| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/08/2014 09:55:43 PM · #76 |
Oh Wendy! Gosh...I've been so busy and I just noticed you have your very own trash thread...Woo Hoo!!!! Congratulations! Now you know you have truly made it!
::beams cheekily::
These threads are always so silly. How exhausting! Come back to California for a vacation...;-D
Message edited by author 2014-02-08 21:56:05. |
|
|
|
02/08/2014 11:04:19 PM · #77 |
This picture is why I resign...
Yes, I'm giving up photography and I'm gonna DANCE! |
|
|
|
02/23/2014 08:51:34 PM · #78 |
I have come and gone from this site over the years, but more from life than.. well never for this reason. If you are here long enough you will see some wonderful photographers and some bad ones. The voting system I feel is fair and just. I do have personal friends who are members and we agreed winning by stacking the votes would amount to nothing. I do not believe this to be the case with the majority of members. Sure with our numbers someone will try to cheat every once in a while. I personally have never won a ribbon and will cherish the day IF I ever do. So to Wendy and the rest don't let the haters take away from your victory. Three things influence my vote.
1. You have to nail the subject of the competition while following the rules.
2. You must be at least equal or better technically than any other photo in the contest.
3. You have to reach inside of my soul and make me feel as a child when they first discover something that amazes them. The WOW factor.
Wendy, feel blessed that you have a hater. That is a sign you did something they only can envy. I'm jealous. |
|
|
|
03/04/2014 09:18:33 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Am I so out of touch? because to me the shots are miles apart in the opposite direction of your preference. |
Not to take away from the hummer, but it just didn't do anything for me. It's like I've seen it before, ya know? I gave it a 6, slightly above average for me. The Bluejay, on the other hand, stopped me in my tracks: the sheer, raw DETAIL of the thing fascinated me. The way the feathers interlock, the "chin hairs", it's all like a minor revelation. I gave it an 8. [/quote]
this was the best STATEMENT about this thread!
If I have to see one more hummingbird on here I don't know what I will do! Scream comes to mind :)
Message edited by author 2014-03-04 21:47:51. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 10:05:29 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by Neat:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Am I so out of touch? because to me the shots are miles apart in the opposite direction of your preference. |
Not to take away from the hummer, but it just didn't do anything for me. It's like I've seen it before, ya know? I gave it a 6, slightly above average for me. The Bluejay, on the other hand, stopped me in my tracks: the sheer, raw DETAIL of the thing fascinated me. The way the feathers interlock, the "chin hairs", it's all like a minor revelation. I gave it an 8. |
this was the best STATEMENT about this thread!
If I have to see one more hummingbird on here I don't know what I will do! Scream comes to mind :) [/quote]
Ohpherphuxache. If I see one more 'insert subject here' on here, I'll 'insert terrible reaction here'...... How freaking tiresome are comments like that? If any one of us can effectively shoot every single style and subject ever seen in photography, THEN you have the 'right' to bitch and moan about how you're sooooo ho hum about 'boring seen-it-all subject of choice'.
Geez, if I have to clap eyes on one more blurry abstract greyed out grainy excuse for a landscape/portrait/nature/street/macro/emotion shot I think I'll.............
Message edited by author 2014-03-05 10:06:22. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 10:37:17 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by pamb:
Originally posted by Neat:
If I have to see one more hummingbird on here I don't know what I will do! Scream comes to mind :) |
Ohpherphuxache. If I see one more 'insert subject here' on here, I'll 'insert terrible reaction here'...... How freaking tiresome are comments like that? If any one of us can effectively shoot every single style and subject ever seen in photography, THEN you have the 'right' to bitch and moan about how you're sooooo ho hum about 'boring seen-it-all subject of choice'.
Geez, if I have to clap eyes on one more blurry abstract greyed out grainy excuse for a landscape/portrait/nature/street/macro/emotion shot I think I'll............. |
The one thing that you neglect to mention with your attempt at symmetry is that greyed out grainy excuses don't get high scores and ribbons. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 12:20:59 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by pamb:
Originally posted by Neat:
If I have to see one more hummingbird on here I don't know what I will do! Scream comes to mind :) |
Ohpherphuxache. If I see one more 'insert subject here' on here, I'll 'insert terrible reaction here'...... How freaking tiresome are comments like that? If any one of us can effectively shoot every single style and subject ever seen in photography, THEN you have the 'right' to bitch and moan about how you're sooooo ho hum about 'boring seen-it-all subject of choice'.
Geez, if I have to clap eyes on one more blurry abstract greyed out grainy excuse for a landscape/portrait/nature/street/macro/emotion shot I think I'll............. |
The one thing that you neglect to mention with your attempt at symmetry is that greyed out grainy excuses don't get high scores and ribbons. |
That's not entirely true,  Neat certainly has had some success with the genre.
|
|
|
|
03/05/2014 12:33:58 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by pamb:
Originally posted by Neat:
If I have to see one more hummingbird on here I don't know what I will do! Scream comes to mind :) |
Ohpherphuxache. If I see one more 'insert subject here' on here, I'll 'insert terrible reaction here'...... How freaking tiresome are comments like that? If any one of us can effectively shoot every single style and subject ever seen in photography, THEN you have the 'right' to bitch and moan about how you're sooooo ho hum about 'boring seen-it-all subject of choice'.
Geez, if I have to clap eyes on one more blurry abstract greyed out grainy excuse for a landscape/portrait/nature/street/macro/emotion shot I think I'll............. |
The one thing that you neglect to mention with your attempt at symmetry is that greyed out grainy excuses don't get high scores and ribbons. |
That's not entirely true, Neat certainly has had some success with the genre. |
Care to do a comparative survey between blurry and tack sharp images on the front page? |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 02:59:29 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by pamb:
Originally posted by Neat:
If I have to see one more hummingbird on here I don't know what I will do! Scream comes to mind :) |
Ohpherphuxache. If I see one more 'insert subject here' on here, I'll 'insert terrible reaction here'...... How freaking tiresome are comments like that? If any one of us can effectively shoot every single style and subject ever seen in photography, THEN you have the 'right' to bitch and moan about how you're sooooo ho hum about 'boring seen-it-all subject of choice'.
Geez, if I have to clap eyes on one more blurry abstract greyed out grainy excuse for a landscape/portrait/nature/street/macro/emotion shot I think I'll............. |
The one thing that you neglect to mention with your attempt at symmetry is that greyed out grainy excuses don't get high scores and ribbons. |
That's not entirely true, Neat certainly has had some success with the genre. |
Care to do a comparative survey between blurry and tack sharp images on the front page? |
Are you admitting that you feel that only high-scoring images should be picked on and hated in a wide-swept way?
Frankly, I think it's a shame for any of us to say that they hate a singular type of image absolutely. It doesn't really foster the environment that we should be fostering here - sure I understand that you've seen it before, but that doesn't mean a new member who just signed up has seen it before, and damned sure shouldn't be discouraged from trying their hand at it.
If one cares to vote down an image type due to 'fatigue', then I'd suggest that in order to be at least fair, they should score all images with at least a component of the score being determined by nothing more than frequency of appearance, regardless of placement. And I assure you, we do see plenty of blurry images here, they're not exactly under represented. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 03:15:32 PM · #85 |
| "Fair" has nothing to do with it, nor with the real world for that matter. I don't understand people who seek "fairness", at least in any subjective endeavors. The best we can hope for is a reasonable transparency, and we don't often get even THAT. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 03:20:56 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
"Fair" has nothing to do with it, nor with the real world for that matter. I don't understand people who seek "fairness", at least in any subjective endeavors. The best we can hope for is a reasonable transparency, and we don't often get even THAT. |
If you don't at least TRY to be fair in your dealings with others, then that makes you either a very bad person, or it means that you've got a very broken sense of justice.
Now, do I really expect it? Hell no... But I still think it's the right thing to do. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 03:27:10 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by Cory:
... Frankly, I think it's a shame for any of us to say that they hate a singular type of image absolutely. ... |
This shouldn't get lost in the noise (btw, I like noise).
An example (there are many): I detest seeing wedding shots on here, and you're almost certain to get a 4 or 5 from me if you post one up. But every now and then, someone will post a phenomenal shot in that genre, like this one, that got a 10 and a fave from me:
Point is, keep an open mind, you may be surprised. And if you took a wedding shot I hate, take comfort in the fact that there is surely someone else out there who will give you a 9 for the same image. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 04:09:31 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Are you admitting that you feel that only high-scoring images should be picked on and hated in a wide-swept way? |
of course not. I am merely pointing out that someone tried to show a symmetry where none exists.
Originally posted by Cory:
Frankly, I think it's a shame for any of us to say that they hate a singular type of image absolutely. It doesn't really foster the environment that we should be fostering here - sure I understand that you've seen it before, but that doesn't mean a new member who just signed up has seen it before, and damned sure shouldn't be discouraged from trying their hand at it.
If one cares to vote down an image type due to 'fatigue', then I'd suggest that in order to be at least fair, they should score all images with at least a component of the score being determined by nothing more than frequency of appearance, regardless of placement. And I assure you, we do see plenty of blurry images here, they're not exactly under represented. |
If you are merely taking a photo of a thingie, then your photo is only as good as the thingie. It's amusing to me that you and others are equating hummingbirds with blur. You're making a category error. Be careful, category errors can lead to religion. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 05:43:02 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
If you are merely taking a photo of a thingie, then your photo is only as good as the thingie. It's amusing to me that you and others are equating hummingbirds with blur. You're making a category error. Be careful, category errors can lead to religion. |
...by extension, could it be argued that if you are taking a photo of a blur, then your photo is only as good as the blur... and if the blur is not readily distinguishable and/or difficult to comprehend, then your vote is based on mere speculation of what is or ought to be? :O)
Ray |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 05:57:12 PM · #90 |
Wow. This is getting deep. Wasn't someone supposed to resign here?
I'll just keep dancing. |
|
|
|
03/05/2014 06:00:54 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
It's amusing to me that you and others are equating hummingbirds with blur. You're making a category error. Be careful, category errors can lead to religion. |
Well, first, to be fair, most hummingbird pictures prominently feature blur - albeit unintentionally. The example discussed here previously was in fact a prime example of said blur. (and frankly I think a bit of grain would have helped it too, as it is, it seems a bit 'plasticky')
As for leading to religion, I would classify that possibility as 'extremely low probability' for me, given my proclivities. ;)
Message edited by author 2014-03-05 18:02:35. |
|
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: 04/24/2024 09:23:06 PM EDT.
