| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/05/2014 06:37:32 PM · #26 |
Fascinating thread. I think there are two things that are important to point out:
1. You're not the only one who has thought that perhaps people are voting on the person vs the photo. This actually isn't my type of photo. There are a number of bird photographers on this site, and many do close up bird portraits. My type of bird shot is more the bird in action -- moving, flying, etc. People don't hesitate to say when they think it's my shot: as you can see in the comments during voting here: 
However, I received 30 comments during voting on this shot, and not one mentioned that they thought it was mine. This one is actually more my style, and as you see, someone thought that one was mine. 
Egrets and GBHs are my favorite. And I do seagulls a lot. The backyard birds every once in awhile, and closeup portraits rarely now.
Example -- these are my shots in the last year. You can see that my style is more in lighting and movement.
                 
      
There was an expert editing dogbird -- but I don't know that that counts. :)
I think I had about 78 entries last year, so my bird entries are also less than half of my entries in a year. So while I may be a bird photographer, there are also a large number of bird photographers that could have done that shot. So I honestly don't think they were voting for me.
2. I actually agree. I didn't think it was a master's shot. I had hoped to do something better, but I ran out of time and had no ideas. And I wanted to put something in. So I did what I had. I sat in front of an open window in the winter-time for about an hour, trying to get a good shot. I like this one because of the arch in the neck/head, and the details. I had no idea they had whiskers like that. I was truly surprised that it placed first, so I assumed it was the non-participants that put it over the top, and that I'd be slammed by the participants. I was incredibly surprised that it scored well with participants as well. So, regardless of what you or I think of the shot, there obviously is something that others saw in it. I'm not that wonderful of a person that they'd give it to me, just because I'm me. It would be nice -- but I just don't see the evidence of that.
As far as oversharpened or over saturated -- bluejays are magnificently blue, and the detail was there. It was a 100-400L lens at the closest it could possibly focus. So I lucked out.
I have no problem with people thinking my photo isn't worthy. But I wanted to put in my two cents that I don't think it's fair to blame the voters for being biased for a person. I think we're all adult here enough to vote for photos, not friends.
Have to run, or I'd probably have a few more points. :) |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 06:41:26 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by LydiaToo:
As usual, I think that I like MY image more than Wendy's image ... and everyone else's image... in this challenge, and it certainly should have scored a ribbon... probably the blue one.
It's because MINE is perfectly to my taste. It's everything I like about photos. And we all know that my opinion is what's right, because... well... it's MINE!
Oh WAIT! I didn't enter.
Never mind, then... |
Damn right! Lydia's opinion is always right!!! I think your picture should have won also Lydia.....oh wait you said you didn't enter the challenge....ok, what I meant was the last challenge you entered...yeah that's it...the last one...you should have won that won. :)
As for this challenge let's just let Wendy have her ribbon. This is a gorgeous shot. However, although I gave it a good score I had hoped this shot by KOBBA would have taken the blue . But that doesn't mean I'm upset with Wendy. Heck no, we're all friends here, aren't we? She gets my full support and a giant thumbs up for the victory.
Life is full of real problems, serious problems, problems worth fighting for or over, but this, well this just ain't one of em. Why not re-think your position? I'm sure it was made in a moment of haste and just embrace your fellow photographers when they do good.
I think you would have had more support if you stated your position and didn't threaten to take your marbles and go home. JMHO
Message edited by author 2014-02-05 20:56:14. |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 06:46:57 PM · #28 |
I got to agree that there's no way this image could have inspired a lot of "we love Wendy" votes. I certainly know her, and her work, about as well as anyone here, and *I* never thought it was hers: I thought Kobba's egret had "Wendy" written all over it.
Why did the Jay do so well? IMO, for the same reason the danged houseflies and robber flies do so well in macro challenges: it's fascinating to plunge deep into so much DETAIL in a place where it's otherwise inaccessible. I mean, who can get so close to a bluejay in real life to leisurely examine the perfect, intricate, interlocking detail of the feathers on the head and neck?
Message edited by author 2014-02-05 18:47:13. |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 07:02:16 PM · #29 |
| One thing this thread has done for me is let me know that I'm not the only one that sits inside my house taking pictures of the birds outside. I thought I was just a lazy, soft bird watcher. I fell so much better about myself now. Thanks, Wendy! |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 07:05:37 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by LN13:
One thing this thread has done for me is let me know that I'm not the only one that sits inside my house taking pictures of the birds outside. I thought I was just a lazy, soft bird watcher. I fell so much better about myself now. Thanks, Wendy! |
Sitting at the breakfast table at my dad's ...  |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 07:06:57 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'll give my 0.02 and I think Wendy can take it.
I don't think the winning image is a "masters" image. Just my opinion, and I'll explain. We all know Wendy is very, very good at taking pictures of birds. In fact, I'd say she qualifies as a "master". But this image, specifically, doesn't possess any ephemeral quality which places it above other bird pictures. It's technically very good, but it's a moment that could be duplicated in an average photo session done by someone who knows what they are doing.
In any genre of photography, the special photos, the master photos, capture something rarely captured. Whether that is a special quality of light in a landscape, or a special moment of serendipity in a candid, or some special behavior or moment in wildlife photography.
When I saw this picture I pretty well knew instantly it was Wendy's, but I didn't think it was particularly special and was, frankly, pretty surprised to see it at the top. No knock to Wendy. My own entry isn't particularly great and wound up about where I think it deserves. It's hard to grab a master shot in two weeks because part of a master shot is, literally, luck.
|
Pretty much agree with this completely.
And honestly, I commend the OP for the fortitude to speak her mind. I myself have thought the same on many occasions.
Message edited by author 2014-02-05 19:09:40. |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 07:14:40 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Sitting at the breakfast table at my dad's ... |
Damn. All I get is your basic backyard birds...cardinals, sparrows, chickadee and juncos. I see about three blue jays a year. Getting a bald eagle at my feeder would be so cool. |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 07:40:54 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by Garry:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'll give my 0.02 and I think Wendy can take it.
I don't think the winning image is a "masters" image. Just my opinion, and I'll explain. We all know Wendy is very, very good at taking pictures of birds. In fact, I'd say she qualifies as a "master". But this image, specifically, doesn't possess any ephemeral quality which places it above other bird pictures. It's technically very good, but it's a moment that could be duplicated in an average photo session done by someone who knows what they are doing.
In any genre of photography, the special photos, the master photos, capture something rarely captured. Whether that is a special quality of light in a landscape, or a special moment of serendipity in a candid, or some special behavior or moment in wildlife photography.
When I saw this picture I pretty well knew instantly it was Wendy's, but I didn't think it was particularly special and was, frankly, pretty surprised to see it at the top. No knock to Wendy. My own entry isn't particularly great and wound up about where I think it deserves. It's hard to grab a master shot in two weeks because part of a master shot is, literally, luck.
|
Pretty much agree with this completely.
And honestly, I commend the OP for the fortitude to speak her mind. I myself have thought the same on many occasions. |
+1
just for the record I gave Wendy's shot a 7 but I had 20 other images in front of hers.
|
|
|
|
02/05/2014 08:48:31 PM · #34 |
Bah.
All this negativity and vitriol is for the birds.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=USafh7Onivo
|
|
|
|
02/05/2014 09:14:34 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by LN13:
One thing this thread has done for me is let me know that I'm not the only one that sits inside my house taking pictures of the birds outside. I thought I was just a lazy, soft bird watcher. I fell so much better about myself now. Thanks, Wendy! |
Staying in the house is just taking advantage of a really comfy blind. Works for me -
 |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 09:18:59 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by MaryO:
Staying in the house is just taking advantage of a really comfy blind. Works for me - |
Me, too. I was sitting at my desk with the window closed for this one.
 |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 09:33:25 PM · #37 |
My birds were not around today... the feeders are all covered with ice... so I took pictures of ice!  |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 09:47:28 PM · #38 |
| Hah, that's what our feeders looked like too. Though more of a slushy snow than ice. We did get a few visitors, though... |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 09:50:44 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Stagolee:
Originally posted by Garry:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'll give my 0.02 and I think Wendy can take it.
I don't think the winning image is a "masters" image. Just my opinion, and I'll explain. We all know Wendy is very, very good at taking pictures of birds. In fact, I'd say she qualifies as a "master". But this image, specifically, doesn't possess any ephemeral quality which places it above other bird pictures. It's technically very good, but it's a moment that could be duplicated in an average photo session done by someone who knows what they are doing.
In any genre of photography, the special photos, the master photos, capture something rarely captured. Whether that is a special quality of light in a landscape, or a special moment of serendipity in a candid, or some special behavior or moment in wildlife photography.
When I saw this picture I pretty well knew instantly it was Wendy's, but I didn't think it was particularly special and was, frankly, pretty surprised to see it at the top. No knock to Wendy. My own entry isn't particularly great and wound up about where I think it deserves. It's hard to grab a master shot in two weeks because part of a master shot is, literally, luck.
|
Pretty much agree with this completely.
And honestly, I commend the OP for the fortitude to speak her mind. I myself have thought the same on many occasions. |
+1
just for the record I gave Wendy's shot a 7 but I had 20 other images in front of hers. |
One last thought before I leave this alone. I agree with Dr. Sneezy.
I do not commend the OP.
I commend her comment that she made on the image: Technically acceptable, but artistically - meh. A 'Master's photo' should have art too. and I agree with that, as well.
But I don't understand why this had to start with insinuations that it only won because people knew whose it was.
I and don't understand why it's worth quitting over.
I hear the same about Gyaban's shots. He just wins because they know it's his. Can't it be feasible that people actually voted fairly on a shot?
If a thread had been started with the original comment: Technically acceptable, but artistically - meh. A 'Master's photo' should have art too. I would have gladly joined in a conversation of why this particular photo won, why are others not scored higher, what are people thinking, is there a bias over certain types of photography, all of that could have been a very interesting conversation.
Instead, the OP has taken an image and cheapened a win by insinuating that the win is not a valid one. Nepotism, angels weep, a few people left with talent...
Seriously? I'd rather have a real discussion of photography and merits of images. I gave a very high number of 7+s in that challenge. I expected a 6.2-6.3 on mine and to be somewhere a little above 50%.
So while I applaud drachoo, I can't applaud the OP -- except in the original comment she made on the shot.
I should have left well enough alone, but I felt the need to say it. Mistake, I'm sure. But it's said now.
You can resume your backyard bird tales.
Which, by the way, I hung up a blanket over most of the window, and had blankets wrapped all around me. It wasn't a fun day to shoot. My windows suck for shooting through. I thought my son should have taken a picture of that for "cold". :) |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 09:52:20 PM · #40 |
| What's amazing is when the table that I had seed out on was covered with 5 inches of really fluffy snow, and the birds land, they don't sink into the snow AT ALL! I know birds are light because of hollow bones, but really, snow is light, too! (or at least that snow was...) |
|
|
|
02/05/2014 10:01:32 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Hah, that's what our feeders looked like too. Though more of a slushy snow than ice. We did get a few visitors, though... |
I was waiting for one of the more frail visitors to get plastered with the sheet of icy slushy mess as it slid off our dome (rather like  PennyStreet's one) which the snow had caused to tilt to an almost vertical position. But perhaps they have a special sense that alerts them to such hazards, 'cause thankfully there were no birds at the feeder when it finally fell off.
ETA: Wendy. I think your latest clarification of your response is right on target.
Message edited by author 2014-02-05 22:31:35. |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 12:36:46 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by LN13:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Sitting at the breakfast table at my dad's ... |
Damn. All I get is your basic backyard birds...cardinals, sparrows, chickadee and juncos. I see about three blue jays a year. Getting a bald eagle at my feeder would be so cool. |
Yeah, but you'd have to bait your feeder with rabbits.... and that would be sad! :-( |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 12:50:20 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Yeah, but you'd have to bait your feeder with rabbits.... and that would be sad! :-( |
Moles work too :-) |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 04:32:18 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by Garry:
...
And honestly, I commend the OP for the fortitude to speak her mind. I myself have thought the same on many occasions. |
I can't say that I agree with this sentiment.
Expressing one's opinion about an image is NOT the same as making wild and unsubstantiated allegations that the community is rife with "nepotism".
The initial comments attacked both the photographer and the whole of the DPC community and I for one take umbrage with being tarred in this manner.
I can assure the OP that my personal feelings towards the individuals I have met in this community has no bearing whatsoever on the votes I dole out on the images they produce.
Ray |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 06:38:14 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
What's amazing is when the table that I had seed out on was covered with 5 inches of really fluffy snow, and the birds land, they don't sink into the snow AT ALL! I know birds are light because of hollow bones, but really, snow is light, too! (or at least that snow was...) |
it has more to do with their feet than their weight, the weight of their body is distributed over a large area of spread feet, just like how humans use snow shoes. distribute the weight over a wider area to reduce the pressure form body weight.
if the birds had little stick feet, yes they wood have sunk into the snow.
science lesson of the day is over, you now go back to your "discussion". |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 07:09:11 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by vawendy:
What's amazing is when the table that I had seed out on was covered with 5 inches of really fluffy snow, and the birds land, they don't sink into the snow AT ALL! I know birds are light because of hollow bones, but really, snow is light, too! (or at least that snow was...) |
it has more to do with their feet than their weight, the weight of their body is distributed over a large area of spread feet, just like how humans use snow shoes. distribute the weight over a wider area to reduce the pressure form body weight.
if the birds had little stick feet, yes they wood have sunk into the snow.
science lesson of the day is over, you now go back to your "discussion". |
But they *do* have little stick feet! It's not like duck feet with webbing. If we just put on boots with 3 little sticks in front and a little one behind, we'd sink into the snow...
Message edited by author 2014-02-06 07:17:15. |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 07:25:20 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by vawendy:
What's amazing is when the table that I had seed out on was covered with 5 inches of really fluffy snow, and the birds land, they don't sink into the snow AT ALL! I know birds are light because of hollow bones, but really, snow is light, too! (or at least that snow was...) |
it has more to do with their feet than their weight, the weight of their body is distributed over a large area of spread feet, just like how humans use snow shoes. distribute the weight over a wider area to reduce the pressure form body weight.
if the birds had little stick feet, yes they wood have sunk into the snow.
science lesson of the day is over, you now go back to your "discussion". |
But they *do* have little stick feet! It's not like duck feet with webbing. If we just put on boots with 3 little sticks in front and a little one behind, we'd sink into the snow...
|
i meant like little pirate peg legs! |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 07:38:27 AM · #48 |
I too was surprised that an obviously set-up bird portrait won this challenge. But that is the very nature of this site. It is entirely possible for EVERY voter to like and vote for an image that meets the criteria of a blue ribbon winner in his/her own mind, but since we all have different taste, those images don't end up on top.
Really, this thread is just another Posthumous Ribbons thread. Honestly, of all the images you posted as examples, which ONE IMAGE would you put at the top? Please choose ONE and explain how it is so much better than the current winner !!! That's the beauty of everyone creating their own little icons to show their faves - we all disagree about the winner pretty much every time - even though we voted it in.
Having said that, the king of all images must be the images that won the Posthumous blue right? LOL
And like LydiaToo, I believe my photo should have come out on top. Yes, the one I didn't submit. =))
Message edited by author 2014-02-06 09:05:00. |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 08:27:04 AM · #49 |
Here's another way of looking at the results.
At a glance, which image won?
 |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 08:34:36 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by tate:
...an obviously set-up bird portrait won this challenge. |
The softbox catchlight and lipstick give it away, huh? |
|
