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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Please explain
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 17 of 17, (reverse)
AuthorThread
10/14/2002 02:28:59 AM · #1
Usually I can tell what it is about my photos that cause them to score below 5, but I'm just flummoxed about my Garbage score! I really liked this photo. It was taken near a building site where there was lots of garbage strewn around, with the nasturtiums growing all over and around it. This is a longer shot of the piece of carboard in my photo.

I was impressed by how well my camera focussed on this flower, because its macro mode is pretty inept. I also was racing to take photos because it was starting to rain, so the fact that I didn't shake the camera too much during the exposure is pretty neat :). I took down the EV compensation a bit to make sure the cardboard wouldn't end up blowing out, and so I could boost the colours up.

In the gimp I desaturated the green a bit and pushed up the red to make the flowers really bright. I didn't need to crop it at all, that was how I framed it with the camera. Of course, I also played with the levels and curves and unsharped it, etc. I love looking at the textures of the cardboard and all the little bits of plants going off into the distance, and the way I composed it around the flowers and carboard seems really nice to me.

So what was it? Why did it score so low? The comments aren't much help.
10/14/2002 02:32:03 AM · #2
Dunno, it's certainly better than average. I don't get the voting on this site :) but then again, you're looking at someone who is probably going to end up with an average 3 for Sin, which hopefuly people gave low scores cuz they're sicken by it, not because they don't understand it or other issues :)



Originally posted by lisae:
Usually I can tell what it is about my photos that cause them to score below 5, but I'm just flummoxed about my Garbage score! I really liked this photo. It was taken near a building site where there was lots of garbage strewn around, with the nasturtiums growing all over and around it. This is a longer shot of the piece of carboard in my photo.

I was impressed by how well my camera focussed on this flower, because its macro mode is pretty inept. I also was racing to take photos because it was starting to rain, so the fact that I didn't shake the camera too much during the exposure is pretty neat :). I took down the EV compensation a bit to make sure the cardboard wouldn't end up blowing out, and so I could boost the colours up.

In the gimp I desaturated the green a bit and pushed up the red to make the flowers really bright. I didn't need to crop it at all, that was how I framed it with the camera. Of course, I also played with the levels and curves and unsharped it, etc. I love looking at the textures of the cardboard and all the little bits of plants going off into the distance, and the way I composed it around the flowers and carboard seems really nice to me.

So what was it? Why did it score so low? The comments aren't much help.



10/14/2002 02:37:59 AM · #3
Sorry, can't help as I gave you a 7. I like the colours, the composition and the message. The cardboard is a bit bright and might not have been recognized as cardboard by everybody.

Marc
10/14/2002 02:42:28 AM · #4
lisae -- I don't know either, but I think the results this week are...garbage? And...my score actually semed to go down when the final vote-purging occurred (quite unusual). There were 3 pictures of syringes this week (something I could have shot, but didn't); they ranked 32, 68, and 186. They're different, but THAT different?
Oh well, I still go more with the comments than the score...
10/14/2002 03:26:25 AM · #5
Well... I've developed a little theory. A lot of the more... "aesthetically sensitive" shall we say :)... people didn't submit to the garbage challenge, and perhaps they found it difficult to vote as well. I would say a large chunk of the people who veer towards the old flowers/kittens/babies/sunsets/pretty girls type photos (and please, don't take me as someone who thinks they're ALL bad, my photo fell into one of those categories :P) might have either not voted or didn't make it all the way through. I think that might have left the malicious types and the arty "free thinkers" battling it out over the voting :). I mean, if you look at my distribution, I got LOTS of 5s, but there were more votes on the low side of the peak than on the high side.

Maybe it's all wishful thinking, but it seems to make some kind of sense to me.
10/14/2002 03:49:06 AM · #6
WOOHOO! Let's hear it for the syringes ;oP (Personally, I think the 3 were fairly different. One had technical problems, and mine just didn't have enough interest or focus.)
I don't agree with the results this week either. Not at all. I didn't especially like my pic and didn't expect it to do well, but there were some good shots that did not do as well as they should have. I just truly don't get the voters around here. I had a really hard time voting through all that crap. Think the low submission rate this week is related to how much people enjoyed last week?
10/14/2002 04:18:58 AM · #7
I don´t have the time argueing with you now about the result because I´m at work. But my first feeling when I read this was:
Have you heard about bad losers?
I´m coming back to you when I´ve got the time.
And I´m surely not going to let you spoil my day.

* This message has been edited by the author on 10/14/2002 4:16:59 AM.

* This message has been edited by the author on 10/14/2002 7:34:29 AM.
10/14/2002 04:26:39 AM · #8
Carsten - this isn't about being a "bad loser", this is about wanting to know the reasons for not rating so well. As I said, I can usually tell why my photos score low, but I couldn't for this one, and the comments don't really tell me.

One person (lionelm) has sent me a great private message detailing what he thought was wrong with it, and I thanked him. Without knowing how others see your work, scores are useless. I'm not going to defend it, I know it has flaws, all my photos do because I have almost no control over how my camera takes them. I see them as photos my camera took, not me :). I patted it on the head for exposing my "Tranqu(i)lity on Heirisson Island" shot so beautifully without me even having to use EV compensation. This one, as I said, turned out much better than most macro shots do.

So, I don't have a big ego problem over scoring badly here. I just like to know what the reasons are.

OH! And congratulations on your 3rd place :). I love it when photos I rate a 10 actually place.


* This message has been edited by the author on 10/14/2002 4:26:43 AM.
10/14/2002 04:28:47 AM · #9
carsten, i dont think she is being a sore loser at all, just being curious about people's thoughts. i for one was one of those apparent arty voters :) (as i am not malicious!) and i admit i didn't score this one high--it didn't really appeal to me. I do, however, really like the second version, the long shot of it and would have scored it better, because to me, it tells a better story.

* This message has been edited by the author on 10/14/2002 4:30:30 AM.
10/14/2002 04:54:46 AM · #10
No Lisae it wasn´t you in the first place. But never mind. I´m really glad to placed a shot so high because everything in it was so planned. The framing (hard), the low contrast and the gray light (waited for a rainy day).
I was lucky this week. I did very badly last week and I will probably do not so good this week (between 100-200?).
Again I´m really glad because there are so many great photographers here.
10/14/2002 08:07:34 AM · #11
Originally posted by lisae:
So what was it? Why did it score so low? The comments aren't much help.


I gave you a low score basically because "flower among the debris" is a very obvious idea, and it has been done and overdone. So if you're going to do it again, some new approach, some creativity (maybe even the "dreadful" artsy thing) would have moved your score upwards in my scale. It is a good photo, but average, and I had it down one notch from average (5) because the subject was not the garbage.

I hope this helps and doesn't hurt your feelings, which is not my intention.
10/14/2002 08:10:08 AM · #12
Originally posted by lisae:

So what was it? Why did it score so low? The comments aren't much help.


I think that this comment says a lot:
"Nice try in the framing. Very boring though. 2/10"

So I think many people looked at it, not appealing, did not look at anything else, gave a low score and went on.

Personally I tend to agree with the 'not very interesting' bit, but also I find the wilderness of green disturbing and distracting. The red / orange of the flower (left corner) is too intens, it draws attention and because that was not the thing in focus (apperently the flower next to it is), your eye is drawn to it and sees something soft and oversaturated.
The cardboard seems to be blown out a bit in the middle (especially in relation to all the other stuff in the picture), giving it an unsharp, soft expression.

This took me ten minutes to write. Voting alone takes a lot of time, so that's why I don't comment to often.


10/14/2002 09:37:34 AM · #13
I was shocked with the scores on my photo this week also. I totally understand that a lot of people have something to say about the solarize effect..but I got 14 ones and 15 twos!
Most of my comments were very good...so where are the comments from the others?
I personally liked how the solarization of the sky added to the surreal effect of the can, but I know it is a personal thing. I did meet the challenge, the photo was composed well, it was technically good, so why the rediculously low scores?
I personally feel a 1 or 2 should be reserved for pictures with none of the above - a photo with poor focus, composition, etc...
Oh well, still just can't figure out the crazy voters here.
10/14/2002 10:05:09 AM · #14
Folks, it was all garbage after all! I found it very difficult to select an image that was creatively appealing to me and still offered something motivating and telling to view. Meeting the challenge criteria seemed to be the easy job this time around. I did rate the top three high, and found some of the others that I preferred to still be ranked in the top 25 images. However, I still found it very problematical to get overly enthusiastic over garbage as a challenge subject, perhaps others did too?
10/14/2002 10:10:28 AM · #15
Nocturno - you read my tone completely wrong if you think I disparaged artsy photos as "dreadful"... I can only imagine you haven't looked at any of my other photos or read my series of "Art Appreciation" discussions if you think I'm somehow uncreative. This was not a "flower among the debris" kind of photo. The title says what I was trying to convey, that this piece of cardboard was rotting back into the earth and being consumed by the flowers and weeds.

TerryGee - I gave you a 9 and only just held back from a 10! I loved that shot.

Anyhoo, my photo this week is rating between 5.5-5.7 (it'll definitely end up being my 3rd highest rated photo so far), and could never be criticised as being "uncreative", so I'm happy :).
10/14/2002 10:18:46 AM · #16
I gave your entry a 7, Lisae... I didn't like how the cardboard hung off the edge so much... and the flower became more of the focal point.. (not because it is a flower, but because of the garbage challenge)...
I liked your message though.
Your outtake is more appealing as it shows the earth swallowing up the cardboard and natural recycling is occurring to create fertility in the soil.
Just one opinion.
:0)

10/14/2002 10:22:53 AM · #17
Terry .. I gave you a 7 .. did not left a comment .. I liked the solarisation effect .. I thought it was bringing a nice effect to the shot.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 02/19/2020 09:35:03 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 © 2001-2020 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: 02/19/2020 09:35:03 AM EST.