DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 
Challenge Entries
Portfolio Images
Quiet morning
Quiet morning
2mccs


Photograph Information Photographer's Comments
Challenge: Impressionism III (Standard Editing)
Collection: Portfolio
Camera: Apple iPhone 7+
Date: Oct 28, 2016
Aperture: 1.8
ISO: 100
Shutter: 1/4
Date Uploaded: Oct 30, 2016



[Nov. 11th, 2016 08:40:14 PM]

Here is the original with no editing.

Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1190460.jpg

The photo was taken with the iphone 7 plus using the 10x zoom in low light from a moving car. When all of those are just right the images have a thick heavy noise that gives them a "painterly" look.

The only post processing was increase saturation and increase contrast.

Statistics
Place: 26 out of 64
Avg (all users): 5.4912
Avg (commenters): 6.0000
Avg (participants): 5.7222
Avg (non-participants): 5.0952
Views since voting: 159
Views during voting: 112
Votes: 57
Comments: 7
Favorites: 0


Please log in or register to add your comments!

AuthorThread
01/11/2017 11:33:49 AM
Originally posted by pointandshoot:

It is your obnoxious presentation, not your comment, that is offensive. A ‘good’ photographer understands the technical details. An ‘excellent’ photographer has forgotten them. A ’soul-less’ photographer judges the worth of a photo by them.

These irrelevant generalisations don't suffice to hide the utter nonsense of your primary statement.

None of what I said has been in any way "obnoxious". After taking the trouble to vote on a contest (on a site that has rapidly diminsihing voter numbers), I have subsequently taken the trouble to clearly and politely comment, explaining my vote - something that, as I'm sure you're aware, increasingly few participants of the site do these days. Receiving this kind of information is something that I personally value very highly on my own work, from other voters. I have subsequently returned to the discussion to answer some snide remarks, and explain precisely why what I said was appropriate, technically correct, and why I stand behind it - again, clearly and politely.

As for the discussion on why I chose to rate images low in this contest that relied entirely on digital effects, that was well covered in the forum post that 2mccs also participated in at the time of the contest, and doesn't need to be rehashed here.

The fact is it's thin skinned critiqueophobes such as yourself who have driven the site into its current sorry state, where everyone is terrified of explaining their vote, or sharing the faults they found in the photograph with its creator - for fear of having some sanctimonious commenter attack them in the comments with some semi-ad-hominem generalisation rubbish, as you've done, about what a "soul-less photographer" does, because they have found fault in yours or someone else's image. The fact also is that most photographers come to this site to learn and improve their skills, and attitudes such as yours are directly interfering with them receiving the very critique they need.

I don't intend to bow to that sort of rubbish from you and others like you, but I do intend to call it out when I see it, because it's important that everyone here who complains about the current commentless state of the site is aware - it's exactly people like you who have brought it to this state.
01/07/2017 12:35:55 PM
Originally posted by riot:

I'm sorry if this offends you, but I stand entirely by my comment - this photograph is nothing at all without reliance on an entirely digital effect.


It is your obnoxious presentation, not your comment, that is offensive. A ‘good’ photographer understands the technical details. An ‘excellent’ photographer has forgotten them. A ’soul-less’ photographer judges the worth of a photo by them.

Message edited by author 2017-01-07 13:07:47.
  Photographer found comment helpful.
01/07/2017 10:13:41 AM
Originally posted by mitalapo:

Originally posted by riot:

Relies on a photoshop filter to produce the majority of its value in meeting the challenge: 2.

broken preconceptions are gold.

This relies on the "digital zoom" feature of an iphone, which acts by blowing up the original image and tiling in new pixels in a bilateral blur, a "smart blur" effect; this is absolutely no different than a photoshop filter, the only change is that it's done by your phone's software instead of by photoshop. I'm sorry if this offends you, but I stand entirely by my comment - this photograph is nothing at all without reliance on an entirely digital effect.
11/14/2016 02:40:34 AM
Originally posted by riot:

Relies on a photoshop filter to produce the majority of its value in meeting the challenge: 2.

broken preconceptions are gold.
 


p.s. pretty damn helpful comment I argue.
  Photographer found comment helpful.
 Comments Made During the Challenge
11/13/2016 10:30:33 PM
the more ink the more light. 7
  Photographer found comment helpful.
11/13/2016 10:29:57 PM
good minimalism
  Photographer found comment helpful.
11/08/2016 04:22:01 PM
Relies on a photoshop filter to produce the majority of its value in meeting the challenge: 2.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2018 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 08/19/2018 12:43:56 PM EDT.