Well, I've entered a few challenges now. I've learned tons! Thank you all very much.
One thing I've noticed is the more "artsy" less obvious shots tend to rank lower.
I've decided that rather than getting all bent out of shape that people aren't voting on my shots as I THINK they should. I'll take the critiscm where appropriate and shoot towards getting at least a 5 overall score.
Which I think given my "eye" will probably be very good.
I agree with Jacko, I only submit things I like. And when I get a comment from someone that says great image or I really like it, well then that’s a nice little boost. I try not to think about scores when Im looking for a challenge photo, and although I do tend to click the Update stats button a lot, Im really just looking for the comments.
I am also putting photos on here I feel meet the challenge that I like..not necessarily for high scores. I figure if someone (just one even!) else likes it then I have accomplished my goal. I am not out for mass appreciation, just showing photo's of what I interpret the challenge to be with my own slant on it I guess you could say.
I posted what I thought (and still do) was my best ever photograph. Needless to say, voting on it started at 4.2 and hasn't moved up much. hehe. Jacko's right, we should strive to please our self first. There's a message in there: If we make ourselves our fiercest critics, we'll do much better.
I'm curious about a few examples of shots that are "more "artsy" less obvious" that got a lower rank. (I'm not necessarily being contentious, just go with it...) Lots of people post with this complaint, without posting specific examples. I know that every challenge there are a handfull of shots (not necessarily the same shots) that everyone feels deserved to be higher. My guess is the shots you are talking about will mostly fall into one of two (or maybe both) categories: interesting, clever or "artsy" takes on the challenge that had technical flaws, or interesting, clever or "artsy" takes on the challenge that didn't effectively communicate the idea to the viewer. (For the sake of not pointing fingers at whose "fault" that is, and hopefully keeping this focused on the photographs, I'll contend that communication is a two-way process, and that that failure to communicate could be blamed on either side - the photographer or the viewer.)
Hopefully this can be a friendly debate without too much venom....
ScottK,
This is about as artsy as I ever got on DPC. It was for the challenge "without the hand of man", I was shooting for a shot thatdidn't show anything that man had made. Like a truck,man,train, clocks, etc, and got slammed for using "food color". Hell I could have used juice for all anybody really knew. Any way here it is.
ScottK,
This is about as artsy as I ever got on DPC. It was for the challenge "without the hand of man", I was shooting for a shot thatdidn't show anything that man had made. Like a truck,man,train, clocks, etc, and got slammed for using "food color". Hell I could have used juice for all anybody really knew. Any way here it is.
I like that pic! Artsy but suggestive of more than just a photo. Indicates chaos of many colors to me...colors combining together to form a solid (somewhere down the road in a billion years or so based on the big bang theory) Would another critic of this got what I just said out of this picture? Or am I just nuts and losing my mind?
I only submit when I think I have a 'good' picture, and by 'good' I mean both that I like it, and that I think it's mainstream enough to avoid being too badly mauled.
I consider any entry that gets above 5 to be good so this week I am a very happy bunny sitting at a fraction about 5.5 - if it can creep up another 0.16 (a man can dream!) then it'll be my second highest and I'll be grinning like a maniac.
So everyone go and give a 10 to it - it's the one with .....
It was my first challenge entry, and I tried to approach it with the attitude of:
If this picture were not in a contest and viewed by itself, would ROUND be one of the things that crossed the viewer's mind? (and that is how I gave points in judging too, assuming the photo was technically good).
I recevied mostly positive feedback... A few suggestions on depth of field and focus that were helpful, but after viewing the dozens of different DOF shots I tried, this was the one I liked the most. Anyway, I came in 195th place... or 66th percentile. I wasn't expecting to win or anything, but had hoped to score a LITTLE better!!
That said though... I had fun, and I completely acknowledge that my opinion is not always going to be the same as others... Some of the round entries that I liked and voted well on actually finished out the challenge below mine... Willem's winning subway-tunnel entry was one of the two that I gave a 10 to though, so I can at least take a little comfort in knowing that I agreed with folks on that one!
My two curent challenge entries are wayyyy less abstract, and scoring much better, so I will probably try to keep going in that direction.
Most important though: I had fun and I learned a thing or two.
I'm curious about a few examples of shots that are "more "artsy" less obvious" that got a lower rank. (I'm not necessarily being contentious, just go with it...) Lots of people post with this complaint, without posting specific examples. I know that every challenge there are a handfull of shots (not necessarily the same shots) that everyone feels deserved to be higher. My guess is the shots you are talking about will mostly fall into one of two (or maybe both) categories: interesting, clever or "artsy" takes on the challenge that had technical flaws, or interesting, clever or "artsy" takes on the challenge that didn't effectively communicate the idea to the viewer. (For the sake of not pointing fingers at whose "fault" that is, and hopefully keeping this focused on the photographs, I'll contend that communication is a two-way process, and that that failure to communicate could be blamed on either side - the photographer or the viewer.)
Hopefully this can be a friendly debate without too much venom....
Ok,,, I'll respond.. and again without any ire or trying to one up or diss anyone.
Let's take the Temperature challenge,, I didn't enter that one I was out of town so have no vested interest in trying to get my shot placed differently.
I think the one that won, while a good photograph and most definitely appropriate to the challenge, was not as good as "Fire and Ice" which met the challenge criteria along with also creating an emotional tension I didn't feel with the winner.
Yes, there is tension w/ the winner, but I didn't feel it as intensely as "Fire and Ice". It's all very subjective, I know. "Fire and Ice" was much more personal.
And maybe that is what I look for, along with originality of subject, or if it is a cliche subject, orginality of vision. (How the subject is being viewed by the photographer)
One thing is for sure, even if you submit a photo YOU like and that MEETS the challenge, you will still get "1's" and "2's" when the votes are counted. GO FIGURE! Something different "artsy" is always good if you are prepared the the scores of those who just don't get it!
