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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> The Flying Pig
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 81, (reverse)
11/04/2012 12:59:18 PM · #26
Pixelpig, thanks for the mention. This is a category dear to my heart.
The old "what would happen if...". Here are some more of my favorites,
in the take away expected reality category.
11/04/2012 01:24:42 PM · #27
Here's my latest.

They're all curiously the same & also curiously different. This is reducing my photographs to only the things that I like. Detail signifying nothing. Motion going nowhere. The cover of the book, but no story. All the elements of a good composition. No subject. Viewed at a distance, the comp looses detail, becomes simplified. Up close the detail seduces the eye into overlooking the shapes, forms & lines.

Message edited by author 2012-11-17 13:37:13.
11/09/2012 09:52:06 AM · #28
The Flying Pig for the Windows Challenge goes to
21_F.gif PennyStreet
"windows update"

A fine example of photography used to create fine art.

This wonderful composition uses the process of photo montage to combine many photo-realistic images & the result is not at all realistic, but more like personal moments remembered all at once, in a single vision. It is unique to its creator & experienced uniquely by each viewer.

I recommend another look!

Message edited by author 2012-11-09 09:56:05.
11/09/2012 12:26:46 PM · #29
Thanks a lot for the award!
I'm not much of an expert with the edits, my goal is to combine things and have them look well, compositionally... fill the frame. I enjoy montages when it comes to paintings and I obviously like abstracts so I just try and merge the two together. This image is about 5 different frames but one or two of them are overlaid a couple of times in different sizes. I am amazed at what people come up with. Again, thanks for noticing my efforts.
11/09/2012 01:07:04 PM · #30
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039947.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039980.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039302.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039845.jpg
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039954.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039150.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039944.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039920.jpg
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039938.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039907.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039975.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039956.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039155.jpg

From the Windows Challenge
These all have that certain something about them, an absence of the 4th element, Time, & a presence of fine art. It's impressive to see them all in one place. There's a lot of talent here at DPC.

Message edited by author 2012-11-09 13:07:51.
11/09/2012 02:14:10 PM · #31
Thrilled to see my shot amongst so much talent. Thank you.
11/09/2012 02:52:03 PM · #32

pixelpig's image reminds me of Duchamp's image:


It's very interesting to talk about "time" being in an "image," and there are multiple ways for this to occur.

For example, Duchamp was trying to *introduce* time into his image by capturing motion. It's important to realize that painting and photography have two very different relationships with time. A photograph is an instant capture of a moment, while a painting is laboriously constructed. The qualities that pixelpig tries to draw out of photos are qualities which have always been inherent to painting, and which many painters have tried to actually remove from painting, to make their paintings more like photographs (even before photography was invented).

Another way of saying this is that pixelpig is trying to make the image look "built," an image that doesn't look like anything but what it is, whereas a "realist" painter is trying to make the image look like a capture of a real moment (even though in reality it was "built" and reflects no real moment).

So the "time" in pixelpig's image is not the time of a moment. There is no "before" or "after" to pixelpig's image. Instead, it has Duchamp's time-as-motion, an illusion that was built up from nothing. There's even the added deliciousness of pixelpig's original image, which was created with time-lapse motion blur, but only used to create a sort of texture.

Interestingly, a photographer "proved" that Duchamp was correct about time:


There's a third way that time gets into paintings, which is arguably impossible in a photograph. Painting captures the motion of the brush, which reflects the motion of the hand, which reflects the motion of the body. This body motion, or dance, becomes embedded in the work... which is why some painters try to paint from the shoulder instead of the wrist. But I'm digressing...
11/09/2012 08:58:42 PM · #33
I wonder what the painters of the early 20th century would think of our abstract photography? What would Mr. Duchamp think of my comp, I wonder?

There isn't anything that exists without Time, unless it's Space. Space may exist by itself, but it's impossible to move through space without Time.

Space and Time exist within the processes of photography and within the processes of painting, but in different ways.

In photography, time is used to control the exposure. There is Light, reflected & refracted. Something is used to control the Light. Something is used to record the presence of Light. Time is used to control the exposure. All 4 elements are required for photography to take place. The only element that can be removed is Time, & only after photography has happened. It might be possible to say that photography is primarily about Light & time. Not space. The camera exists in space, & uses space to control depth of field.

In painting, Time is an unknown presence & remains so until after the painting is completed. The artist's physical human brain is unable to recognize time, its 5 senses keep it contained in the 'now.' A painting is not created in relation to time but in response to the artist's inner vision & physical capabilities.

Unlike a photographer, an artist can create directly from a personal vision, with no example or likeness in the real world. The challenge for me is using a camera more like I would use paint & a brush, directly expressing my personal vision. The energy for painting is created in the small of my back--I paint on my feet, usually to music, with whole-body motions & bigger canvases. And you know what? it's funny but I enjoy using camera motion in many of my shots.

I am experimenting with using PP to remove Time from my images. So far, I've discovered that the best, quickest way is to use multiple originals, some of which I create, combined to create an abstract. Maybe I'm converting Time into Motion. Mr. Duchamp was expressing time by implying motion. Time and motion are linked, so, maybe.

I didn't google any of this. I just sat & thought. So, I'm open to argument.

11/14/2012 12:03:46 AM · #34
The Flying Pig for the Halloween challenge goes to


Skeleton in the Car
by 31_N.gif photomommom

This would look good hanging on the wall somewhere. Very well done composition. There is a lot of color here, excellent contrast, interesting arrangement of line, shape, & tone. Keeps my eye moving all around, exploring. I'm not a fan of descriptive titles, so I think you could've done better with that. In my mind, the paper white of the bone, the arrangement of the red, blue, yellow, green, & black, work perfectly together with the lines, shapes, & tones. Perfectly.

I recommend another look!

Message edited by author 2012-11-14 00:08:47.
11/15/2012 01:20:21 AM · #35
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1040113.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1040434.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1040453.jpg
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1040213.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1040467.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1040472.jpg
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1040452.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039921.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1039917.jpg

These were my favorites in the Halloween challenge, as I was looking for comps that were not 'photographic in nature.' Most of them are free of the element of TIME.

Message edited by author 2012-11-15 01:32:38.
11/15/2012 01:54:37 AM · #36
Oh wow! I just saw this. Thanks for including me with such talent!
12/06/2012 10:32:06 AM · #37
Cool! thanks! Find it by chance, nice surprise.
01/04/2013 12:37:41 AM · #38
From the "Deep in Heart of December" challenge

The Flying Pig to:
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1046421.jpg 21_N.gif jmritz
Flying Pig Honorable Mentions to
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1046646.jpg 21.gif Bear_Music
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1046721.jpg 21.gif posthumous
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1046452.jpg 21_F.gif Neat
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1046641.jpg 21_N.gif MNet
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1046717.jpg 21.gif gyaban

Message edited by author 2013-01-04 00:48:49.
01/04/2013 01:16:28 AM · #39
Awesome, thanks!
01/04/2013 01:33:22 AM · #40
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Awesome, thanks!

I was pretty sure, in voting, that this was yours. Style comes thru, even in a flip'n'blend! The process seemed so simple, when I first learned it. I never expected it to be so responsive to individual interpretation. I'm still doing it, still learning. Love it!

Message edited by author 2013-01-04 01:35:09.
01/04/2013 01:49:53 AM · #41
WOW! Thanks! That's my first Flying Pig!
01/04/2013 01:52:25 AM · #42
Yes thanks 21_F.gif pixelpig I have to admit, I'd never heard of it until now, so thanks!
01/04/2013 06:28:02 PM · #43
Thanks Annie, I love my Flying Pig.
02/28/2013 10:37:30 PM · #44

We humans live in a sea of light that we cannot see directly. Our eyes can only pick up the effects of light & it is our brain that structures the information.

Say it again, it bears repeating: People don't see with their eyes. Images are created by the brain based on simple signals sent from the eyes representing edges, shapes, and motion. The eyes don't send completed, complex "photographic in nature" images to the brain. It takes a year or more for a human to learn to see. People learn to see by practicing.

Photography at the most basic level is just light (and time). The camera captures the effects of light impartially. There is no camera-brain to structure the information.

A photograph printed on paper is an object that reflects light. When we look at it we recognize it for a photograph & also we recognize the information captured by the camera. When we look at a digital photograph displayed on a computer screen, it's more complicated. We don't have the paper photograph itself to go by, all we have is the information displayed.

Arguably, the photograph on paper is the best part of photography. But wait, if the computer screen avoids the constraints of the photograph-on-paper it does offer a chance to explore the possibilities in processing the information only. It offers the viewer a chance to experience the information directly. It offers me a chance to use the information that is photographic in nature to create interesting abstracts.
03/01/2013 12:04:27 AM · #45
I don't get that many chances to award The Flying Pig, so it was a great pleasure to have so many to choose from in the Artificial Symmetry challenge. Thank you all!

The Flying Pig to:

The Flying Pig Honorable Mention to:
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054386.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054064.jpg

Other worthy contenders:

Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054304.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054373.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054291.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054098.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054303.jpg
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054408.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054196.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054162.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1053978.jpg
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054093.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054288.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054375.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054267.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1053872.jpg
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054274.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1053941.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054245.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1054311.jpg

Message edited by author 2016-02-21 10:02:00.
03/01/2013 12:24:37 AM · #46
Thank you!!! I'm quite honored!!
05/24/2013 12:32:17 AM · #47
The more choices the editing rules allow, the easier it seems to recognize the work of individual photographers. Curious. It seems the technology of photography has a homogenizing effect on photographic vision.

I've been pondering for a while the question of what exactly does photographic in nature mean? There is a certain quality to the visual information captured in a photograph. That quality is created in part by the flattening effect that is the inescapable result of using a camera & lens, in part by photography's particular relationship to time, in part by the intent typical to a photographer, & in part by the nature of reality.

There are a few photographs in the challenge that used the light effectively to deny the flattening effect of photography. IMO these were much more painterly in nature, than photographic. While I can see that it is the lighting that makes the difference, I wonder why that lighting is painterly & other lighting is not. Maybe a part of its painterly nature is in the way it uses light & shadow to motivate & move my attention through the composition. The lighting in real life is seldom so dramatic. It looks painterly partly because it is so theatrical. It looks looks like the conscious decision of a purposeful mind.

To my surprise, I have taken a lot of time to vote on the Photography becomes a Painting challenge. At my very first glance, the page of thumbnails looked just like ordinary photographs. In the thumbnail size I could not see the little details that imitate the details typical of paintings. Some of the entries, though, kept their photographic nature even after viewing at full size. So I asked myself -- for the assignment of Photograph Becomes a Painting, is there a way to avoid the photographic nature of photographs?

Some of the entries, especially when viewed at full size, taught me that yes, there is a way to avoid the photographic nature of photographs. These 3 are my favorites--
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1038123.jpg The Flying Pig goes to
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1069014.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1069640.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1069488.jpg

And these three taught me that it is possible to create Chiaroscuro with the camera--
Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1046796.jpg The Flying Pig Honorable Mention goes to

Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1069739.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1069177.jpg . Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1069490.jpg
05/24/2013 12:39:50 AM · #48
Thanks 21_F.gif pixelpig! Very cool award, and thanks for the nice comment attached!
05/24/2013 01:02:36 AM · #49
Thanks a lot, very glad you liked my work.
05/24/2013 01:07:19 AM · #50
thank you for the bacon
Current Server Time: 03/22/2019 04:11:24 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 © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 03/22/2019 04:11:24 PM EDT.