| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/22/2006 04:29:48 PM · #351 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Across the board it doesn't matter how good or how bad the composites were they got that same treatment. I'm sorry but that's just not right. |
Yanko, I've posted a couple of times how I voted differently for different shots that were obviously composites. Why do you assume I'm the only one who applied any thought other than "composite: low"?
|
|
|
|
12/22/2006 04:35:37 PM · #352 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Btw, I noticed my cat photo didn't get hammered yet you could easily make the argument that it's over processed not quite photographic in nature, etc yet it was entered under advance editing. Had I entered it in Sky assuming for a second it fit the challenge, I'm pretty sure it would have gotten hammered also because I believe people voting low were voting low not on the merits of the image but on trying to make a statement about the expert rules. Across the board it doesn't matter how good or how bad the composites were they got that same treatment. I'm sorry but that's just not right. |
I think your cat would have done great if pet portrait was under expert rules, but you should shave called it "Tribal Kitty" to go with your stare :P.
I think in some voters mind, an "over processed" single photograph is still photographic in nature, where several photographs with noticeable editing isn't. And for those who create image composites and do feel their photographic in nature, this debate won't end. Finding a way to create seamless, well balanced composites like Bear's in my mind will be the way to score best in these challenges.
Message edited by author 2006-12-22 16:36:20.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2006 04:41:19 PM · #353 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Originally posted by yanko:
Across the board it doesn't matter how good or how bad the composites were they got that same treatment. I'm sorry but that's just not right. |
Yanko, I've posted a couple of times how I voted differently for different shots that were obviously composites. Why do you assume I'm the only one who applied any thought other than "composite: low"? |
Where am I referring to you? I base my opinion on the vote distributions the entries got. There are clear patterns of low votes on just the composites. |
|
|
|
12/22/2006 04:47:07 PM · #354 |
Originally posted by jdannels:
Originally posted by yanko:
Btw, I noticed my cat photo didn't get hammered yet you could easily make the argument that it's over processed not quite photographic in nature, etc yet it was entered under advance editing. Had I entered it in Sky assuming for a second it fit the challenge, I'm pretty sure it would have gotten hammered also because I believe people voting low were voting low not on the merits of the image but on trying to make a statement about the expert rules. Across the board it doesn't matter how good or how bad the composites were they got that same treatment. I'm sorry but that's just not right. |
I think your cat would have done great if pet portrait was under expert rules, but you should shave called it "Tribal Kitty" to go with your stare :P.
I think in some voters mind, an "over processed" single photograph is still photographic in nature, where several photographs with noticeable editing isn't. And for those who create image composites and do feel their photographic in nature, this debate won't end. Finding a way to create seamless, well balanced composites like Bear's in my mind will be the way to score best in these challenges. |
Oh I totally agree. Basically just edit to advance editing standards or make it look like it was and you're good to go. It just makes the expert rules pointless, IMO and let me state again in case anybody else is confused it is JUST MY OPINION. I've never laid claim to be all knowing, the holder of the truth. I leave that to others who more willingly accept such claims for themselves.
Message edited by author 2006-12-22 16:47:18. |
|
|
|
12/22/2006 04:49:35 PM · #355 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by jdannels:
you should shave called it "Tribal Kitty" to go with your stare :P.
|
Oh I totally agree. |
hehe
|
|
|
|
12/22/2006 04:52:30 PM · #356 |
Originally posted by jdannels:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by jdannels:
you should shave called it "Tribal Kitty" to go with your stare :P.
|
Oh I totally agree. |
hehe |
Hey maybe I'll do that! Perhaps when I want another 5ish score. :P |
|
|
|
12/22/2006 05:06:33 PM · #357 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by levyj413:
Originally posted by yanko:
Across the board it doesn't matter how good or how bad the composites were they got that same treatment. I'm sorry but that's just not right. |
Yanko, I've posted a couple of times how I voted differently for different shots that were obviously composites. Why do you assume I'm the only one who applied any thought other than "composite: low"? |
Where am I referring to you? I base my opinion on the vote distributions the entries got. There are clear patterns of low votes on just the composites. |
You weren't referring to me. My point is that I voted differently on different composites, so others may have, too. A 4 you see on one composite doesn't mean that person voted 4 on another composite. "Clear patterns" may in fact be totally different people voting low on different composites for different reasons.
Anyway ...
I'm gonna take a minute here to see whether I can get anything decent for my occupation shot, then take some shots to go in harsh environment, then go home. :)
Happy holidays!
|
|
|
|
12/22/2006 05:09:39 PM · #358 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by levyj413:
Originally posted by yanko:
Across the board it doesn't matter how good or how bad the composites were they got that same treatment. I'm sorry but that's just not right. |
Yanko, I've posted a couple of times how I voted differently for different shots that were obviously composites. Why do you assume I'm the only one who applied any thought other than "composite: low"? |
Where am I referring to you? I base my opinion on the vote distributions the entries got. There are clear patterns of low votes on just the composites. |
You weren't referring to me. My point is that I voted differently on different composites, so others may have, too. A 4 you see on one composite doesn't mean that person voted 4 on another composite. "Clear patterns" may in fact be totally different people voting low on different composites for different reasons.
Anyway ...
I'm gonna take a minute here to see whether I can get anything decent for my occupation shot, then take some shots to go in harsh environment, then go home. :)
Happy holidays! |
No you can't leave. I command you! :P |
|
|
|
12/22/2006 05:13:30 PM · #359 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by jdannels:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by jdannels:
you should shave called it "Tribal Kitty" to go with your stare :P.
|
Oh I totally agree. |
hehe |
Hey maybe I'll do that! Perhaps when I want another 5ish score. :P |
well I got an extra 7 if you want that too :P
Edit: I also have some foursies that I would gladly give away, LOL.
Message edited by author 2006-12-22 17:19:06.
|
|
|
|
12/22/2006 05:57:24 PM · #360 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Good the feeling is mutual. Sorry that you need to get emotional but the fact remains is that the term "photographic in nature" means nothing. |
No emotions here other than the fact if an image feels like it is Photographic in nature" to me that's all that matters. To answer your original question regarding your car pic, it "looks like a photograph" to me, so if it were in a challenge here, I would vote it as such. I'll leave it up to the council to verify that it is indeed a photograph if it came to that. |
|
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: 04/24/2024 07:53:49 AM EDT.
