| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/10/2011 01:17:51 AM · #101 |
I should have read this thread first. I have always felt out-of-balance socially that I thought it would help to create an out-of-balance photo, but apparently I find myself once again, like Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer and Herbie on the Island of Misfit Toys.
The prospector said it best, "How do you like that? Even among misfits, you're a misfit." SOL. ;) |
|
|
|
01/10/2011 08:53:43 AM · #102 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
...our opinion based on your interpretation of the challenge brief... |
If there is a black and white challenge, and you come up saying "I entered color because that's what I believe", I think what "I" believe (black and white) would be the correct one.
Now, at the end of this one, I am not sure if I will see a winner or runner up that is truly what this challenge is all about.
I yet to see a good sample of "Out of balance" photo EVER... |
You think the degree of agreement over what constitutes Black and White is similar to that relating to 'Out of Balance'?? |
It was an answer to your comment. I don't want to think as "my" idea for a challenge, rather something "known" not "guessed". So, if technique of a challenge known better, people would vote correctly. Having said that, this is a learning website. If I give "my" version, than come up with better one, so I know what your thinking of the challenge is, I won't attack "why did you give your opinion", I might disagree until I or you learn as correctly as possible. |
|
|
|
01/10/2011 09:07:20 AM · #103 |
I'm glad you posted here Leo because I can just refer you to  tanguera's posting a few below which says exactly what I feel about this and far more eloquently than I would've.
Thanks for taking the time to follow up on this conversation.
Paul |
|
|
|
01/10/2011 09:10:51 AM · #104 |
I still rather to learn what "Out of balance" photography is. Unless if  Langdon is trying to blow our brain without a gun... which seems pretty simple to do LOL |
|
|
|
01/10/2011 09:16:13 AM · #105 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
To unbalance something, you need two things, one subject can not be unbalanced, because there is nothing to unbalance to (visually). I assume background or space cannot count as "things", if they do, then this challenge also should be consider as "rule of thirds". Is the technique "where your eyes go to", or "where else your eyes go to"? |
I see no reason why a tiny subject located in the corner of a vast negative space would not be considered an "unbalanced" composition, so I disagree with you on this. It might not be the most creative approach, but it IS "unbalanced".
R. |
Ok, so it's also rule of thirds? and if it is, there are more than one technique for this challenge, means less DNMCs. |
|
|
|
01/10/2011 09:54:29 AM · #106 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
To unbalance something, you need two things, one subject can not be unbalanced, because there is nothing to unbalance to (visually). I assume background or space cannot count as "things", if they do, then this challenge also should be consider as "rule of thirds". Is the technique "where your eyes go to", or "where else your eyes go to"? |
I see no reason why a tiny subject located in the corner of a vast negative space would not be considered an "unbalanced" composition, so I disagree with you on this. It might not be the most creative approach, but it IS "unbalanced".
R. |
Ok, so it's also rule of thirds? and if it is, there are more than one technique for this challenge, means less DNMCs. |
I didn't say that... I said "tiny subject in corner", which is NOT rule-of-thirds. It was just one example of how a single subject and a negative space can produce an imbalanced image. Another example would be a massive subject at the very top of an otherwise empty, negative-space expanse; to the human eye, single-subjects with any mass at all belong low in the frame, and when you squeeze them in the very top that seems imbalanced to most people. Invert the same image so subject is on bottom, and it would seem more balanced, because "the weight is where it belongs". Contrariwise, birds in flight at the top would seem natural, birds in flight at the bottom (with empty sky above) subtly less so.
This whole idea of "imbalanced" is much less cut-and-dried than you are making it out to be. While your own approach is perfectly valid, it's NOT the only one. It's a fascinating challenge. My advice is to stop trying to nail it down into a single box and let it BE what it is, to start enjoying all the different approaches people took. That's my intention, anyway :-)
R. |
|
|
|
01/10/2011 10:02:05 AM · #107 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
...My advice is to stop trying to nail it down into a single box and let it BE what it is, to start enjoying all the different approaches people took. That's my intention, anyway :-)... |
I understand. However, it's also nice to argue one or two, and learn something from it :) |
|
|
|
01/10/2011 10:13:53 AM · #108 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
To unbalance something, you need two things, one subject can not be unbalanced, because there is nothing to unbalance to (visually)... |
The frame of the image itself is part of the image, so the composition balances (or unbalances itself. The subject and the negative space are parts of the whole.
|
|
|
|
01/10/2011 10:37:40 AM · #109 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
My advice is to stop trying to nail it down into a single box and let it BE what it is, to start enjoying all the different approaches people took. That's my intention, anyway :-)
R. |
This is my thought excactly. |
|
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: 04/25/2024 06:07:29 AM EDT.
