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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Bokeh - It's been kicked up a notch
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 101, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/10/2005 12:47:55 AM · #1
I just did a quick review of the submissions to "Bokeh" and it looks like everybody has kicked it up notch. Good thing we have a week to narrow down the best of all the great work submitted.
01/10/2005 12:50:30 AM · #2
hmmm... thats interesting bcos i had the impression this was going to be a low scorer, maybe its just my entry being really bad.
01/10/2005 12:53:46 AM · #3
I just went through them also, and I was WAY outgunned! I saw quite a few stunners?
01/10/2005 12:54:05 AM · #4
I'm getting narrowed down early. :-/

For all the complaining and confusion in the forums, it looks like folks had no problem with Bokeh after all.

Message edited by author 2005-01-10 00:55:40.
01/10/2005 12:58:16 AM · #5
I am so impressed with this lot! Only a few people missed the idea completely and some are beautiful photos (but not for this challenge), but the majority are simply great! Well done, folks!
01/10/2005 12:58:32 AM · #6
after two votes i had an extremely low score and was already thinking that it could somehow do worse than my toilet shot - but it's gone up a bit as is hovering.. only 15 votes thus far and could still change quite a bit.. but i must agree, i've seen a lot of wonderful shots in this challenge.. considering how few challenges i've entered in the past year+, i certainly chose to enter one that i'm very outperformed in.
01/10/2005 01:16:06 AM · #7
I totally agree that this challenge has kicked it up a notch. I just went through all the entries and was wowed by many of them. Very impressed!
01/10/2005 01:22:08 AM · #8
this is such a great collection of images...and so many...this is a perfect diversion from that dismal 'what's a wally' challenge
01/10/2005 01:24:30 AM · #9
I am in Heaven with this collection! Thanks to all who participated!!
01/10/2005 01:26:32 AM · #10
Boke has several flavors. You have the non-descript background where everything just melts and allows the foreground to shine. You have the reverse.

You also have the related background. Not just any background but one that is tied to the subject. Example: a man putting on a tie while all other ties filled the background.

Blobs, etc are sometimes the property of the non-descript. Knowing the voters and their propensity for left brain allocation, the definition will probably predominate. Remember, right or wrong, the voters always decide.

Given the fact that a voter has to decide between what is and not related, the voters will apt for the non-descript background.

However, agree. There are some very nice images in this challenge.
01/10/2005 01:28:32 AM · #11
I agree there are some very, very good shots in this challenge. Hoever, IMO (and it's JUST my opinion) close to half the shots missed the concept of "bokeh" significantly. Many very good images are what I'd classify as "shallow DOF" shots.

I have done a preliminary sort of images into "not bokeh IMO", "sort of bokeh/ (or) bokeh but not such a hot image IMO", and "definitely bokeh and dynamite IMO." The latter category has 48 images in it. So that's a high % of really nice work, yes.

Robt.

01/10/2005 01:45:40 AM · #12
Originally posted by bear_music:

I agree there are some very, very good shots in this challenge. Hoever, IMO (and it's JUST my opinion) close to half the shots missed the concept of "bokeh" significantly. Many very good images are what I'd classify as "shallow DOF" shots.

I have done a preliminary sort of images into "not bokeh IMO", "sort of bokeh/ (or) bokeh but not such a hot image IMO", and "definitely bokeh and dynamite IMO." The latter category has 48 images in it. So that's a high % of really nice work, yes.

Robt.

well, robt, sometimes i disagree with you and sometimes i agree with you. on this one, though, i think i'd rather find myself in your 48%...
01/10/2005 01:56:50 AM · #13
Well, I hate to say it, but my Bokeh was too smooth. My 70-200/F4L does wonderful bokeh at F4 if there's sufficient distance. Getting killed by voters who may even think I used a solid background. (Can't say more without giving too many clues, but my background was not solid!)
01/10/2005 02:10:34 AM · #14
Originally posted by bear_music:

I agree there are some very, very good shots in this challenge. Hoever, IMO (and it's JUST my opinion) close to half the shots missed the concept of "bokeh" significantly. Many very good images are what I'd classify as "shallow DOF" shots.


I agree. And few not even have shallow DOF.
But there are great pictures, outstanding pictures in my opinion ... and mine is not one of them :)

Message edited by author 2005-01-10 02:11:57.
01/10/2005 02:16:15 AM · #15
Guess with mine being at:

Votes: 23
Views: 41
Avg Vote: 6.9130
Comments: 1

I must have "got it", and if I hadn't, I'd be saying "so what" as it is something new and certainly a shot I really like!

This makes a milestone for me too, as this and WWaldo are both over 6.9 on shots that I really like as opposed to some I have done that I would never print.
:)

Message edited by author 2005-01-10 02:38:04.
01/10/2005 02:22:50 AM · #16
You've got it with the voters, anyway... whether they agree with my personal take on the challenge is a whole 'nuther thing. My pic's holding in the 5.5 range, and it's "true" bokeh by my definition, so...

Robt.

01/10/2005 02:37:16 AM · #17
Originally posted by BradP:

Guess with mine being at:

Votes: 23
Views: 40
Avg Vote: 6.8696
Comments: 1

I must have "got it", and if I hadn't, I'd be saying "so what" as it is something new and certainly a shot I really like!


Is that a good score? I noticed that some of the images you have won yellows with are above 7. Do these fluctuate or start out low? I have never entered one before, so I would like to know what to expect.
01/10/2005 02:39:35 AM · #18
Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by BradP:

Guess with mine being at:

Votes: 23
Views: 40
Avg Vote: 6.8696
Comments: 1

I must have "got it", and if I hadn't, I'd be saying "so what" as it is something new and certainly a shot I really like!


Is that a good score? I noticed that some of the images you have won yellows with are above 7. Do these fluctuate or start out low? I have never entered one before, so I would like to know what to expect.


Its a very good score. I can honestly say that almost everyone on here would be very happy with such a score... I would be ecstatic with that score, lol.
01/10/2005 02:40:32 AM · #19
Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by BradP:

Guess with mine being at:

Votes: 23
Views: 40
Avg Vote: 6.8696
Comments: 1

I must have "got it", and if I hadn't, I'd be saying "so what" as it is something new and certainly a shot I really like!


Is that a good score? I noticed that some of the images you have won yellows with are above 7. Do these fluctuate or start out low? I have never entered one before, so I would like to know what to expect.

brad's scores are not a good benchmark for normal people mortals to measure by ;-)

Message edited by author 2005-01-10 02:42:58.
01/10/2005 02:41:27 AM · #20
if you click on challenge history, you can get a better idea.. sometimes it takes over 7 to ribbon, sometimes 6.5 can ribbon. the average tends to be around 5.1-5.2 i think.
01/10/2005 02:45:41 AM · #21
Originally posted by nsbca7:

Is that a good score? I noticed that some of the images you have won yellows with are above 7. Do these fluctuate or start out low? I have never entered one before, so I would like to know what to expect.

The way I see it, any score that is higher than my average is a good score, as that is my pulse on getting better - or should I say pleasing the voters. (which is not necessarily a means to judge a good quality photograph).
Some challenges will be a roller coaster ride, as they can be a Love it or Hate it challenge and you will see scores swing wildly.

Regarding 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5 score-wise? Any of them can be ribbon winners. Just cruise through the Challenge archives and be ready for a few surprises! The points also mean less than the % where it finished in my opinion.

I am learning to judge my work more by the comments and being added to favorites than the actual points score.

Message edited by author 2005-01-10 02:47:01.
01/10/2005 03:44:56 AM · #22
I'm not sure about this one.

I agree with several views above that some of the entrants have really got it dead right with their interpretation of 'bokeh'. However, there are quite a number who I think have missed the point completely. Still, that's only my view. Perhaps I got it wrong, as I thought my entry captured what I thought it to be, but I've only got about 4.4 to date.
01/10/2005 03:59:20 AM · #23
Well, wobble... First ya gotta HAVE bokeh, then ya gotta please the voters with a pic they like. Great bokeh on a middle-of-the-road pic would still be mniddle of the road scores. Ohn the other hand, a wonderful pic with no bokeh ought to be voted lower by quite a bit...

Robt.

01/10/2005 05:01:38 AM · #24
Originally posted by bear_music:

Well, wobble... First ya gotta HAVE bokeh, then ya gotta please the voters with a pic they like. Great bokeh on a middle-of-the-road pic would still be mniddle of the road scores. Ohn the other hand, a wonderful pic with no bokeh ought to be voted lower by quite a bit...

Robt.


Got to agree with you here.

The question is...are the voters going to KNOW what's good bokeh, bad bokeh, or NO bokeh. I saw a number of images with bokeh that's definitely not "good bokeh", but my guess is that they will score high because it's "obvious" bokeh.

Maybe I'm being harsh, but I'm not voting photos high just because they "have" bokeh, I'm looking for "good bokeh"; (which is almost laughable, since I was unable to produce a photo with "good bokeh", and didn't enter the challege!).
01/10/2005 05:05:33 AM · #25
Lhall,

There's two working definitions of bokeh here. The one the challenge framers seemed to have in mind was an interelationship between out-of-focus backgrounds with sharp foregrounds, artefacts relatively incidental to this. The other is the technical definition of bokeh as a lens artefact produced by spherical abrerations.

I'm using the former, artistic definition to vote. Presence of artefacts is a plus in this challenge, but I'm not judging htem by technical "good" or "bad" bokeh terms; rather by how the image as a whole works.

Robt.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 12:49:40 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 © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 12:49:40 AM EDT.