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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> A group to discuss Compositions, framing, etc.
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 65, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/07/2008 08:16:11 AM · #1
I was thinking about getting a small group together for post challenge analysis of some of the winning photos in their respective challenges to discuss why the winning photos are so effective. What about them made them stand out above the rest through composition, DOF, Framing etc.

My thoughts on how this would work is, we would pick a challenge for the week that has already on the front page and we would discuss its ribbon winners for the technical aspects of the photo. The idea behind this would be to learn more about the technical side of photography, compostion, and what makes a photo stand out in peoples eyes from a techinical stand point.

If there is any interest put your name here and we will figure out what to do once we have a group of 10-15 people. I am looking for both new people, people who are experienced, and ribbon winners alike. We need a good comulation of people so we can have different aspects of the technical details.

11/07/2008 08:29:24 AM · #2
Sign me up, I need all the help I can get with composition. Sounds like a fun way to learn.
11/07/2008 08:31:14 AM · #3
I am interested
11/07/2008 08:34:03 AM · #4
Sign me up.
11/07/2008 08:42:04 AM · #5
Learn and offer opinions on composition?

I'm there if you'll have me.
11/07/2008 10:52:15 AM · #6
Bump for more interest....
11/07/2008 11:11:26 AM · #7
I'd be interested.
11/07/2008 11:12:48 AM · #8
Also interested.
11/07/2008 11:19:18 AM · #9
Count me in.
11/07/2008 11:23:14 AM · #10
Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:

...to learn more about the technical side of photography, compostion, and what makes a photo stand out in peoples eyes from a techinical stand point...


In a good photograph, IMHO, technical aspects are subordinated to its unique artistic demands. I believe it would be more profitable to regard composition as an artistic element, rather than a technical one. ?
11/07/2008 11:26:52 AM · #11
Originally posted by zeuszen:

Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:

...to learn more about the technical side of photography, compostion, and what makes a photo stand out in peoples eyes from a techinical stand point...


In a good photograph, IMHO, technical aspects are subordinated to its unique artistic demands. I believe it would be more profitable to regard composition as an artistic element, rather than a technical one. ?


It would be profitable to regard it from both angles. If Art History taught me anything, it was that composition has an incredibly strong technical side, and that being able to use it artistically requires a fundamental knowledge of the technical.

As in most things.
11/07/2008 11:33:49 AM · #12
I agree with both of you, I am was really more trying to say that we will concentrate on the aspects that made it a winning photo, technically and asthetically but what I dont want is photo bashing more than anything, there will be both angles brought up just in a neutral way with respect to the photographer/artist.

I believe that a good composition comes from the sound knowledge of your techinicals, and how to use them and deviate from them to create art. Both of you are more than welcome to join in and give the artistic aspect of the composition, I just have noticed there should be discussion on this topic.

Message edited by author 2008-11-07 11:40:21.
11/07/2008 11:39:24 AM · #13
I'd like to do this too if there's still room. This could be a great learning opportunity.
11/07/2008 11:48:04 AM · #14
Originally posted by smichener:

I'd like to do this too if there's still room. This could be a great learning opportunity.

Ummm...if it's a public forum I'd imagine many people will be able to "discuss" and "participate". Should be interesting. Good idea Rich!
11/07/2008 11:56:21 AM · #15
Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:

I agree with both of you, I am was really more trying to say that we will concentrate on the aspects that made it a winning photo, technically and asthetically but what I dont want is photo bashing more than anything, there will be both angles brought up just in a neutral way with respect to the photographer/artist.

As long as there will be people viewing the work with different perspectives, there should be lots to learn.

Personally, I like to have people who see things differently than I give me their views that I may look at the work with a different perspective.

It seems already that there will be differing viewers.....8>)

Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:

I believe that a good composition comes from the sound knowledge of your techinicals, and how to use them and deviate from them to create art. Both of you are more than welcome to join in and give the artistic aspect of the composition, I just have noticed there should be discussion on this topic.

Discussion is good.....I learn well with discussion accompanied by visual aids.

What motivates me to be a part of this is my own lack of fundamental knowledge.
11/07/2008 11:58:56 AM · #16
This sounds interesting. Kind of like a side challenge, but with other people's photographs. I hope to get better at the technicals, so heck yeah I'd love to join in, if you'll take me.
11/07/2008 12:11:32 PM · #17
Sounds cool - count me in if you got room.
11/07/2008 12:20:44 PM · #18
Yes, to the both of you. I should have been clearer: one cause for much confusion about the merits of certain (technical) choices we make as photographers is that what works for one image may not work at all for another. Why is that? It is so, because when we chop wood, we'd be wise to use an axe. For carrying water, a bucket would be better.

This is why I tried to stress the order of things, which should not be regarded as a personal preference or fancy, but a ratio, a logical hierarchy showing why b) follows a) and why equal value does not, necessarily, make equal place and use.

This, in my opinion, is the critical premise. If we discount it, we will, I fear, not be able to move beyond it and, again, have to contend with the usual cliches and excuses, which are reflected in comments like "It's all in the eye of the beholder", "All art is subjective" or "Intent".

When, however, we acknowledge the dependency of technical decisions on artistic givens, we can see the why, the relation between cause and effect.

Message edited by author 2008-11-07 12:25:18.
11/07/2008 12:29:03 PM · #19
Originally posted by zeuszen:

Yes, to the both of you. I should have been clearer: one cause for much confusion about the merits of certain (technical) choices we make as photographers is that what works for one image may not work at all for another. Why is that? It is so, because when we chop wood, we'd be wise to use an axe. For carrying water, a bucket would be better.

This is why I tried to stress the order of things, which should not be regarded as a personal preference or fancy, but a ratio, a logical hierarchy showing why b) follows a) and why equal value does not, necessarily, make equal place and use.

This, in my opinion, is the critical premise. If we discount it, we will, I fear, not be able to move beyond it and, again, have to contend with the usual cliches and excuses, which are reflected in comments like "It's all in the eye of the beholder", "All art is subjective" or "Intent".

Well, technicals aside, which can & should be reviewed for the merits of an image, it will be interesting contending with subjective viewing, and as to the intent?

With input from the photographer, it may give insight as to the origin of the image in the first place.

I'm pretty much thinking that the images chosen will be ones that in particular pique the panel at large. Am I wrong in assuming that we may be discussing what made the images winners as far as appeal goes?
11/07/2008 12:29:37 PM · #20
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by smichener:

I'd like to do this too if there's still room. This could be a great learning opportunity.

Ummm...if it's a public forum I'd imagine many people will be able to "discuss" and "participate". Should be interesting. Good idea Rich!


I was acutually going to run this on a side group such as yahoo, or google.. That way we would have more focus and individual attention. I wasnt really thinking of running it as a public forum. But I suppose the people who are participating can make that decision when we are starting.


11/07/2008 12:30:46 PM · #21
Originally posted by Hot_Pixel:

I was acutually going to run this on a side group such as yahoo, or google.. That way we would have more focus and individual attention. I wasnt really thinking of running it as a public forum. But I suppose the people who are participating can make that decision when we are starting.

Sounds like a good idea.
11/07/2008 12:33:54 PM · #22
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by zeuszen:

Yes, to the both of you. I should have been clearer: one cause for much confusion about the merits of certain (technical) choices we make as photographers is that what works for one image may not work at all for another. Why is that? It is so, because when we chop wood, we'd be wise to use an axe. For carrying water, a bucket would be better.

This is why I tried to stress the order of things, which should not be regarded as a personal preference or fancy, but a ratio, a logical hierarchy showing why b) follows a) and why equal value does not, necessarily, make equal place and use.

This, in my opinion, is the critical premise. If we discount it, we will, I fear, not be able to move beyond it and, again, have to contend with the usual cliches and excuses, which are reflected in comments like "It's all in the eye of the beholder", "All art is subjective" or "Intent".

Well, technicals aside, which can & should be reviewed for the merits of an image, it will be interesting contending with subjective viewing, and as to the intent?

With input from the photographer, it may give insight as to the origin of the image in the first place.

I'm pretty much thinking that the images chosen will be ones that in particular pique the panel at large. Am I wrong in assuming that we may be discussing what made the images winners as far as appeal goes?


Yes you are corret in the asumption, the group will pick one challenge a week that is currently in voting for discussion of the winners of particular for the next week. Each person will attempt to highlight the strengths both technical and artistic of the photo and give an opnion of how strong th overall image is in regards to these points and then we will have discussion based upon these inputs for the week. At least thats the way I was thinking it would work. Hopefully we can get commentary from some of the winners as we go as well.


11/07/2008 12:34:24 PM · #23
Sign me up as well please! Sounds like a great idea!
11/07/2008 12:37:49 PM · #24
count me in!
11/07/2008 12:39:36 PM · #25
Originally posted by zeuszen:

Yes, to the both of you. I should have been clearer: one cause for much confusion about the merits of certain (technical) choices we make as photographers is that what works for one image may not work at all for another. Why is that? It is so, because when we chop wood, we'd be wise to use an axe. For carrying water, a bucket would be better.

This is why I tried to stress the order of things, which should not be regarded as a personal preference or fancy, but a ratio, a logical hierarchy showing why b) follows a) and why equal value does not, necessarily, make equal place and use.

This, in my opinion, is the critical premise. If we discount it, we will, I fear, not be able to move beyond it and, again, have to contend with the usual cliches and excuses, which are reflected in comments like "It's all in the eye of the beholder", "All art is subjective" or "Intent".

When, however, we acknowledge the dependency of technical decisions on artistic givens, we can see the why, the relation between cause and effect.


I think you have stated this very well. I wanted to start this group to help people and myself see the relation to the technicals and the artistic side of things and hopefully make peoples understanding of the artistry and the technical side grow. Growth is essential in photography. Growth helps people see differently and gives oppertunity when before some may not have been seen. This is to merely scatch the surface of understand for composition, to try to understand what does work, and as many of our winning photos do, see why breaking some of those rules and technicalitize actually produce stellar images.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/21/2019 09:20:52 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 © 2001-2019 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: 07/21/2019 09:20:52 AM EDT.