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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> How light on white should read
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 29, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 03/04/2005 12:25:43 AM · #1
Here is how the challenge should read so that we can all get it right. Ya.

Challenge (Light on white). Take a photo in which the background is white and the subject is predominately a "light" color. Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights! Also be mindful that white is not a color and should not be used as the subject. Also black and whites are not valid as the white in B&W is really not white at all. The white background must meat a brightness quotient of 120 lumens or is not white enough. Black can not be used as a background and inverted to white as it is still really black not matter how white it looks. But the good news is that the bone I will through you so we can have ten thousand threads on the interpitation of this challenge is the light color is up for grabs. Good luck trying to score over a 5.
 03/04/2005 12:28:45 AM · #2
Originally posted by puma:
Here is how the challenge should read so that we can all get it right. Ya.

Challenge (Light on white). Take a photo in which the background is white and the subject is predominately a "light" color. Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights! Also be mindful that white is not a color and should not be used as the subject. Also black and whites are not valid as the white in B&W is really not white at all. The white background must meat a brightness quotient of 120 lumens or is not white enough. Black can not be used as a background and inverted to white as it is still really black not matter how white it looks. But the good news is that the bone I will through you so we can have ten thousand threads on the interpitation of this challenge is the light color is up for grabs. Good luck trying to score over a 5.


Sarcastic or bitter?
 03/04/2005 12:30:26 AM · #3
dumb·founded

Message edited by author 2005-03-04 00:30:36.
 03/04/2005 12:41:00 AM · #4
Originally posted by puma:
dumb·founded


Better than founded dumb... :-)
 03/04/2005 12:41:10 AM · #5
i, too, was surprised with the entries...didn't meet my interpretation of the challenge at all

Message edited by author 2005-03-04 00:41:22.
 03/04/2005 01:08:25 AM · #6
Originally posted by puma:
Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights!


What the F... does "Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights!" mean?

Does it mean you should or shouldn't? It shopuld read "Be mindful not to over-expose your highlights!" if they don't want the highlights blown out.
 03/04/2005 01:24:41 AM · #7
At this point "WHO CARES!!!!!!!" The bottom line is this challenge has caused: 1.Argumnet , 2. Discussion, 3. Interpretation and 4.controversey
We all are better photographers because of this great debate and now fully appreciate that artistic creativity comes in many forms and viewpoints. Now if we could all just settle down and enjoy the ride for the next couple of days watching our scores take a nose dive.(That is after my double cafe mocha wears off from star.....)

Message edited by author 2005-03-04 02:22:42.
 03/04/2005 02:01:53 AM · #8
Originally posted by puma:
Here is how the challenge should read so that we can all get it right. Ya.

Challenge (Light on white). Take a photo in which the background is white and the subject is predominately a "light" color. Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights! Also be mindful that white is not a color and should not be used as the subject. Also black and whites are not valid as the white in B&W is really not white at all. The white background must meat a brightness quotient of 120 lumens or is not white enough. Black can not be used as a background and inverted to white as it is still really black not matter how white it looks. But the good news is that the bone I will through you so we can have ten thousand threads on the interpitation of this challenge is the light color is up for grabs. Good luck trying to score over a 5.


I got a great laugh out of this. I am pretty new to the forums and in fact the three challenges currently being voted on are the only 3 I have ever entered, so I am learning from the process here. I have to admit I have been amused at the amount of controversy over the interpretation of "white". My opinion, which may or may not amount to much, is that half the fun is in seeing the different interpretations of the challenge. What if a challenge stated "take a picture of a whole red delicious apple. Locate the whole unpeeled and undecorated apple upright in the center of the upper right quadrant of an all white background with no other objects in the photo. The photo must be 640 by 640. No post processing is to be used." Sure we could get a wonderful idea of the raw skill of the photographers on the site and the quality of their equipment, but I'd like to think there is more to photography than that. Actually now that I think on it, I bet we'd probably get some very interesting interpretations even so constrained. Man, can you imagine trying to vote on 200 nearly identical photos. ouch.
 03/04/2005 02:08:04 AM · #9
It certainly is a weird one, whether you're sarcastic or bitter!
 03/04/2005 02:21:18 AM · #10
Originally posted by hecksheri:
Man, can you imagine trying to vote on 200 nearly identical photos. ouch.


I was a little blind after voting on this challenge. ;)

I suggest that the SC takes a certain portion of the funding brought in by members and hires a competent copywriter or editor to assist in removing language from challenge descriptions that could be considered contrary, (see ncbca7's comments) and deflect the sort of controversy apparent in this challenge (see DDYJR's comment).

Now, I'm all up for "interpretation" and vote with that in mind. I don't envy the SC's description-writers (this issue has popped up more than once), though sometimes I think they're feeling a little sadistic. :)

I think that hecksheri's idea pops up as often as these controversies do, but this is a gray area (18%?), the solution is not black and white (ha!) and within a few days we'll know how little the description mattered to the voters--I often find myself surprised at what ribbons and what tanks in such a contested challenge as this week's.

Now let's get surreal.

Message edited by author 2005-03-04 02:22:56.
 03/04/2005 03:10:19 AM · #11
I take it to mean do not let the highlights blow out this is a High key challenge.The focal encylopesia describes this as using the light and middle tones only, with the light being soft and full .
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by puma:
Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights!


What the F... does "Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights!" mean?

Does it mean you should or shouldn't? It shopuld read "Be mindful not to over-expose your highlights!" if they don't want the highlights blown out.
03/04/2005 03:47:07 AM · #12
Can it be, that the reason for low scores from the voting bullies is too much bright white can be blinding?

Therefore I now see how blind most preople really are:)
White can make other colors look brighter.
Light is the key to the change in white.
I am curious how many out there that entered this challenge or practice this.... Measuring light?
Do you use a white piece of paper in different situations to change your setiings?
Do you know what to change your settings to?
Here is a en excellent link to this topic of white...White temperatures I still have yet to master it with my fugi but I am trying and practicing everyday:)
03/04/2005 04:03:00 AM · #13
Originally posted by animes2k:
Originally posted by hecksheri:
Man, can you imagine trying to vote on 200 nearly identical photos. ouch.


I suggest that the SC takes a certain portion of the funding brought in by members and hires a competent copywriter or editor to assist in removing language from challenge descriptions that could be considered contrary, (see ncbca7's comments) and deflect the sort of controversy apparent in this challenge (see DDYJR's comment).


I'm up for that one; my current profession is "editor", and I write the rules for a 35,000+ member site for social game-playing. They don't even have to pay me :-) I think a lot of this weird confusion can be avoided with better copywriting.

HOWEVER...

I believe there's a case to be made that this is INTENTIONAL, that the challenge-framers WANT ambiguity so we can have all this glorious fun pondering the runes of the challenges, reading the entrails, tossing the bones, stirring the tea leaves...

Robt.

Message edited by author 2005-03-04 04:03:30.
 03/04/2005 04:31:31 AM · #14
HOWEVER.....lol I think Robert is Right.... this is what makes DPC ...what it is..
 03/04/2005 04:32:48 AM · #15
I Like TEA....lol
 03/04/2005 04:43:08 AM · #16
Originally posted by bear_music:
I believe there's a case to be made that this is INTENTIONAL, that the challenge-framers WANT ambiguity so we can have all this glorious fun pondering the runes of the challenges, reading the entrails, tossing the bones, stirring the tea leaves...


hence my mention of their sadism :)

Message edited by author 2005-03-04 04:43:33.
 03/04/2005 07:47:06 AM · #17
Originally posted by hecksheri:
Man, can you imagine trying to vote on 200 nearly identical photos. ouch.


I do that every challenge, don't you? Trying to reduce (vote) my pile of photos down to one to submit for the challenge. ;^) Well, 200 may be a bit extreme...
 03/04/2005 08:28:20 AM · #18
I believe with clear(er) parameters you can still get an amazing degree of variation.

I'm embracing the the variety of takes on the challenge and it's been reflected in my voting. I'm still getting nailed for my entry. Hey, I voted 60's entries in the 70's competition well. I'm an easy goin guy.

DDYJR-I'm not sure if I'm a better photographer OR a more conservative one at this point(regarding this challenge and future entries). The comments which are far and few between would normally be helpful and educational but all I've learned is that many of us are on completely different pages.

A time trial race is only fair or worthy if all the runners are running the same distance on the same track.

I'm still hopeful that people will go back after this and some revoting. Loosen up a bit?

And I hope that the SC might do some minor tightening up.

Other than that...Vive la difference!!!
 03/04/2005 08:29:15 AM · #19
Originally posted by justin_hewlett:
i, too, was surprised with the entries...didn't meet my interpretation of the challenge at all


I think you might have missed the point.
 03/04/2005 08:40:14 AM · #20
A funny thing dawned on me after voting on about half the entries. I started by saying I was going to deduct marks for "x" and give marks for "Y". But then when I came across a gret shot but it had "X" i couldn't bring myself to deduct...it was a great shot.

The point is that a winner is a winner even if it has broken some of the rules we make up in our mind when we start out voting.
 03/04/2005 09:25:00 AM · #21
Originally posted by animes2k:
I suggest that the SC takes a certain portion of the funding brought in by members and hires a competent copywriter or editor to assist in removing language from challenge descriptions that could be considered contrary, (see ncbca7's comments) and deflect the sort of controversy apparent in this challenge (see DDYJR's comment).

Or they could just give me the money, do nothing and achieve exactly the same effect. Remember, we're talking about a group that's capable of arguing what counts as white, whether white counts as light and that the white in black & white isn't really white.

I'll never fully understand people who attach extra "rules" to the challenges, it seems more like computer programming than photography, but at the end of the day everyone's vote is worth the same ... and at least they're a constant that I can mostly allow for when considering my entry.

[mumble]a constant pain in the butt that is[/mumble]
:P

And imagine how dull this site would be without all the arguments intellectual discussions. : )

"'Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing"
- Douglas Adams
 03/04/2005 09:33:13 AM · #22
Originally posted by bod:

...what counts as white...
...like computer programming...

And imagine how dull this site would be without all the arguments intellectual discussions. : )



White: RGB (255, 255, 255)
White: HTML (#FFFFFF)

;^)
 03/04/2005 09:36:33 AM · #23
Black: the lack there of.
 03/04/2005 09:38:34 AM · #24
I think I over-exposed my highlights again. I forgot to count the lumens.

Message edited by author 2005-03-04 09:40:04.
 03/04/2005 10:59:48 AM · #25
I don't believe in white anymore. It can bunk with quantum physics for all I care.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 12:03:21 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 © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 12:03:21 AM EDT.