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

DPChallenge Forums >> Tips, Tricks, and Q&A >> depth of field in previous challenge entries
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 42, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 01/28/2012 07:03:26 AM · #1
ive noticed when ive used a shallow dof to highlight a particular element in a picture that i want in focus and to draw the eye to, but the other elements out of focus i get comments to the extent of your picture is not in focus, when looking at the commentors they generally only have one or two kit lenses in teh 4.5-5.6 range, do you think this is them not understanding dof with faster lens?? i dont mind the comments and i'll take any comments just made me think was all.
 01/28/2012 08:10:35 AM · #2
Can you post an example?
 01/28/2012 08:10:44 AM · #3
It's a worthwhile thought, I think. But the quality of their equipment might not be the best indicator of their understanding. I get that you want to get a feel of where they're coming from by creeping their profile, and that's valid IMO. I don't know if you can get enough info from the profile though to make it worthwhile.
 01/28/2012 08:10:57 AM · #4
Post some examples.
 01/28/2012 09:23:15 AM · #5
HEE HEE


Sorry for the hi-jack, it just reminded me of this...
 01/28/2012 09:25:10 AM · #6
ahahaaahahahhhhhaha!!!
 01/28/2012 10:18:39 AM · #7
A quote I stole from Bonnie and Clyde.........."My eyes, My eyes. :O)

Ray
 01/28/2012 10:49:14 AM · #8
I often find such comments more than a little frustrating. I think this image and comments epitomises it:

01/28/2012 10:52:52 AM · #9
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
I often find such comments more than a little frustrating. I think this image and comments epitomises it:



I truly don't know why you would be frustrated by the comments as most of them are spot on, at least from my perspective.

Ray
 01/28/2012 10:54:23 AM · #10
I got the same comment on my Macro entry from a non-member, the person said "your photo is not in focus you can do this by shooting from another angle" I was like... hrr emmmmmm???? I chalk it up to not understanding DOF.
Originally posted by Giles_uk:
ive noticed when ive used a shallow dof to highlight a particular element in a picture that i want in focus and to draw the eye to, but the other elements out of focus i get comments to the extent of your picture is not in focus, when looking at the commentors they generally only have one or two kit lenses in teh 4.5-5.6 range, do you think this is them not understanding dof with faster lens?? i dont mind the comments and i'll take any comments just made me think was all.
01/28/2012 10:57:47 AM · #11
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
I often find such comments more than a little frustrating. I think this image and comments epitomises it:



I truly don't know why you would be frustrated by the comments as most of them are spot on, at least from my perspective.

Ray


Sigh...
 01/28/2012 10:58:17 AM · #12
Originally posted by ShutterRev:
I got the same comment on my Macro entry from a non-member, the person said "your photo is not in focus you can do this by shooting from another angle" I was like... hrr emmmmmm???? I chalk it up to not understanding DOF.
Originally posted by Giles_uk:
ive noticed when ive used a shallow dof to highlight a particular element in a picture that i want in focus and to draw the eye to, but the other elements out of focus i get comments to the extent of your picture is not in focus, when looking at the commentors they generally only have one or two kit lenses in teh 4.5-5.6 range, do you think this is them not understanding dof with faster lens?? i dont mind the comments and i'll take any comments just made me think was all.


Taking it from another perspective, some may instead like to see pictures that are 'in focus throughout' and consider shallow DOF to be a gimmick. I am not advocating this position, merely stating that people see things differently. For example, I generally don't consult my wife on images that are shallow DOF as she does not generally like them.
 01/28/2012 11:02:46 AM · #13

Unless they are specifically for "shallow DOF" challenges, I've noticed that they generally do not do well...as if some voters believe any out of focus areas demonstrate poor photography.
 01/28/2012 11:13:04 AM · #14
The one I posted below was for a Bokeh challenge.

I suppose to me, the effect looks entirely deliberate and comments that imply a technique fault seem a bit odd. I'm with Giles; surely people know that some lenses are built to give such effects and as such some photographers will choose to use them?

There are similar issues with the use of grain and motion blur and the comments they receive.
 01/28/2012 12:41:57 PM · #15
In fact I find it rude to assume that your image is the product of faulty technique. Disagreeing with one effect over another is one thing (e.g. I see the effect you're trying to obtain, but I think the image would have more impact with a larger/smaller depth of field), but blatantly trying to educate the photographer about an effect they weren't even trying to obtain is a whole other thing (e.g. dial your aperture larger so you can get a larger depth-of-field).

By the way Paul, I see no fault in your image, to me the effect is completely intentional and definitely adds an element of fantasy to your image.
 01/28/2012 12:48:54 PM · #16
ok maybe they're on 2 current challenges but i was trying to be discreet lol

01/28/2012 01:00:18 PM · #17
Originally posted by Cinnabear:
In fact I find it rude to assume that your image is the product of faulty technique. Disagreeing with one effect over another is one thing (e.g. I see the effect you're trying to obtain, but I think the image would have more impact with a larger/smaller depth of field), but blatantly trying to educate the photographer about an effect they weren't even trying to obtain is a whole other thing (e.g. dial your aperture larger so you can get a larger depth-of-field).

By the way Paul, I see no fault in your image, to me the effect is completely intentional and definitely adds an element of fantasy to your image.


Many thanks - though on reflection, I wouldn't want to be critical of the commenters; just expressive about the phenomenon of mismatch between intention and interpretation. As a friend has let me know in a private thread, the plane of focus is eclectic at best and I need to take some responsibility for how that is perceived.

My intention in posting here is to let Giles know that his comment resonated with my experience.

Paul
 01/28/2012 01:17:47 PM · #18
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Many thanks - though on reflection, I wouldn't want to be critical of the commenters; just expressive about the phenomenon of mismatch between intention and interpretation. As a friend has let me know in a private thread, the plane of focus is eclectic at best and I need to take some responsibility for how that is perceived.

My intention in posting here is to let Giles know that his comment resonated with my experience.

Paul


Yes, what would be the point if we all just walked around thinking "everyone else is wrong, my image is flawless!!!! #&@*!&!!!" However it's possible when people view art, they don't even consider the artist's intention before they start trying to correct perceived flaws. People AT LEAST need to try to dissect the meaning before they claim wrong technique. It's best to assume the artist intended it to be the way it is. It's never wrong to say that the meaning was translated poorly, therefore fine to suggest ways to enhance said meaning, but to completely ignore the original intent is wrong. Of course...this is DPC and I'm sure a lot of people just zoom through voting without really taking the time to truly look and digest.
 01/28/2012 01:27:32 PM · #19
It's a subtle but important difference, between "try to get more DoF" and "IMO the very narrow DoF is not working here." The first statement assumes the photographer did not know what they were doing, while the second assumes nothing. The second statement is simply a reflection of the viewer's reaction.
Nonetheless, I tend to assume that commenters that make comments like the first statement are really saying "this doesn't work for me." And if I get a lot of comments like that, then I have failed.
 01/28/2012 01:30:47 PM · #20
Originally posted by kirbic:
It's a subtle but important difference, between "try to get more DoF" and "IMO the very narrow DoF is not working here." The first statement assumes the photographer did not know what they were doing, while the second assumes nothing. The second statement is simply a reflection of the viewer's reaction.
Nonetheless, I tend to assume that commenters that make comments like the first statement are really saying "this doesn't work for me." And if I get a lot of comments like that, then I have failed.


+1
The good thing about DPC is you really get a fast, relatively unbiased opinion about your photos. You know if you succeeded or failed right away.
 01/28/2012 01:32:40 PM · #21
Originally posted by Cinnabear:
...you really get a fast, relatively unbiased opinion about your photos. You know if you succeeded or failed right away.


Oh, yeh. And sometimes it stings a little, LOL.
 01/28/2012 01:37:32 PM · #22
Originally posted by kirbic:

Oh, yeh. And sometimes it stings a little, LOL.


A little?! :P But yes...it goes without saying...we're all masochists on here. HAHA :D
 01/28/2012 02:10:37 PM · #23
Ok -- Time to get myself into some trouble here (probably not the first time. :)

First, never dismiss a comment, even if you disagree with it. The commenter may be saying that you know absolutely nothing about photography, and your technique stinks. But what they're really saying is that, not only doesn't it work for them, but it really fails (in their opinion). You may think that the commenter is an ignorant troll, but you still have feedback. A good number or commentors aren't leaving critical comments anymore, because people are making comments similar to those in this thread. If it is your prerogative to use your knowledge to create the shot, it is their prerogative to use their knowledge (even if it is limited) to make the comment, and it may help you understand why you are getting other low scores.

Second, regarding Paul's shot, even if I understood ahead of time that it was a definite choice, I still wouldn't care for the dof. I love Paul's work (which made me go look to see if I ever fav'd him, because he's definitely one of my favs), but I think the dof was not the best choice here.

So many people are softening their comments because of reactions. I still will comment on something I don't care for, but I couch it carefully. If I were to comment on Paul's shot, I'd probably say something like: "I'm not sure this shallow of a depth of field works on this." My real comment is: "With the eyes partially closed, and with the mouth so soft, the blur is very unflattering on this shot. My eye is drawn to the blurriness, which along the tilt of the head, and it makes it look like the right side (left as you're looking at the picture), is drooping and a little slack. It's not a flattering picture, but I truly believe it's the blur that's causing the issue."

So there. Now I've gotten myself into trouble. But this is the type of critiques I would like. When my photos don't work with people -- I really want to know why. And I want details. No matter what the details are. I may disagree with them, but I'd really like to know.
 01/28/2012 02:26:38 PM · #24
Originally posted by vawendy:

Second, regarding Paul's shot, even if I understood ahead of time that it was a definite choice, I still wouldn't care for the dof. I love Paul's work (which made me go look to see if I ever fav'd him, because he's definitely one of my favs), but I think the dof was not the best choice here.


I fail to understand this statement. Are you stating Paul made a mistake or that you do not like the image because of the shallow DOF? I think the latter is likely the answer.
 01/28/2012 02:39:31 PM · #25
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
Originally posted by vawendy:

Second, regarding Paul's shot, even if I understood ahead of time that it was a definite choice, I still wouldn't care for the dof. I love Paul's work (which made me go look to see if I ever fav'd him, because he's definitely one of my favs), but I think the dof was not the best choice here.


I fail to understand this statement. Are you stating Paul made a mistake or that you do not like the image because of the shallow DOF? I think the latter is likely the answer.


That truly is a fascinating question -- and really gets to the point, doesn't it?

I guess when I give a critical comment, I find what I dislike about the photo, and figure out what I would have done differently.

Yes, it's true that I don't like the image because of the shallow DOF.

But seriously, doesn't that translate into: I think Paul made a mistake in his choice?

Why do we leave a comment suggesting a different way of doing something, unless we really believe that the photographer made the wrong choice? (or that there were better choices to be made.)

It's rare that I leave a critical comment anymore -- I usually just comment on what I like. Because I do think it's presumptuous to assume that the photographer doesn't know what they're doing. I think it's sad, though. Because I received a couple of negative comments that really turned around my processing.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/28/2024 08:02:13 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: 04/28/2024 08:02:13 PM EDT.