Is DPC ready...? - DPChallenge Forums

11/08/2006 12:19:51 PM · #1

Peter(Pedro)Pan-tsless suggested that I push the whites more and I totally agree. He's so right but I was too chicken to hear "blown highlight" comments. So my question is: Will there ever be a day when I can make a slightly edgy choice for a Challenge entry and it will be understood? Or, will I always get nailed in the butt?

(I'm diggin the over-the-top high contrast but I think it would have been shredded)

Regarding another shot I took, a few commentors said that they didn't like the blown light up top. Now personally, I think it makes the shot to some degree.

Am I that out of sync with the planet or just planet DPC?

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 15:10:15.

11/08/2006 12:22:46 PM · #2

For a you and Mr. Pantless collaboration?

NOOOOOO!!!!!

As for a slightly edge entry and be understood, "Yes". As for the squirrels, I don't know, neither strikes me as "done". Weird.

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 12:24:16.

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

11/08/2006 12:27:51 PM · #3

Originally posted by ursula:

For a you and Mr. Pantless collaboration?

NOOOOOO!!!!!

As for a slightly edge entry and be understood, "Yes". As for the squirrels, I don't know, neither strikes me as "done". Weird.

Not sure I understood what you said there?

For the record, Pedro only made the suggestion. I alone, blasted the contrast, which I could have pulled back a bit.

justine

Canon EOS-50D

11/08/2006 12:29:41 PM · #4

I think she means..the rest of us are dead meat.

:)

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

11/08/2006 12:31:40 PM · #5

Are you shooting wide open on the Squirrel shot?

The reason I ask..when shooting at Ap f2.8 from a distance you are going to have a really shallow depth of field. When you oversharpen a really shallow depth of field photo you end up with a really chunky looking overprocessed feel to the photo because the soft.oof areas will be sharpened too heavily while not maintaining enough detail.

The photos that do the best when really contrasted and sharpened a lot are ones where the depth of field is great (Think AP f5.6 - f11).

Is that squirrel shot full framed or did you crop? The reason I ask is the first one looks soft everywhere except the Squirrel's right eye and shoulder.

DPC has always shown a desire for contrasty and crunchy photos like

or especially this one which is where I think you are going with yours

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 12:38:00.

Azrifel

Nikon Coolpix P340

11/08/2006 12:34:46 PM · #6

I like the high contrast stuff, but really hate those little squirrily buggers.

wavelength

Nikon D300

11/08/2006 12:37:38 PM · #7

I don't mind either version with the "blow hightlights" blahblah BS. Light is to be used as a photog sees fit, technical "flaws" are only flawed if they hurt the composition.

Like this shot from

Melethia

I thought that the whole blown sky MADE the shot, rather than hurting it. I think learning when to break the rules is as important as knowing what they are. Some people just can't get past the rules, as if artistic means and compositions were set in stone or something. which is silly.

11/08/2006 12:41:32 PM · #8

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by ursula:
For a you and Mr. Pantless collaboration?

NOOOOOO!!!!!

As for a slightly edge entry and be understood, "Yes". As for the squirrels, I don't know, neither strikes me as "done". Weird.

Not sure I understood what you said there?

For the record, Pedro only made the suggestion. I alone, blasted the contrast, which I could have pulled back a bit.

Oh nothing. Pedro is good, you're good, I figured we'd be sunk if you two collaborate. Actually, I was just trying to be silly.

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

11/08/2006 12:42:02 PM · #9

Originally posted by wavelength:

I don't mind either version with the "blow hightlights" blahblah BS. Light is to be used as a photog sees fit, technical "flaws" are only flawed if they hurt the composition.

Like this shot from Melethia

I thought that the whole blown sky MADE the shot, rather than hurting it. I think learning when to break the rules is as important as knowing what they are. Some people just can't get past the rules, as if artistic means and compositions were set in stone or something. which is silly.

I think photos only hurt themselves when they dont reach the intended audience. Composition, color, subject matter, processing techniques etc.. are just means to an end...communication.

If you are talking to kids age 16-25 some images and treatments work better than to upper middle class adults age 45-60.

Its all in the eye of the beholder so if the beholder thinks something sucks...they are right for them.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

11/08/2006 12:42:16 PM · #10

Just a quick stab at it; I lost the toning when I did it but too lazy to bring it back. But I think this accomplishes some of your goals without blown highlights that are objectionable:

TrynityRose

Nikon D100

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8

11/08/2006 12:45:58 PM · #11

High contrast images with blown highlights can look ok, but as with everything else, it's very subjective. The corridor pic looks good with them, the squirrel's blown highlights just look distracting to me.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

11/08/2006 12:47:57 PM · #12

I guess my point was the my taste have drifted so far from DPC's Challenge standard, I'm not sure whether to enter anything or not and when I tend to compromise to the standard, that doesn't seem to work for me either. I like blown highlights...distractions...noise...tilts...etc. What to do...what to do?

hokie- I was using my 70-200mm which was set at 2.8. I was looking at subjects 20-30 yards away where there was good light but this guy struck that pose maybe 4 feet in front of me (in a dark shaded area)a range where that lens won't focus. I had less than a second to back peddle, focus and get the shot. That's one of the toughest...most fleeting moments I've ever been challenged with.

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 12:50:39.

DefyTime

Canon EOS-7D

11/08/2006 12:51:31 PM · #13

I like Bear's edit...just the right contrast needed

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/08/2006 12:54:10 PM · #14

Steve (

wavelength), thanks very kindly for the nod - very very much appreciated! And Steve (

pawdrix), I love your squirrel - it's the attitude that makes the shot. Go with the blown highlights if you like 'em and ignore the "you have blown highlights" comments. There are those of us out here who like to see shots like this one.

p.s. Keep entering - variety is what makes voting more fun. :-)

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 12:58:44.

11/08/2006 12:56:20 PM · #15

Originally posted by pawdrix:

IMHO, I think you should do whatever you want. If you want to enter an image that you think is different than DPC standards, go for it. I really, really wish more people (including myself) had the guts to do so. I think we all like to get high scores, but it is a sort of dead end, or at least just one room out of many.

There is so much more that could be entered to challenges, that we all could learn to look at and appreciate. And yes, the scores probably will not be up there, but I guess in my mind there's two things one can do, (1) work for high scores exclusively or (2) work for doing what you want to do and what you think is good and the best you can do and high scores all at the same time. If #2 doesn't produce high scores, who cares.

Anyway, I'm getting off my big box now.

11/08/2006 01:06:35 PM · #16

Originally posted by pawdrix:

I figured as much..those squirrels are twitchy!

Regarding your tastes and whether you should enter DP Challenges. I feel the same way ..at times. My wife looked at my last two shots ..she was actually with me when I took those photos... and thought they were some very good shots. I told her the Balloon one would do well because of the colors but maybe not great because I didn't oversaturate or oversharpen for fear of losing the detail in the horses manes and tails. It might have been too natural looking (If you look close you can see the sun through their mane and tails).

My Portrait shot was a set-up of a young and upcoming actress and was shot under stage lights which are designed to be contrasty..throwing harsh shadows. When I took the photo to Duotones it looked like a Black and White clip form a film to me. The young actress has an uncanny resemblance to the late Janet Leigh minus the fact her hair is black. I suspected the photo would not do well at all because of the very harsh shadows but..to me..that was the appeal of the photo.

These are the types of photos I shoot and my wife wonders why I participate at DPC if what I shoot is not well received. I told her it's because photographers get better if they force themselves out of their comfort zone and learn new things.

I think you are a great photographer and you need to be here. We need diversity at DPC and you bring it.

Hope this helps you stay hopeful :-D

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

11/08/2006 01:13:03 PM · #17

Bear-I like what you did. I just hit the contrast and didn't bother to address the blowout partially to state my point.

Ursula- Doing, what I do is one thing....stomaching a low score and comments that go against my intent, are another thing entirely but you struck on something very interesting when you said "I really, really wish more people (including myself) had the guts to do so" in regards to taking risks and not serving up a guaranteed winner. That might be a subject for a whole'nother but man-o-man, would I like to see some of the perenial Ribbon winners lead the site to higher ground.

Oh and fwiw, I'm getting "nailed in the butt" as we speak, for an odd crop choice that I made in Neon.

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 13:17:56.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

11/08/2006 01:17:57 PM · #18

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Steve, that's a light application of tone mapping, some edge burning, and some sharpening on the squirrel itself, for what that's worth.

As far as "higher ground" is concerned, and following one's own heart, I entered the following (which I LOVE) in FS and got crucified, below the middle of the pack:

I had plenty of much more conventional images that would have scored better, but I was determined to get this one in a challenge, if only because it's so outside my norm. It was a potential "wind" entry, but the "Stormbirds" looked windier and I liked them too.

R.

11/08/2006 01:19:25 PM · #19

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Ursula- Doing, what I do is one thing....stomaching a low score and comments that go against my intent, are another thing entirely but you struck on something very interesting when you said "I really, really wish more people (including myself) had the guts to do so" in regards to taking risks and not serving up a guaranteed winner. That might be a subject for a whole'nother but man-o-man, would I like to see some of the perenial Ribbon winners lead the site to higher ground.

I think at least for me part of the problem is that I'm finding it kind of difficult to figure out how to take risks. Does that make sense to you? It's like, yes, I really want to go out there and take risks and experiment and I don't know what else to say here, but how? And then there's the little nagging voice in my head that says, "Hey, don't think so highly of yourself, maybe you're just not that good."

To add: It's a funny thing, recognition (and high scores at DPC). They mean a lot in the end. It's so easy to say, hey, I entered a shot that did poorly because I liked it and believe it is worth it, but without public acknowledgment it's not easy to be sure that you're right, that you're not just seeing your own stuff as much better than it really is. Also, the old, "out of the box, low score" thing. I don't know. I am just not convinced that it works that way.

It's sort of like, you need to be true to yourself, but you also need to have recognition or it's an empty thing. Recognition doesn't have to be "DPC type recognition' though.

I entered this image recently:

It did better than I expected, yet it didn't do well. It is a direction I'd dearly like to explore, and will. But it needs to get a lot better than it is, and for me to just say, hey, I entered it, it's out of the box (maybe), and thus scored low is not enough. Does that make sense?

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 13:26:25.

11/08/2006 01:34:56 PM · #20

Originally posted by ursula:

It's like, yes, I really want to go out there and take risks and experiment and I don't know what else to say here, but how?

Ursula, I have three words for you....Nude Self Portraits! Hmmmm? Hmmmmm?

Recognition or feeling that you connect is what it's all about. That's the bottom line and that doesn't always come by means of high scores or ribbon. There are a few "perenial ribbon winners" that keep serving up the same photo and that I really don't understand. What pleasure do they get after wiping up the competition with their proven formula, week after week? Ribbons are nice but doing the same thing over and over doesn't seem to Challenging to me. I'll take it any way I can get it these days. I'm such a slut.

I'll give you one thing without question, you serve up a good variety of images in different styles. You aren't as timid as you think.

Bear-I dig that image AND I love the cars in the background...they belong there. They add a feel of urgency to the image. The cars look like they are evacuating the area...it's awesome. Funny how so many people see them as a distraction. That's the part that kills me.

What's up with the distraction B***-Sh**?

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 15:11:47.

11/08/2006 01:39:49 PM · #21

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Ursula- Doing, what I do is one thing....stomaching a low score and comments that go against my intent, are another thing entirely but you struck on something very interesting when you said "I really, really wish more people (including myself) had the guts to do so" in regards to taking risks and not serving up a guaranteed winner. That might be a subject for a whole'nother but man-o-man, would I like to see some of the perenial Ribbon winners lead the site to higher ground.

I think at least for me part of the problem is that I'm finding it kind of difficult to figure out how to take risks. Does that make sense to you? It's like, yes, I really want to go out there and take risks and experiment and I don't know what else to say here, but how? And then there's the little nagging voice in my head that says, "Hey, don't think so highly of yourself, maybe you're just not that good."

To add: It's a funny thing, recognition (and high scores at DPC). They mean a lot in the end. It's so easy to say, hey, I entered a shot that did poorly because I liked it and believe it is worth it, but without public acknowledgment it's not easy to be sure that you're right, that you're not just seeing your own stuff as much better than it really is. Also, the old, "out of the box, low score" thing. I don't know. I am just not convinced that it works that way.

It's sort of like, you need to be true to yourself, but you also need to have recognition or it's an empty thing. Recognition doesn't have to be "DPC type recognition' though.

I entered this image recently:

It did better than I expected, yet it didn't do well. It is a direction I'd dearly like to explore, and will. But it needs to get a lot better than it is, and for me to just say, hey, I entered it, it's out of the box (maybe), and thus scored low is not enough. Does that make sense?

Ursula..I think I have said this about your photography before but it's worth repeating. I find the fact you get such detail and interest out of simple things. I bet if I gave you a comb you would make it interesting. Your photography shows that you don't have to live in Thailand to create incredible stuff.

What I would love to see (as an advertising and marketing guy) is you take your style and apply it to other things...like people..or landscapes..or product shots. Imagine studying the human body they way you study flowers...Heck..imagine a Pepsi can done with your style.

Post Script... This photo by Ursula is what I want to see explored even more..

Message edited by author 2006-11-08 13:46:05.

11/08/2006 01:42:47 PM · #22

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by ursula:
It's like, yes, I really want to go out there and take risks and experiment and I don't know what else to say here, but how?

Ursula, I have three words for you....Nude Self Portraits! Hmmmm? Hmmmmm?

I thought self-portrait was one word :)

11/08/2006 01:46:01 PM · #23

Originally posted by hokie:

What I would love to see (as an advertising and marketing guy) is you take your style and apply it to other things...like people..or landscapes..or product shots. Imagine studying the human body they way you study flowers...Heck..imagine a Pepsi can done with your style.

Funny you should say that. I've had quite a number of people say stuff like that. It hasn't quite made sense yet, maybe sometime it will.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

11/08/2006 01:54:34 PM · #24

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by ursula:
It's like, yes, I really want to go out there and take risks and experiment and I don't know what else to say here, but how?

Ursula, I have three words for you....Nude Self Portraits! Hmmmm? Hmmmmm?

I thought self-portrait was one word :)

He didn't suggest self-portraits. He wants you naked, shooting portraits I think.

As to ways to take risks and experiment. Something I try to do occasionally is, when I'm out shooting, pay conscious attention to that little voice in your head that says 'x won't work' or 'it isn't worth doing y because...' and then deliberately try to do it.

Take some constraint that you automatically apply to your photography and throw it away for an hour, a day, or forever. Just do it. Look at the results. See what kernel of what might have worked is in there, in the middle of all the stuff that didn't. Then try to do more of that.

Shoot at mid day on a bright sunny day when the light is terrible.
Shoot everything out of focus.
Crop people at joint boundaries.
Shoot slower than 1/focal length of the lens.
Use the wrong white balance.
Kick the tripod in the middle of the exposure.
Use a wide angle for portraits.

Just find some of those inbuilt assumptions that we all have about whatever we photograph and throw it away for a bit and see what happens. But don't just throw it away, actively pursue it for a bit.

The worst that can happen is you convince yourself that it really was a valid restriction all along.