Just a quick note to all those "out of the box" people:
I did not mark your photo down for being "different" or "out of the box." I marked it down for being out of focus, boring, poorly photoshopped (notice I said "poorly" not "over"), so dark or so bright or so weird that I couldn't get a clue what I was looking at. I am Christian, but I'm not against nudes, don't vote down for gun shots, shots with contraceptive devices, etc. I may not add points for those, but I don't take points off. It may just be that your photo is not "arsty", it's just not good.
Of course "good" is a relative term, so you could take me for task for even that I suppose. I will say that something that is "different" or "creative" when done well will certainly score higher than the vast majority of typical shots. It may not win a ribbon, but it will score well.
Will this stop folks from whining about scores? No way. :)
Just a quick note to all those "out of the box" people:
I did not mark your photo down for being "different" or "out of the box." I marked it down for being out of focus, boring, poorly photoshopped (notice I said "poorly" not "over"), so dark or so bright or so weird that I couldn't get a clue what I was looking at. I am Christian, but I'm not against nudes, don't vote down for gun shots, shots with contraceptive devices, etc. I may not add points for those, but I don't take points off. It may just be that your photo is not "arsty", it's just not good.
Of course "good" is a relative term, so you could take me for task for even that I suppose. I will say that something that is "different" or "creative" when done well will certainly score higher than the vast majority of typical shots. It may not win a ribbon, but it will score well.
Will this stop folks from whining about scores? No way. :)
However, I just wanted to rant - so I did.
Sounds like you got hit pretty hard with some PM's from individual(s) that didn't like your comments?
Just a quick note to all those "out of the box" people:
I did not mark your photo down for being "different" or "out of the box." I marked it down for being out of focus, boring, poorly photoshopped (notice I said "poorly" not "over"), so dark or so bright or so weird that I couldn't get a clue what I was looking at. I am Christian, but I'm not against nudes, don't vote down for gun shots, shots with contraceptive devices, etc. I may not add points for those, but I don't take points off. It may just be that your photo is not "arsty", it's just not good.
Of course "good" is a relative term, so you could take me for task for even that I suppose. I will say that something that is "different" or "creative" when done well will certainly score higher than the vast majority of typical shots. It may not win a ribbon, but it will score well.
Will this stop folks from whining about scores? No way. :)
However, I just wanted to rant - so I did.
Sounds like you got hit pretty hard with some PM's from individual(s) that didn't like your comments?
Nope...not at all. I've never been bashed for any of my comments. I'm referring to forum threads, mainly. "I'm being penalized for thinking outside the box." I'm not the most creative photographer, and I'm pretty average with the scores I've received, so I'm no expert. I just got a little tired of hearing that with every new challenge as the scores start to come in. I don't expect it to change anything. That's why it's in "rant" :)
After reading a thread where no less than 5 people complained that their score was low due to being "outside the box" or others affirming that belief, I have to say, I agree. Some of the best shots in these challenges are way outside the box, but they still meet the challenge. The difference? They are good pictures.
If your picture lacks in quality in some way, the score may be more reflective of that than your subject matter.
outside of the box
does not includes everything you think of first
light on white - eggs, light bulbs, animals
or currently
lines - power lines, gutar strings, blinds, lines of powered 'sugar'
though some are tastefully done ./.
maybe thats a good "challenge" ... "outside of the box"
that way we can argue about which image is inside or not ...
my guess is things that are people think of first are more likely to win
- providing the images are good -
people really do like their "boxes" (or is that pigeon holes ?)
for the most part - i try make/show images that make people think
more amusing are the people who don't 'get it'
i think their 'box' is smaller than those who do
but - of course - that is my opinion ....
Out-of-the-box is like my color shot in Ansel Adams challenge, the only one. But I thought it was funny being the only one, and which met my personality perfectly. I know the shot wasn't as low as rated, just funny that folks though AA was only a b&W person. I thought my contrasts were in the style of AA, and especially adding a bit of moon too. I always try to do something that few other would not do, except when I'm trying to compare my work with others to see how I do in similar subjects. I'm to right brained to follow exact rules if there's an out.
Out-of-the-box is like my color shot in Ansel Adams challenge...
That might be a stretch. When the Challenge description says, "...this famous B&W photographer," you can pretty much bet that anything color will bomb. Even though Ansel did shoot color, many people would interpret that as not reading the assignment rather than thinking out of the box. Take out the 1 and 2 votes that resulted and you did pretty well. Given your skill with landscapes, I'm surprised that you would avoid the expected B&W.
...people who didn't read the assignment properly :D
There's a proper way? Hmm... I don't see too many people interpreting the "style of this B&W photographer" (paraphrased) to mean a color photo. Though obviously one did. ;-)
Style is what I was interpreting, since it said in the style of B&W photographer. To me B&W was a discription of AA's most famous works, my interpretation was that style was what we were supposed to shoot and I did. I tried to do the shot in the style, so I guess I miss interpreted what was obvious to everyone else "B&W". We all know he did some color. If the DPC Leaders would have placed an AA shot in color, instead of B&W, would the shot have been zapped by voters? Most likely!
...people who didn't read the assignment properly :D
There's a proper way? Hmm... I don't see too many people interpreting the "style of this B&W photographer" (paraphrased) to mean a color photo. Though obviously one did. ;-)
The only proper way of reading that I know of is to read what is written and not to add your own bits to it - that is where personal interpretation comes in, but it's not reading. : )
"Take a photograph in the style of this famous black & white photographer" This is what the challenge said. Now tell me I miss read it. "In the style", it didn't say in B&W, B&W was a description of AA, or did I really miss read it again. lol
If the DPC Leaders would have placed an AA shot in color, instead of B&W, would the shot have been zapped by voters? Most likely!
Agreed... partly because the description specifically mentioned B&W. If the description just said "this famous photographer," then you'd have a better chance.
Originally posted by bod:
The only proper way of reading that I know of is to read what is written and not to add your own bits to it - that is where personal interpretation comes in, but it's not reading. : )
Er... without personal interpretation, I'm not sure which side of the debate you're on. Isn't color adding more bits (literally) than using B&W to emulate the style of a B&W photographer? Few people would identify Herb Ritts with landscapes or Anne Geddes with a shot of driftwood, capiche?
"Take a photograph in the style of this famous black & white photographer" This is what the challenge said. Now tell me I miss read it. "In the style", it didn't say in B&W, B&W was a description of AA, or did I really miss read it again. lol
When a challenge description is posted, it's not just the photographers that have to read it; the voters read it too.
Now, the challenge was to emulate the "style" of Ansel Adams. He had a very recognizable "style", and it's called "zone system". It's a B/W style. That he occasionally or often made images in color is neither here nor there; of all famous photographers I can think of, with the single exception of cartier-Bresson, he's the most recognizable for his "style", which is why he was chosen for this challenge. If you asked 1000 knowledgeable amateur photographers to define Ansel Adams' style, I'd bet 990 of them would answer "damatic B/W images with rich blacks" or some variation of same. Most would probably include "landscape" in their answer as well.
So, sorry, I don't see entering a colour image as "outside the box" here; I think of outside the box as a creative leap, not a contradiction of predictable responses. Of the high finishers, one of them actually WAS outside the box in terms of this challenge; that would be the horses, which in NO way resembled an actual ansel adams image except to some degree in the richness of the tonalities. The subject matter, rendering, and the composition of the photo remind one more of Heida than of Ansel. Indeed, the photographer said as much in the comments section of that image; that this was an attempt to be heida-esque.
Now tell me I miss read it. ....B&W was a description of AA
I've said before that all challenge interpretations are valid, but in this context, I think they've basically defined Ansel's style as B&W. You shot a very good landscape, and I think you know as well as I do that a good grayscale version would have scored higher. You don't get THAT many 1,2,3 votes for a good photo unless your interpretation was not shared by many.
Isn't color adding more bits (literally) than using B&W to emulate the style of a B&W photographer?
You either don't understand or choose to ignore my point. The description did not say that your entry must be in Black and White. Therefore a colour entry is neither adding or taking anything away from the challenge description.
That, plus the fact that Adams apparently shot in colour too.
Originally posted by scalvert:
Few people would identify Herb Ritts with landscapes or Anne Geddes with a shot of driftwood, capiche?
Which has nothing to do with colour or black and white does it?
I repeat, just to make sure it sinks in this time ... the desription did not say that your entry must be in black and white. That is my point.
...the description did not say that your entry must be in black and white. That is my point.
Okayyyy... nor did it literally say that your photo must look like an Ansel Adams shot, but I think most people understood that to be the case. Some photographers are known for their specialties, and that's what the voters will interpret as their style...
Herb Ritts = celebrity portraits
Anne Geddes = studio shots of babies
William Wegman = posed Weimariner dogs
Ansel Adams = rich B&W photos with deep depth of field
It's a pretty safe bet that ALL of these photographers took other types of images, but most people wouldn't recognize them as that artist's work.
As I've said on many occcasions, you are free to interpret a challenge any way you like. However if your interpretation runs counter to most voters' understanding, then ones and twos will swarm like gnats around your update button. ;-)
As I've said on many occcasions, you are free to interpret a challenge any way you like. However if your interpretation runs counter to most voters' understanding, then ones and twos will swarm like gnats around your update button. ;-)
But I never argued that point.
You stated that a photographer who entered a colour shot must have misread the challenge. Misinterpreted maybe. Misjudged the "common" interpretation for sure. Misread, no.
Heck, I don't know how I've even got here now - it was suppsed to be a joke, hence the --> :D
You stated that a photographer who entered a colour shot must have misread the challenge. Misinterpreted maybe. Misjudged the "common" interpretation for sure. Misread, no.
Misread...Misinterpreted. Doesn't matter. Just splitting hairs here. In this case the photographer knew exactly what he was doing and intentionally submitted a color photo to be "different"/"outside-the-box". If a high score was the goal then it was a choice made in error. I think it was to be different and controversial (look at AA thread postings during the challenge).
I would bet that same photographer is having a blast watching this thread erode into a discussion that's already been hashed out extensively.
