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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Apologies to Low Tech Challengers
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 22 of 22, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/06/2004 03:18:04 PM · #1
I spent a lot of time this weekend trying to run a stream of thought style of commentary on many of the challenge entries. In reviewing some of them, I hope that I have not offended anyone in any way. A few pm's during the challenge have pointed out where my written presentation may have come off as super critical or even know-it-all. I did not intend this at all and will work on that.

My thought process often pointed out that I saw little or no link to technology in the image presented. This was a simple note to the artist that indicated the viewer had a hard time seeing that which they may have easily seen. In most cases, that comment did not mean I thought the image should be trashed on voting due to a 'doesn't meet the challenge' point of view, just a note that in some ways the subject matter may not have a very clear link to what one person's perspective of low technology meant. In other cases, I clearly could not see the link and I noted where I felt an adjustment had to be made in the scoring.

To those of you where this applies. I apologize sincerely if my written word was harshly taken or I completely misunderstood the art you presented.

JD
edits: spelling and clarification

Message edited by author 2004-12-06 15:22:18.
12/06/2004 03:47:25 PM · #2
i actualy would like to thank u for commenting on my shot.

some parts of your comment did seem as if u thought u were the best photog of all time...but at least u took the time to look at my shot and think through it and it is for that that i thank u.

not many commenturs are willing to spend the time....they go through and say "there are some parts of this shot that i do not like-5" the never say what at least u had the gutts to say what u saw that u liked and what u saw that u didn't like.

i think my shot is boardering "didn't like" but thanks anyway.

_brando_
12/06/2004 04:01:36 PM · #3
LOL...wait til you all see the shot I posted in low tech. You'll see that I already know I'm not the best photog of the world! (Hovering round a 4.2 right now.) Theory is one thing, but I often have a really hard time pulling it all together.
12/06/2004 04:08:04 PM · #4
Just wanted to say that I would never complain about any comments I receive from anyone in regards to my photos. So keep them coming! I must say that I did enjoy reading your comment Arcanist and it's a pleasure to actually read any comment(s) that goes into the details of why and why not you like it or not.

For me, every comment I receive is like Christmas ... so type more gift please. Ha ha...

I know it's hard to critique someone else's work, but I think that it's our choice to vote anywhere from 1 to 10 ... I think it's also our choice to comment anyway we see fit in regards to the photographs.
12/06/2004 04:24:54 PM · #5
Arcanist, I've been trying to do the same thing with my commenting. I was pleasantly surprised to see your comment and it really is the only truly useful one I've received so far. In my limited experience, it seems that formal photography contest judging is done much the same way, with "stream of thought" type commenting helping the judge sort out what they think of the image. Often times, what comes out are the brutally honest facts about what is wrong with the image...sometimes at the expense of the photographer's feelings.

Message edited by author 2004-12-06 20:12:50.
12/06/2004 04:36:57 PM · #6
Originally posted by Moose101:

Just wanted to say that I would never complain about any comments I receive from anyone in regards to my photos. So keep them coming! I must say that I did enjoy reading your comment Arcanist and it's a pleasure to actually read any comment(s) that goes into the details of why and why not you like it or not.

The only thing I find odd about your (Arcanist's) comment is that you seem to maybe see something in my photo which can't possibly be there ... I'll send you a note about it (or maybe post it here) after the voting's over : )

I'd like to see all the comments stay considerate, but they certainly benefit from the amount of detail you include about why you like/dislike something.

Message edited by author 2004-12-06 16:37:58.
12/06/2004 04:42:02 PM · #7
Arcanist, Your comment on my photo is one of the most useful I've ever received. Thanks for taking the time and keep up the good work. :)
12/06/2004 05:40:05 PM · #8
GE, please feel free to PM me anytime. If I have missed something or seen a ghost, I would rather go back and re-evaluate a posting. I keep a firm hold of why I scored a certain way, but if I see that I made an obvious mistake in something I'd rather fix it than have soemone suffer the consequences of my blind eyes. ;-)

Thank you all by the way for letting me know that I didn't go too far over the line, but I'll still try to be a bit more careful about wording.

edit: how the heck do you watch a thread?

Message edited by author 2004-12-06 17:44:02.
12/06/2004 06:11:33 PM · #9
Arcanist, out of 7 comments you’re the only one who "got it" as far as far as seeing what we tried to convey in our entry. Thanks!
12/06/2004 06:52:37 PM · #10
Originally posted by Arcanist:

... edit: how the heck do you watch a thread?

When you open the Forum Thread at the very top you will see a drop down that currently defaults to Thread Options, just pick Watch from that drop-down menu.

Nice and easy
12/06/2004 07:00:23 PM · #11
Personally I really appreciate your comment on my Low Tech, it really gave me some insight as to why it's not doing as well as I thought it would. Just about every comment I had gotten was a compliment (I'm not complaining, mind you) but the score was still low for what I expected. Your comments and those of nshaprio really helped me see why it wasn't sitting higher. Thank you both!

Deannda
12/06/2004 09:35:56 PM · #12
Moose - WOOT! I really am blind. Thanx for steering me in the right direction.
12/06/2004 10:16:07 PM · #13
Well I was quite proud of the comment you gave me. You could tell you really put a lot of thought into the wording of it. Thanks for taking the time to do it.
12/06/2004 10:25:40 PM · #14
I really appreciated your well thought out comment on my pic. Thank you for taking the time.
12/06/2004 10:52:19 PM · #15
and why didn't you say anything to me? now i'm really hurt.... ;-)
12/06/2004 11:02:10 PM · #16
Originally posted by gibun:

and why didn't you say anything to me? now i'm really hurt.... ;-)


LOL. I was just thinking the same thing. I hadn't checked any of my comments during the voting and just went in to look. Arcanist, I took a quick stroll through the comments in your profile and didn't see anything other than honest feedback and suggestions. I think you do a great job.

Message edited by author 2004-12-06 23:03:24.
12/07/2004 12:32:36 AM · #17
As one of the PM'rs, no offense taken. Thanks for commenting and giving my shot (as well as others) some thought, more than a one line thought.

As to your finish in the Challenge, you beat me. Point wise I am not too surprised by my score, but % finish wise...yuk!
12/07/2004 12:41:38 AM · #18
Originally posted by Arcanist:

I spent a lot of time this weekend trying to run a stream of thought style of commentary on many of the challenge entries. In reviewing some of them, I hope that I have not offended anyone in any way. A few pm's during the challenge have pointed out where my written presentation may have come off as super critical or even know-it-all. I did not intend this at all and will work on that.

My thought process often pointed out that I saw little or no link to technology in the image presented. This was a simple note to the artist that indicated the viewer had a hard time seeing that which they may have easily seen. In most cases, that comment did not mean I thought the image should be trashed on voting due to a 'doesn't meet the challenge' point of view, just a note that in some ways the subject matter may not have a very clear link to what one person's perspective of low technology meant. In other cases, I clearly could not see the link and I noted where I felt an adjustment had to be made in the scoring.

To those of you where this applies. I apologize sincerely if my written word was harshly taken or I completely misunderstood the art you presented.

JD
edits: spelling and clarification


Your comment on my photo was well reasoned, showed you had actually looked at it, and offered specific advice on how to improve it. Thank you. It was a model of constructive comment.
12/07/2004 02:42:16 AM · #19
Hi JD

Firstly I do applaud you on the effort and thought that you have put into your comments - it's very much appreciated.

I do however disagree with your interpretation of what qualifies as low-tech, I noticed that you questioned the yellow ribbon winner (low tech qualification: the wheel), as well as mine which included 'the press' (technology used for printing, industry and much more). That said it's interesting to take on board your viewpoint.

Thanks again for your input, please keep up the good work! :)

Darren
12/07/2004 05:07:47 AM · #20
Arcanist, I was one of the recipients of your comments. I specifically chose a board game that dates back several hundred years for the challenge. Some say it evolved from Egypt, others say Africa. Nonetheless, it's a fun game :D

Anyways, your comments were well phrased and I took no offense to them. It's the quick, smug ones with zero explanation that I personally can't stand and yours clearly did *not* fall into that category.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/281/thumb/124369.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/281/thumb/124369.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
12/07/2004 05:23:14 AM · #21
Originally posted by colda:

... what qualifies as low-tech, I noticed that you questioned the yellow ribbon winner (low tech qualification: the wheel), as well as mine which included 'the press' (technology used for printing, industry and much more).
Darren


Actually Darren, both examples you gave are bold reasons why I spent so long struggling with both low-tech and pointing out why I questioned the link, combined with offering critique at all on shining portraits.

You and many others saw the wheel. This perspective could be confounded by the colorization of the entire wagon which brought me right out of the realm of thinking about the part, but thinking about the whole. *Now* I see a wheel and the low-tech link is solid. Then I saw a wagon and was unsure what the link really was and in fact, the wrench's position didn't even give the link away to me then because of the boldness of the larger focal point.

The stamp you produced was a marvelous picture. In its simplicity, though, I the viewer had to draw on the associated images that the library of the mind chose to draw upon and where you saw printing and industry, my librarian chose to talk to me of old letter writing, sealing of envelopes and the marking of scrolls, which in my limited perspective never brought me around to typsetting or presses.

As I continued through the process of 'thinking aloud' with my comments, something evolved where I had to say - There aren't this many far away links to technology (low tech), what am I not seeing that they all see? As it nagged and nagged, the epiphany came on a photo I had struggled with for most of the week: ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/281/thumb/124959.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/281/thumb/124959.jpg', '/') + 1) . 'The Broom.

I liked the detail, but hated the subject. It reminded me of working, of dirt, of things I don't want to do on the weekend or after work. After struggling with it for so long, it finally came to me: my perspective on Low Tech: Take a picture of something non-electronic that is considered low technology, was from a perspective of a techie (empashis on the 'technology' word). I see gears and plans, advances in science, computers, military tech, all that bunk. Others have approached this challenge from a perspective of Low Tech = Simplicity. The broom was simplicity at its finest and it was enlightening.

Thankfully in most part, I did not put as much weight scoring where I thought there were 'shady' links to tech as I had in actually commenting that I had a hard time seeing the link. (Evaluating my chosen scores, each one seemed to be very close to the median score offered.) The process is a learning and growing experience. I think I now have a bit broader view of the world (after this challenge) and the commentary has helped me to try and keep things in mind when I produce my next challenge entry...now if I will just choose not to be lazy and settle for the easy edit, take the time to critique my own work as honestly as I did others, maybe someday I'll get me one of those ribbons.

Message edited by author 2004-12-07 07:51:06.
12/07/2004 01:50:48 PM · #22
After reading some comments in another thread, I will try to keep a more open mind on how an item relates to the challenge. It is always difficult to view an image and know what the artist had in mind (if anything ;). The low tech challenge is a prime example of that - What is Low Tech? There are as many answers as their are people to ask.

I find it interesting to see how the photographers interpret and express the the Challenge subject and description. I feel pretty confident in my technical abilities, so the comments i find most interesting on my entries are those that explore the connection to the challenge or offer suggestions to improve that connection in the viewer'd mind.


Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/18/2019 09:31:25 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: 07/18/2019 09:31:25 AM EDT.