| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/27/2006 12:20:57 PM · #1 |
Mike Johnston's blog, absolutely hilarious entry rings rather true, find it
here |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 12:25:42 PM · #2 |
Funny stuff. Very true, I suppose.
Lynne, you better be careful to focus on the right end of the horse :)
Message edited by author 2006-06-27 12:39:12. |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 12:27:55 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 12:34:13 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 12:36:43 PM · #5 |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 12:38:27 PM · #6 |
And not a single one of them used the full 640 pixels allowed.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2006 12:42:57 PM · #7 |
That's hilarious.
I found this link on the blog site too.. Cartier-Bresson on Flickr
Unbelievable comments... |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 02:49:11 PM · #8 |
| Well, that just made my whole day!!! |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 03:31:53 PM · #9 |
| A touchdown (for you soccer fans: goooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllll) of a find :) |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 03:48:48 PM · #10 |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 04:10:11 PM · #11 |
| I forgot to include the "[Nikon D200, Nikon D70s backup, 17-35 f/2.8, 80-200 f/2.8, 4GB Microdrive (2), Photoshop CS, Epson 2200]" as my forum signature ;). |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 05:24:41 PM · #12 |
| Thanks for sharing this. Sounds very familiar. :) |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 05:42:18 PM · #13 |
Classic :-D
A few of us started a topic a while back where we posted historical photos here in the forum under the guise that the photos were ours and we wanted feedback.
The comments were priceless! Even after a few people found out what we were doing someone even had the audicity to say "Yeah, but if these photographers just had photoshop back in their time imagine how much BETTER they would have been!"
Sometimes I just don't think people get it at all :-/ |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 05:47:30 PM · #14 |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 05:55:29 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by hokie:
Classic :-D
A few of us started a topic a while back where we posted historical photos here in the forum under the guise that the photos were ours and we wanted feedback.
The comments were priceless! Even after a few people found out what we were doing someone even had the audicity to say "Yeah, but if these photographers just had photoshop back in their time imagine how much BETTER they would have been!"
Sometimes I just don't think people get it at all :-/ |
That said there are some of the 'classic' shots on that site that I do not particular care for. This proves both that people can break the rules and still create 'classic' shots, but also that a lot of people try to help others by handing down the basic technical info. A purposefully tilted horizon versus a newbie who doesnt know any better is not always obvious. Then there are people who think that because someone has named something 'classic' that everyone must immediately love it. I dont particularly like Van Gogh - I dont care how much people pay for his paintings and how many books and etc etc there is about them. They may be classic but I dont have to like them.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2006 06:17:41 PM · #16 |
| Hey, I've gotten every one of those comments! Does that mean I'm really great and nobody gets me? Nah, didn't think so. LOL! |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 06:22:07 PM · #17 |
Placing: 11th
Average Score: 6.658
Don't forget that right here at DPC this picture by Ansel Adams himself was secretly entered into the Ansel Adams challenge by site administrators as an experiment to see how it would be scored by DPC voters.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2006 07:00:09 PM · #18 |
Now that's why I don't comment too often. Just kidding (mostly).
I do need to continue reading everybody elses comments on everybody's photos because I am still learning what to look for and how to offer a quality critique. |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 07:10:42 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Placing: 11th
Average Score: 6.658
Don't forget that right here at DPC this picture by Ansel Adams himself was secretly entered into the Ansel Adams challenge by site administrators as an experiment to see how it would be scored by DPC voters. |
I didn't realize this was done - very funny!
The blog and flickr site were great too. Especially for someone who's taken photo history classes. Sometimes it bothers me that photographers online don't know/appreciate those who came before the digital revolution! |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 07:33:58 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by TrynityRose:
I dont particularly like Van Gogh |
How can you not like Van Gogh?
|
|
|
|
06/27/2006 07:46:08 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
Originally posted by TrynityRose:
I dont particularly like Van Gogh |
How can you not like Van Gogh? |
I didn't particularly like Van Gogh either...... until I stood in front of an original in a museum in London! WOW! |
|
|
|
06/27/2006 11:08:57 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Ristyz:
Originally posted by larryslights:
Originally posted by TrynityRose:
I dont particularly like Van Gogh |
How can you not like Van Gogh? |
I didn't particularly like Van Gogh either...... until I stood in front of an original in a museum in London! WOW! |
It's not whether people like somethng or not that gripes a lot of people.
It's the anal attentiveness to technical theory. The "lets find waldo"
way people go about looking for faults rather than appreciating the emotions that went into a photo or painting. This is what dissappoints most people when they see crtics.
Most people on the net (including me) are not qualified to give "expert" opinions on whether a lot of photos are good or not technically. It's perfectly acceptable to say you don't like something because you just don't...but lots of folks like using "Rule of Thirds" or "Depth of Field" or the myriad of other technical buzz words/phrases they have picked up while learning photography as the most important aspects of enjoying photography rather than just talking about the emotions of an image..and that is too bad.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2006 11:16:08 PM · #23 |
I should have put a " ; ) " after my question about not liking Van Gogh.
I saw lots of stuff at the Museum of Modern Art that I thought was pure crap (but not "Starry Night"). But somebody paid big bucks for it. Even the plain white canvas.
|
|
|
|
06/27/2006 11:26:05 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
I should have put a " ; ) " after my question about not liking Van Gogh.
I saw lots of stuff at the Museum of Modern Art that I thought was pure crap (but not "Starry Night"). But somebody paid big bucks for it. Even the plain white canvas. |
And that is totally cool :-) I don't like a lot of stuff that is considered great art. Why? Just because it doesn't float my boat.
I think you or me or anybody just not liking something is a helluva lot more honest than a lot of the psuedo-critics that inhabit the net today (like the ones that this thread was aimed at).
|
|
|
|
06/27/2006 11:42:44 PM · #25 |
Thanks for the link. It was well worth the visit.
|
|
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 10:14:54 AM EDT.
