| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/15/2003 05:18:13 AM · #1 |
Shots of type
Shots of rainbow c.d.'s
Just tired of seeing these almost every week. Is there something that you don't like seeing all the time?
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 06:11:39 AM · #2 |
Spiders....I hate spiders. I can't even look at photos of them, so I don't vote on pictures of spiders.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 06:17:03 AM · #3 |
Yeah type shots where they print out a word a few hundred times then place an object on top. First 1 or 2 were nice.
Also, those awful part B&W and part color images, arrrgggghhhhh!!! |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 06:21:58 AM · #4 |
| the cold studio shoots of flowers done in macro. I would rather see them in there natural setting than with a black or white background. They are just so cold and impersonal that way. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 06:29:25 AM · #5 |
how's about a nice warm yellow backgound. hehe ;)
 |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 06:59:10 AM · #6 |
| Somebody pass me my sunglasses! That yellow distracts from the flower...and there is my other pet peeve large embedded photos in the forum if ya have to put them in the forum can't ya keep them thumbnailed. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 07:10:19 AM · #7 |
Gratuitous borders. Grrrrrr!!
Shots submitted with the wrong white balance.
I don't remember seeing many rainbow cd shots though in the last few months.
I agree that the repeated type ones are getting irritating. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 07:30:41 AM · #8 |
I disagree about doing a studio shot with a black background. The black background here was carefully chosen to emphasize the subject, making the subject, the only thing that matters. I dont think these 2 pictures appear cold because of the BG.
 
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 07:47:17 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
Somebody pass me my sunglasses! That yellow distracts from the flower...and there is my other pet peeve large embedded photos in the forum if ya have to put them in the forum can't ya keep them thumbnailed. |
I recall you pointing this out in this thread too (sarcasm) Bandwidth Hog Don't bother clicking the link unless you have a couple of hours to waste while it loads! |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 07:54:34 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by robsmith:
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
Somebody pass me my sunglasses! That yellow distracts from the flower...and there is my other pet peeve large embedded photos in the forum if ya have to put them in the forum can't ya keep them thumbnailed. |
I recall you pointing this out in this thread too (sarcasm) Bandwidth Hog Don't bother clicking the link unless you have a couple of hours to waste while it loads! |
I am on high speed and it still slows ya down when everyone starts posting large photos in the forum. Hey only the lazy can't click a thumbnail or a link if they want to see it. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 07:57:34 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by scab-lab:
I disagree about doing a studio shot with a black background. The black background here was carefully chosen to emphasize the subject, making the subject, the only thing that matters. I dont think these 2 pictures appear cold because of the BG.
|
Yeah the black may look good but it is a matter of personal taste. I prefer the natural to the studio shots of flowers. But I won't argue to much on the point cause I have done of a few studio shots myself. I just find the natural setting more of a challenge. Especially today with the wind blowing. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 08:17:03 AM · #12 |
| Bad borders - There were LOTS of awful borders when the rule first changed. Now there are just a few. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:08:19 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
how's about a nice warm yellow backgound. hehe ;)
 |
Wow. Reminds me of the Warhol prints I saw recently.
Certainly arresting. Not entirely certain I like it
but it sure stands out!
Message edited by author 2003-10-15 09:29:42. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:10:22 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by jonpink:
how's about a nice warm yellow backgound. hehe ;)
|
Wow. Reminds me of the Warhol prints I saw recently.
Certainly arresting. Not entirely certain I like it
but it sure stands out! |
But did you really need to embed the picture again Gordon????!!!!! |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:11:47 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by robsmith:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by jonpink:
how's about a nice warm yellow backgound. hehe ;)
|
Wow. Reminds me of the Warhol prints I saw recently.
Certainly arresting. Not entirely certain I like it
but it sure stands out! |
But did you really need to embed the picture again Gordon????!!!!! |
Whoops, just did it myself, sorry!!!! 
Message edited by Gordon - big image. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:16:02 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by faidoi:
Shots of type
Shots of rainbow c.d.'s |
Well I gotta admit I'm guilty! I always see post about how "stock photo's" do so good around here and after seeing all the pics of type I submitted one. Now I'm payin' for my lack of originality! Heesh, can't seem to win lately...
Message edited by author 2003-10-15 09:17:38.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:23:47 AM · #17 |
I can't think of any pet peeves . . . perhaps mediocre photos of ducks? (or photos of mediocre ducks!) I like GOOD photos of any kind; I don't care if I've seen similar stuff before. That's one way we learn--by copying others' techniques.
My latest shot of the building was a fairly obvious attempt at trying to use techniques learned by Xertion in this photo.
His is better, but I learned a lot by doing it. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:28:05 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
Shots submitted with the wrong white balance.
|
Do you mean wrong, as in picked the wrong one by accident, or wrong as in the photographer made a deliberate choice to tone the image ?
If the later, you must hate most nature photographers and all those colour filters they use... |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:31:46 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
Shots submitted with the wrong white balance.
|
Do you mean wrong, as in picked the wrong one by accident, or wrong as in the photographer made a deliberate choice to tone the image ?
If the later, you must hate most nature photographers and all those colour filters they use... |
I'm talking about all the indoor shots that have an obvious yellow/orange tint. You can tell when this is deliberate, and when this is accidental. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:37:51 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
how's about a nice warm yellow backgound. hehe ;)
|
i love it. great shot
Message edited by author 2003-10-15 09:38:09.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:38:53 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by dsidwell:
I can't think of any pet peeves . . . perhaps mediocre photos of ducks? (or photos of mediocre ducks!) I like GOOD photos of any kind; I don't care if I've seen similar stuff before. That's one way we learn--by copying others' techniques. |
How true your words are David. There is nothing at all that hasn't been photographed in some way or another in the past and very many photos are just copies of other photos. And I, as yourself, often look for other photos for inspiration to copy, or shoot in a similar or different way. Especially at times when I have a lack of originality.
As for pet peeves, well I find it difficult to vote on photos that are so small that it is difficult to recognise what I am looking at.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:52:33 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
[quote=Gordon][quote=BobsterLobster]
Shots submitted with the wrong white balance.
...
I'm talking about all the indoor shots that have an obvious yellow/orange tint. You can tell when this is deliberate, and when this is accidental. |
Those bug me too. I quite like the creative use of white balance, but the indoor orange shots which are so easy to avoid are painful.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 09:58:29 AM · #23 |
I think the WB problem is maybe a little bit harsh, not everyone has access to photoshop et al, or a decent camera with WB settings.
Others may have photoshop etc, but not know quite how to get rid of the yellow casting (for those people, this is quite good: //www.gurusnetwork.com/tutorials/photoshop/curves1.html )
My numero uno pet hate has to be out-of-focus shots, by that I mean all out of focus by a long way. One man's f4 is another man's "not in focus", but I can't understand people who submit badly focused shots. It's not like were using film cameras now is it.
Message edited by author 2003-10-15 09:58:59. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 10:07:18 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I'm talking about all the indoor shots that have an obvious yellow/orange tint. You can tell when this is deliberate, and when this is accidental. |
disclosure: I'm a total newbie to photography, digital or otherwise.
This problem with indoor white balance... correct me if I'm wrong... it can be corrected by using a white sheet of paper placed where the shot will be taken... let the camera measure the "temperature" of that white sheet in the lighting conditions... the camera can then use that measurement as a yardstick for picking up accurate colour for photographs in the same lighting conditions? |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 10:14:11 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
I think the WB problem is maybe a little bit harsh, not everyone has access to photoshop et al, or a decent camera with WB settings. |
I think that is wrong - my 1 MP, 6 year old digicam has white balance settings for indoor light. My palm pilot camera deals with white balance. The cameras in the phones I'm designing deal with white balance. I don't think there are any cameras that don't correct for it, though I could be entirely wrong.
As for the 'dont have access to photoshop' thing haven't we beaten this one to death yet ? There are tons of free tools out there - check my profile for links.
|
|
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: 04/19/2024 06:33:51 PM EDT.
