| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/30/2003 01:48:21 AM · #1 |
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=18955
Well, I went a little off-the-beaten-path this week and was duly punished for it (4.5-ish average). I received "ones" and I received a "ten"...I guess this confirms the subjectivity of our chosen art. Oh well, I'm not upset by it; I kind of expected it actually. I liked the way it turned out (it's framed in my office, and I actually get lots of compliments). It was intended to push the envelope a little, and that apparently appealed to some, but mostly not. ;)
thanks to all who commented constructively, and to those who so elequently reported the obvious..."it's overexposed".
:)
no entry this week...looking forward to "glass"
Peace,
Pedro
Message edited by author 2003-04-30 02:49:18.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 01:55:32 AM · #2 |
I hear you brother. I got bet up pretty bad for This shot a few weeks ago but it remains one of my favorites.
To each his own I suppose.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:00:45 AM · #3 |
I actually like the exposure, gave you an 8 :)
There are two factions here:
artist-like voters
and non-artist-like voters
Unfortunately non-artist-like voters is about 25:1 ratio against the artist-like voters. So you can choose to submit something that they like which in turn FORCES you to photograph the way that you think they'll like it and not necessarily the way you like it.
Originally posted by pedromarlinez:
Well, I went a little off-the-beaten-path this week and was duly punished for it (4.5-ish average). I received "ones" and I received a "ten"...I guess this confirms the subjectivity of our chosen art. Oh well, I'm not upset by it; I kind of expected it actually. I liked the way it turned out (it's framed in my office, and I actually get lots of compliments). It was intended to push the envelope a little, and that apparently appealed to some, but mostly not. ;)
thanks to all who commented constructively, and to those who so elequently reported the obvious..."it's overexposed".
:)
no entry this week...looking forward to "glass"
Peace,
Pedro |
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 06:39:51 AM · #4 |
I liked your shot Pedro. However I gave it a low score, as it didn't really say anything to me that connected with the challenge - sure I can see environment there, and the toning and extreme high key are ecellently done, and yeah, it's an animal, but the shot seems more to be about the fence and the fence-post, largely because of the way the horse is positioned I think - facing away, quietly grazing, it's back turned to it's cage, as it were.
paganini - we can approach this thing a number of ways, but we're only FORCED to submit photo's the way 'they' like if we're all out for a ribbon. Then, by definition, you're trying to be a populist photographer, which is no recipe for art. Your statement is tautological. Of course we can think up ways of categorising the voters, but then what do you want out of the site? I don't know whether it's deliberate, but you sound dismissive of what you categorise as 'non-artist-like'. Personally, the 'title' of 'artist' is something that is given to someone, not something they choose for themselves.
ed
Message edited by author 2003-04-30 06:56:16.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 06:42:00 AM · #5 |
I gave that shot a 9... I really thought the exposure added a neat effect.... excellent work :)
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 08:21:51 AM · #6 |
| I think what happened was to many people didn't appreciate the exposure used and the horse appears to have blended in and get lost cause of it. |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 08:35:03 AM · #7 |
I know your pain...I submitted something artistic to transportation & I'm already paying the price.
I've done this in the past (artistic photos) and gotten killed,but what the heck. You have to take risks sometimes.
I've decided that here is different then other places. If it is simple, original and colorful you will do well. Some of the shots that do well here I don't agree with. Some are technically so-so.
Never, never change the colors or contrast(as I did this time) because that is not liked here! Oh well......
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 08:57:05 AM · #8 |
To pedromarlinez:
Don't fed up !! Don't let that little voting result beaten you down !!
I saw your submission of that horse, the shooting is not really so bad.
Just some times,some voters tend to cast their vote based on their personal taste.
No No No, please keep your good work.
(^0^) Anyway, I m new member for dpc.
My first submission was on "transportation" topic.
So far I only scored 4.15 of overall voting result on my submission.
Upset? No, I wil try extra hard for next submission - GLASS,
YES...I can win !! Hope you too... !!
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 09:21:02 AM · #9 |
| All my submission's have been low scored, but I have to agree with it, my lastest is really doing bad, but I guess if there where no bad ones the good ones would'nt look so good, you think? Anyway I have learned so much here, and realized I need a different camera, so next week look out, hope to be one tuff cookie! lol |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 10:35:44 AM · #10 |
| I think it's a truly beautiful shot. Very artistic. I didn't have time to complete voting on the challenge, so I never had a chance to vote on it, but I think I'd have given it a 9, most likely. The only point is really that it's a good, creative image that is well-composed and you used the overexposure to your advantage. As long as you know that, forget the score. If you want to go for a good score next time, forget the art and go for a technical shot. It all just depends on how you'll get the most out of the challenges. :) |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 10:43:54 AM · #11 |
Pedro,
Don't give up! It's a beautiful shot. I like the way the fence gets lost into the white sky, and I like the white rectangle (wall? fence?) to the top left. My one comment (personal preference, I guess) is that I would have liked the sepia tone be a bit less on the warm side, maybe just more of a hint of sepia, a little less brown? - the picture has an ethereal quality, and the warm sepia, to me, distracts a bit. Come to think of it, that might be affected by the colour settings for my computer screen.
BTW - I've been looking at posted pictures on different computers (only 4 so far) and they (the pictures) look quite different!
~Ursula |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 11:05:53 AM · #12 |
Nah, I'm too stubborn to change! I'm going to keep submitting the things I like...maybe someday the masses will agree, maybe not. Either way, DPC gives me new ideas, and I get great feedback from people who actually want to help. I like that.
I'm building a new house, and I've decided that everything that goes up on the walls will have been created by myself or someone I know... Photos, paintings, drawings, framing....EVERYTHING. So let's hope none of the challenges in the next little while have topics like "Garbage" or "Ugly Things" or "Human Waste"...I really don't think I want pictures like that up on my walls.
Peace,
Pedro
Message edited by author 2003-04-30 11:06:30.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 11:09:32 AM · #13 |
I can't speak for everyone, but for me I gave you a 6. If you would've been 2 feet closer to take the fence out of play, I probably would've given you an 8. I like the exposure and the way it looks like a very old photo. I think turning the brightness down just a little would make the horse stand out just a bit better and not disrupt the high-keyness of the shot.
Its almost a really nice shot. Keep shooting and good things will happen.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 11:11:50 AM · #14 |
For my Transportation entry, I had two choices after my shooting was done. There was a photo I really liked that was more creative and fun, and one that I thought would "do better." I chose the latter and now I feel kind of like I gently cheated myself, even thought I like both shots. For the long haul, I wish I'd have chosen the more creative one.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 11:18:04 AM · #15 |
And your point is? I know what this site is and what type of photos will do well, that doesn't mean I am going to vote like the other people on here.
Originally posted by e301:
I liked your shot Pedro. However I gave it a low score, as it didn't really say anything to me that connected with the challenge - sure I can see environment there, and the toning and extreme high key are ecellently done, and yeah, it's an animal, but the shot seems more to be about the fence and the fence-post, largely because of the way the horse is positioned I think - facing away, quietly grazing, it's back turned to it's cage, as it were.
paganini - we can approach this thing a number of ways, but we're only FORCED to submit photo's the way 'they' like if we're all out for a ribbon. Then, by definition, you're trying to be a populist photographer, which is no recipe for art. Your statement is tautological. Of course we can think up ways of categorising the voters, but then what do you want out of the site? I don't know whether it's deliberate, but you sound dismissive of what you categorise as 'non-artist-like'. Personally, the 'title' of 'artist' is something that is given to someone, not something they choose for themselves.
ed |
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 11:19:18 AM · #16 |
BTW, whoever says i am submitting photos that only DPC would like? Actually, I do that once in a while, but not all the time.
Originally posted by e301:
I liked your shot Pedro. However I gave it a low score, as it didn't really say anything to me that connected with the challenge - sure I can see environment there, and the toning and extreme high key are ecellently done, and yeah, it's an animal, but the shot seems more to be about the fence and the fence-post, largely because of the way the horse is positioned I think - facing away, quietly grazing, it's back turned to it's cage, as it were.
paganini - we can approach this thing a number of ways, but we're only FORCED to submit photo's the way 'they' like if we're all out for a ribbon. Then, by definition, you're trying to be a populist photographer, which is no recipe for art. Your statement is tautological. Of course we can think up ways of categorising the voters, but then what do you want out of the site? I don't know whether it's deliberate, but you sound dismissive of what you categorise as 'non-artist-like'. Personally, the 'title' of 'artist' is something that is given to someone, not something they choose for themselves.
ed |
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:29:09 PM · #17 |
Pedro, I really liked this shot. Glad to see the score isn't going to stop you 'taking chances', it made a refreshing change during the voting.
Your average vote per commenters was a very respectable 6+, much higher than the shots around you, so pay no attention to the 'real' score ; ) |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:34:09 PM · #18 |
Pedro-
Excellent shot. Great effect having the posts dissolve into the sky. I like how it happens with the horse too. Really adds "punch" to the spots. |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:44:59 PM · #19 |
paganini:
Originally posted by paganini:
Unfortunately non-artist-like voters is about 25:1 ratio against the artist-like voters. So you can choose to submit something that they like which in turn FORCES you to photograph the way that you think they'll like it and not necessarily the way you like it.
|
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 02:59:40 PM · #20 |
And your point is? If your photo doesn't satisfy the intended audience, they wont' like it much and you will not score high. THat's all there is.
Originally posted by e301:
paganini:
Originally posted by paganini:
Unfortunately non-artist-like voters is about 25:1 ratio against the artist-like voters. So you can choose to submit something that they like which in turn FORCES you to photograph the way that you think they'll like it and not necessarily the way you like it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 03:16:05 PM · #21 |
| i'm sorry pedro, that shot was hardly pushing the envelope. check out my fauna and bridge submissions. |
|
|
|
04/30/2003 04:56:02 PM · #22 |
It's allllll realtive, my friend. :) I like your thinking. I've really toned it down here so far...you're encouraging me NOT to do so. Giddy-up.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 05:22:15 PM · #23 |
well,
not to diminish your request for insight into the processes at work around the voting and reception of your picture, but this conversation has been had on here many many times before :) ...
THere's been a tremendous of energy expended on trying to analyse 1) why the people on this site vote how they vote and 2) how to make pix that do well - and if doing that means you 'sold out'.
Then there are some perennially high scoring people on here that no one could ever accuse of doing uncreative work, confusing the entire mix and analysis :)
What does it all mean?
Sometimes the simplest explanation is in fact the most likely. Most often if your image got positive comments but not a high score it meant that it had strong appeal to smaller specific demographic.
Nothing wrong with that :). Think of great musicians that have devoted cult followings. They might be warped or twisted in ways that are interesting, but that the majority of populace wouldn't possibly gravitate towards.
It might also represent - which I think it does in this case - that people didn't think it met the challenge, but a few open minded souls recognized it as an interesting photograph. And then there were all the people who were 'trying to help you' by telling you it was overexposed. (sidenote: that's interesting because I too sometimes like the luminous brilliant quality overexposure can add to a pic - like painting with white paint - but a lot of people seem to automatically think it's a flaw (not just on DPC). Maybe this stems from a very traditionalistic view of photography?
Ultimately, the information this site can provide you about your pictures will be dictated and limited by the backgrounds of the majority of it's (and the most vocal) participants. Only you can decide if that's complementary to your own goals with your image-making. And the ways in which you want to develop.
Certainly if you have other sources of feedback , and they contradict what you're learning here, you should make the decision that works best for you as to 'who to listen to'. But if not, maybe when x number of people tell you a specific thing about your shot, it might have merit.
In the end it all boils down to your goals :).
Idea: Try to see if you can technically pure (ie well-managed exposure, sharp focus) pictures of interesting subjects and see how those do.
Or just express yourself. It's up to you :) ... Good luck !
sorry to ramble - (ahh it's good to be off work :) ...
Message edited by author 2003-04-30 17:24:08.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 05:30:45 PM · #24 |
My retarded snapshots have gotten better scores than my well-planned, thought out shots. My studio shots have done horribly.
What's it all mean?
No clue. I'm thinking it means I know nothing about photography.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2003 05:35:23 PM · #25 |
| The good news is I still get to put food on the table, even if no one likes my pix. I'm just here for fun, ideas, and some dialogue...I think I found it. :) |
|
