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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Squares
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 46, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/28/2003 03:45:02 PM · #1
I just wanted to say I am very disappointed in some people's kinergarten teachers.

It would appear that technically, mathematically infact however you want to look at it some people have got the whole square thing wrong. If I could be really bothered I would give a graphical demonstration but it's not worth the effort.
Here's how I understand geometry to work. A square has equal side width and length, hence is symetcrical in almost every half you take (if not every as far as I know) a rectangle whilst having right angle corners is not a square and is a rectangle. A square by definition has to have sides of all the same lengths.

Some people have objects in their photos which are squares very obviously, some people have abstract squares, some people have perspective distorted squares (that was one of my choices for an entry, but i forgot to enter), some people have actually cropped their image to be square shaped itself where as some have just got plain old rectangles going on.
I hope you all appreciate your mistake and are spanking yourselves rightously as you read this, I just thought It would have to be down to me to start some petit bickering this week.
Now no fighting back please just take my word for it and be done.

oh for examples on shapes see here

oh and by the way anyone noticed how many great cliche shots are in the square entry list .. one stood out .. a square meal ... he he .. that would be good for next week too !

Message edited by author 2003-01-28 15:49:44.
01/28/2003 03:48:29 PM · #2
The rules read: Square SHAPED, not PERFECT square.
01/28/2003 03:49:06 PM · #3
Let's really open up a can of 'worms' here... the challenge said your 'subject' should be square... Lots of photos don't meet the challenge :) There are 'squares' in the photo, but those squares are not the subject of the photo :)


01/28/2003 03:51:44 PM · #4
and square shaped would be square shaped and not rectangle shaped would it not .. meaning a shape of all FOUR EQUAL sides.

and yes jm, many of the main subjects are not square .. nor square shaped, but yes may be surrounded by many other squares. A very nice can of worms indeed.
I know you bloody art students don't like to take things literally, but you really screwed up here. Do I have to go through and click disqualify that many times ?
01/28/2003 03:55:52 PM · #5
Pictures aren't disqualified for not meeting the challenge. :P
01/28/2003 03:56:25 PM · #6
a photo will not get disqualified for not meeting the challenge...
01/28/2003 04:04:01 PM · #7
Removed...

Message edited by author 2003-01-28 18:02:36.
01/28/2003 04:08:19 PM · #8
mine is definitely square which would meet the challenge, but i'm getting 4.7
01/28/2003 04:08:40 PM · #9
I think the idea is that it has to look like a square... at least at first glance. If you pull out a ruler to measure the accuracy, you are a loser... get a life.

Here was a photo I posted a while back about this challenge. I think it meets the challenge, although it woulda had a low score.

square1.jpg
01/28/2003 04:25:18 PM · #10
I did give that photo with a golf ball a higher score than I should have!(still not very high) And I don't even believe in evolution.
01/28/2003 04:33:06 PM · #11
I have a square and it is the the main subject. WHY am I getting such a low score? hmmmm.....You must not have seen mine, because you didn't comment on it. I will just sit right here and wait for a comment.

If you did give me a low score it is because you can't handle originality. :p
01/28/2003 04:39:53 PM · #12
Removed...

Message edited by author 2003-01-28 18:03:10.
01/28/2003 05:06:10 PM · #13
I am so glad I haven't entered the square challenge, my idea would definitely have had some complaints.

I had an idea the geometry police would be waiting to catch some offenders.:)
01/28/2003 05:11:29 PM · #14
Originally posted by aurora:

I am so glad I haven't entered the square challenge, my idea would definitely have had some complaints.

I had an idea the geometry police would be waiting to catch some offenders.:)


I agree with you. There are nitpickers all over the place here :) There is a small crowd that does not allow for any artistic interpretation at all.
01/28/2003 05:34:48 PM · #15
Would it be fair to everyone if the challenge being voted on is not discussed in forum.just in case members could be influenced?
01/28/2003 06:02:40 PM · #16
Originally posted by digitallywet:

I just wanted to say I am very disappointed in some people's kinergarten teachers.

It would appear that technically, mathematically infact however you want to look at it some people have got the whole square thing wrong. If I could be really bothered I would give a graphical demonstration but it's not worth the effort.
Here's how I understand geometry to work. A square has equal side width and length, hence is symetcrical in almost every half you take (if not every as far as I know) a rectangle whilst having right angle corners is not a square and is a rectangle. A square by definition has to have sides of all the same lengths.

Some people have objects in their photos which are squares very obviously, some people have abstract squares, some people have perspective distorted squares (that was one of my choices for an entry, but i forgot to enter), some people have actually cropped their image to be square shaped itself where as some have just got plain old rectangles going on.
I hope you all appreciate your mistake and are spanking yourselves rightously as you read this, I just thought It would have to be down to me to start some petit bickering this week.
Now no fighting back please just take my word for it and be done.

oh for examples on shapes see here

oh and by the way anyone noticed how many great cliche shots are in the square entry list .. one stood out .. a square meal ... he he .. that would be good for next week too !


Win a challenge, then we'll talk.
01/28/2003 06:30:10 PM · #17
too harsh dude
01/28/2003 07:57:25 PM · #18
Originally posted by Fibre Optix:

Win a challenge, then we'll talk.


Way too harsh, considering you haven't won a challenge either, Fibre!!!
01/28/2003 10:24:35 PM · #19
IF ONLY members could be influenced by the threads here in the forums. We have these silly debates about meeting the challenge and accepting alternate interpretations all the time, but it doesn't seem to change much of anything. I'm all for creative interpretations, but I have to agree when it is as plain as this. If you don't have a square or some representation of a square then you just don't meet this one.
01/28/2003 11:21:00 PM · #20
Square: A person who is regarded as dull, rigidly conventional, and out of touch with current trends.

Message edited by author 2003-01-28 23:21:21.
01/28/2003 11:54:35 PM · #21
Originally posted by KimInNB:

Originally posted by Fibre Optix:

Win a challenge, then we'll talk.


Way too harsh, considering you haven't won a challenge either, Fibre!!!


Yes, that is true. I have not won a challenge and most likely never will. However I'm not the photo-nazi who is insulting people's intelligence by referring them to web sites defining what a square is. I know what a square is, I know what a road sign is, I don't have to think out of the box if I don't wish to, if my photo is dependent on the title so be it. It's my f#$!'n photo. You think my photo is too literal, you think my photo doesn’t meet the challenge, fine give it a low score. That's the whole point of this site. I'm not a professional photographer, I do it for fun.

And I'm being harsh? He's referring people to a web site that defines what a square is. Do you think he's doing it cause he honestly thinks people don't know. NO! He's doing it cause he thinks he a genius. He's thinks his crap smells sweeter than most. Well I don't think so. If you’re going to talk down to people back it up. WIN A CHALLANGE at least.


Message edited by author 2003-01-28 23:55:56.
01/29/2003 12:56:29 AM · #22
Actually I found Digitallywet's post kind of amusing Fibre, and I certainly had to smile when I saw the website he posted. It shows me he has a similar sense of humor. I could have done something like that myself.

And to answer your question "Am I being harsh?" Well if you had spoken to me like that then the answer is a definite yes.
01/29/2003 02:08:50 AM · #23
Originally posted by cwmccall:

Square: A person who is regarded as dull, rigidly conventional, and out of touch with current trends.


deleted!

just realized my remark was totally out of context, or at least not the one I thought.




Message edited by author 2003-01-29 09:37:18.
01/29/2003 02:29:16 AM · #24
wow what a conundrum we have here! in reference to an earlier discussion this week, I once again began measuring the so called squares with my micrometer... in the sprit of fairness however, this time I relaxed my constraints from the first projection of .001 of an inch to .01 of an inch.... unfortunately it appears we have a plethora of parallelograms, trapezoids, and uneven quadrilaterals.. with a few actual squares tossed in here and there... however, I think the fact that many of the so called squares in the shots are not actually squares is the least of our problems... I think Master Setzler said it best in his posting... many of the squares in the pics are not actually the subject of the photo... so, since the challenge is for the squares to be the subjects, coupled with the fact that when you measure the objects with a micrometer and find that most are not squares,we find that many of this weeks photos simply do not meet the challenge... too bad though... lots of nice photos to be sure! ummm, are we allowed to grade on that? :oP
01/29/2003 03:24:11 AM · #25
Originally posted by Anachronite:

I once again began measuring the so called squares with my micrometer... in the sprit of fairness however, this time I relaxed my constraints from the first projection of .001 of an inch to .01 of an inch....


Watch out for parallax error! Oh, and make sure you correct for the slight curvature of your monitor and any deviation it might have from perfectly square pixels. Then add a correction for the smearing effect of jpeg compression... it may really have been a square had the file size requirements been less strict, so be fair! Then, make sure you have the latest data on the effect of gravity waves and local relativistic variations in the speed of light due to gravitational lensing.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/18/2019 07:07:29 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: 04/18/2019 07:07:29 PM EDT.