Serendipity ?!? - DPChallenge Forums

04/26/2004 05:48:27 AM · #1

Originally posted by mirdonamy:

It's always a possibility :)

Indeed. I hope my response didn't come across as patronising - it wasn't intended that way - I was just sleuthing/ thinking about how you might have received an email like that and then about how you might have received an email that you misinterpreted like that and just wondering out loud really...

:o)

Canon Digital IXUS 200 IS

04/26/2004 05:47:17 AM · #2

Alex

I would be more than happy to do that. Just send me a PM to remind me once the challenge is over - I'm quite quite senile.

Don't worry too much about score. I'm sitting at 5.2 but the important thing is that I feel happy with the image. There are things I'd improve in it for definite but I'm still happy overall.

I know that the score itself reflects the interpretation of many voters that staged shots don't meet the challenge but that's OK. It's their right to vote any way that like. I vote as I like, after all.

At the end of the day if you are happy, or if entering allows you to receive even one comment that really turns something around for you, that helps you improve in the future, or that shows you that one person really connected with and loved your image - that's the important thing.

Best of luck, Alex.

Kavey

AlexHugel

04/26/2004 05:08:42 AM · #3

Kavey, when this challange will be over I would really like to have just a few words of comment from you regarding my entry. Now it's under 5 rated and I don't think anything is going to change at this point. I think I was too optimistic when I submitted. But everything started seeing your signature ("We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are") And that gave me enaugh reasons to try. I am very disappointed about how most of the people reacted over my entry. But in the same time I feel so fortunate... ;-)

04/25/2004 08:50:31 PM · #4

It's always a possibility :)

04/25/2004 05:57:57 AM · #5

Originally posted by mirdonamy:

If you replace the word "theme" with meeting the rules then your memory of the response makes more sense.

We are asked not to assume someone has broken the RULES when we vote and to vote assuming that the entry is legitimate. We should award a score based on how well we think the entry meets the challenge and how good an image we think it is. If we suspect that rules may have been broken we should submit a DQ request to allow the Site Council to examine the issue but continue to vote as though the image was legal.

Could it be that you are rememberng a response about RULES instead of about challenge theme?

04/25/2004 05:47:26 AM · #6

Very strange. No, rules on that aspect have not changed since I've been here.

04/25/2004 04:29:11 AM · #7

I also find it interesting that the email I received stating something different then the rules state. Has anything changed over the past 6 months? I wonder why the rules say to take the theme into consideration for voting, but that email I received told me not to. I wish I kept it!!! Hmmmm, I may have to rethink this. I want to follow & honor the rules. It's only fair to everyone. I am a bit frustrated by this situation :(

04/25/2004 04:26:32 AM · #8

Originally posted by Kavey:

Originally posted by mirdonamy:
I was told by DPChallenge that it's their job to disqualify due to the theme, but our job to vote purely on the photo.

Who told you this???

This is the opposite of what is stated *somewhere* in the rules/ guidelines which ask the voters to keep the challenge theme utmost in their minds when voting. Different voters certainly give different emphasis to the challenge theme in terms of how it affects the scores they give but to ignore it completely seems to me to miss the entire point of having themed challenges in the first place.

It has also been said more times than I can remember that images are NOT considered for DQ on the basis of how well or badly they meet the challenge theme since this is something that is for voters to decide.

I had written an email a few months back, asking a few questions about themes. I was told not to vote up or down on the theme, but to vote on the photo quality itself. I was indeed told not to send a DQ to DPChallenge if I thought a photo did not meet the theme, stating that they would decide if the photo met the challenge or not without my pointing it out 'so to speak'.

So simply, I just follow the theme for my entries, and for my votes, I only vote on the photo quality (contrast, lighting, composition, etc., not theme).

Whatever anyone wants to do is fine with me. I have had plenty of classes in critiquing, so that's what I love to do. That's why I am here, to learn :)

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

04/24/2004 04:01:13 PM · #9

Thanks Eddy, sorry, I couldn't find them when I needed them to quote them in my post above, which is what I wanted to do!

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

04/24/2004 09:38:51 AM · #10

A photo will not be disqualified for "not meeting the challenge". So please do not use the "Recommend this photo for disqualification" for that purpose.

As the rules state:

While voting, users are asked to keep in highest consideration the topic of the challenge and base their rating accordingly.

So "meeting the challenge" is up to the voters to decide, not the Site Council.

04/24/2004 07:05:55 AM · #11

Originally posted by mirdonamy:

I was told by DPChallenge that it's their job to disqualify due to the theme, but our job to vote purely on the photo.

Who told you this???

This is the opposite of what is stated *somewhere* in the rules/ guidelines which ask the voters to keep the challenge theme utmost in their minds when voting. Different voters certainly give different emphasis to the challenge theme in terms of how it affects the scores they give but to ignore it completely seems to me to miss the entire point of having themed challenges in the first place.

It has also been said more times than I can remember that images are NOT considered for DQ on the basis of how well or badly they meet the challenge theme since this is something that is for voters to decide.

scottwilson

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 28mm f/2.8

04/24/2004 02:19:07 AM · #12

Originally posted by mirdonamy:

I hope nobody feels that I have voted them down because I agree or disagree with some of the theories of the interpretation of the challenge. Personally, I grade photos on composition, contrast, quality, lighting & partially on intrigue. I never take into consideration the "theme" anymore. I was told by DPChallenge that it's their job to disqualify due to the theme, but our job to vote purely on the photo. So, that's what I do. And, I find it really helps me focus on helping and learning, as opposed to being opinionated.

I don�t believe anyone had been DQ for not meeting the theme. I believe that only violating the rules will get you DQ. For what it is worth I will remove a point or two if a photo fails to meet the theme, how is it fair to the people who do take the time and effort to meet the theme not to at least take this into account.

04/24/2004 02:12:20 AM · #13

Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM

04/23/2004 04:20:42 PM · #14

Originally posted by grdSavant:

Originally posted by Kavey:

The description (which I know pretty well since I wrote it) specifically asks the viewer to represent serendipity in their image. It doesn't specify whether the image should be taken candidly (at the moment something serendipitous occurs) or whether it should be a staged shot that communicates the concept itself.
But what that "represent" tells us is that the image does need to communicate the concept to the viewer.
Many of the entries might be images that the photographer felt they were serendipitous to capture but don't convey that aspect in any way to the viewer.

Thanks for the quite informative explanation of what you had envisioned for the competition. (this is like our very own Federalist Papers) Many of us have been trying to explain the challenge in exactly the way you have put it.

Don't forget that what I had envisioned doesn't hold any importance - I say it just to explain what I was trying to convey when I wrote the description for the challenge... but it's really 100% up to voters to decide how to intepret.

Personally I'm disappointed that people are still looking for excuses to mark down, reasons to be unimpressed, rather than looking at the image, deciding how well it conveys the challenge and how much they like it and voting on that alone.

SHRUG...

grdSavant

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

04/23/2004 03:36:20 PM · #15

Originally posted by Kavey:

The description (which I know pretty well since I wrote it) specifically asks the viewer to represent serendipity in their image. It doesn't specify whether the image should be taken candidly (at the moment something serendipitous occurs) or whether it should be a staged shot that communicates the concept itself.
But what that "represent" tells us is that the image does need to communicate the concept to the viewer.
Many of the entries might be images that the photographer felt they were serendipitous to capture but don't convey that aspect in any way to the viewer.

Thanks for the quite informative explanation of what you had envisioned for the competition. (this is like our very own Federalist Papers) Many of us have been trying to explain the challenge in exactly the way you have put it.

flip89

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

04/23/2004 02:47:05 PM · #16

Originally posted by beckettboots:

Originally posted by Kavey:
I would have hoped both interpretations - the candid and the staged - would have been deemed acceptable.

I will admit that when the challenge was open I didn't think that a staged shot would qualify, but now that I'm looking at them, I find that both are perfectly acceptable - but I might be scoring a little tougher on the staged shots because I figure that they have greater control over many more aspects of their shoot.

That's a good way to do it and I think that's how it should be. Staged shots don't look good if they are too contrived anyway :-).

beckettboots

04/23/2004 02:38:06 PM · #17

Originally posted by Kavey:

I would have hoped both interpretations - the candid and the staged - would have been deemed acceptable.

I will admit that when the challenge was open I didn't think that a staged shot would qualify, but now that I'm looking at them, I find that both are perfectly acceptable - but I might be scoring a little tougher on the staged shots because I figure that they have greater control over many more aspects of their shoot.

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

04/23/2004 02:22:59 PM · #18

Originally posted by flip89:

Originally posted by drdespair:
I think we are all starting to see the issues with this challenge, I personally am not disappointed with the low score my image is getting, yeah I set my shot up, but my interpretation of the challenge was that we could create an image which represented serendipity, so from my point of view it doesn�t matter how set-up the image is, as long as I get what the photographer is trying to show. Unfortunately while grading the photos I found my self faced with several works which look nice, but I could not link what it had to do with serendipity, for a few of them I went on the web to see if I can find some reference to the subject, to be fair in my evaluation.

You got it. The challenge description was "to create an image which represent serendipity" - and many entrants clearly set up their scenes because the challenge told them to do so. But viewers and some other entrants seem to forget or ignore that the challenge was about creating a representation and, not looking for a lucky shot.

Perhaps this could have been emphasized (like how you did it in bold) in the description. I am assuming that many of the entries that were 'set up' or 'contrived' are being penalized, a presumption that could be false, of course.

I don't think it's false - I have seen SEVERAL posts in various threads stating that the poster feels that staged images aren't appropriate and that only candids of serendipitous situations that occured during challenge week are acceptable.

I'm not too fussed about my score but I do think it's sad that people insist on looking for ways to judge entries as not meeting the challenge even for a challenge as context driven as this one.

I would have hoped both interpretations - the candid and the staged - would have been deemed acceptable.

flip89

Nikon D700

04/23/2004 01:58:20 PM · #19

Originally posted by drdespair:

I think we are all starting to see the issues with this challenge, I personally am not disappointed with the low score my image is getting, yeah I set my shot up, but my interpretation of the challenge was that we could create an image which represented serendipity, so from my point of view it doesn�t matter how set-up the image is, as long as I get what the photographer is trying to show. Unfortunately while grading the photos I found my self faced with several works which look nice, but I could not link what it had to do with serendipity, for a few of them I went on the web to see if I can find some reference to the subject, to be fair in my evaluation.

You got it. The challenge description was "to create an image which represent serendipity" - and many entrants clearly set up their scenes because the challenge told them to do so. But viewers and some other entrants seem to forget or ignore that the challenge was about creating a representation and, not looking for a lucky shot.

Perhaps this could have been emphasized (like how you did it in bold) in the description. I am assuming that many of the entries that were 'set up' or 'contrived' are being penalized, a presumption that could be false, of course.

admart01

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

04/23/2004 01:32:00 PM · #20

Originally posted by Resurrected:

Whats with all the staged pictures? The idea is to go out and take pictures of something that you didnt expect to find...sort of a discovery. It isnt a set up picture shoot. It seems like the photos that were staged didnt have anything very interesting to photograph.

ReS

My shot isn't stage so I'm getting the "opposite" comment - doesn't meet the challenge because there isn't an "obvious connection to the theme" ... go figure! Either way, one group of folks won't be pleased.

04/23/2004 01:27:10 PM · #21

Just to throw in another opinion. I found the theme to be an excellent one! I knew that it was not something I could photograph with a goal. I just had to catch a great photo or see something that I didn't expect to see. I wanted it to be true, unexpected and in the simplest of words: a pleasant surprise.

I actually wasn't going to enter this challenge, but as you'd have it, i was pleasantly surprised while out with my camera one night, and so I entered. I personally don't find the shots of 'posed' serendipity too engaging, but to each his/her own. I was just happy to have stumbled across something that i could enter.

This was fun!

04/23/2004 12:19:50 PM · #22

Originally posted by Resurrected:

Here are two excerps from the challenge description.(see bold text at bottom) They both tell you exactly what to photo. Something accidental...and something you didnt expect to find. Yes this is a broad topic but it is something you didnt expect to see. It allows you to happen upon a "NEW" discovery by "ACCIDENT". It does say accident...am I right? So in turn that would convey to me that you are to go in search for this photo not just set up a photo. Head out and find something you didnt expect to find. This could be ANYTHING. Just a setup photo represents lack of thought or the inability to see something you didnt expect to see or even a time restraint. Yes the topic is broad and yes you would have a bunch of photos that dont mean much to the viewer but in the reality of it all the description after the voting may portray a new view to you.

Some examples that I persoanlly thought would be good photos. It could be a bunny in the middle of a BIG city.(I have seen them in downtown chicago a couple times...very odd) Thats not expected. Or maybe even taking a shot of an odd looking person. Which by the way I am surprised I didnt see any photos of. Those to me would be serendipitous photos. To go in search of one thing but happen upon something you didnt expect or didnt intend to encounter.

"a fortunate yet accidental discovery"

"always making discoveries, by accidents and sagacity, of things which they were not in quest of"

I don't think Serendipity is merely something unexpected - there must also be the fortunate element as well.

A bunny in a big city might indeed be unexpected but, other than the surprise value, what's fortunate about it? Unless you add the additional premise that you were either hoping to buy a pet bunny or make bunny stew... then it would be serendipitous.

And I am curious about how you deliberately quote the parts of the description that are intended to explain the meaning of the word and ignore the end of the description which is about what to DO.

Message edited by author 2004-04-23 12:20:17.

Resurrected

HP PhotoSmart 612

04/23/2004 12:13:58 PM · #23