| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/08/2008 09:35:06 AM · #1 |
This thread is for keeping DPC honest. Post photos here that you think are good enough to be published in a magazine and yet scored under 6. Try to avoid photos that don't meet the challenge. Also, avoid weird "artsy" photos. This thread is about photos getting into magazines, not art galleries.
For those who want to defend DPC, please keep the discussion to specific photos. If you want to blather on about the wisdom of multitudes or might makes right or whatever, there are plenty of other threads for that. This thread is about specific cases where DPC took their eyes off the ball.
These first examples are from the Free Study, so there is no question of DNMC:
 (this would work great in the page layout of a magazine)
|
|
|
|
09/08/2008 09:42:35 AM · #2 |
| Great thread idea. I've often left challenge comments that I could envision a photo being used in a magazine or book. I'll see if I can find some of those. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 10:07:39 AM · #3 |
Well I dont know about magazine quality, however my FS that just ended scored under 6. 
It looks pretty good in a large print and was suppose to be hung in my house. However I sold it this morning for some nice $$$$ and will be hanging in the office of a local businessman. :D
Printed at 11x14 and framed in a 16x20 frame.
BTW I'm proud to say this is the first one, that has been done from start to finish by me. Photo, printing, and mat all done by me, only store bought item was the frame.
Matt |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 10:08:04 AM · #4 |
I wonder what kind of magazines you read.
Seriously,
this would be a magazine-worthy shot, if the fishing line weren't blurred and the rod rarely identifiable. Crop could also be slightly enhaqnced. Other than that, brilliant shot.
Concerning these two, , I fully agree.
This one is just not clear enough, lacks of detail and tonal range, has motion blur. I don't know of a mag that would print it.
Finally, this one, just hasn't got anything that qualifies, not even the weird crop.
My 0.02 €.
PS I wonder why this isn't in your choice: 
Message edited by author 2008-09-08 10:08:52. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 10:22:10 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
... This thread is about specific cases where DPC took their eyes off the ball. ... |
What's the difference between this thread and this ==> Posthumous Ribbons of the Week, part 2 |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 10:24:34 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by eyewave:
This one is just not clear enough, lacks of detail and tonal range, has motion blur. I don't know of a mag that would print it. |
The softness only enhances the beauty of the shot.
Originally posted by eyewave:
Finally, this one, just hasn't got anything that qualifies, not even the weird crop. |
It's an excellent composition for a "thin" image. Examples of thin images, to give you some sense of the genre:
//www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/klimt/klimt.stonborough-wittgenstein.jpg
//www.topofart.com/artists/Gustav_Klimt/art_reproduction/2634/Gold_Fish.php
In addition to Klimt, I've seen quite a few Art Deco full-body portraits in this format/ratio.
Originally posted by eyewave:
PS I wonder why this isn't in your choice: |
I had to leave something for you!
Message edited by author 2008-09-08 10:27:43. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 10:27:14 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by posthumous:
... This thread is about specific cases where DPC took their eyes off the ball. ... |
What's the difference between this thread and this ==> Posthumous Ribbons of the Week, part 2 |
Excellent question. In an ideal world, DPC would be choosing excellent quality images and I could focus on looking for people with vision, people ahead of their time or behind the times, people in their own world. But DPC isn't holding up its end of the "bargain." |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 10:34:52 AM · #8 |
These were published and scored under a 6 here.
 
  |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 10:44:26 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by eyewave:
I wonder what kind of magazines you read.
Seriously,
this would be a magazine-worthy shot, if the fishing line weren't blurred and the rod rarely identifiable. Crop could also be slightly enhaqnced. Other than that, brilliant shot.
Concerning these two, , I fully agree.
This one is just not clear enough, lacks of detail and tonal range, has motion blur. I don't know of a mag that would print it.
Finally, this one, just hasn't got anything that qualifies, not even the weird crop.
My 0.02 €.
PS I wonder why this isn't in your choice: |
Personally I think all these images are great. So I have to wonder what magaziines you read? I think DPC has just become too perfect. What is wrong with an image having flaws?
|
|
|
|
09/08/2008 11:57:23 AM · #10 |
The whole concept of "magazine quality" is a little amorphous anyway. I mean, even in big-bucks magazines some pretty forgettable images get published, and don't even MENTION the trade publications and such, which are notorious for the mediocrity of their photography.
Meanwhile, here at DPC we are basically voting on what we consider striking, UNforgettable images.
Now, admittedly many simply excellent images fall under the radar screen at DPC; I absolutely agree with that. I'm just quibbling with the category "magazine quality", which seems to me to be a meaningless attribute, given the range of what's out there.
R.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2008 12:02:14 PM · #11 |
| LOL! A "photo" thread topic has become controversial ;) |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 01:23:35 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by James:
What is wrong with an image having flaws? |
Just read your own sentence again and you will know. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 01:27:56 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The whole concept of "magazine quality" is a little amorphous anyway. I mean, even in big-bucks magazines some pretty forgettable images get published, and don't even MENTION the trade publications and such, which are notorious for the mediocrity of their photography.
Meanwhile, here at DPC we are basically voting on what we consider striking, UNforgettable images.
Now, admittedly many simply excellent images fall under the radar screen at DPC; I absolutely agree with that. I'm just quibbling with the category "magazine quality", which seems to me to be a meaningless attribute, given the range of what's out there.
R. |
I did struggle a bit with the title. I know that "magazine" is vague, but I wanted to convey the idea that these photos are good enough to get the photographer published on a free-lance basis, which is one of the most common goals of photographers here. The thought that such a photo, which is emblematic of real world success, should get less than 6, is a problem, or at the very least, a trend worth working against. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 01:35:59 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The whole concept of "magazine quality" is a little amorphous anyway. I mean, even in big-bucks magazines some pretty forgettable images get published, and don't even MENTION the trade publications and such, which are notorious for the mediocrity of their photography.
Meanwhile, here at DPC we are basically voting on what we consider striking, UNforgettable images.
Now, admittedly many simply excellent images fall under the radar screen at DPC; I absolutely agree with that. I'm just quibbling with the category "magazine quality", which seems to me to be a meaningless attribute, given the range of what's out there.
R. |
I did struggle a bit with the title. I know that "magazine" is vague, but I wanted to convey the idea that these photos are good enough to get the photographer published on a free-lance basis, which is one of the most common goals of photographers here. The thought that such a photo, which is emblematic of real world success, should get less than 6, is a problem, or at the very least, a trend worth working against. |
I agree with your sentiment Don, but the scoring on challenge entries also takes the theme into account, so some images may be great for publication but just didn't hit the mark for the challenge theme or context that voters were expecting (hence score under 6). We see that all the time where someone will post to the forums about great success they've had with an image at a show or made a sale, etc... Same here - I've had some challenge entries totally tank, yet do very well at some other event outside of DPC.
I guess I just supported what your point of intention is, but I'm not sure you're really comparing apples to apples. JMO of course. :-) |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 01:37:32 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I did struggle a bit with the title. I know that "magazine" is vague, but I wanted to convey the idea that these photos are good enough to get the photographer published on a free-lance basis, which is one of the most common goals of photographers here. The thought that such a photo, which is emblematic of real world success, should get less than 6, is a problem, or at the very least, a trend worth working against. |
One thing that has always made me laugh about this place is the fact that getting a 60% approval rating(or scoring a 6.0) is considered a good to great score, and yet in most universities and schools it will get you sent back to repeat your failure!
Matt
|
|
|
|
09/08/2008 01:54:22 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by eyewave:
Originally posted by James:
What is wrong with an image having flaws? |
Just read your own sentence again and you will know. |
Maybe I am lost? I will back out and leave the thread. I will now just hang in the back of the room. I have realized that everything on DPC must be perfect to succeed. And with that realization I have decided this place is not for me.
Message edited by author 2008-09-08 14:11:07.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2008 01:58:36 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by James:
Originally posted by eyewave:
Originally posted by James:
What is wrong with an image having flaws? |
Just read your own sentence again and you will know. |
Maybe I am lost? I will back out and leave. I have realized that everything on DPC must be perfect to succeed and this place is not for me. |
??? That was quick.
Your profile bio:
"Last Updated 07/20/2008
I have started uploading my stuff back here because I have decided I really like this community. I am not here to be perfect and post perfect stuff." |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 02:08:34 PM · #18 |
| Geez guys. This seems like another thread to post images from any challenge that you think might have been missed but are magazine worthy. Let's not be too picky about what is chosen here. It certainly wasn't intended to be something to repel people from DPC! |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 03:24:37 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I agree with your sentiment Don, but the scoring on challenge entries also takes the theme into account, so some images may be great for publication but just didn't hit the mark for the challenge theme or context that voters were expecting (hence score under 6). We see that all the time where someone will post to the forums about great success they've had with an image at a show or made a sale, etc... Same here - I've had some challenge entries totally tank, yet do very well at some other event outside of DPC.
I guess I just supported what your point of intention is, but I'm not sure you're really comparing apples to apples. JMO of course. :-) |
That's why I started with a free study and gave a warning about not choosing DNMC entries.
Remember, I'm not talking about missing the Top 10 here. I'm talking about scoring below a 6. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 03:35:29 PM · #20 |
This was for the Low Tech Challenge and scored a massive 5.4! I think it could stand well alongside any magazine shot for House & Home or similar type mags.
It certainly met the challenge description as Low Tech :) |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 03:47:00 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by James:
Originally posted by eyewave:
Originally posted by James:
What is wrong with an image having flaws? |
Just read your own sentence again and you will know. |
Maybe I am lost? I will back out and leave the thread. I will now just hang in the back of the room. I have realized that everything on DPC must be perfect to succeed. And with that realization I have decided this place is not for me. |
There is probably no reason to believe that this place is not for you. Photography is so subjective that there is no way you will give unanimous satisfaction to the viewers, absolutely no way. Some may like your photographs and some others may not. No photograph is flawless. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 04:10:07 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I agree with your sentiment Don, but the scoring on challenge entries also takes the theme into account, so some images may be great for publication but just didn't hit the mark for the challenge theme or context that voters were expecting (hence score under 6). We see that all the time where someone will post to the forums about great success they've had with an image at a show or made a sale, etc... Same here - I've had some challenge entries totally tank, yet do very well at some other event outside of DPC.
I guess I just supported what your point of intention is, but I'm not sure you're really comparing apples to apples. JMO of course. :-) |
That's why I started with a free study and gave a warning about not choosing DNMC entries. |
Well, there's part of the rub...what is DNMC to one is not to another. :-P
Good luck and have fun. |
|
|
|
09/08/2008 04:23:06 PM · #23 |
without knowing how much was cropped out of an original who's to say an image is magazine capable. i've seen plenty of 'great' looking images ( at 640px ) here that are a nothing but a smidge of the original.
i'm not bitching, but to lable something as something requires a bit of background, no ?
of course there are those little photos in magazines, but i get the impression you are talking about full page spreads. or at least something that's not a 'mini' image...
Message edited by author 2008-09-08 16:24:03.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2008 04:42:24 PM · #24 |
It depends on what kind of magazine you look at, not all of those posted are ready for some of the uppity photography magazines, but i could see in maybe a smaller magazine. DPC has gotten so much talent over the last couple years, that its hard to score an image that isn't outstanding over a 6. However i agree that a couple of those are phenomenal and should've scored over a 6, especially  Larus' shot.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2008 05:06:46 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by soup:
without knowing how much was cropped out of an original who's to say an image is magazine capable. i've seen plenty of 'great' looking images ( at 640px ) here that are a nothing but a smidge of the original.
i'm not bitching, but to lable something as something requires a bit of background, no ?
of course there are those little photos in magazines, but i get the impression you are talking about full page spreads. or at least something that's not a 'mini' image... |
Obviously, a DPC voter is not going to concern himself with whether the original image is medium format, large format, etc., so that's not relevant to this thread, either. This isn't a recruitment thread for actual magazines... sheesh. |
|
