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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> My lowest ranked 10 this week.
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 10 of 10, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/27/2003 12:57:02 AM · #1
Last week I posted the lowest ranking photo from the Landscape challenge that I gave a 10 to. I decided to do the same thing this week :), just because it's an interesting discussion.

I voted and commented on all the "Got Milk?" photos. This one, "Cheese Grater" by kosmikkreeper, received a 10 from me but ranked 46th out of 59, with a score of 4.885:



My comment was:

"Awesome shallow DOF and beautiful black and white. I'm giving this a 10!"

I was the only person to give it 10! How would you all critique this photo? I think it's a beautiful abstract that stood out above nearly all the photos in the challenge.
01/27/2003 08:17:31 AM · #2
It's not a bad photo at all.. I believe that taking an 'indirect' approach to the challenge is costly in many cases, as far a score is concerned. It's too easy for the voter to say "I don't see anything dairy in this photo."

The challenge was to 'photograph anything dairy'. Cheese graters aren't 'dairy'. They definitely can be related to dairy in an indirect way, but I have come to realize that the voter is not that lenient.

01/27/2003 08:19:29 AM · #3
i did a pretty spectacular cheese grater macro for Textures. It also didn't really score too spectacularly.

Maybe people in general arent as big fans of cheese grater macros as we are :).
01/27/2003 08:27:38 AM · #4
Originally posted by magnetic9999:


Maybe people in general arent as big fans of cheese grater macros as we are :).


Damn philistines!! :P
01/27/2003 10:23:07 AM · #5
I voted the "other"cheese grater photo higher. It had more interest to me, with the scratches and the golden-ish light.

:-)
01/27/2003 10:44:06 AM · #6
I think the one in the post is much better than mine technically, and I really thought mine would do a lot worse than it actually did!
01/27/2003 11:17:47 AM · #7
Konador - I thought both cheese grater photos were really nice. I gave yours a 9 and this one 10. I liked the extra effect of the slightly different camera angle and shallow DOF on this one.
01/27/2003 11:47:54 AM · #8
In my view the composition is a bit boring and there is something behind it that blocks the clear view trough some of the holes. Because that background isn't a certain color (the whole image is B&W) or in the field of focus or in any other way recognizable, it doesn't add anything.
The use of a shallow dof doesn't distinguish the point of focus from the rest of the subject. It doesn't point out a certain point of interest. Nice for a dof excercise, but it doesn't add anything particular to the image.
Because it is in B&W the steel doesn't really look like steel. Just a dull non-steel grey.

But that's just my opinion, I scored it a six.
I think that showing real steel (that would mean color), a better background, some playing around with the composition and angles could make it much stronger.

Message edited by author 2003-01-27 11:50:18.
01/27/2003 12:19:28 PM · #9
Originally posted by Azrifel:


The use of a shallow dof doesn't distinguish the point of focus from the rest of the subject. It doesn't point out a certain point of interest. Nice for a dof excercise, but it doesn't add anything particular to the image.


I think shallow DOF on an abstract photo like this is important in adding depth. I don't really like photos that appear flat or have no sense of scale or depth. Maybe that's because I work in 3d graphics, but I like some impression of what's going on in the z-axis! In this case, you get both depth and scale from the blurring.

This actually simulates what happens when your own eyes look at an object that closely. It doesn't work when you use both eyes (because of the stereoscopic effect), but if you close one eye and look at an object very closely, and try to work out what's going on around the area you're focussing on (tricky without moving your eye to see, but it's possible), you will notice the same effect. Your eye is just like a camera, with a lens and an aperture. When a photo simulates the same effects we see in real life, I like it. It gives my brain more to work with in interpreting the photo.
01/27/2003 03:58:03 PM · #10
I agree with you, that's also why I didn't mention it under what I think it needs. I think the effect of using a shallow dof in this image would have had more effect on a more diagonal layout of the holes.

Hmm, idea?
Use the widest aperture available to get it really narrow.
Position the grater diagonally in reference to the horizontal of the camera (but don't change the depth angle like the image is now). Make a diagonal of holes horizontally line up to the focus point, the diagonal should be in the field of focus now. Leave enough room to be able to rotate it back to a horizontal position (like the image you quoted here) again in photoshop/editor.
Rotate it back in the editor and crop out the white triangles that are caused by the rotation.
This could create a depth of field that runs diagonally trought the image, for example from the lower right corner to the upper 2nd from the left and two triangular blurs. That might be cool.
What do you think? (I don't have a cheese grater to test it on) :)

Message edited by author 2003-01-27 15:59:10.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 02:10:43 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: 03/28/2024 02:10:43 PM EDT.