Okay, so the vast majority of you don't find this shot to be taken "from the ground up". I've somehow failed to get you to see this perspective, and I'm trying my best to take responsibility for that. It isn't working. The camera was held at about the level of the driving girl's shins, as is evident if you look at the photo (what things are seen head-on, what things are seen from above / below, it really is possible to determine more or less where the camera was). Look at the legs of the girl on the back of the scooter. Are you seeing them from below, level or above? The seat of the scooter is about 24" off the ground. Look at the hand on the near handlebar. Again, are you viewing it from above, level, or below? I must be missing something, but how does this not meet the challenge criteria?
|
|
05/06/2002 04:49:47 AM · #2 |
Perhaps if the instructions were a little clearer when a challenge is posted maybe we could meet the expectations of the voters/admins. After all it was Langdon who said my gargoyle shot wasn't from the ground up. The statue was only five inches tall. Take another look, Langdon.
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.asp?IMAGE_ID=1206
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/6/2002 4:50:56 AM. |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 04:53:01 AM · #3 |
Note, the following is merely my opinion, and not the general consenus.
To be honest, I'd say that there wasn't enough angle to it, and that the shot *feels* as though it's been taken at a parallel to the ground, even if that is not the case. The problem really stems from whether you interpret 'from the ground up' to mean that the camera must be from the ground up, or whether just the subjust should be from the ground up.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 05:11:20 AM · #4 |
from the ground up means whatever you want it to. its the photographers who vote. langdon and drew get one vote to a picture just like everyone else. people tell others that their photo doesnt really meet the challenge, then you turn around and ask why someone said that to you. its the voters making the decision, the nazis have nothing to do with it.
this is like people blaming an incompetant judge year after year. just quit electing the dumbass |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 05:17:54 AM · #5 |
| LANGDON was the one who said my shot didn't fit the challenge. |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 05:22:51 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by conceptgraphics:
Perhaps if the instructions were a little clearer when a challenge is posted maybe we could meet the expectations of the voters/admins. After all it was Langdon who said my gargoyle shot wasn't from the ground up. The statue was only five inches tall. Take another look, Langdon.
I never said it didn't meet any expectations. I just said that it didn't "SEEM" like it was taken from the ground up. The challenge wasn't macro shot, so the fact that your statue was only five inches tall doesn't help your case much. I didn't feel that your angle conveyed that the shot was taken from the ground up. The background is green, meaning it could be anything from grass to shrubs to trees. A more notable background would be a blue sky to denote up.
The shot is very nice, I have no problem with the aesthetics, but fitting into the challenge, it's borderline IMO.
Like clay said, I only got one vote, as did everyone else.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 09:38:52 AM · #7 |
See, though, this is just the kind of lameness I'm talking about. How does it fail to "seem like it was taken from the ground up"? Are you or are you not looking up the gargoyle's nose? If a shot "feels" to you like it was taken from a horizontal perspective, can you put into words, somehow, how you managed to ignore what you saw in the image and got to some feeling of a horizontal perspective? It's one thing to clearly evaluate an image, and another to hide behind pollyana "seems"s and "feels like"s. This kind of muddy thinking and seeing will not help your or anyone's image making. So, out with you:
langdon - 5/5/2002
from ground up isn't really represented here.
-really? In what way? At least you almost really said something here.
sjgleah - 5/3/2002
Yes its all that but its not really a severe enuf angle from the ground up.
-and what angle, precisely, is enuf?
JJart - 5/3/2002
Good picture, but doesn't jump out as a from the groound up shot.
-does it have to "jump out", or is there room for subtlety in photography?
Moondoggie - 5/2/2002
Certainly is an interesting title. I like the sense of motion created in this shot. But not too consistent with this weeks challenge topic.
-what do you mean?
shortredneck - 5/1/2002
This is an interesting photo. I'm not really too sure it is what the challenge was asking for though. Perhaps a lower angle pointing upwards would remove that doubt. I would also try to frame the women better to avoid cropping any heads.
-"a lower angle pointing upwards"???
pnicholls - 5/1/2002
Don't see much "up" in here, but a nice shot nevertheless.
-perhaps you could point out just where in the challenge the ammount of 'up' required was stated...
Patella - 5/1/2002
nice pan -- not sure I dig the way the girl's head has been cropped out of the picture -- also, while the camera angle is low, I'm not entirely certain how this meets the challenge objective, even though it's an overall well done photo
-is the camera not low to the ground? Is the lens not pointed up? Was that not the entire objective of the challenge?
rcrawford - 4/30/2002
Very nice photo but weak on the 'Ground Up'.
-very nice comment, but weak.
gr8photos - 4/30/2002
Very cool idea and would've been awesome photo if the girl's head wasn't half chopped off. Love the panning - crisp girls and scooter, blurry background. IMO, it doesn't really fulfill the challenge as it was intended.
-well, you know what opinions are like...
cthenk - 4/30/2002
I want her shoes! :) Nifty pic, however - from the ground up?
-yup
VGunnigle - 4/29/2002
WTF
-why bother?
Stillwatch - 4/29/2002
this looks more like a straight forward shot than 'from the ground UP.' you can't even see above their heads. sorry.
-I don't even know where to begin. "Can't see above their heads"??? How on earth would that have anything to do with perspective? I could stand on a ladder and shoot down at them and see above their heads.
Maverick - 4/29/2002
like the "chicks", don't think this meets the challenge though
-There is, possibly, a difference between what you think and the facts...
Allowishus13 - 4/29/2002
The name is way to confusing
-go watch TV
chariot - 4/29/2002
That's pretty cool. How did you manage to get the scooter stopped and clear, and everything else moving? The flash seems a bit hard. I also don't think this is a good photo for "From the ground up".
-because...
jmsetzler - 4/29/2002
This is a neat photo but I don't see how it meets the challenge...
-and I don't see how it doesn't. Maybe somebody could fill me in.
Look... it's not that I don't want you to comment (well... okay, some of you would be better off leaving off using language alltogether, but I'm past all that). Commenting on photographs is a great way of learning to see. But, for the love of dog, try to say something, and something you can support in some way. If you're able to look at an image taken from a low angle with the lens raised above the horizontal and somehow decide that it wasn't taken from a low angle with the lens raised above the horizontal, either the photographer is really good or you need to learn about what you're looking at.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 10:05:26 AM · #8 |
irae...chill. It's just a freakin photograph :-)
But..I will be specific.
I liked it. I liked the title (sorta japanese manga style). I liked the subject. I liked the blurred background.
My only issue with the photo was I would have liked (personal preference..so sue me) a more dramatic angle..tighter on the base of the scooter adding even more to the "ground up" feeling.
Cutting the chicks head off was a distraction because she is cute, mysterious..almost a female ninja thing, crouching tiger bu11$hit stuff that I go for :-)
Move to the front of the scotter, tighter to the scooter base and get the ninja chick more and it's a 10.
BTW..I don't get the "doesn't meet the challenge" comments either but...what the hey..thats my opinion too.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/6/2002 10:06:33 AM. |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 10:19:37 AM · #9 |
Moreover, your in the challenges is to convince others that you've effectively captured the topic. It is quite possible that the photograph would have done better in a different challenge, but I gather that the people whose comments you're posting here weren't convinced of your interpretation.
But, for the love of dog, try to say something, and something you can support in some way.
I count several of your comments with very constructive technique points and points that would have made the photo more appealing to them. And I also personally think it's quite fine to tell a photographer that you don't think he met the challenge criteria well.
It's a subjective criticism.
Drew |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 10:21:56 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by irae:
See, though, this is just the kind of lameness I'm talking about. How does it fail to "seem like it was taken from the ground up"? Are you or are you not looking up the gargoyle's nose? If a shot "feels" to you like it was taken from a horizontal perspective, can you put into words, somehow, how you managed to ignore what you [i]saw in the image and got to some feeling of a horizontal perspective? It's one thing to clearly evaluate an image, and another to hide behind pollyana "seems"s and "feels like"s. This kind of muddy thinking and seeing will not help your or anyone's image making. So, out with you:
Moondoggie - 5/2/2002
Certainly is an interesting title. I like the sense of motion created in this shot. But not too consistent with this weeks challenge topic.
-what do you mean?
gr8photos - 4/30/2002
Very cool idea and would've been awesome photo if the girl's head wasn't half chopped off. Love the panning - crisp girls and scooter, blurry background. IMO, it doesn't really fulfill the challenge as it was intended.
-well, you know what opinions are like...
Maverick - 4/29/2002
like the "chicks", don't think this meets the challenge though
-There is, possibly, a difference between what you think and the facts...
jmsetzler - 4/29/2002
This is a neat photo but I don't see how it meets the challenge...
-and I don't see how it doesn't. Maybe somebody could fill me in.
[/i]
Yes, chill.
Look, most of the comments on your photo were positive, but the majority of people just didn't 'get' your take on the challenge. Dont get pissed at eveyone else just because they didnt get it. Did you ever consider the fact that maybe it's not everyone else's fault for not seeing what you see, but rather that you did not effectively convey your take on the 'Ground Up' theme? Personally, I liked the shot OK and really liked the title, but jheez, if so many people had the same comment, maybe thats something you can learn from this photo, and use to your advantage in the next challange. And so what if it didn't win a popularity conest. move on...
Look... it's not that I don't want you to comment (well... okay, some of you would be better off leaving off using language alltogether, but I'm past all that). Commenting on photographs is a great way of learning to see. But, for the love of dog, try to [i]say something, and something you can support in some way. If you're able to look at an image taken from a low angle with the lens raised above the horizontal and somehow decide that it wasn't taken from a low angle with the lens raised above the horizontal, either the photographer is really good or you need to learn about what you're looking at.
[/i]
The reason my comment is so brief is that I barely have tiome to freaking vote and comment on all of thse images. I would personally rather get a very brief comment reflecting the viewers perception of my pohoto than get no comment at all, so I comment on other photos accordingly. Sorry if that irritates you.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 10:22:15 AM · #11 |
I defend my comment wholeheartedly... I did not get the feel that I was looking up in this photo... sorry... I don't apologize for my comments that I post here...
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 10:23:11 AM · #12 |
| now that's constructive criticism. . .I'm trying to be serious BTW. A little more of that and we could all learn from our 'mistakes'. Nice job, Hokie. Thanks. |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 10:59:31 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by drewmedia:
I'm much more confused than angry about all this, but I'll try to tone it down a notch.
Moreover, your in the challenges is to convince others that you've effectively captured the topic.
Okay, I hear that. The trouble is it seems that lots of voters interpret the specific challenge requirements subjectively and enforce their interpretation very stringently. A lot of good, creative approaches to the challenge that can be easily defended as meeting the requirements on the front page of the site because they somehow miss fulfilling the interpretation that's most popular. I wonder if having such an emphasis on 'does it meet the challenge' is good for photography. If you understand someone's take and find it lame, that's one thing. If you just don't see it at all, then you're either missing something or the photographer is somebody who just posts random photos to websites without reading what they're about.
It is quite possible that the photograph would have done better in a different challenge, but I gather that the people whose comments you're posting here weren't convinced of your interpretation.
They sure were convinced of theirs, though, eh? As I said right off, I'm trying to see where I went wrong, but this challenge was purely technical. If the camera was on, near or held by someone standing on the ground (one would think), and pointed 'up' (about 20% of the top 20 could have been taken horizontally), it met the challenge. Right? It's not like the challenge was 'Make Me Happy' or something. Either it was or it wasn't, and if it was, and you can't see it, then the problem is most likely not the image.
I count several of your comments with very constructive technique points and points that would have made the photo more appealing to them. And I also personally think it's quite fine to tell a photographer that you don't think he met the challenge criteria well.
I agree that I got some good comments, and I'm happy as anything that I'll still get them the next time I post a photo since nobody will be able to tell who the ungrateful bastard is until after the voting and first comments are over. Some of the ones I posted were otherwise useful comments. Thank you. You know who you are.
It's a subjective criticism.
Well, sometimes it is - "Transitions", for example. But sometimes it isn't. If the challenge is "1/125 second exposure", and people get it in their head that that means one 125" exposure, is that how you want the challenge to go? Maybe it's actually a good thing to have to anticipate what the most popular interpretation will be, but I'm afraid it's going to make taking 'safe' photos a requirement. I think it would be much better to post the challenge as usual at midnight sunday, then give folks till wednesday (say) to bring up interpretation issues. Then, one of you guys could read them over and, if necessary, make a final decision as to exactly how the challenge reads and post any changes on the main page. I know we have discussions about them here, but most people don't get here. People have to know what they're voting on and what/how they can and can't photograph for this to make sense.
Tnx,
E
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 11:03:42 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by hokie:
irae...chill. It's just a freakin photograph :-)
But..I will be specific.
See how cool that was! Little do you all know that hokie is my other login.
Just kidding, hokie. Thanks! You just made the whole thing worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 11:06:28 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I defend my comment wholeheartedly... I did not get the feel that I was looking up in this photo... sorry... I don't apologize for my comments that I post here...
I'm not asking for an apology. If I came across that way, I'm sorry. This is my socially inept and heavy handed way of telling some of you that the challenge was not "Make Me Feel Like I'm Looking Up". Was it?
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 11:16:04 AM · #16 |
To be quite honest, I think that looking up was my main drift of that challenge. Your title of your photo says "low angle" which fits the shot. *MY* interpretation of the challenge was high angle. I got as close to 90 degrees from the horizon as I could in my entry.
Your shot and your knowledge of your camera shows. Second curtain synchronization is nice and I wish my camera had it.
I test my photo with my mom before I enter it into a challenge. She knows nothing about photography. I tell her what the challenge topic is and then show her my photo. If she ever says "how does this fit the topic," I would toss it immediately.
do that same shot for the next challenge but have the girl on the back be leaning backwards off the bike and you photograph her from behind :) it will be a 10 in my book :)
Originally posted by irae:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
[i]I defend my comment wholeheartedly... I did not get the feel that I was looking up in this photo... sorry... I don't apologize for my comments that I post here...
I'm not asking for an apology. If I came across that way, I'm sorry. This is my socially inept and heavy handed way of telling some of you that the challenge was not "Make Me Feel Like I'm Looking Up". Was it?
[/i]
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 11:33:08 AM · #17 |
I hear that. Most people thought that the closer to vertical the camera was held, the better the image. What bothers me is that I can imagine a time, some weeks down the road, when there will be a "Looking Down" challenge, and everyone will know that if you don't point the camera straight down, people will bust you, and I'll be so bored I'll want to curl up and die. It's gotta be a photography contest more than an interpretation test.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 11:38:27 AM · #18 |
like i said, it was just *my* interpretation. I scored lots of photos well last week that weren't extreme high angle shots too.. I'm sorry that you didn't get what you expected out of this challenge...
Originally posted by irae:
I hear that. Most people thought that the closer to vertical the camera was held, the better the image. What bothers me is that I can imagine a time, some weeks down the road, when there will be a "Looking Down" challenge, and everyone will know that if you don't point the camera [i]straight down, people will bust you, and I'll be so bored I'll want to curl up and die. It's gotta be a photography contest more than an interpretation test.
[/i]
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 11:57:28 AM · #19 |
Like all challenges, this, too, shall pass. I guess I've got really high hopes for this site as a place to learn, though, and it really frustrates me when it looks like the priorities are something else. Thanks for having a civil conversation after I was so naughty above.
-E
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 12:20:13 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by irae:
See, though, this is just the kind of lameness I'm talking about. How does it fail to "seem like it was taken from the ground up"?
...
langdon - 5/5/2002
from ground up isn't really represented here.
-really? In what way? At least you almost really said something here.
"In what way?" In the most obvious way: in looking at this picture, a) I don't feel like I'm really ON the ground, and b) I don't feel like I'm looking up at anything.
The shot you took is looking DIRECTLY at the scooter and 2 girls with little-to-no UPWARD angle. If the red lights in the background are 3 stories from the ground, then you didn't convey that with your panning of the scooter: they could've been lights from a store window.
What it comes down to is that if 16/37 comments on your photo said that it didn't fit the challenge, the bottom line is that it probably more-so didn't than did.
And the lameness you're talking about is no more lame than someone not being able to take constructive criticism.
* Somehow I keep getting targeted in this forum, and I though I should reply.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 12:25:22 PM · #21 |
| cant you see that your lashing tongues cut at langdon like a thousand columbian cocaine stompers machetes? |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 12:28:14 PM · #22 |
-What it comes down to is that if 16/37 comments on your photo said that it didn't fit the challenge, the bottom line is that it probably more-so didn't than did.
There is an old saying--If 16 of 37 doctors say you are dead perhaps you should lay down.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2002 12:31:35 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by heritcon:
-What it comes down to is that if 16/37 comments on your photo said that it didn't fit the challenge, the bottom line is that it probably more-so didn't than did.
There is an old saying--If 16 of 37 doctors say you are dead perhaps you should lay down.
Are you sure? That's less than half. LOL |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 12:34:14 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by shortredneck:
Originally posted by heritcon:
[i]-What it comes down to is that if 16/37 comments on your photo said that it didn't fit the challenge, the bottom line is that it probably more-so didn't than did.
There is an old saying--If 16 of 37 doctors say you are dead perhaps you should lay down.
Are you sure? That's less than half. LOL[/i]
Nobody said anything about stoping your heart, ceasing brainwaves or giving up breathing. Just lay down. The saying was only three docs in it's original form. |
|
|
|
05/06/2002 12:56:10 PM · #25 |
irae...the strange part about this thread?
You got more talent than me and I feel better about the photo than you do...:-)
Meaning screw the votes..hehe
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/6/2002 12:56:28 PM.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/6/2002 12:58:01 PM. |
|
