| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/24/2005 06:00:35 PM · #1 |
If you are one of the many who dismissed this entry, please take a second look now & post a comment in this thread.
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=136122
I gave it a 10, for the reasons given in my original comment, and was astonished that it was so harshly treated by others. I'm fairly new to photography & may have a lot to learn, but I know enough to say with certainty that this image was absurdly underrated. It has both artistic and challenge-related qualities that simply could not be overlooked, and yet they were! Some interesting post-challenge discussion has already started on the image's own page (see above link).
P.S : I have since become aware of this photographer's background, which explains the skill with which the image was composed and executed. I will leave it to him to choose whether or not to comment on that. |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 06:06:29 PM · #2 |
Aim high...score low.
Shame
Bob |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 06:07:22 PM · #3 |
Less concentration on Photoshop, more on composition :)
What up Bear?
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 06:08:41 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 06:17:00 PM · #5 |
I didn't vote on this, but to be honest the the brighter background seems more interesting then the subject and I found my eyes drawn more to it then to the house. Although this is an interesting and imaginative composition in a competion where the consentration should be on the architecture of the photo this may have missed the mark.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 06:29:58 PM · #6 |
I didn't vote the architectural challenge, but I probably would have given this a 5. It's technically fine, but the composition is pedestrian - nothing exciting or inspiring. To me, anything ove a 5 has to be better than 'technically proficient'. This showed a portion of a crackerbox house, badly (to me ) cropped, no interesting perspective and said nothing about 'architecture'.
The house didn't even seem to be the most important element of the photo, as nsbca commented.
BTW, I'm an admirer of the photographer, also. This is not my favorite image of his, but it's also a matter of taste, in many ways.
Message edited by author 2005-01-24 18:33:34.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 06:31:03 PM · #7 |
One of the great skills of "true" architectural photography is to place the building in its context. Buildings do not exist in a vacuum, they exist in relation to their surroundings.
Of the 3 ribbon winners, only the yellow ribbon has any sense of this, and it has it in spades. All were worthy winners, don't get me wrong... But in the main, this challenge was about details, as far as the voters were concerned; only 4 of the top 20 showed a significant portion of the whole building, and only 5 of the top 20 placed the building within a recognizable context.
For whatever that's worth.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 06:38:25 PM · #8 |
Left this on the photo too.
I appreciate the additional explanation about the crop on the right. I think what "bothers" me about that is that, with the smaller room a perfect rectangle shot square-on, too much attention is now drawn to the "missing" cottage off the right edge, rather than to the junction/relationship of the cottage to the marsh, which you state is the primary subject.
Had you been standing just a couple of feet to the right so that you keep essentially the same composition but with a very slight perspective of the cottage wall receding into the marsh it would soften the impact of the missing building.
Since the topic was Architecture, I'm sure a lot of people just expected you to concentrate on the building. Still, I voted on the high side of the bell curve ... |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 07:06:10 PM · #9 |
the challenge details were 'Creatively capture an interesting photograph of architecture.'
not to photograph a building according to standard professional standards.
personally i didn't find this particular image all that creative, nor enjoy how the building was chopped.
be content a few prints were sold, and it has valuable appeal to some.
my entry, i thought was quite creative, and still do despite the rather painful beating it was issued...
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 07:15:56 PM · #10 |
I guess I'm Judy. I gave this image a 5. I felt the comp was good, but the building boring. I also thought that the color of the grass and trees in the background looked artificial. There are dead bushes in front of the house, yet the grass is almost flouresent. To me the bright hues did not quite fit with the rustic/simple structure.
Just my opinion |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 07:25:36 PM · #11 |
I never said we should be photographing "to professional standards"; in fact I said the ribbon winners were all deserving of their status.
The colors are very close to as I found them, just a smidgen of hue/saturation work.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 07:37:03 PM · #12 |
| I did not vote on this photo, I think it is a good photo but that is about it. I would have voted it a 6 if I had voted on it, it is a clean image and the composition is good but it is certainly nothing that is special, at least to my eye. From looking at the votes it got I would say a great number of people would agree, it got a lot of 6s some 7s but hardly any 8 9 or 10s, which by the way sums up the voting on my photo as well, nobody really hated it but nobody really liked it either. |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 07:53:28 PM · #13 |
The truth of the matter is that architecture has many schools of taste. Personally, I love the simpler designs such as this one. Others love the high risers and complex bridges. I have spent a lot of time inside these cottages and colonial homes. They are indeed a wonder because the art of carpentry is well displayed.
This image is certainly competent and if you look at it long enough you will extract its old flavor. There is a high sense of simplicity in the outside shells of these units. However, once inside they become addicted at the great detail in construction.
It did end too low but this is no reflection on the quality. Oftentimes, the challenges are taken very literally and voters are expecting jaw dropping images with cables, glass and converging pillars. This is all right, because if you take a survey you will find that most people prefer the high risers and the complex to such simplicity. There are exceptions where these houses will score better but then the lighting and sky complement an overall feel. This shot is like a cover for "Beautiful Home" It is not at all exciting, it is simply beautiful.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 08:03:57 PM · #14 |
Maybe I'm wrong... it wouldn't be the first time. Today even. But I simply find this image to be unexciting at best. The sky is blown out and lacking any detail, the field on the left appears to be on fire, and the grass in the foreground is too green and quite noisy. I don't care for the centered placement of the chimney, and I don't care for the chopped-off look of the tree on the far left edge. I scored it a generous 5, simply because it is in focus and meets the challenge (as it is an example of architecture).
Maybe it's my age, my background, or my inexperience, but overall I am not surpised at its placement in the least. I hope that Robert doesn't take all this personally either, because this has nothing to do with him as a person. It's simply a matter of personal opinion and taste. Nothing more, nothing less. :o)
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 08:05:26 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Maybe I'm wrong... it wouldn't be the first time. Today even. But I simply find this image to be unexciting at best. The sky is blown out and lacking any detail, the field on the left appears to be on fire, and the grass in the foreground is too green and quite noisy. I don't care for the centered placement of the chimney, and I don't care for the chopped-off look of the tree on the far left edge. I scored it a generous 5, simply because it is in focus and meets the challenge (as it is an example of architecture).
Maybe it's my age, my background, or my inexperience, but overall I am not surpised at its placement in the least. I hope that Robert doesn't take all this personally either, because this has nothing to do with him as a person. It's simply a matter of personal opinion and taste. Nothing more, nothing less. :o) |
You said what I was thinking. |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 08:52:20 PM · #16 |
I think the redeeming value of this image is in the lighting, especially in the shade of the house. It has a soothing effect and balances the hotter colors of the marsh. I'm guessing that the community locals' were the ones that found it appealing enough to purchase.
That said, I don't feel this image has broad appeal for people outside of the immediate geographic location as it lacks detail and, imo, leaves the viewer wanting. Neither the structure, nor the marsh, supplies much in the way of visual information. Had you been able to gain access to the house, an indoor, wide angle shot looking out through the double windows so that you could see more of the surrounding marsh, as well as, the indoor architectural detail, imo, would have been preferable. Or, had you been able to shoot from the outside, through the left window so that you would have captured both the indoor fireplace and the outdoor marsh through the far windows, that may have been more interesting to view, as well as, a more challenging shot.
I did enjoy looking at this photo, though, as I live on Long Island, which looks just like this locality. |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 09:30:10 PM · #17 |
it appears you hinted at it... and are taking it to heart.
Originally posted by bear_music:
One of the great skills of "true" architectural photography is to place the building in its context.
Of the 3 ribbon winners, only the yellow ribbon has any sense of this, and it has it in spades. All were worthy winners, don't get me wrong... But in the main, this challenge was about details, as far as the voters were concerned; only 4 of the top 20 showed a significant portion of the whole building, and only 5 of the top 20 placed the building within a recognizable context.
For whatever that's worth.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 09:38:14 PM · #18 |
| Bear has been a puzzle to me. He knows infinitely more about photography than I do. I love reading his comments on the forums, and have learned quite a bit from him. He is very much appreciated in that regard. I have found his challange photographs a little disappointing. I have tried to figure out why. The subject of this thread is an example. I think it has to do with the subjects he picks(dull and bland). His post-processing is excellent, but there is only so much you can do with an ordinary photo. It seems to me that the best photographers on this site spend a lot of effort on setting up or planning their photograph. No disrespect meant for Bear. He may be like me, and not have a lot of time to go and get a great shot. I truely think he is a huge assest to this website, and I am enriched by his postings. |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 09:51:28 PM · #19 |
| IMHO 5.0 is fair score for that,nothing special about it,maybe I would give it 6 :-( |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 10:03:56 PM · #20 |
On the bright side, it scored higher than Artyste, deapee, jjbeguin, soup, arnit, GeneralE to name but a few.
Personally, I don't find much of interest in it - it is obviously carefully composed, but the result doesn't connect with me in anyway or demonstrate the reason for such careful composition.
At least on my screen it looks over processed and garish, but even with that changed, it wouldn't hold much interest for me. I could see how someone who lived there or cared for this style of architecture or marshland might find it representative or evocative of some memories, but it leaves me cold. |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 10:09:16 PM · #21 |
Regarding the "puzzle" aspect of me, it's simple. By choice I am a naturallight photographer, and there ain't no light in this region at this time of year. My "studio" shots, done for the heck of it, are made under skylight illumination, except my "new ground" shot.
I enter the challenges to be a aprt of things, not expecting to place especially well. Also, while I was disappointed to see my serene little image finish in 175th place, I don't "take it to heart"; I did a nice picture with very little light available to me, and I'm happy with it. Are there 174 better pictures in that challenge? personally I don't think so, but I'd have expected to finish in, say, the 50's...
You'll see a different side of me come spring, when I can get out in the light again.
The bottom line is, I'm a very subtle photographer, in the sense that I rarely go for the grand gesture. Never have. It's not my nature. So I really don't expect ever to ribbon in one of these challenges, and this doesn't bother me. My pleasure in this art comes from subtly-observed things, tiny details, muted colors, serenity and quietude.
Please don't any of you think this is a "whining" thread for me; I didn't start it. It just seemed churlish not to participate, since someone else did. I'm not bothered by people who think this shot is a 5 or a 6 at best. I'm just a little surprised that in the eyes of the voters fully 174 of these images were "better" than one which I believe is a very nice, if not truly outstanding, picture.
But I'd never have started this thread...
It seems to me if we can take anything from the thread, it's this; Take the time to look closely at images that are technically well-done, and see if maybe theybegin to grow on you. I make a great effort to do this, and I find that in many, many cases I have given much higher-than-average scores to certain images that, to my eye, end up being underappreciated. On the other hand, all my 10's in architecture made the top 15, and most of my 9's made the top 30.
One exception: I rated the following image very high. It does a fine, fine job of letting the architecture (great architecture) speak, it doesn't let the camera get between the architecture and the viewer. It's processed a little too down-tone, but it's basically a FINE architectural study that places the building squarely within its context:
It got hammered even worse than mine.
another I liked a lot that finished below mine:
An excerpt from my comment: I am very pleased to see someone dealing effectively with minimalist strucutral elements. This is a stunningly effective B/W composition. I hope it's not voted down as far as I fear it will be.
In the main, I feel that the most of the best images finished at the top where they belong; the voters' scoring very closely parallelled my own sense of how these images ranked, in the top 30 or so.
Peace, friends. I'm enjoying my time here.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-01-24 22:11:19.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 10:26:33 PM · #22 |
This image needs more photographic interest and higher technical quality to be rated higher. I gave it a 5 myself.
I traveled over 200 miles to photograph structures by two great architects - Paolo Soleri and Frank Lloyd Wright. I even created two PBase galleries with some of the images I took that you can go see yourself and started a DPC thread about my architecture experience...
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=162876
However, I did not submit to the challenge because the pictures I took were just not that good.
With all due respect to Bear_Music and ubique, I would not have submitted this image either.
Message edited by author 2005-01-24 22:27:24.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 11:04:19 PM · #23 |
Well, as long as we're tooting our own horns...I think my entry was better than yours ;-)
|
|
|
|
01/24/2005 11:14:28 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Well, as long as we're tooting our own horns...I think my entry was better than yours ;-)
|
Oh, well here's my Architecture shot  |
|
|
|
01/24/2005 11:15:52 PM · #25 |
| Hey I know,,,, why don't we just re-post all of our submissions and we can vote on them again!!! |
|
