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

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> But there IS a person in this photo!!!!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 197, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/11/2013 10:32:37 PM · #1
In the Where's Waldo outtake thread I was basically accused of submitting a pareidolia shot as opposed to using a real person. ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/55000-59999/59029/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1094438.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/55000-59999/59029/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1094438.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' Bad enough peeps were bitching that there wasn't a person in the shot at all, even worse that some think I used some bark and woodgrain to create a face.

HOWEVER...that is me in the shot, in an extreme 3/4 profile with hair hiding my face. I set the exposure for 3 seconds and ducked from the frame during the first second in order to create the too-well done translucent effect.

Here's what I probably should have entered, in full colour, just to make things *easier* for all those here who only know how to look, but not see. ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/55000-59999/59029/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1094876.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/55000-59999/59029/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1094876.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

I am disappointed beyond belief with this site. There is such a narrow definition of what is creative here; if a good photo hasn't been gobsmacked around with obvious PS and a disarmingly simple image is produced at close range, using a very simple shooting technique to create an illusion with virtually no pp at all...yeah.
12/11/2013 10:37:10 PM · #2
Holy shit Susan... At first I though you were kidding, but after looking again and again, I see that you're not... Yes, the colored version is somewhat better, but damn if that isn't subtle.
12/11/2013 10:39:47 PM · #3
Wouldn't be the first time that someone fit the challenge so well that people thought the photographer had missed the target. I can't even see your face in the version where you circled the features. I did give it a 6, however, trusting that there was indeed a hidden person that I was not patient enough to find.

12/11/2013 10:50:06 PM · #4
I can see your face in the color version but still can't make it out in the black and white version. I know you didn't want it to be obvious but as you can see we had difficulty finding it. Maybe Viveza or some other editing tool could have made it more obvious. I like your idea for the challenge. It's to bad we couldn't find your face.
12/11/2013 11:03:52 PM · #5
You should of entered the colour version, and made it pop a bit, I couldn't see a face at all in the black and white version, you have to trust the voters on this one, plus I have to admit it was a very dull picture as well and it sparked no longer linger to me ;)
12/11/2013 11:42:18 PM · #6
what Cory said. it's brilliant.
12/11/2013 11:57:37 PM · #7
Originally posted by snaffles:

I am disappointed beyond belief with this site. There is such a narrow definition of what is creative here; if a good photo hasn't been gobsmacked around with obvious PS and a disarmingly simple image is produced at close range, using a very simple shooting technique to create an illusion with virtually no pp at all...yeah.

You know, I only beat you by one place ... I think you just need to shrug it off. Subtlety is not the best strategy in this type of contest, where we know most people don't linger on the photos for long. Personally, my main complaint with finishes like yours is that, once ones score is in the nether region of the results list, you don't cop the Brown Ribbon ... maybe we should also award Ecru and Tan ribbons to round out the bottom three ...
12/12/2013 12:13:42 AM · #8
As Neat said, it's just not a great photo. Combine that with the next-to-impossible finding of a person, and you have your answer.

It's not always the voters.
12/12/2013 12:22:21 AM · #9
Originally posted by snaffles:


I am disappointed beyond belief with this site. There is such a narrow definition of what is creative here; if a good photo hasn't been gobsmacked around with obvious PS and a disarmingly simple image is produced at close range, using a very simple shooting technique to create an illusion with virtually no pp at all...yeah.

Susan, I love ya bunches, but this statement is ridiculous...

It's not an interesting picture and the face is nearly impossible to find. In the color version I can see it, but I can't find it in the B/W version even after you drew the circles. And I couldn't find it when you asked my opinion of the picture before submitting it, and told you so...

So why are you blaming the voters for this? I don't blame the voters when *I* put up obscure stuff that I like and it tanks... I laugh at myself and soldier on. Which is what I hope you're doing by now :-)
12/12/2013 12:52:24 AM · #10
Obtuse, all of you. No one was able to see the maple syrup for the tree.
12/12/2013 01:56:58 AM · #11
The coloured version shows clearly the face.
The monochrome on the other hand is soooooo subtle that even with you pointing out the exact spot I couldn't find it. Sorry Susan.

I can follow Anita: by entering the colour version and making it stand out a bit more, you would have gotten I higher score imho.
12/12/2013 02:22:21 AM · #12
If I were you I'd be more disappointed in missing out on the brown ribbon by just one spot!!

12/12/2013 06:59:15 AM · #13
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:

Wouldn't be the first time that someone fit the challenge so well that people thought the photographer had missed the target. I can't even see your face in the version where you circled the features. I did give it a 6, however, trusting that there was indeed a hidden person that I was not patient enough to find.


Ditto, except I gave it a 5.
12/12/2013 08:22:53 AM · #14
I can see the virgin mary's face.
12/12/2013 08:32:38 AM · #15
Honestly, I see nothing.
12/12/2013 12:03:02 PM · #16
There is a reason DPCers are called votards and failtographers. You should have known better and just posted some over-processed crap that doesn't even look like a photograph anymore. Those things get high ratings here.
12/12/2013 12:09:28 PM · #17
Waaaaaay too subtle to realistically expect the voters to see it en masse.

I can see it with the red ink ... but even then its borderline.

Learn from the experience and move on.
12/12/2013 04:32:06 PM · #18
Originally posted by schlake:

some over-processed crap that doesn't even look like a photograph anymore

Oh, thank God for that. I thought it was just me.
12/12/2013 04:57:08 PM · #19
Interesting feedback, thanks everyone.
12/12/2013 05:01:47 PM · #20
I see nothing. Even with the circles and arrows, the color version as an example, and three different attempts to see it on two different monitors. Nothing. It looks like a log.
12/12/2013 05:32:47 PM · #21
Originally posted by schlake:

There is a reason DPCers are called votards and failtographers. You should have known better and just posted some over-processed crap that doesn't even look like a photograph anymore. Those things get high ratings here.

And, if anything, this is a reason I would stop participating here. Why the fuck should I bother trying to be creative and entering stuff I like, because it's obviously over processed mainstream crap that only "votards" and "failtographers" would vote highly??!! Comments like this insult virtually the entire DPC family and very nearly every winning image.
12/12/2013 05:59:44 PM · #22
Originally posted by pamb:

Originally posted by schlake:

There is a reason DPCers are called votards and failtographers. You should have known better and just posted some over-processed crap that doesn't even look like a photograph anymore. Those things get high ratings here.

And, if anything, this is a reason I would stop participating here. Why the fuck should I bother trying to be creative and entering stuff I like, because it's obviously over processed mainstream crap that only "votards" and "failtographers" would vote highly??!! Comments like this insult virtually the entire DPC family and very nearly every winning image.


+1......I find that comment insulating to this community as well.

Message edited by author 2013-12-12 18:00:15.
12/12/2013 06:01:53 PM · #23
I remember driving out to Seattle, WA a few years back to visit ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21_F.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21_F.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Beetle and her hubby and when questioned as to how it was that I managed to make it there in 3 days I answered the following:

Well...because when I initially checked the map, it's only ________________________________________________ this far.

Perception is often all that matters, and in this instance you image failed to resonate with the masses. Nothing to do with taste really, just something really, really hard to decipher.

I looked at this image long and hard, and truth be told I never did find you... and I do pride myself in being very observant.

Oh, and I might add that the image did fall in the "meh" category for me and did not remotely compare to the quality images I have known you to produce.

In closing, please remember "Don't shoot the messenger" :O)

Ray

Message edited by author 2013-12-12 18:03:06.
12/12/2013 06:45:00 PM · #24
Well, for all those who STILL can't see it,here you go, the full colour version. ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/55000-59999/59029/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1094936.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/55000-59999/59029/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1094936.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

And some observations....most of the entries were shot wide angle, I doubt anyone else went with as short a focal length as I did, which was 50mm. That automatically means that I had to come up with something way more difficult when you have so little room to play in; yes, I agree that it's something of a 'meh' shot...however...the simplicity of the shot, technique used and pp were all intentional to make the viewer look all the harder, then, ideally, go 'Dang! That sure was a lot more clever and effective a shot than most everyone else's! 10!!!'

Obviously I forgot that DPCers like their objects bright n shiny n obvious in even a challenge where you're supposed to be looking for a hidden person. And I did go waayyy too subtle (even though after I desatted the above and got feedback from Bear and others, I did dodge the face and burn the knot quite a lot to enhance the contrast in that area. Wasted efforts.

Anyway. Whatever. Water under the bridge blahblahblah. I'll shut up now and quietly slip back into my lifelong role as dark horse.
12/12/2013 06:52:21 PM · #25
[quote=snaffles] Well,

There's always a problem when you start a statement with "Well"

I still can't see your face in the edited color version, I can see a knotted face in the wood but not a human face. Also the viewer has no idea how much work went into a photo, and it's irrevalent to me to know as well, I look at the final product.

Message edited by author 2013-12-12 18:52:40.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/13/2019 08:59:01 AM

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: 12/13/2019 08:59:01 AM EST.