Some will say this gets a DNMC, but I call poppycock. Thanks to JustCaree for her constructive criticism. Anyone else have an opinion why this failed so miserably?
1/125 of a second isn't considered a long exposure, I guess. (Of course, voters didn't know what the shutter speed was exactly). I think you would have needed much more blurriness for it to have gained a higher score.
I gave it a vote on the higher end, as I liked the perspective, but I really didn't expect it to do too well overall. I suspect that it might have been deemed snapshotty, and maybe not a long enough exposure to satisfy some definitions of the topic.
Thanks for the inputs all. I agree with all of the compositional critiques.
Regarding the DNMC, I know it doesn't matter, but I have to say it again:
A "normal" exposure FOR THIS SHOT would have frozen the scooter. By using a ND filter, I was able to "use a longer than normal exposure to create the impact of [my] image." What am I missing?
Thanks for the inputs all. I agree with all of the compositional critiques.
Regarding the DNMC, I know it doesn't matter, but I have to say it again:
A "normal" exposure FOR THIS SHOT would have frozen the scooter. By using a ND filter, I was able to "use a longer than normal exposure to create the impact of [my] image." What am I missing?
- Alex
Forgive me, but I just don't think of 1/125 as long exposure..
Sure you've got motion blur, and it does give the image impact.. But.. This wasn't a motion blur challenge.
I know you disagree, but I think the majority of people around here start to consider it a long exposure when it looks like it was exposed in 1+ second range..
FWIW: I have had that debate before. The description of the challenge is apparently totally open for the user's interpretation. I still do not understand what 'point of color' means for example, and this question was shot down so fast I thought I had asked for ownership of Greece or something ;-);-)
Originally posted by Alex_Europa:
So, just to be clear, we're ignoring the instructions of the challenge and imparting our own interpretation of what's in black and white?
ETA: Cory, thanks for your input. I appreciate it, even if I don't agree.
FWIW: I have had that debate before. The description of the challenge is apparently totally open for the user's interpretation. I still do not understand what 'point of color' means for example, and this question was shot down so fast I thought I had asked for ownership of Greece or something ;-);-)
Then how can anyone give anyone else a DNMC vote?! That is the worst line of logic ever. (I know that's not YOUR logic. Please don't take this as shooting the messenger.)
Look, if you make the concept "longer than normal" relative to the circumstances of the shot, then all the night shots are DNMC 'cuz long exposures are normal at night, right? So it makes more sense to define "normal" as "in the hand-holdable range", or something like that. And by that metric, this isn't a real good example.
We can fuss back and forth about "ignoring the instructions of the challenge and imparting our own interpretation of what's in black and white", but sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose, and I don't see anything in the way the challenge description is phrased that gives *your* interpretation any clear precedence over the other one. I'm not surprised the voters leaned the way they did.
Look, if you make the concept "longer than normal" relative to the circumstances of the shot, then all the night shots are DNMC 'cuz long exposures are normal at night, right? So it makes more sense to define "normal" as "in the hand-holdable range", or something like that. And by that metric, this isn't a real good example.
We can fuss back and forth about "ignoring the instructions of the challenge and imparting our own interpretation of what's in black and white", but sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose, and I don't see anything in the way the challenge description is phrased that gives *your* interpretation any clear precedence over the other one. I'm not surprised the voters leaned the way they did.
For whatever that's worth...
R.
True or False.
The fact that I shot this at 1/125, vice 1/1000, created the impact of the shot?
Look, if you make the concept "longer than normal" relative to the circumstances of the shot, then all the night shots are DNMC 'cuz long exposures are normal at night, right? So it makes more sense to define "normal" as "in the hand-holdable range", or something like that. And by that metric, this isn't a real good example.
We can fuss back and forth about "ignoring the instructions of the challenge and imparting our own interpretation of what's in black and white", but sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose, and I don't see anything in the way the challenge description is phrased that gives *your* interpretation any clear precedence over the other one. I'm not surprised the voters leaned the way they did.
For whatever that's worth...
R.
True or False.
The fact that I shot this at 1/125, vice 1/1000, created the impact of the shot?
- Alex
Alex: Although I do understand your sentiments about a cool idea not scoring well in the challenge, I foresee a can of worms being opened.
Knowing Robert (and others who responded before), may I suggest you please look at the essence of what everyone is saying, take away something that you would want to improve when you take this shot the next time, and also understand that you cannot please every voter?
Trust me each one of us have had such moments on DPC, and in my short experience here, the best thing is to take the positive aspect of it and move on to a better entry next time, or you will always be stuck endlessly debating in the forums, and will have lil time left for getting a ribbon or favorite worthy image:-)
Great image. But then again, leaving the definition of 'long exposure' to the voters, I deem at least 1 second of exposure time to cause a visual effect worthy enough of a positive note.
OTOH, the voters would have no clue of how long the exposure time was by just looking at an image. So all other things considered equal, the 'awe' factor of an image would win on DPC.
Great image. But then again, leaving the definition of 'long exposure' to the voters, I deem at least 1 second of exposure time to cause a visual effect worthy enough of a positive note.
But why the arbitrary standard? So a 30 second exposure of a static subject is OK? But a 1/8 sec exposure with a dramatic effect isn't?
Originally posted by Prash:
OTOH, the voters would have no clue of how long the exposure time was by just looking at an image. So all other things considered equal, the 'awe' factor of an image would win on DPC.
Not "would win," did win. He ribboned with that shot.
Great image. But then again, leaving the definition of 'long exposure' to the voters, I deem at least 1 second of exposure time to cause a visual effect worthy enough of a positive note.
But why the arbitrary standard? So a 30 second exposure of a static subject is OK? But a 1/8 sec exposure with a dramatic effect isn't?
Alright boy. You were warned.
[1] Now bring me a definition of long exposure that talks about a specific duration of time, and we will talk.
[2] Regardless of whether you opened the shutter for 1 second or 10 seconds, your entry lacks the visual appeal that would engage the viewer and make them rate it high. You can only force the voters to rate your image high: by creating engaging images. This one didn't. DrAchoo's did. No one had any idea what exposure time you used at the time of voting. The image was judged solely on it;s visual merit. It didn't work, sorry. Mine didn't work either. I got the message, and will try better next time.
So learn how to improve, accept the shortcomings, and move on. Alright?
First off, calling me "boy" is rude; especially since you know nothing about me. Just as you are entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to question it.
Originally posted by Prash:
[1] Now bring me a definition of long exposure that talks about a specific duration of time, and we will talk.
That is precisely my point. There ISN'T specific duration, so what caused you to choose 1 second for yours? You ARE welcome to your opinion, I am simply trying to discuss WHY that's your opinion. That's what a DISCUSSION forum is for.
Originally posted by Prash:
[2] Regardless of whether you opened the shutter for 1 second or 10 seconds, your entry lacks the visual appeal that would engage the viewer and make them rate it high. You can only force the voters to rate your image high: by creating engaging images. This one didn't. DrAchoo's did. No one had any idea what exposure time you used at the time of voting. The image was judged solely on it;s visual merit.
I agree that it didn't have the visual appeal, but that's NOT what the discussion was about until DrAchoo said it. You said that it was judged solely on its visual merit; we BOTH know that some people voted low primarily because they did not think it met the challenge.
Originally posted by Prash:
So learn how to improve, accept the shortcomings, and move on. Alright?
I actually did that right after DrAchoo's reply, I even said so. I then moved on to discussing your post about 1 second.
