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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Underrated: 'Centered'
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 126, (reverse)
AuthorThread
05/24/2004 06:00:57 AM · #1
A few shots that I feel have slipped too far down the rankings. :)

77141.jpg

77168.jpg

76622.jpg
05/24/2004 06:04:49 AM · #2
I had this one pegged for top-10
77168.jpg
05/24/2004 06:23:47 AM · #3
Originally posted by Beagleboy:

I had this one pegged for top-10
77168.jpg


Indeed that's a masterpiece, however nothing seems to beat frogs, birds, and flying motorcycles on this site... and especially any sort of insect macro. Many people here can't distinguish art from "postcard material".

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 06:26:31.
05/24/2004 08:24:32 AM · #4
Those first two shots were very high up on my list. I really love the shot of the arm chair!
05/24/2004 08:44:07 AM · #5
I like them too I'd send a postcard to friends with any of them anytime. I'm sure they'd lough good. But the chair is true pure ART, a masterpiece. And that should count a hell of alot more. Ok not a ribbon let the funny little frogs win but 26??? I'm sorry but that tells alot about many of this site's members standards. IMHO I'm being a bit frustrated whenever I see something like this, something where it's obvious someone took it verry serious put some work in it being taken ove by some little macro animals. Don't DPC people ever get tired of them? Not to mention flying motorcicle clichee which seems like it became a 100% guaranteed success here recently. I wonder what most people are doing here? I mean the most of us the learners. Do we ever whant to do art, real photography, or this is just fun to kill some time with "those nice postcards" ? No offence to anyone, but there are some shots in the top10... for example I'm sure if I give my camera to my 3 year old niece, she could make a verry nice dandy shot, or a fish or a chicade, or a frog shot, but I'm sure she doesnt have the brains to make the chair shot. That's the difference. Childish shots always seem to win here while inteligent ones always seem to end up in the middle of the pack.

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 08:49:01.
05/24/2004 08:51:16 AM · #6
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

I had this one pegged for top-10
77168.jpg


Indeed that's a masterpiece, however nothing seems to beat frogs, birds, and flying motorcycles on this site... and especially any sort of insect macro. Many people here can't distinguish art from "postcard material".


I think alot of people on this site recognize or think they recognize photographers styles and vote accordingly. To put it bluntly, lots of people dole out tens because of who took the shot. Just look at the comments.
05/24/2004 09:54:54 AM · #7
After looking at the chair photo and reading the comments, now I know why I can't get in the top 10. I am not artsy fartsy enough for the site. Oh well. Van

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 09:55:15.
05/24/2004 11:07:14 AM · #8
the chair was my choice for blue.
05/24/2004 11:25:26 AM · #9
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:

I like them too I'd send a postcard to friends with any of them anytime. I'm sure they'd lough good. But the chair is true pure ART, a masterpiece.....[snip]...Childish shots always seem to win here while inteligent ones always seem to end up in the middle of the pack.


I think you're offside on a few counts here. First of all, this is a photography challenge, not an art challenge. The best photographs should, and often do win. While I completely agree that some of the more artistic shots ('Scrap' is a wonderful example) tend to get overlooked by some less experienced eyes. Perhaps people who think they are critiquing the integrity of the photograph, when really they're showing their lack of understanding of the artist's intent ("hm, that's too blurry, grainy, overexposed, underexposed...2").

But to call the top shots 'childish' is uncalled for. technically, they are extremely competent photographs, which to emphasize is the point of the competition. As a side note, I don't understand how a flying motorcycle is cliche, given that i've never seen one, but maybe that's just me.

Anyhow I understand that you feel some of the more creative entries should place higher in your opinion, but that's not just cause to disrespect the very talented photographers who placed above them.

Not attacking you or anything frumoaznicul, just making the point.

P-ness.
05/24/2004 11:56:30 AM · #10
Originally posted by orussell:

Originally posted by frumoaznicul:

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

I had this one pegged for top-10
77168.jpg


Indeed that's a masterpiece, however nothing seems to beat frogs, birds, and flying motorcycles on this site... and especially any sort of insect macro. Many people here can't distinguish art from "postcard material".


I think alot of people on this site recognize or think they recognize photographers styles and vote accordingly. To put it bluntly, lots of people dole out tens because of who took the shot. Just look at the comments.


Which comments?
05/24/2004 12:41:21 PM · #11
Just wanted to know if anyone else thought that I was underrated, or was it my poor attempt at creativity. Here is a comment by Jesuispeure on it after the voting, "Robbed. Utterly, utterly robbed. I expected this to do sooo much better! It's well shot, it's got a great story, every detail accounted for down to the spit. Good job!" Guess I wanted to see if she is the only one...and by me doing this I am in no saying this should have been in the same scoring as the ones at the top of this thread. The chair is a grabbing photo, love it, should have definitely been higher.

76068.jpg

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 12:44:45.
05/24/2004 12:45:47 PM · #12
Originally posted by Pedro:


I think you're offside on a few counts here. First of all, this is a photography challenge, not an art challenge. The best photographs should, and often do win.


That would be true if there were a qualified jury to judge the shots. As long as all of us more or less experienced have the power of decision alow me to have doubts on this.

When I whas in art school (painting not photo but it's the same) my teacher once told me the simple way to tell if your work is any good. Imagine yourself as a speialized critique, and ask yourself for how many minutes you could talk about it? There should be a considerable amount of hidden catches, elements in your shot besides the subject to make him talk for half hour.

Another is in the book I'm just reading "Villem Flusser - For a philosophy of fotography" (translated from Romanian, may not be the same in english) ".. if all ther is to a photograph reveals on the first look, that photograph is most probably garbage".

I did say it before and I say it again, all this is IMHO, i called them childish because basicaly any child with a medium or advanced camera can easily take them, and I no way consider them any good, because at any of them I look I could not imagine anyone talking about them for more than 30 seconds personaly the only coment I have in mind is "haha cute" and similarities.

[quote]While I completely agree that some of the more artistic shots ('Scrap' is a wonderful example) tend to get overlooked by some less experienced eyes. Perhaps people who think they are critiquing the integrity of the photograph, when really they're showing their lack of understanding of the artist's intent ("hm, that's too blurry, grainy, overexposed, underexposed...2").
[/quote]

This and only this is exactly what I tried to say above. That most DPC members tend to be far from art. I whas just observing, I whasn't complaining, nor being mad, a bit frustrated maybe to see a shot like that end up on 26'th place.

[quote]But to call the top shots 'childish' is uncalled for. technically, they are extremely competent photographs, which to emphasize is the point of the competition. As a side note, I don't understand how a flying motorcycle is cliche, given that i've never seen one, but maybe that's just me.[/quote]

75533.jpg 66984.jpg 59062.jpg... an many many more all ribbons or DPC top shots.

[quote]
Anyhow I understand that you feel some of the more creative entries should place higher in your opinion, but that's not just cause to disrespect the very talented photographers who placed above them.

Not attacking you or anything frumoaznicul, just making the point.

P-ness. [/quote]

Yes it is my opinion, and belive me I do not intend to attack or disrespect anyone, I just disrespect some of the photographs, not the photographers, and consider them garbage all together with theyr blue ribbon. It is my opinion and I belive I can have one. If someone would say about any of my shot that it is garbage, I would probably give that shot a second thought and even if I don't agree, I would respect that man's opinion and wouldn't feel attacked or disrespected. To be more clear I personaly consider my only ribbon shot the most garbage shot I probably ever submited.

Peace! Cristi
05/24/2004 12:54:42 PM · #13
Indeed you are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine. I think you basically insulted the photographers by calling their shots childish, whether you feel it just or not.

Three shots out of 75,000 do not a cliche make.

Lastly, as I said before - it's a photography challenge, not an art challenge. In order to win, you need to appeal to the masses, since it's the masses who do the judging. The masses clearly do not agree that they are garbage.

You may have your opinion, but you can't make me agree with it ;)

Respectfully,

Pedro
05/24/2004 01:01:29 PM · #14
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:



I did say it before and I say it again, all this is IMHO, i called them childish because basicaly any child with a medium or advanced camera can easily take them, and I no way consider them any good, because at any of them I look I could not imagine anyone talking about them for more than 30 seconds personaly the only coment I have in mind is "haha cute" and similarities.



I would like to see you duplicate any of the ribbon winners in the Centered Composition challenge. I would say you have a "medium or advanced" camera, so I say it's time to put up or shut up. And, you wouldn't even have to come up with the idea, which is most of the work.

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 13:03:56.
05/24/2004 01:07:34 PM · #15
Originally posted by StevePax:

Originally posted by frumoaznicul:



I did say it before and I say it again, all this is IMHO, i called them childish because basicaly any child with a medium or advanced camera can easily take them, and I no way consider them any good, because at any of them I look I could not imagine anyone talking about them for more than 30 seconds personaly the only coment I have in mind is "haha cute" and similarities.



I would like to see you duplicate any of the ribbon winners in the Centered Composition challenge. I would say you have a "medium or advanced" camera, so I say it's time to put up or shut up. And, you wouldn't even have to come up with the idea, which is most of the work.


I'm preety sure if I put my macro on and set a 2.0 aperture and give the cam to my 3 year old niece and tell her to point to a dandy, frog, fish, insect or whatever, one of the shots would probably ribbon. While ofcourse you need a certain amount of inteligence, eye, vision and everything to take a shot like that armchair

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 13:08:28.
05/24/2004 01:09:16 PM · #16
It can't possibly be that easy to put a frog in and egg shell and make it look that good. I personally don't think there is any child out there that can make it work, Heck, I couldn't even make it work. I understand what you're saying about the difference between art shots and "cute shots" but those shots took just as much skill. I mean at least the chair isn't gonna hop around on ya! :)
05/24/2004 01:10:13 PM · #17
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:

Originally posted by StevePax:

Originally posted by frumoaznicul:



I did say it before and I say it again, all this is IMHO, i called them childish because basicaly any child with a medium or advanced camera can easily take them, and I no way consider them any good, because at any of them I look I could not imagine anyone talking about them for more than 30 seconds personaly the only coment I have in mind is "haha cute" and similarities.



I would like to see you duplicate any of the ribbon winners in the Centered Composition challenge. I would say you have a "medium or advanced" camera, so I say it's time to put up or shut up. And, you wouldn't even have to come up with the idea, which is most of the work.


I'm preety sure if I put my macro on and set a 2.0 aperture and give the cam to my 3 year old niece and tell her to point to a dandy, frog, fish, insect or whatever, one of the shots would probably ribbon. While ofcourse you need a certain amount of inteligence, eye, vision and everything to take a shot like that armchair


Then I repeat, do it! Take a shot duplicating the quality, colors, depth of field, composition, detail, etc. of one of the current ribboning shots in the Centered challenge. You talk the talk, so let's see you do it!
05/24/2004 01:12:14 PM · #18
Whats the difference in pointing a camera at a frog and pointing a camera at a chair? I would say the chair was easier to do.
05/24/2004 01:17:06 PM · #19
I can understand frumaoznicul's point in that alot of people can see how a frog in an eggshell would make for an interesting photograph. Whereas many would look at that chair and think what an eyesore and never even think about taking a photograph of it. It's a vision. But as there are many different folks in the world, there are just as many different visions. I would still have to say that taking a photo of a frog would still be a bit more challenging than the chair. But they are just very different. Personally, I like the chair shot better. :)

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 13:17:52.
05/24/2004 01:23:58 PM · #20
I agree, ok all you have convinced me. It is so hard, almost close to impossible to break a egg and put a frog in it I admit with some good lighting, but it is verry easy to make all the story feeling atmosphere, there is in the chair shot. I won't even try to replicate anything I know now that I could never break an egg and put a frog in it. Sorry I said anything I didn't whant to offend anyone, I whas just expressing a feeling I had. If anyone took it as an offence I retreat every word and humbly apologise. From now on I will really only comment shots I like I will never dare to say anything about shots I personaly don't like or don't understand. My own ribbon shot is still the most garbage one I ever submitted, I hope I'm alowed to attack and disrespect myself. :)
05/24/2004 01:32:00 PM · #21
This was my entry:

76599.jpg

It finished 139th....

I will gladly trade you for 26th place if you have a problem being 26th.

05/24/2004 01:32:09 PM · #22
Originally posted by jenesis:

I can understand frumaoznicul's point in that alot of people can see how a frog in an eggshell would make for an interesting photograph. Whereas many would look at that chair and think what an eyesore and never even think about taking a photograph of it. It's a vision. But as there are many different folks in the world, there are just as many different visions. I would still have to say that taking a photo of a frog would still be a bit more challenging than the chair. But they are just very different. Personally, I like the chair shot better. :)


the catch is that you can always find an eg and a frog. we all have them and they all look preety much the same. That chair is unique. Ok here we go. I take the challenge to replicate any of the frog shots, if you take mine to replicate the chair shot. Anyone? C'mon that chair (not any chair) worth 1 million words, it has a story it has an atitude, and the way the photographer seen it and framed it it is absolutely monumental. I do find the frog shots cute, I may say I even like them, I would like to send some of those postcards they can become to a friend or too, I'm sure theyll find them cute too. But when I see a masterpiece like that chair shot end up on 26'th place excuse me if I'm a bit sick. Could be the amount of bananas I eaten yesterday. :)
05/24/2004 01:45:14 PM · #23
77168.jpg
Why? It says nothing on its own. Sure I can bring a conversation with me to look at it (any of a number of conversations, in fact), give one side of the conversation to the picture (either side will do) and then Oh and Ahw as I read it back off again -- the the picture says nothing by itself.

If there was an element in the composition that has something to say... but without the viewer putting it there, there is not; nothing flows in, nothing flows out, there is not even a flow within to become curious about -- it just sits there and does not hold any interest.

Just out of curiousity, what is it you like about it? In the comments and here it is just 'It is art!' and a lot of talk about noise and the halo, but not much of anything about the subject. What is it you are bring with you to the viewing?

I see a lot of talk degrading other photos in an attempt to make this one appear better, but there is very little being said about this photo itself -- perhaps that is all there is to say about it.

David
05/24/2004 01:51:54 PM · #24
Kind of an unusual distribution of votes for scrap. Top half is more of a zig-zag pattern than the normal bell curve.

I can see that the photographer put some effort into it but I can't quite think of it as worthy of a ribbon, or as a masterpiece. Can someone explain what I am missing without just repeating an emotional defense of the shot. Seriously, what sets this one apart from the ordinary?
05/24/2004 02:06:15 PM · #25
First it is compositionaly perfect for a square photography. the placement the angle the dof and all the other tehnicalities are just perfect too. When I first saw the "centered composition" I said in my mind there will be 90% square shots. To me for a composition to be perfectly centered and give you the most perfect feeling of center it needs to be square. Than there comes the light and b/w treatment contrasts, sharpness and non the last the grain wich gives me a Tarkovsky like feeling of spookyness. I don't know how to say (my english is not so good) like a dream. Like that chair is not even real there. Verry unnatural treatment wich imediately captivates my eyes right in the verry center of it. here come the burned corners, that pushes your eyes to the verry center of it. What do I see there? History. Oh if that chair could tell what it's been through during it's existence. How many people placess, days nights discussions, debates, fights, did it whitness every since he whas a brand new shining chair in some furniture shop until this day when it looks how it looks but it refuses to fall apart. And I could go on and on, but I'm sure nobody is reading this anymore... I'm curious tho what other than "haha cute" could someone say about the frog, insect, fish, flower, or whatever shot.

Oh and Pedro your Foggy road home is my second masterpiece discovery for today, you were just luckier you ended in the top 10, but your shot for me is just as good as the chair one. Both incredible shots. It is my opinion, it's the way I see things sorry if expressing my feelings offended anyone, I never intended that. I apologise once more.

PS if I could write in my language the one I think in you would of got atleast 10 pages of the scrap story.

Message edited by author 2004-05-24 14:15:46.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/14/2018 09:13:51 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 © 2001-2018 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: 12/14/2018 09:13:51 AM EST.