| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/20/2011 10:01:21 AM · #126 |
Just need to say this...
I am struggling with the entries in this challenge. There are some excellent shots, many that are blow out or just high key to make them appear more light on white and then some that look like no one checked the white balance on their camera! This IS minimal editing, but it's a test of how well you can use your camera settings! Some have nailed it and other shots seem to be trying way to hard. Makes it difficult to vote in that I vote every shot in a challenge when I vote, but I don't like giving out less than average scores, nor do I like rewarding shots that have not hit the mark and still others that are trying to almost shoehorn in shots. Having said that, I do give credit for making an effort when I vote, not just....love this...hated it.... blown out and arm is missing....etc. I take the time to LOOK at the photos, not just speed vote and in that is where some of my disappointment has come.
YES, I am in this challenge, so don't go there. My own shot is not doing as well, as it started (6.75), but I did get one comment and that helped as maybe others are thinking along the same lines and I'm ok with it. It is doing better than expected, but I tried to utilize my camera to do the job! I really am dreading this, but I LOVE MINIMAL EDITING CHALLENGES!!
Off to clean house. Will vote later. :) |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 10:05:49 AM · #127 |
Look at the last white challenge. 6 of the first 10 look to have at least a blown background. I'm willing to bet that 6 of the first 10 from this challenge will be the same.
Originally posted by bergiekat:
Just need to say this...
I am struggling with the entries in this challenge. There are some excellent shots, many that are blow out or just high key to make them appear more light on white and then some that look like no one checked the white balance on their camera! This IS minimal editing, but it's a test of how well you can use your camera settings! Some have nailed it and other shots seem to be trying way to hard. Makes it difficult to vote in that I vote every shot in a challenge when I vote, but I don't like giving out less than average scores, nor do I like rewarding shots that have not hit the mark and still others that are trying to almost shoehorn in shots. Having said that, I do give credit for making an effort when I vote, not just....love this...hated it.... blown out and arm is missing....etc. I take the time to LOOK at the photos, not just speed vote and in that is where some of my disappointment has come.
YES, I am in this challenge, so don't go there. My own shot is not doing as well, as it started (6.75), but I did get one comment and that helped as maybe others are thinking along the same lines and I'm ok with it. It is doing better than expected, but I tried to utilize my camera to do the job! I really am dreading this, but I LOVE MINIMAL EDITING CHALLENGES!!
Off to clean house. Will vote later. :) |
|
|
|
|
05/20/2011 10:15:02 AM · #128 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Look at the last white challenge. 6 of the first 10 look to have at least a blown background. I'm willing to bet that 6 of the first 10 from this challenge will be the same.
Originally posted by bergiekat:
Just need to say this...
I am struggling with the entries in this challenge. There are some excellent shots, many that are blow out or just high key to make them appear more light on white and then some that look like no one checked the white balance on their camera! This IS minimal editing, but it's a test of how well you can use your camera settings! Some have nailed it and other shots seem to be trying way to hard. Makes it difficult to vote in that I vote every shot in a challenge when I vote, but I don't like giving out less than average scores, nor do I like rewarding shots that have not hit the mark and still others that are trying to almost shoehorn in shots. Having said that, I do give credit for making an effort when I vote, not just....love this...hated it.... blown out and arm is missing....etc. I take the time to LOOK at the photos, not just speed vote and in that is where some of my disappointment has come.
YES, I am in this challenge, so don't go there. My own shot is not doing as well, as it started (6.75), but I did get one comment and that helped as maybe others are thinking along the same lines and I'm ok with it. It is doing better than expected, but I tried to utilize my camera to do the job! I really am dreading this, but I LOVE MINIMAL EDITING CHALLENGES!!
Off to clean house. Will vote later. :) |
|
It's very easy to do a blown background in advanced editing. It's extremely difficult (at least I find it so) to do a blown background and a non-blown subject in minimal editing.
I have no problem with blown backgrounds. It's a style, and a choice of doing something other than a setup shot with a white backdrop. |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 10:16:08 AM · #129 |
@ Ken
I'm with ya on that thought. I've stopped worrying about the average voters around here as they never fail to disappoint. Rather, there are certain proven photographers on this site (Proven in that they have more ribbons than could be possible, their work is NOT mainstream/ stockish, and they leave comments that help explain what they saw, thus helping me to better understand what makes them tick!
I've had a couple of challenges where shots have been around or under 5.0, but had some amazing comments from some of the above type photographers that averaged 8.2 or better and I'm talking anywhere from 4-6 comments. I now live for those and all of the self proclaimed experts can do what some have come to expect, lol.
There are a few that are NOT blown out backgrounds that I would hope to do well, but tend to agree with you Ken...probably most of the top 10 will be blown out backgrounds...sigh. :)
Message edited by author 2011-05-30 18:49:22. |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 10:18:02 AM · #130 |
| I think maybe I'm talking about something different... |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 10:20:31 AM · #131 |
You are right....blowing a background and not your white subject is a huge challenge !
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Look at the last white challenge. 6 of the first 10 look to have at least a blown background. I'm willing to bet that 6 of the first 10 from this challenge will be the same.
Originally posted by bergiekat:
Just need to say this...
I am struggling with the entries in this challenge. There are some excellent shots, many that are blow out or just high key to make them appear more light on white and then some that look like no one checked the white balance on their camera! This IS minimal editing, but it's a test of how well you can use your camera settings! Some have nailed it and other shots seem to be trying way to hard. Makes it difficult to vote in that I vote every shot in a challenge when I vote, but I don't like giving out less than average scores, nor do I like rewarding shots that have not hit the mark and still others that are trying to almost shoehorn in shots. Having said that, I do give credit for making an effort when I vote, not just....love this...hated it.... blown out and arm is missing....etc. I take the time to LOOK at the photos, not just speed vote and in that is where some of my disappointment has come.
YES, I am in this challenge, so don't go there. My own shot is not doing as well, as it started (6.75), but I did get one comment and that helped as maybe others are thinking along the same lines and I'm ok with it. It is doing better than expected, but I tried to utilize my camera to do the job! I really am dreading this, but I LOVE MINIMAL EDITING CHALLENGES!!
Off to clean house. Will vote later. :) |
|
It's very easy to do a blown background in advanced editing. It's extremely difficult (at least I find it so) to do a blown background and a non-blown subject in minimal editing.
I have no problem with blown backgrounds. It's a style, and a choice of doing something other than a setup shot with a white backdrop. |
|
|
|
|
05/20/2011 10:22:55 AM · #132 |
| well apparently people are confused, I am getting a much wide range of scores, sadly more low then high, but again, I really thought this one would do well. 29 votes, 73 views and no comments, so not sure what I did wrong :/ |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 10:23:27 AM · #133 |
I wanted to enter this challenge but my imagination ran dry. But, I looked at the entries to see what is the range of subjects used for such highly demanding challenge for creativity. Here is how I break down the subjects in broad terms. I know, I know.. one has unlimited opportunity to unleash creativity within a subject, but I still think it is revealing. There are some 'signature' shots that can be seen over and over in the past challenges in one or the other form. Yet, some have really come out with interesting interpretations; kudos to them.
Flowers- 30%
Props and artefacts- 30%
People- 10%
Animals- 10% |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 11:28:48 AM · #134 |
Originally posted by bergiekat:
Just need to say this...
I am struggling with the entries in this challenge. There are some excellent shots, many that are blow out or just high key to make them appear more light on white and then some that look like no one checked the white balance on their camera! This IS minimal editing, but it's a test of how well you can use your camera settings! Some have nailed it and other shots seem to be trying way to hard. Makes it difficult to vote in that I vote every shot in a challenge when I vote, but I don't like giving out less than average scores, |
Im glad to see Im not the only one having problems with the voting. I have finished with this and will have to start commenting now...maybe try and give comments on all as this is one challenge where people could learn something from having to actually had to use the camera and not the mouse. If my comments will benefit anybody...that's another one since many might find my comments unfair..maybe, I hope not - Maybe even at risk of being called an idiot ;)
I think the minimal editing challenges is the way to go for anybody who want to start getting the answers to their question as to why they spent $xxx for their camera..
Message edited by author 2011-05-20 11:29:50. |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 12:02:50 PM · #135 |
| I agree with most of you. My photo is not that good, I probably miss interpetrated the subject, but i tried my best as well without any editing help. It's true many of the photo are amazing but I really doubt are with minimum editing..... |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 12:07:18 PM · #136 |
Originally posted by danieletagliabue:
I agree with most of you. My photo is not that good, I probably miss interpetrated the subject, but i tried my best as well without any editing help. It's true many of the photo are amazing but I really doubt are with minimum editing..... |
If you seriously doubt a photo, you can use the link to alert the SC. |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 12:10:36 PM · #137 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Well since he admitted the mistake...it is a done deal now. It will be a DQ. Should have just rode it out ! Let's say he gets 50th place and doesn't get a DQ. IMO this kind of thing happens all the time !
Originally posted by salmiakki:
If you have done editing that doesn't comply with the ruleset, then I don't think you can self dq. I believe that would result in a normal dq |
|
"Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is looking."
Even though a DQ would result in self-reporting, I think SC would consider that in a positive light should something else happen (another DQ) in the not so distant future. One DQ isn't a problem, it's when you get multiple hits that penalties kick in.
From the Challenge Rules page:
"In order to discourage repeated disqualifications and abuse of the disqualification system, the following penalties will apply for repeat disqualifications:
*
1st DQ in last 25 submissions: No penalty
*
2nd DQ in last 25 submissions: 1 week suspension of submission privileges
*
3rd DQ in last 25 submissions: 2 week suspension of submission privileges
*
4th DQ in last 25 submissions: 4 week suspension of submission privileges and 3 months of required “pre-submission” of proof file.
The above penalties will be assessed only after review by the Site Council. In exceptional circumstances, the Site Council may elect not to apply a penalty. If a user is found to have intentionally violated the Challenge Rules, the above penalties will be in addition to any assessed for the violation itself." |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 12:12:53 PM · #138 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by danieletagliabue:
I agree with most of you. My photo is not that good, I probably miss interpetrated the subject, but i tried my best as well without any editing help. It's true many of the photo are amazing but I really doubt are with minimum editing..... |
If you seriously doubt a photo, you can use the link to alert the SC. |
I second that, please do so: I think we all would prefer sending our originals to the SC and be validated, rather than getting low marks due to voters' doubts. |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 12:31:57 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by danieletagliabue:
I agree with most of you. My photo is not that good, I probably miss interpetrated the subject, but i tried my best as well without any editing help. It's true many of the photo are amazing but I really doubt are with minimum editing..... |
I am looking at the entries as if they are all legal. Let the Site Council decide if they are not within the rules, and vote accordingly. My guess is that more of them are within the rules than not. |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 01:03:55 PM · #140 |
| I would be happy with some comments as to why mine is doing so badly.. I mean 40 votes, 90 views.. not a single comment. and the scoring is alll over the map |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 02:33:02 PM · #141 |
| It has been interesting to hear how negatively people react to a blown area, when blocked up black areas are seen as being just fine. Why is a white area with no detail punishable by death while a black area with no detail featured on half of the front page at the moment? |
|
|
|
05/20/2011 06:06:35 PM · #142 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
It has been interesting to hear how negatively people react to a blown area, when blocked up black areas are seen as being just fine. Why is a white area with no detail punishable by death while a black area with no detail featured on half of the front page at the moment? |
I don't think the black areas are any better than blown out white areas, unless that is the goal. Also, these extremes mean more for pre-processed images than after one has changed them for presentation. The common thinking is that one can 'extract' information from an underexposed area than from the overexposed area in the image. But, other factors weigh in. For example, if you are shooting RAW vs. jpg, the former will be more forgiving than the latter. If the black values in an image are are hovering around '0' then you will extract a lot of noise which will not do much good either.
In a processed image, the scorers are seeing whether one has pushed the histogram (willingly or unwillingly) so far to the right (white, or 255) that the image has lost all the details. A well exposed high-key image will not be overblown. There are some excellent examples of such beautifully exposed, and I should say, STUNNING, images in this contest. |
|
|
|
05/21/2011 10:36:21 AM · #143 |
| you were allowed to use the SAVE for WEB right??? |
|
|
|
05/21/2011 11:21:56 AM · #144 |
I hope so !
Originally posted by Ja-9:
you were allowed to use the SAVE for WEB right??? |
|
|
|
|
05/21/2011 11:25:03 AM · #145 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
I hope so !
Originally posted by Ja-9:
you were allowed to use the SAVE for WEB right??? |
|
Ok, that's the only thing I wasn't sure of...I was asked for validation as well...because it's "as minimal as it gets folks"
|
|
|
|
05/21/2011 11:40:04 AM · #146 |
I have a comment from one BOZO commenting on possible blown out areas. This is the same BOZO who tells voters/commenters to check their monitors each and EVERY time they comment that they see blown areas on his/her entry !
Check your monitor BOZO ! Mwahahahaahhaha Mwahahahaahhaha
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
It has been interesting to hear how negatively people react to a blown area, when blocked up black areas are seen as being just fine. Why is a white area with no detail punishable by death while a black area with no detail featured on half of the front page at the moment? |
|
|
|
|
05/21/2011 11:55:19 AM · #147 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
I have a comment from one BOZO commenting on possible blown out areas. This is the same BOZO who tells voters/commenters to check their monitors each and EVERY time they comment that they see blown areas on his/her entry !
Check your monitor BOZO ! Mwahahahaahhaha Mwahahahaahhaha |
Sometimes, it is hard to hear constructive criticism. After all, everyone has "cost of acquisition" ownership pride in their images.
Not sure if I'm the one you are calling "BOZO", kenny. But, I did make a comment on a challenge image with a histogram that looks like this:
Um, even a BOZO might note the more than 33% pixels at 255 and the preponderance of other nearly white pixels.
There were other high key images in the challenge with good management of the number of blown out pixels:
It is possible to have white pixels less than blown out which contain detail.
Message edited by author 2011-05-21 11:59:35. |
|
|
|
05/21/2011 12:06:16 PM · #148 |
Great job hahn23! Your pictures say more than a thousand comments!! LOL.
Sometimes, it is hard to hear constructive criticism. After all, everyone has "cost of acquisition" ownership pride in their images.
Not sure if I'm the one you are calling "BOZO", kenny. But, I did make a comment on a challenge image with a histogram that looks like this:
Um, even a BOZO might note the more than 33% pixels at 255 and the preponderance of other nearly white pixels.
There were other high key images in the challenge with good management of the number of blown out pixels:
It is possible to have white pixels less than blown out which contain detail. [/quote] |
|
|
|
05/21/2011 12:17:09 PM · #149 |
I have to say Hahn23....YOU are the bozo I am speaking of and you knew exactly who's photo you were commenting on when you made that comment.
You even said you posted a histogram of my image. I will now report you to SC showing that you EXPOSED my photo to potential voters. I will request that you be suspended from the site.
EDIT: I quoted your post with the histo and will delete it after SC removes your post and the other quote that copied the histo.
Originally posted by hahn23:
Originally posted by kenskid:
I have a comment from one BOZO commenting on possible blown out areas. This is the same BOZO who tells voters/commenters to check their monitors each and EVERY time they comment that they see blown areas on his/her entry !
Check your monitor BOZO ! Mwahahahaahhaha Mwahahahaahhaha |
Sometimes, it is hard to hear constructive criticism. After all, everyone has "cost of acquisition" ownership pride in their images.
Not sure if I'm the one you are calling "BOZO", kenny. But, I did make a comment on a challenge image with a histogram that looks like this:
Um, even a BOZO might note the more than 33% pixels at 255 and the preponderance of other nearly white pixels.
There were other high key images in the challenge with good management of the number of blown out pixels:
It is possible to have white pixels less than blown out which contain detail. |
Message edited by author 2011-05-21 12:24:31. |
|
|
|
05/21/2011 12:51:16 PM · #150 |
| I made no mention of whose image the histogram belonged to...because I don't know. ALL the images in my voting window are completely anonymous as to author. And, even if I suspected the identity of the author, it wouldn't alter my vote. I vote based on the caliber of the image and appropriateness for the challenge. It doesn't matter to me who the image's author is, even if I thought I might know. |
|
