums is not always pleasant, but if I read a thread I don't agree with, I will just move on (unless I feel like stirring sh#@$% up). It's no reason to cancel a membership.

Edit to add:
My first glance was admittedly a cursory one. I took the time to further review the images after the different opinions were voiced. I see what you mean about several of the images (marginal at best), but you must admit, there are a few spectacular and technically very difficult shots in there.

Message edited by author 2005-12-21 11:13:32.
 12/21/2005 11:13:01 AM · #7
I've shared my opinion as well. All I have seen the last couple of weeks is people berating the overall caliber of photos entered here. Seems the vast majority of DPCers have forgotten what it is like to be new here. The holier than thou posts saying how there is only one interpretation of a challenge topic and all the entries (other than your own of course) don't meet it and are subpar makes me sick. I am not going to waste any more of my time or money here. It is obvious to me that DPC is going somewhere I do not wish to go. I want to come here, relax and have fun. Not get told I am wrong and my photo sucks.
 12/21/2005 11:17:59 AM · #8
Ah, qaurawa snuck in a response 2 seconds before mine.

MrsFuzzButt, I think you're being a little sensitive on this one. One of the purposes of forums is for people to have a way to discuss different views. If you like all the pictures, great!, give them all high votes. Some people see them differently - that's way photography falls under the "art" category - it's all in the eyes of the beholder.
 12/21/2005 11:19:37 AM · #9
Originally posted by MrsFuzzButt:
I want to come here, relax and have fun. Not get told I am wrong and my photo sucks.

How else would you ever learn and improve then without the critisism? I would MUCH rather people told me why my photo sucked and how to improve rather than have people just blow smoke up my butt.
 12/21/2005 11:26:49 AM · #10
Originally posted by MrsFuzzButt:
Just because you didn't find them "Good" doesn't mean the photographer didn't put any thought into the photo.


Guarawa's suggestion is worth considering... that any technique or topic we're supposed to focus on should be important to the photo or enhance it in some way. If someone didn't score well because the technique was more of an afterthought or unsuitable for that particular image, then such comments are worth their weight in gold. I didn't have much direction on DPC until I received these comments in the Selective Desaturation challenge:



Originally posted by Paulk:
good picture but perhaps not the best choice for this challenge


Originally posted by Glacierwolf:
You could have pulled a 10 here but you blew it by just desaturating the unfocused (and inconsiquencial) background. You should have greyscaled the flower and that bee would have stood out like a lighthouse.


Until then, I thought my entry was pretty good and didn't understand the low score. Those comments made me understand that I was guilty of EXACTLY the same problem that Guarawa mentioned- the desaturation was just there for the sake of being there and wasn't effectively used for the challenge. I finally GOT IT (as demonstrated by the entries that followed that one). Best $25 I ever spent. :-)
 12/21/2005 11:30:24 AM · #11
But you DON'T tell people why their individual photos suck! You just come to the forums and complain that everyone misunderstood the challenge except you and tell how you voted everyone with a different interpretation low. How is that telling people how to improve?????????? Your interpretation is not the be all end all. Take a look at the previous Shallow DOF challenge. With the current definition, a lot of the top shots there would not have scored as well. A lot of people look to past challenges to get inspiration. In this challenge, if you don't have some of the foreground blurry, you suck. Oh paalease. Come donw off your high horse and realize that there are many different versions of Shallow DOF. The sites I visited just this morning vary from foreground in focus and background not to anywhere in between. It just depends on HOW SHALLOW a DOF you were going for. Not here.... you have to be the mid ground to make people happy and if you didn't do that you are wrong and don't know what it means or there wasn't "much thought put into how to use shallow dof to enhance the photo." Since it seems I am never going to be in agreement with the DPC elite I am not going to waste any more time here.
 12/21/2005 11:42:27 AM · #12
Originally posted by Palmetto_Pixels:
I've just completed a cursory glance at the shallow DOF entries, and I have to say for the most part, they look spectacular! I expect this will be a high scoring challenge!!! Congratulations on great images to all who participated


When I read this I thought that it was just posted to boost scores.
I get frustrated with threads, comments, critiques and attitudes.
Should I not renew my membership? Bottom line...everytime I check into DPC I learn something new! That's me, though. It's your choice, MrsFuzzButt. Good luck to you.
 12/21/2005 11:45:01 AM · #13
These people wanted to say goodye before you left:




Message edited by author 2005-12-21 11:47:47.
 12/21/2005 11:50:57 AM · #14
Originally posted by MrsFuzzButt:
But you DON'T tell people why their individual photos suck! You just come to the forums and complain that everyone misunderstood the challenge except you and tell how you voted everyone with a different interpretation low.


Where are you getting this from? Whether somebody says it or not, it's important that your "assignment" plays a "lead role" in the photograph. That's all he's saying. Sure, there may be different ways of expressing Shallow DOF (or any other topic), but you still have to communicate that to the voters.
 12/21/2005 11:51:45 AM · #15
Originally posted by Marjo:
When I read this I thought that it was just posted to boost scores.


Huh? I didn't even participate in this particular challenge. I was just was stating an opinion, not trying to boost scores.
 12/21/2005 11:57:08 AM · #16
Originally posted by Palmetto_Pixels:
Originally posted by Marjo:
When I read this I thought that it was just posted to boost scores.


Huh? I didn't even participate in this particular challenge. I was just was stating an opinion, not trying to boost scores.


I didn't mean anything directed at you personally. It's just the first thought that came to mind...and I was trying to make a point to MFB.
 12/21/2005 12:42:20 PM · #17
Originally posted by MrsFuzzButt:
But you DON'T tell people why their individual photos suck! You just come to the forums and complain that everyone misunderstood the challenge except you and tell how you voted everyone with a different interpretation low. How is that telling people how to improve?????????? Your interpretation is not the be all end all. Take a look at the previous Shallow DOF challenge. With the current definition, a lot of the top shots there would not have scored as well. A lot of people look to past challenges to get inspiration. In this challenge, if you don't have some of the foreground blurry, you suck. Oh paalease. Come donw off your high horse and realize that there are many different versions of Shallow DOF. The sites I visited just this morning vary from foreground in focus and background not to anywhere in between. It just depends on HOW SHALLOW a DOF you were going for. Not here.... you have to be the mid ground to make people happy and if you didn't do that you are wrong and don't know what it means or there wasn't "much thought put into how to use shallow dof to enhance the photo." Since it seems I am never going to be in agreement with the DPC elite I am not going to waste any more time here.


First of all JAYWALK, I think you are NOT funny at all with your "wave goodbye post". You know, MrsFuzzButt, it seems a lot of people on here could care LESS who leaves, because that is less competition for them.

With that said, let me say I TOTALLY understand you. And here we have another challenge where there are 642 interpretations, and that is ALL it is. I have to say, I did research on about 5 websites, and I viewed the entries here from the last Shallow DOF, and I scanned about 100 other images in other areas on the subject. This is a VERY subjective contest with a whole hell of a lot of subjective posters and entries. I myself liked another shot I did better, but to tell you the truth, my own interpretation of actual Shallow DOF from what my research brought me was there MUST be what is called a "confusion line" before and after or side to side of the subject, completely "isolating" it from the rest of the entire photo.

Example: 6 nails lined up in a row. Only the 2nd and 3rd nails are in focus. That is actual shallow DOF. It is not a telephoto shot. It is not a macro shot. It is not a shot with the closest object in the photo in focus only.

Given that, I voted according to what I learned on the subject and only those that used the correct shallow DOF using the confusion lines got my higest votes. Hell, the photo I entered was not my favorite, but I entered it simply because it had the confusion lines and I wanted to enter a correct version of shallow dof. So it isn't my interpretation of shallow dof, it is THE actual description from the research I did that gave me the cause to enter what I did.

Now, you say that those photos with this blur before and after are fairing better? Well, mine isn't. I am not even scoring a 5 yet, and my photo has fantastic shallow dof, and the subject rocks, and the title rocks. It seems photos like those that did win the last shallow dof here, where to me are nothing but close ups/macros/ etc are getting the voters attention more. I disagree with that; however, I am not going to fret about it. To me, my integrity in entering a correct photo by what "I" learned was more important than the interpretations of the wayward. LOL...

In final, please don't leave. I myself pay by the month and not by the year, just in case. LOL....My first month here I vowed to leave due to run ins with those whom act more superior than any age could possible take them, but you know what? It is a new mission for me to outdo the naysayers in challenges, and challenges is what keeps me here. Each challenge is different. Most are very subjective. I am about to start a thread now on "Ooops" because I haven't the slightest clue what the hell that is about, and "patterns" looks boring...LOL.

If you ever need to talk, or would like a DPC buddy, just pm me or email me!

Rose
 12/21/2005 12:54:05 PM · #18
Originally posted by Rose8699:
my photo has fantastic shallow dof, and the subject rocks, and the title rocks.


ahh thats where you went wrong, you should have used some pebbles ... :P
In the spirit to lighten up the mood here...

and I second Shannon on, this is the best $25 I have spent so far !!

edit : pressed enter at the wrong place :D

Message edited by author 2005-12-21 12:54:51.
 12/21/2005 12:55:42 PM · #19
Rose, I think you're over analyzing this a bit. DOF field is defined empirically as how much of the photo is in focus, front to back. To have shallow DOF, then, a photo should have fairly little of the photo in focus, front to back. It would be perfectly acceptable to have just the forground in focus, and the background out of focus, or to have only the closest object in focus.

All this talk of "lines of confusion" and stuff I think might be distracting from the larger issue of just looking at the photo for aesthetics, then noting whether it met the challenge rules of having comparitively little of the photo in focus, front to back.
 12/21/2005 12:59:52 PM · #20
Shallow depth of field does not require that only the middle is in focus. In your 6 nails example, an effective shallow depth of field could have only the first or last nail in focus. Also, using a macro lens will give you the shallowest depth of field possible as the depth of field decreases the closer you get to your subject.

And are you referring to the circle of confusion?
 12/21/2005 01:04:45 PM · #21
I found the average submittal to the challenge rather disapointing also. If the challenge was "Pink" the majority of submissions would be pretty darn pink with a few red and a few off white. Many of the shallow DOF are not.

It is a tough challenge, I feel some people don't understand how to shoot very very shallow, and some understand but face technical limitations on what their camera can do. and some of those who nailed the technical challenge failed to find a subject that benefited from the technique.

That said the best of the shots are lovely and are alot more fun to look at than phobias, those are creepy.
 12/21/2005 02:25:11 PM · #22
Originally posted by Palmetto_Pixels:
Originally posted by Marjo:
When I read this I thought that it was just posted to boost scores.


Huh? I didn't even participate in this particular challenge. I was just was stating an opinion, not trying to boost scores.


Same thing happened to me a couple months ago; I made a post telling people I'd just voted all the images in a certain challenge and I wanted to say how impressed I was at the creativity and overall quality of the images, and got crucified for "trying to manipulate the vote". I never did quite figure that one out :-)

R.
 12/21/2005 02:29:10 PM · #23
Originally posted by MrsFuzzButt:
...You just come to the forums and complain that everyone misunderstood the challenge except you and tell how you voted everyone with a different interpretation low. How is that telling people how to improve?????????? ...Since it seems I am never going to be in agreement with the DPC elite I am not going to waste any more time here.


Instead of taking your toys and going home, why not be a leader for change and post some positive forum comments?

I think you have some nice shots in your portfolio. Perhaps you could take a newbie under your wing and offer advice and counsel to them. There were lots of people in the Christmas Wish thread that were looking for something like that.
 12/21/2005 02:35:04 PM · #24
A gentle reminder to all users, new and old: please refrain from identifying entries currently being voted upon. Confine discussions of currently challenges to general comments only until after voting has finished.

Thanks!
12/21/2005 02:39:26 PM · #25
Sorry about the small incident.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/20/2024 12:00:15 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/20/2024 12:00:15 AM EDT.