I do agree with you to a point, but I'm also proud of some decent results with blatantly 'off-topic' shots - a sunset entered in the sports challenge, and most notably my science entry. Voters are easily distracted by pretty lights :P
I don't disregard the challenge topic, but I don't always stick to it in the way this thread insists we should.
Experimentation is good, how else do we expect to grow in our skills? But some people, week in and week out, submit any old thing to the challenges, and of those any old thing shots, it seems we are getting more and more quick 'snapshots' that don't have anything to do with the theme of the challenge. It's all those shots that are pushing the challenges to 300+ images. That's a lot of our time to wade through them just to find the few hidden gems that have the potential for ribboning.
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by crabappl3:
I am human too, ...
Of course I'm only messing : )
I do agree with you to a point, but I'm also proud of some decent results with blatantly 'off-topic' shots - a sunset entered in the sports challenge, and most notably my science entry. Voters are easily distracted by pretty lights :P
I don't disregard the challenge topic, but I don't always stick to it in the way this thread insists we should.
I have finally finished voting on all the submissions in this challenge. After going back and reviewing them all, I can only find about 30 or so that do not fit Still Life (ie landscapes, portraits and pet shots- although I can see why they were submitted as the challenge was taken literally instead of looking further and readin the description). However, after the posts on about page 4 of this thread about not understanding another site's Still Life winners, I can see why so many of you think the vast majority of the submissions in this challenge are off topic. A lot of you seem to have a very narrow view of what a still life photo is. I do that type of still life day in and day out as part of my job (advertising and product photography) and when I saw this challenge I wanted to go in the other direction with my submission. Now, mine isn't perfect as I am new to the whole digital world and am still figuring out how to work this camera. Some of the things I take for granted with my film camera are a lot harder to achieve with my digital... for instance lighting. that is why I joined this site... to submit photos to a challenge for fun and get constructive comments from other users who have more digital experience then I. I have yet, however, to get any such comments in regards to technique. My Alone submission is a good example... I know what is wrong with it... tell me how to fix it! Although, in another way it is a bad example as I uploaded the wrong copy of the stupid thing (was trying to figure out EXIF info and didn't know I lost all that when I cropped in PSP so I cropped in a couple other programs to find which ones kept the info and wound up uploading one of those hasty cropped images instead of the intended copy).
Anyway, in regards to entering images that you know won't do well, had I realized that nothing short of a perfectly staged studio still life was acceptable, I wouldn't have entered the image I did. I stupidly thought that any Still Life photo whether a found(as my professor calls them)one or a studio one was sufficient.
Now, in regards to voting based on whether an image meets the challenge or not, if meeting the challenge to perfection is so important, why can't you recommend a photo for disqualification based on it not meeting the challenge? I think that would accomplish a couple of things:
1) weeding out the off topic shots so there aren't so many to vote on
and
2) giving some with a narrow view of certain topics a better idea of what is considered acceptable.
Obviously, for things such as Grace and Sacred Places, this would be difficult, but for things like Still Life and Motion it would be fairly straight forward.
...I can see why so many of you think the vast majority of the submissions in this challenge are off topic. A lot of you seem to have a very narrow view of what a still life photo is.
Maybe I do, but the challenge details said something like "This is a classic subject for many forms of art." So my interpretation is that I should provide as close an image to the classical form as possible. After all, that's what they asked for. I was creative and had fun. So I met all 3 criteria for the details... and to boot, I have a score 6+.
...if meeting the challenge to perfection is so important, why can't you recommend a photo for disqualification based on it not meeting the challenge? I think that would accomplish a couple of things:
1) weeding out the off topic shots so there aren't so many to vote on
and
2) giving some with a narrow view of certain topics a better idea of what is considered acceptable.
Obviously, for things such as Grace and Sacred Places, this would be difficult, but for things like Still Life and Motion it would be fairly straight forward.
It would not be straightforward at all -- it is completely subjective and a lose-lose porposition for whomever is forced to make the decision.
Either:
1. challenge definitions can (should) be written more precisely, allowing little wiggle room for people to shoot anything but (e.g.) a bowl a fruit as well as they can, or
2. the persnickety voters can accept the fact that the challenge topics are left deliberately vague and "subject to interpretation" for the very purpose of encouraging a variety of non-traditional shots and not just 300 competitors for the cover of Good Houskeeping.
I gave out 55 1s in this challenge. I usually give out 1 or 2 at the most. What a disaster this challenge has been... and what a chore it was scoring them all this time. I hope everyone can be more on-topic the next time, and I hope the challenges are made clear to everybody in future.
3 ribbons are awarded each challenge. Shouldn't those who enter, be entering for the chance at one of them?
All right, I just wanted to pipe up on one point here, for the sake of my own sanity. For the record, I'm in the camp that agrees whole heartedly that submitted challenge photographs should meet challenge criteria. The whole point lies in being asked to do something within a framework so that one can broaden technique within that framework.
Having said that, I've been here for only a little while, and I *know* I'm no where near the photographer that many here are. I'm here to get better. Consequently, I disagree with your "we're here to win! Get that ribbon!" attitude. I honestly would be astounded if I ever got a ribbon, but I am pleased that my scores have improved. When I take a photograph for DPC, I try to take the best one I possibly can within the challenge criteria. To flex my creativity and evolving technical skills. I do NOT take it expressly to WIN at all costs. If I did that week in and week out, I'd becone so depressed I'd never last a month here. There are ALWAYS better photographers and better pictures. I strive for personal best, not the best as outlined by voters here.
