| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/07/2011 12:15:20 AM · #1 |
Voting is gonna be hard for this one. There are alot of images I really like but given the challenge, some are silly/cute and do in a way make some sense...
Oh what to do |
|
|
|
10/07/2011 12:13:50 AM · #2 |
| Looks like we have a club ... great membership! :D |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 11:58:40 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by JuliBoc:
Mine makes no sense to me, but is it "nonsense"??? Who wants to race me for the brown? |
Probably me. I'm not sure if mine is nonsense or just rubbish.
|
|
|
|
10/06/2011 11:57:35 PM · #4 |
| That is the question! Yes, I'll race you. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 11:06:24 PM · #5 |
| Mine makes no sense to me, but is it "nonsense"??? Who wants to race me for the brown? |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 10:53:29 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
It was probably the 1980's, during the Crack era. |
Are you thinking of the coin slot challenge?
Message edited by author 2011-10-06 22:54:19. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 08:17:18 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
voters have always been like teenage girls in the mall, wearing northface denali jackets and uggs on the outside of their skinny jeans, with long straight hair in a pony tail. unknowingly striving for perfect similarity of "literal" challenge interpretations. |
You had me at "skinny jeans"... |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 07:43:35 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I want to hear more about this golden age when dpc voters were open-minded.
The 1920s perhaps? No, it couldn't have been during Prohibition. It was probably the 1980's, during the Crack era. |
voters have always been like teenage girls in the mall, wearing northface denali jackets and uggs on the outside of their skinny jeans, with long straight hair in a pony tail. unknowingly striving for perfect similarity of "literal" challenge interpretations. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 05:58:56 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I want to hear more about this golden age when dpc voters were open-minded.
The 1920s perhaps? No, it couldn't have been during Prohibition. It was probably the 1980's, during the Crack era. |
Open minded... or delusional :O)
Ray |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 05:23:53 PM · #10 |
I want to hear more about this golden age when dpc voters were open-minded.
The 1920s perhaps? No, it couldn't have been during Prohibition. It was probably the 1980's, during the Crack era. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 04:16:48 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by hahn23:
One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad. |
IMO, it is the voters' definition of the challenge topic that matters since they are the judges. Some will see it the artist's way, some will not, some won't care. Your job as the artist, aside from taking a good photograph, is to convince enough of them that your entry fits. Just be thankful there are many of them. |
Some voters are spending too much time scrutinizing an image for challenge compliance... looking for a reason to cast a low vote. |
Seriously?? On what basis are you making that assessment?? Always the victim, Hahn. If voters don't see things your way, it's because they are out to get you.
The voting may have elements of unfairness, but if all you care about is your score, then why not just play along and deliver the appropriate literal-topic-interpretation, eye-candy that consistently scores highly instead of bucking the reality and then complaining about it? If you don't care about your score (highly recommended), then just shoot what you like and appreciate the few many that appreciate your work. Frankly, I don't know why you enter challenges here - you certainly don't need the validation that you are a gifted and skilled photographer and there is no monetary benefit, so why bother?
edited because there are actually many who appreciate your images, myself included, regardless of the score I give it.
Message edited by author 2011-10-06 16:19:28. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 04:14:23 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
There has been a change in recent months. Some voters are spending too much time scrutinizing an image for challenge compliance... looking for a reason to cast a low vote. It used to be that images which met the challenge ... generally.... were assessed for the caliber of the photography. And, it used to be common for there to be more votes than entries. Not any more! That gives more power to the fewer voters, some of whom are using a narrower definition of the challenge than intended. I'd simply like to see this remain a photography site, rather than a "tear down your neighbor" tactical vote, intended to improve your challenge ranking. |
...and of course there is empirical evidence to support this claim?
Sorry my friend, I am not buying it... voters have and continue to vote according to their preferences.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 04:01:14 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by hahn23:
One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad. |
IMO, it is the voters' definition of the challenge topic that matters since they are the judges. Some will see it the artist's way, some will not, some won't care. Your job as the artist, aside from taking a good photograph, is to convince enough of them that your entry fits. Just be thankful there are many of them. |
There has been a change in recent months. Some voters are spending too much time scrutinizing an image for challenge compliance... looking for a reason to cast a low vote. It used to be that images which met the challenge ... generally.... were assessed for the caliber of the photography. And, it used to be common for there to be more votes than entries. Not any more! That gives more power to the fewer voters, some of whom are using a narrower definition of the challenge than intended. I'd simply like to see this remain a photography site, rather than a "tear down your neighbor" tactical vote, intended to improve your challenge ranking. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 03:21:54 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad. |
IMO, it is the voters' definition of the challenge topic that matters since they are the judges. Some will see it the artist's way, some will not, some won't care. Your job as the artist, aside from taking a good photograph, is to convince enough of them that your entry fits. Just be thankful there are many of them. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 01:37:57 PM · #15 |
| I'm in, but I found that, for this challenge, it was extremely difficult to come up with a good idea. I did come up with what I think is a fantastic idea but it was a lucky thought (if that makes any sense). If I hadn't come up with this fleeting thought then I wouldn't have anything because I have tried to think of another idea and can't. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 01:15:07 PM · #16 |
| I amhaving trouble in that my proposed entry may make too much sense. - or as Ken may have previously pointed out, perhaps entering something sensible is more nonsensical than a blatant attempt at nonsense. Anyway, my title makes it more nonsense than the photo is itself. I hope we get some voters with good senses of humor, not nonsenses of humor. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 01:01:45 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad. |
so, it's a "silly" FS
i'll pass and not vote
next! |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 12:55:58 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by hahn23:
One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad. |
Well put.
I looked at your portfolio, very impressive. I was looking for the nonsense shots you spoke of, but only found this. 
Get it? "Non-cents" hee hee |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 11:53:51 AM · #19 |
| One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad. |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 10:34:07 AM · #20 |
He is just being silly... |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 10:21:47 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by mefnj:
The sample photo is certainly SILLY, but it still makes sense (two guys being funny). How is this "nonsense" in terms of the challenge description? |
Originally posted by dtremain:
Originally posted by crowis:
I feel Captain Underpants and his trusty side-kick Hair-Shirt man gearing up for another showing!!!!  |
This definitely qualifies as nonsense - the Capt. has his tights on OVER his pants, so they should be Overpants, not Underpants... |
I agree with  Crowis, any "nonsense" photo can be deemed "just silly" with that attitude. That shot totally makes "no sense"...
If I had a shot of say an astronaut wearing a top hat, using a chainsaw to cut a refridgerator, while on the ocean floor, I am sure someone can opinionate, "That is just silly", when others think "nonsense". So what is the determining factor of "Nonsense" or "Sense"??? |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 09:56:47 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by crowis:
I feel Captain Underpants and his trusty side-kick Hair-Shirt man gearing up for another showing!!!! |
This definitely qualifies as nonsense - the Capt. has his tights on OVER his pants, so they should be Overpants, not Underpants... |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 09:55:14 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by IAmEliKatz:
Anyone not entering want to help me decide?? |
sure... |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 09:34:40 AM · #24 |
Nonsense = Take a photograph of all the new Plug-in's I have to buy for a portrait workshop this weekend ((((with all of 3 days notice beforehand))
=\
=| |
|
|
|
10/06/2011 08:38:01 AM · #25 |
| The sample photo is certainly SILLY, but it still makes sense (two guys being funny). How is this "nonsense" in terms of the challenge description? |
|
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: 04/23/2024 02:17:21 PM EDT.
