| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/09/2007 08:59:42 AM · #1 |
I'm curious as to what EVERY member thinks. I have a series of questions regarding the challenges and how everyone thinks when voting considering this issue. Yes, this site should be used as a learning tool...but damn, who doesn't want a ribbon. So here's an attempt at understanding some of the voters.
Thinking out of the box: The last challenge was religion. If there were 2 equally beautiful pictures, one is of a preacher outside his church, the other is of a beautiful young woman with shopping bags outside of a department store. Both titled "My place of worship" or something more interesting, would you...
A. Vote both the same, since both are beautiful and fall within the category of religion.
B. Vote high on the preacher. However, vote lower on the shopping since it is less religious than the other picture.
C. Vote high on the preacher but higher on the shopping one since it's 'thinking outside the box'.
D. Vote high on the preacher and give the shopper a DNMC vote.
We've all heard the term 'I shop religiously' or something similar. If you haven't, you've never had a girlfriend or wife and are blessed with more money to spend on camera stuff. This obviously doesn't apply to all females. I would see the shopping picture as 'thinking out of the box'. I would vote the shopping picture a point higher for that extra effort in creativity. However, I understand that some will say "You can then apply that to anything...drinking, games, books, sports etc.' Of course...
For those that feel that the shopping picture is just a dumb attempt at getting a picture into the contest, or really is a DNMC, I ask this. If you take the same preacher picture and instead put it up against an equally well shot Jedi Knight, would you DNMC the Jedi. We've all heard the story (I think...if not, google it) about the cencus where people put their religion as 'Jedi' and the governement in England had to declare it an official religion. How true the story is, I'm not sure, but still religious in nature. So, would this also get your DNMC vote?
A. Yes, because it's not a real religion.
B. No, because it's far more interesting than a shopper.
Alright...so my last question is in relation to this picture. The importance of titles for the out of the box pictures. With this picture you'll notice the comment "Does nothing without title". Well, some pictures are obvious when it comes to the topic, a church, a priest, a nun...but how many people know about the religious meaning of tieing these pieces of paper as ways of turning bad fortunes into good? The picture sucks (I'm Canary's biggest critic, friends always are) The title helps push the, dare I say it, ignorant into maybe doing a little research before scoring it low to see whether or not there is a religious significance. Some scored it low because it's a bad picture, but there were several that just didn't see the 'religious aspect of it. There were pictures in the religion challenge that I wasn't sure about, didn't know. I gave no score to those unless I looked it up. A better example would be of my chess shot that got DNMC because people didn't think it was a sport. OK, there was no hand in it moving a piece...if that's why it got voted down, cool. If it's on ESPN, it's a sport. So, here's the question: When unsure about a picture do you...
A. Vote it low thinking it's a DNMC
B. Skip it.
C. Do a little research before voting on it.
I'm curious as to how many take the challenges as literal as possible, and how many like thinking outside the box.
Message edited by author 2007-06-09 09:00:43. |
|
|
|
06/09/2007 09:06:54 AM · #2 |
For me it depends partly on how the image is presented. If an image looks like it has been shoehorned using the title then it does not get the benefit of the doubt from me.
Now, if the image is presented in context and the title only strengthens the connection to the challenge then that's a different story.
With the image example you give, to me it is without context. I think having the shrine in the background (albeit out of focus) would strengthen the image in my mind. |
|
|
|
06/09/2007 09:29:58 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by heavyj:
this site should be used as a learning tool...but damn, who doesn't want a ribbon. So here's an attempt at understanding some of the voters. |
Your base assumption is wrong. This site should be used to win ribbons (hence 'a digital photography contest'), but damn who doesn't want to learn a little.
The shopper and the preacher would both meet theme to me because I 'get' the shopping as religion concept. Neither concept is breaking new grounds in creative thought. The higher vote would go to the better photo.
I would dnmc the Jedi picture, knowing full well it is a fictional religion. Having sold a lot of movie tickets doesn't validate it as challenge appropriate material.
No one would do research on the last picture. Those who recognized it would vote accordingly. Those (likely the majority) who did not, would probably consider it dnmc.
This is a very hashed out discussion here, but to perpetuate it... Thinking outside of the box doesn't mean casting challenge scope to the wind and making laughable arguments to justify a shot (like the Jedi thing). Thinking outside the box is finding a way to be original and creative within the bounds of the topic. First shot that comes to mind is Scalvert's picture of 'bio-tech' corn in the Science challenge. Clever, fit the theme and certainly out-of-the-box as far as being a novel approach to a mundane subject.
|
|
|
|
06/09/2007 10:26:43 AM · #4 |
| OK...but how is Jedi and a shopper really different. One is a fictional religion that some take quite seriously (Star Wars fans speak up), and the other is not really a religion but a just a term used to describe how much time is spent on shopping. |
|
|
|
06/09/2007 10:38:20 AM · #5 |
Thinking outside the box is a good thing. But may not be good for your scores.
Both views - that of submitting for a ribbon and that of participating for learning are equally valid, as is a third view which is taking pictures to express something.
What remains is simply a personal choice as to which of these things matters most to you as a photographer.
Ribbons do not indicate absolute photographic excellence because they are relative. Plenty of blue ribbon shots on here that suck.
i was viewing a portfolio of a friend the other day that he has stored up from negative scans of his SLR days in Russia and on the farm in eastern canada through the eighties and nineties. Most of the shots that caught my eye were far better than so man ribbon winners here, yet they wouldn't catch much better than a 5 here as they were scratchy, soft and grainy. I noticed this and told him that he was gifted with a special skill to make beautiful and intriguing images that have nothing to do with the quality of the equipment.
If that's the sort of comment that would warm your toes for a month, then shooting out of the box can be only good.
If that kind of comment would make you frustrated, then perhaps you would be better off browsing the challenge archives for ideas of shots to set up. |
|
|
|
06/09/2007 11:13:28 AM · #6 |
| If you want to get a ribbon, meet the challenge in as obvious a way as possible. That's all there is to it. Sure there are people who like out-of-the-box thinking, but they are outnumbered. |
|
|
|
06/09/2007 02:18:43 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by heavyj:
...If there were 2 equally beautiful pictures, one... of a preacher outside his church, the other... of a beautiful young woman with shopping bags outside of a department store. Both titled "My place of worship" or something more interesting, would you...
A. Vote both the same, since both are beautiful and fall within the category of religion.
B. Vote high on the preacher. However, vote lower on the shopping since it is less religious than the other picture.
C. Vote high on the preacher but higher on the shopping one since it's 'thinking outside the box'.
D. Vote high on the preacher and give the shopper a DNMC vote.
...If you take the same preacher picture and instead put it up against an equally well shot Jedi Knight, would you DNMC the Jedi. We've all heard the story (I think...if not, google it) about the cencus where people put their religion as 'Jedi' and the governement in England had to declare it an official religion. How true the story is, I'm not sure, but still religious in nature. So, would this also get your DNMC vote?
A. Yes, because it's not a real religion.
B. No, because it's far more interesting than a shopper.
Alright...so my last question is in relation to this picture....When unsure about a picture do you...
A. Vote it low thinking it's a DNMC
B. Skip it.
C. Do a little research before voting on it.
... |
Questions A - D (top):
In the end, I'd try to determine which of the two posessed the greater range (emotional/historical/cultural complex) and vote accordingly, regardless of anyone's perceived topicality.
Question A and B (middle) and A - C (bottom):
I don't hand out DNMC votes. The challenge topic serves to benefit the author's creativity. It doesn't benefit anyone, when it's subjected to the prejudicial glee of voters.
I would, however, do some research - for my own benefit and out of respect for the photographer.
Message edited by author 2007-06-09 14:19:17. |
|
|
|
06/09/2007 02:27:37 PM · #8 |
| Thinking outside the box is independent from meeting the challenge. You should try to do both. It annoys me when people enter a shot with a weak or obscure connection to the challenge and then complain about the voters not appreciating original ideas. DPCers LOVE original ideas (trust me on this), but that's NOT thinking outside the box- it's thinking outside the topic. |
|
|
|
06/09/2007 02:39:52 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Thinking outside the box is independent from meeting the challenge. You should try to do both. It annoys me when people enter a shot with a weak or obscure connection to the challenge and then complain about the voters not appreciating original ideas. DPCers LOVE original ideas (trust me on this), but that's NOT thinking outside the box- it's thinking outside the topic. |
Very well said...
One should also not discount visual impact. A photo with great visual impact that is more on the fringe of conventional thinking will likely score better than a weak visual presentation that is spot on topic.
|
|
|
|
06/09/2007 02:52:17 PM · #10 |
I based my "Religion" entry on a verse from a famous Anglican hymn: "All things bright and beautiful, all creatures great and small, all things wise and wonderful, the Lord God made them all."
The challenge topic was "Religion", the challenge description said to show us "what you believe". I definitely believe the above; the Lord God made them all.
The image was slapped with several DNMC-type comments. So it goes. It was just a little ways out of the box, if at all, IMHO.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/09/2007 03:03:04 PM · #11 |
From my observation, if someone is going for anywhere in the top 10 (and specifically the top 3), they aren't in it to learn per see. They have already done a certain amount of their homework... ie they have a good grasp of lighting, exposure, composition, depth of field, focus and all the other technical aspects of a winning image. And they have studied how the people vote on challenges. Unless they have a really really unique image that came out very well in spite of not knowing anything, most of the winners seem to have a good idea of what they are doing. How many times has one of the top three been someone that just picked up a camera and hasn't had any training or not done a lot of learning in one form or another? I'm sure there has been someone that never touched a camera in their life, got handed one to hold for a minute while the owner tied their shoe laces and took a award winning shot. Life's like that sometimes. LOL!
Now those that are trying to learn, or need to learn even if they don't think they do, are probably going to fall in the bottom 50% to 70%. Those in the next 25% are those that are getting close but still lack some technical ability or follow through on their idea. There are always going to be those that bounce back and forth depending on an idea or luck but I think it's those that have already learned a lot that are consistantly in the upper percentage score wise.
But I suspect that those that win consistantly or get up in the top 10 aren't there just because they are lucky in everything they do.
Mike
Message edited by author 2007-06-09 15:04:03.
|
|
|
|
06/09/2007 03:03:06 PM · #12 |
I read the entire OT but none of the responses (yet) for two reasons: 1)I don't want to taint my response and 2) I'm lazy.
That being said, if two pictures are equally/comparably good technically, I'm prone to vote the more original one higher (ie shopper over priest). But I may not vote an 'out of the box' image higher if the subject just doesn't appeal to me (ie priest over exercising).
I also feel that titles are very important and can have a significant impact on how I perceive an image. A title can sometimes be more important that the image itself. If I don't 'get' an image, I usually just don't vote on it, period. You only have to vote on 20% of the images for the votes to count (I have voted on all images in a challenge before, as well). But if the image strikes me for some reason, any reason at all, I may come back to it and just study it. I may google it. I may also vote it lower than I would have if I had voted on it the first time around. It's a case by case thing for me.
I did not vote on this image, but I do understand its meaning. I think it may have done better if the writing were more visible or if there were something else within the frame to show that the picture is from a shrine in Japan. That may show viewers why they don't understand it which could in turn cause less confusion. They may just think 'oh, thats a picture representing a religion in Japan'.
Lastly, I love chess, it's fun. But I wouldn't call it a sport. There's all sorts of crap on MTV (music television) that isn't music.
Message edited by author 2007-06-09 15:04:20. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 12:20:17 PM · #13 |
I've come to the conclusion that it is very difficult to score well on something "outside the box". On the orignal question I would vote them both the same if they were equal in regards to technicals. If the challenge was more specific like rule of thirds, sports, double take, etc then I would bump up the one that specifically meets the challenge especially in an "out of the box" way (see scalver's reply). In vague challenges like religion there technically can be no DNMC. In my short time here on DPC I've seen very few truly DNMC photos and I think they all were going for brown. Edit to add that "Pure" and "Transitions" are the type of challenges IMHO that would be next to impossible to not meet the challenge. You really would have to try hard to not meet the challenge on those types IMO...(which is definately not close to the opinion of your average DPC voter I think).
I submitted "religion" as defined specifically in the Christian bible and a pretty good technical photo, but it scored very average. I was thinking outside of the box and got "averaged" for it  .
On "double take" I submitted a very boreing photo that couldn't be voted down for DNMC (IE thinking Inside the box) and it scored pretty high.  Contrast that with a teammate's photo (evanH)  . His photo was "out of the box" and in my opinion should have scored much higher than my boreing photo.
If you want high scores (but not ribbon winners) shoot boring technically good photos that 100% meet the challenge...if you want average scores shoot technically good photos that are "Outside the box" but may stretch the meening of the challenge. If you want ribbons shoot technically good photos that are outside the box but still meet the challenge 100%...(See scalvert's post) I haven't figured out how to do that!
Message edited by author 2007-06-12 12:25:20. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 12:38:27 PM · #14 |
Photography is all about vision. A picture is worth a 1000 words, so make sure its got plenty to say, because the picture needs your help talking to the audience, otherwise its going to st..st...stutter. What you see isn't always what the voters see, and thats where this site helps us all. Anyone can point at something and take a picture, but this site definately helps (or pushes, beats you into submission) in making our photos jump at people.
Religion is a hard topic no matter how much you want to stay in or out of the box because its something that you're raised with and the opinions are burned into your inner being. Same with politics. For those topics, I tend to think its hard to please anyone with beliefs that differ from yours.
For jason - comparing the 2 double take images, you might think your sunflowers are boring next to your teammates gun, and while the subjects themselves are spot on to what your thinking, the presentation is opposite. Your sunflower's color jumps out and holds you there, while the guns split attention and kind of blend into the rest of the picture. So for me, I would be drawn to the flowers more than the guns.
Ad i think scalvert summed it up nicely... Out of the box is fine, as long as its still in topic. Gonna try something for my transitions entry and I'll let ya know how it goes :) |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 12:38:32 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Thinking outside the box is independent from meeting the challenge. You should try to do both. It annoys me when people enter a shot with a weak or obscure connection to the challenge and then complain about the voters not appreciating original ideas. DPCers LOVE original ideas (trust me on this), but that's NOT thinking outside the box- it's thinking outside the topic. |
Very well said...
One should also not discount visual impact. A photo with great visual impact that is more on the fringe of conventional thinking will likely score better than a weak visual presentation that is spot on topic. |
Yes, very much so!
So much of what's presented as "outside of the box" thinking is just an excuse for rather conventional so-so stuff, and a pat on one's own back. A lot of what's presented as "outside of the box" really isn't, not at all. Outside of the box well done can scores quite well at DPC. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 01:24:43 PM · #16 |
A lot of what is being presented as 'Outside the Box' is actually a shoehorned image with a catchy title.
Presented well, the title should only enhance the presentation, not to explain how an image fits the challenge topic. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 01:40:02 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by heavyj:
I'm curious as to what EVERY member thinks. I have a series of questions regarding the challenges and how everyone thinks when voting considering this issue. Yes, this site should be used as a learning tool...but damn, who doesn't want a ribbon. So here's an attempt at understanding some of the voters.
Thinking out of the box: The last challenge was religion. If there were 2 equally beautiful pictures, one is of a preacher outside his church, the other is of a beautiful young woman with shopping bags outside of a department store. Both titled "My place of worship" or something more interesting, would you...
A. Vote both the same, since both are beautiful and fall within the category of religion.
B. Vote high on the preacher. However, vote lower on the shopping since it is less religious than the other picture.
C. Vote high on the preacher but higher on the shopping one since it's 'thinking outside the box'.
D. Vote high on the preacher and give the shopper a DNMC vote.
We've all heard the term 'I shop religiously' or something similar. If you haven't, you've never had a girlfriend or wife and are blessed with more money to spend on camera stuff. This obviously doesn't apply to all females. I would see the shopping picture as 'thinking out of the box'. I would vote the shopping picture a point higher for that extra effort in creativity. However, I understand that some will say "You can then apply that to anything...drinking, games, books, sports etc.' Of course...
For those that feel that the shopping picture is just a dumb attempt at getting a picture into the contest, or really is a DNMC, I ask this. If you take the same preacher picture and instead put it up against an equally well shot Jedi Knight, would you DNMC the Jedi. We've all heard the story (I think...if not, google it) about the cencus where people put their religion as 'Jedi' and the governement in England had to declare it an official religion. How true the story is, I'm not sure, but still religious in nature. So, would this also get your DNMC vote?
A. Yes, because it's not a real religion.
B. No, because it's far more interesting than a shopper.
Alright...so my last question is in relation to this picture. The importance of titles for the out of the box pictures. With this picture you'll notice the comment "Does nothing without title". Well, some pictures are obvious when it comes to the topic, a church, a priest, a nun...but how many people know about the religious meaning of tieing these pieces of paper as ways of turning bad fortunes into good? The picture sucks (I'm Canary's biggest critic, friends always are) The title helps push the, dare I say it, ignorant into maybe doing a little research before scoring it low to see whether or not there is a religious significance. Some scored it low because it's a bad picture, but there were several that just didn't see the 'religious aspect of it. There were pictures in the religion challenge that I wasn't sure about, didn't know. I gave no score to those unless I looked it up. A better example would be of my chess shot that got DNMC because people didn't think it was a sport. OK, there was no hand in it moving a piece...if that's why it got voted down, cool. If it's on ESPN, it's a sport. So, here's the question: When unsure about a picture do you...
A. Vote it low thinking it's a DNMC
B. Skip it.
C. Do a little research before voting on it.
I'm curious as to how many take the challenges as literal as possible, and how many like thinking outside the box. |
Here's the thing - there's no stepping outside the box in your example, but rather ignoring the box altogether. Religion is not necessary for worship in a modern context. People "worship" celebrities or drown their sorrows in department stores, but neither of these are going to be mistaken for "religion" despite the use of tongue-in-cheek religious jargon.
Likewise, religion is not required to do something religiously. You may jog religiously, but it has nothing to do with faith. You may faithfully wash and wax your car every Monday afternoon, but it has nothing to do with what you believe. Using rhetoric to force a DNMC photo into a Religion isn't thinking outside the box - it's ignoring the box altogether.
The topic is Religion. Not worship, not devotion, not obsession, and it doesn't matter what faith-flavored adverb you append to it.
And this comes from someone who is generally liberal and gives the benefit of the doubt to just about everything. But there IS a line.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2007 01:42:01 PM · #18 |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 01:48:42 PM · #19 |
| A picture can be worth 1000 words, but many have far less to say. The photographer has make sure that their image says at least that much and that what their image says relates to the topic without relying on words. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 02:07:53 PM · #20 |
To me neither of these is 'out of the box'. Both of them say 'Double Take' to me and I didn't even open the large image.
Maybe my box is just bigger than most. At least for this challenge anyway. ;o)
Message edited by author 2007-06-12 14:09:48. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 02:13:41 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
To me neither of these is 'out of the box'. Both of them say 'Double Take' to me and I didn't even open the large image.
Maybe my box is just bigger than most. At least for this challenge anyway. ;o) |
I agree with you - but I think a lot of people read the challenge that the objects had to be very similar, saying something like "a woman doing a cartwheel and a ferris wheel CANT be the same!!!!" |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 02:18:19 PM · #22 |
| In reguards to the prayers on a wire. Yes, a picture is worth a thousand words. This picture to me without the title doesn't tell me anything other than there is some cloth/paper on string. To someone who practices that religous belief it said a thousand words. It probably even spoke to them emotionally. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 03:00:19 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by ursula:
So much of what's presented as "outside of the box" thinking is just an excuse for rather conventional so-so stuff, and a pat on one's own back. A lot of what's presented as "outside of the box" really isn't, not at all. Outside of the box well done can scores quite well at DPC. |
Depending on the topic. Certain topics will never get very high scores when 'O.T.B.' thinking is applied. Especially: Religion, Politics and Nationality.
|
|
|
|
06/12/2007 03:47:39 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by bassbone:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
To me neither of these is 'out of the box'. Both of them say 'Double Take' to me and I didn't even open the large image.
Maybe my box is just bigger than most. At least for this challenge anyway. ;o) |
I agree with you - but I think a lot of people read the challenge that the objects had to be very similar, saying something like "a woman doing a cartwheel and a ferris wheel CANT be the same!!!!" |
... and the topic description doesn't even say objects. It says subjects.
I think voters went as far as thinking that each subject had to be tangible as well. |
|
|
|
06/12/2007 04:01:27 PM · #25 |
Why even consider if thinking outside the box is "a good idea"?
What are the challenges about?
1. Winning ribbon or get a high score, getting lots of faves, please the voters, be clear and obvious, maybe even clichee in the challenge-description
2. Enjoy the (creative) process of making the photo, grow every time taking a photo for a challenge, giving yourself a pat on the shoulders because you made something that came outside of your heart, and not to please voters (see nr. 1)
I'd go for 2. |
|
