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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Share your SCORES pre-POSTHUMOUSly
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 393, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/26/2010 07:55:51 AM · #76
Originally posted by h2:

I don't feel threatened.. And I don't see the juxtaposition, unless you think "attitude" is only certain people's attitude. (for example, people, that give low scores to excellent photos, just to prevent them from scoring highly, or, the other way round, hand out 10s to images, just because they are less well executed - not saying, there aren't less well executed images that still deserve 10s - that's what I call dishonesty, not attitude. So in that way you are right, dishonesty threatens me.)


Um, i think i'm missing something here. Where on earth is this threat of dishonesty coming from? That's gone over my head. Are you implying that because there are images you don't understand or like then it is impossible for others to like them and so they must only score highly out of some dishonest devious plan? Weird.
11/26/2010 07:57:24 AM · #77
I was going to post my score, but it seems this is no longer a scores thread. :(
11/26/2010 08:00:42 AM · #78
Originally posted by Kelli:

I was going to post my score, but it seems this is no longer a scores thread. :(


Yes, it has gone off on a tangent hasn't it. Back on track then

Votes:26
Views:56
Avg Vote:4.6154
Comments:3
11/26/2010 08:02:57 AM · #79
Originally posted by Kelli:

I was going to post my score, but it seems this is no longer a scores thread. :(


Awfully good point Kelli. Please post it. I'd much rather read that than what I have been reading. My own score is ... where it always is: bit south of ordinary.
11/26/2010 08:04:51 AM · #80
LOL! That's better! Mine isn't much to look at either, but it was fun shooting...

Votes: 29
Views: 62
Avg Vote: 5.4483
Comments: 2
11/26/2010 08:12:03 AM · #81
Originally posted by ubique:

Please, h2 and (to a much lesser extent) gyaban, back off a bit on the sensitivity. Don't take the existence this challenge as a personal slight. You are both immensely successful and good at whatever the hell it is that you do with your cameras. None of us on the dark side cares nor is threatened by you, none of us feels defensive about your criticisms, implied or expressed. Liberace and Michael Jackson may alas be gone now, but if Billy Ray Cyrus or Whitney Houston ever need some new profile pics they will call you and not us. Nobody will ever buy our stuff. Just be happy with that.


I don't think I am extremely sensitive about it... Photography is not my main work, I am not earning any money with it, and don't intend to. Just enjoying my time, and trying to learn how to get better at it, that's all.

Also I don't see why we tend to oppose artistic approaches and technical skills, both are needed to achieve the best results. A perfectly sharp glass of wine shot may be boring, but so is a photo coming off a randomly shaked camera. We are all on that path, just walking from different ends :)
11/26/2010 08:28:45 AM · #82
Originally posted by ubique:

Please, h2 and (to a much lesser extent) gyaban, back off a bit on the sensitivity. Don't take the existence this challenge as a personal slight. You are both immensely successful and good at whatever the hell it is that you do with your cameras. None of us on the dark side cares nor is threatened by you, none of us feels defensive about your criticisms, implied or expressed. Liberace and Michael Jackson may alas be gone now, but if Billy Ray Cyrus or Whitney Houston ever need some new profile pics they will call you and not us. Nobody will ever buy our stuff. Just be happy with that.


That really made me smile.
You miss the point, though. I wouldn't reject Whitney's call nor had I Liberace's, but, probably as well as you, I take photographs because I like to take photographs and because I want to take images of what I see.
And I don't care if you sell any of your work or if you get famous one day. Which takes me to

Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:

I'm currently studying for an MA in documentary photography and if i critiqued images such as Nan Goldin's self portrait or Stephen Shore's photographs or an an image by Giacomo Brunelli with an emphasis on technical quality i'd do pretty piss poor really. It's different way of looking at images and i believe that if you can only view photography through one filter, such as i think Oliver may be doing, then anything you don't understand or don't like you are going to dismiss as 'pretentious' or the art version of the Emperor's New Clothes (not accusations made in this thread but the usual stuff that has come up elsewhere).


Three different kinds of photographs to me and probably made for different purposes. Nan Goldin's SP is strictly documentary, she is considered an artist, but would she really call her SP art? Few people would hang it on their wall for it's artistic value, rather buy it for investment or as a kind of intellectual bling. Stephen Shore's shot surely was meant to be documentary, but, taken out of the temporal context, has turned into art. Brunelli's shots are strictly artistic, if I had to critique it under documentary aspects they'd have to fail. What all three examples have in common: The artists exactly knew what they were doing, they know the technicals, but have a different way of using them. I will always honor that when I see it, all this is not about what I like or what I understand. Just FYI and maybe explaining our different POVs (not wanting to show off): I have an MA in Applied Design and of course that filters my perception. BTW, I wish we could discuss this in german, all that looking usp in teh dictionary is annoying :)
11/26/2010 08:30:43 AM · #83
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:

Originally posted by h2:

I don't feel threatened.. And I don't see the juxtaposition, unless you think "attitude" is only certain people's attitude. (for example, people, that give low scores to excellent photos, just to prevent them from scoring highly, or, the other way round, hand out 10s to images, just because they are less well executed - not saying, there aren't less well executed images that still deserve 10s - that's what I call dishonesty, not attitude. So in that way you are right, dishonesty threatens me.)


Are you implying that because there are images you don't understand or like then it is impossible for others to like them and so they must only score highly out of some dishonest devious plan?


That's not what I said.
11/26/2010 08:47:48 AM · #84
Originally posted by h2:

Originally posted by ubique:

Please, h2 and (to a much lesser extent) gyaban, back off a bit on the sensitivity. Don't take the existence this challenge as a personal slight. You are both immensely successful and good at whatever the hell it is that you do with your cameras. None of us on the dark side cares nor is threatened by you, none of us feels defensive about your criticisms, implied or expressed. Liberace and Michael Jackson may alas be gone now, but if Billy Ray Cyrus or Whitney Houston ever need some new profile pics they will call you and not us. Nobody will ever buy our stuff. Just be happy with that.


That really made me smile.
You miss the point, though. I wouldn't reject Whitney's call nor had I Liberace's, but, probably as well as you, I take photographs because I like to take photographs and because I want to take images of what I see.
And I don't care if you sell any of your work or if you get famous one day. Which takes me to

Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:

I'm currently studying for an MA in documentary photography and if i critiqued images such as Nan Goldin's self portrait or Stephen Shore's photographs or an an image by Giacomo Brunelli with an emphasis on technical quality i'd do pretty piss poor really. It's different way of looking at images and i believe that if you can only view photography through one filter, such as i think Oliver may be doing, then anything you don't understand or don't like you are going to dismiss as 'pretentious' or the art version of the Emperor's New Clothes (not accusations made in this thread but the usual stuff that has come up elsewhere).


Three different kinds of photographs to me and probably made for different purposes. Nan Goldin's SP is strictly documentary, she is considered an artist, but would she really call her SP art? Few people would hang it on their wall for it's artistic value, rather buy it for investment or as a kind of intellectual bling. Stephen Shore's shot surely was meant to be documentary, but, taken out of the temporal context, has turned into art. Brunelli's shots are strictly artistic, if I had to critique it under documentary aspects they'd have to fail. What all three examples have in common: The artists exactly knew what they were doing, they know the technicals, but have a different way of using them. I will always honor that when I see it, all this is not about what I like or what I understand. Just FYI and maybe explaining our different POVs (not wanting to show off): I have an MA in Applied Design and of course that filters my perception. BTW, I wish we could discuss this in german, all that looking usp in teh dictionary is annoying :)


All very good points Oliver. I would say that you know in retrospect that those artists knew what they were doing but you have no idea the intention or technical skill of the anonymous entries so really it is only the actual image that counts. For myself i tend to assume a level of intention in all images so i can't really judge anything as incompetent. Your design background is interesting as that shows strongly in your work. I have more of an art background my self so i guess that shows. Don't speak German sadly. Wish i could.
11/26/2010 08:49:05 AM · #85
Originally posted by h2:

Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:

Originally posted by h2:

I don't feel threatened.. And I don't see the juxtaposition, unless you think "attitude" is only certain people's attitude. (for example, people, that give low scores to excellent photos, just to prevent them from scoring highly, or, the other way round, hand out 10s to images, just because they are less well executed - not saying, there aren't less well executed images that still deserve 10s - that's what I call dishonesty, not attitude. So in that way you are right, dishonesty threatens me.)


Are you implying that because there are images you don't understand or like then it is impossible for others to like them and so they must only score highly out of some dishonest devious plan?


That's not what I said.


No, i'm not sure what you were saying really so probably misunderstood so apologies about that.
11/26/2010 08:59:27 AM · #86
Originally posted by h2:

BTW, I wish we could discuss this in german, all that looking usp in teh dictionary is annoying :)

Ich verstehe nicht.

11/26/2010 09:07:42 AM · #87
Originally posted by h2:

Can't wait to see which one is yours, Clive.
And sorry to all who didn't get a comment from me yet, I had to stop commenting after #26 because I was totally blown away by the amount of incompetence shown here.
Must urgently produce some eye candy now, maybe I feel better afterwards and can go on.

You have rated 133 of 133 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 26 images (20%) in this challenge.
You have given an average score of 3.4962.
(including two 10s and three 8s)


Well, I received a kind comment from you and it was much appreciated.

My photo however is in the 4.6 range (even though on pure photo quality, it should be I would think 5.4 or higher)
11/26/2010 09:22:41 AM · #88
I was going to start my votes in this one, but since I really did not understand the challenge, I'm not sure how to calibrate my vote.
Should I just vote on the image as if free study? I keep reading about blurry images. Is blurry actually better for this challenge?
I thought under appreciated was the goal and not just a OOF or blurred image.
11/26/2010 09:26:10 AM · #89
Originally posted by amsterdamman:

I was going to start my votes in this one, but since I really did not understand the challenge, I'm not sure how to calibrate my vote.
Should I just vote on the image as if free study? I keep reading about blurry images. Is blurry actually better for this challenge?
I thought under appreciated was the goal and not just a OOF or blurred image.

The images do not at all need to be blury or OOF.

You should vote as you like. I vote as I normally do but personally prefer images with a message to images of for example a water droplet which to me is just a picture of an object and not a picture that tells a thousand words. In this particular challenge, I think a picture that tells a story might be better off than the pure eye-candy. IMO

Message edited by author 2010-11-26 09:27:21.
11/26/2010 09:30:10 AM · #90
Excellent. My score is only 5.6xx, but got an awesome comment from Posthumous. The real winners in this challenge will be the Posthumous Ribbons. I suspect the competition on that front will be tough, though.
11/26/2010 09:39:44 AM · #91
Originally posted by wiesener:

I woke up to a 6.35 with 20 votes. Now, 5 votes later it's down to a 6. Oh well, it was glorious for the second it lasted!

Oh, and I am one of those that hope for a good score, no matter what challenge I enter. I'm sure most of you had that attitude before winning your first ribbons...


12 more votes and I'm back at 6.35! Woot :)

Oh, and I got a really nice comment from TrollMan :D

Message edited by author 2010-11-26 09:40:21.
11/26/2010 10:20:31 AM · #92
Votes: 40
Views: 69
Avg Vote: 5.1000
Comments: 2

Not doing the best but I LOVE my comments :D
11/26/2010 10:20:47 AM · #93
Votes: 34
Views: 66
Avg Vote: 5.1176
Comments: 4

I got great comments from posthumous, trollman, tanguera, and one not so nice one from h2! So even though my score isn't that great I feel like I must be right on track.
11/26/2010 10:22:42 AM · #94
Originally posted by amsterdamman:

I was going to start my votes in this one, but since I really did not understand the challenge, I'm not sure how to calibrate my vote.
Should I just vote on the image as if free study? I keep reading about blurry images. Is blurry actually better for this challenge?
I thought under appreciated was the goal and not just a OOF or blurred image.


Amsterdamman: Being relatively new to DPC I looked at every posthumous award I could find, and in MY OPINION it's not about blurr or swirl, or weird and fuzzy black and whites, it's about doing a photo your passionate about doing processing your passionate about and doing it to the best of your ability.. Any how that's how I entered and thats how I'm voteing, stepping out of my comfort zone in the voteing and looking deep into a photo to see if "the feel" is there... I've 8 and 9nd several that I might have skipped over before because I feel the work put into the photo and the processing were very honest and done well. Actually I consider it a really eye opening challenge making me look much deeper into what makes a good photo...
11/26/2010 10:38:58 AM · #95
Oh! I thought perhaps this image would go into the commentless category and remain zero all week...but someone found something nice to say!

Thank you...;-)

P.S. Does The Hat come with Mickey Mouse ears?
11/26/2010 10:40:20 AM · #96
Posthumous Ribbon
Votes: 38
Views: 85
Avg Vote: 6.1579
Comments: 5
Favorites: 1

I like my h2 comment. He's a good antagonist. He's smart, unflinching, detail-oriented and fails to understand certain concepts, like "technical quality" and "competence." He is eager to point out a contradiction that I find very intriguing: "the posthumous cliche." Anything is subject to the disease of cliche. h2 is like a virus that makes your immune system stronger...
11/26/2010 10:41:46 AM · #97
I never thought I would say this but....

..all I need is 5 (pumb pumb ba ba ba (from Beatles))

Votes: 42
Views: 91
Avg Vote: 4.9286
Comments: 2
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
11/26/2010 10:42:57 AM · #98
He must be so proud.

Originally posted by posthumous:

h2 is like a virus that makes your immune system stronger...
11/26/2010 10:57:41 AM · #99
Originally posted by h2:

Can't wait to see which one is yours, Clive.
And sorry to all who didn't get a comment from me yet, I had to stop commenting after #26 because I was totally blown away by the amount of incompetence shown here.
Must urgently produce some eye candy now, maybe I feel better afterwards and can go on.

You have rated 133 of 133 images (100%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 26 images (20%) in this challenge.
You have given an average score of 3.4962.
(including two 10s and three 8s)

LOL! Oh, keep commenting, Oliver. You haven't reached my horribly abyssmal blurry mess yet. :-)
11/26/2010 11:00:15 AM · #100
Don liked my entry.

I win. :)

As for the voters:
Votes: 41
Views: 73
Avg Vote: 5.0732
Comments: 2
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 06:54:30 PM

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: 03/28/2024 06:54:30 PM EDT.