DPC is an open competition, so, best cameras´s owners have more possibilities against others. i propose to separate the competition by camera´s categories too
You can sort profiles and (I think results) by camera type.
I believe there exist several informal competitions for highest-ranking photos among owners of particular cameras -- check some of the old forum threads.
I think it is good that we have open competitions. People vote on the merits of the photo, not the name of the camera or photographer.
OK, I see that you are new. DO NOT OPEN THIS CAN OF WORMS!!!! This has been discussed a gazillion times before. It is not the camera that makes a photograph, it is the photographer. You can have the best camera there is in the market and still take crappy pictures. So, don't think that the people with better cameras score better.
Ok chiqui, the camera doesn´t make the photographer, but the final result and quality may a lot of shots in a gold frame if you own a good camera and lens, and the many professional equipement you have, the more possibilities of a really good result you keep, ando the better choice to get a ribbon
i personally use a comparitively crappy camera compared to the likes of the 10D militia and the like :)....but that makes me try harder imo.
I have a kick arse medium format camera thats gee whiz cool, and truth be told i miss working with it when i do these competitions...but i'm researching digital SLR's right now - and I will have one soon, but you CAN take cool pics with less is my point i guess. I don't want to be separated from the higher cam's...bring em on! =`)
It's generally been agreed upon that separating challenges into categories based on either photography skills or camera types is not a good idea. For one thing it would make things much more complicated. Most people find that competing with everyone else to be a great part of these challenges because it is very rewarding to score higher than someone who supposedly has more experience or a more advanced camera and hardware. Generally as a person's skills and experience grow they progressively upgrade to better or more advanced equipment. I think most people are realistic about where they are as compared to others and as long as they are progressing they are happy. Winning shots have been achieved from users of all skill levels and all types of cameras. This isn't an event like racing where you pretty much have to have the best of everything in order to win, in a photography challenge anyone can win. What helps is to be aware of what your particular camera can and can't do well and if you are staying within those limits you should be able to take vey successful photos.
You can sort profiles and (I think results) by camera type.
I believe there exist several informal competitions for highest-ranking photos among owners of particular cameras -- check some of the old forum threads.
I think it is good that we have open competitions. People vote on the merits of the photo, not the name of the camera or photographer.
Just a couple points. I'm all for open competition.
Ah, but is the camera make and model, and photographer name not hidden during votes. I would say it's also easier to get the lighting and focus just right with a high-end camera.
Any idea how you might go about sorting results by camera?
I have a 1.3MP three year old camera, my entire home studio setup consists of
1) 2 tablelamps with tungsten bulbs
2) 6 meters of black cloth (that explains my past two submissions ;)
3) colored poster papers
4) old tripod
5) 2 polariser filters (not used much)
Have accquired some old reflectors with clamps and plan to refurbish them. I have enjoyed scouring the photo studios and junk for reusable stuff and also setting up the home studio very much...
My scores for me are quite irrelevent BUT the comments I have recieved and the learning here is much more satisfactory than any other place. I use to think that unless I have a better camera I cannot do better photography BUT continuously hanging out here has changed that.
Yeah I did discover some minus points with the site but they are just as irrelevent as my scores.
What I've learned is that you've got to work within your camera's capabilities to score well. Setting up a shot to maximise your camera's capabilities isn't super difficult if you know your camera's limitations, and master them. There is, however, a fundamental difference in using a camera to score well, and using a camera to capture images which satisfy you photographically. There are two camps of people who trade up to 'better' cameras:
1. Those who have mastered their current camera and have specific needs which only a camera with that feature will meet.
2. Those who think that a more expensive camera will make them a better photographer.
A camera is a tool and is used for a specific application. A more expensive camera is only a better camera if it gets a shot that you couldn't otherwise. Context matters. A Pentax Optio is a better camera than a Canon 10D if you want to take snapshots in a nightclub, for example. You're going to get a photo which you wouldn't have otherwise.
More expensive cameras like DSLRs and high-end fixed lens cameras like the F7x7, E-20, 5700 etc. are equipped to deal with extremes better. They have higher ISO settings, bigger aperture ranges, faster fastest and slower slowest shutter speeds etc. In many situations, though, it's difficult to tell images from a point and shoot, and a more expensive machine. This is especially true when the photographer captures something which engages us emotionally rather than technically - where the subject's interest eclipses all technical aspects of a photograph.
I like competing against the big dogs, but it might be fun to have something like an annual competition where there are two classes for a challenge. One for previous ribbon winners and one for people who have never won a ribbon.
The winners of the previous ribbon winner category would get Gold, Silver, and Bronze medals while the never won a DPC ribbon category would just get regular ribbons.
Kind of a best of winners and best of non-winners thing...
I don't understand why setting a camera to auto mode evens anything out and I really don't understand how that helps anyone become a better photographer.
I won a compo witha Fuji Finepix 2800z (retailing at about 150 pounds now), and have just upgraded to a new Oly E20.
To me, I find this harder to use - I ahve to think about the apature - shutter speed and ISO. Where as befiore, I just pointed the camera and pressed the button.
So perhaps the people with high-end cameras have a harder life ;)
I won a compo with a Fuji Finepix 2800z (retailing at about 150 pounds now), and have just upgraded to a new Oly E20.
To me, I find this harder to use - I have to think about the apature - shutter speed and ISO. Where as befiore, I just pointed the camera and pressed the button.
So perhaps the people with high-end cameras have a harder life ;)
a good photographer should be able to take a good picture with ANY camera... even disposables...
i am not agree, sometimes a pretty objecitve is really far, like a bird, or really small like an insect.... a bad camera will NEVER shot that ones as good, as near and as sharp as a good one
a good photographer should be able to take a good picture with ANY camera... even disposables...
i am not agree, sometimes a pretty objecitve is really far, like a bird, or really small like an insect.... a bad camera will NEVER shot that ones as good, as near and as sharp as a good one
The term 'good' is subjective, but I'll say that for someone to take a photograph of something that the majority of people consider 'good' is also about learning the strengths and weaknesses of both the photographer's talents and the limitations of his/her camera. A 'cheap' camera may not be able to take far away objects or really small things like bugs but that does not mean the camera cannot take good pictures of other things. There is certainly a hurdle, but most of these challenges are not so strict in that both 'cheap' and 'expensive' cameras are going head to head on the exact same subject. The photographers of 'cheap' cameras can still utilize creative 'tricks' or play to their cameras good points. It just makes it more of a challenge, which in turn makes it a sweeter victory.
DPC is an open competition, so, best cameras´s owners have more possibilities against others. i propose to separate the competition by camera´s categories too
As many others have said here, that is simply not true.
Take look at the pictures which got second and third place in the "Back to school" challenge, neither of those are fancy DSLR cameras.
The reason why so many high-end cameras win ribbons is the talent of the photographers themselves. Often when you start to take your hobby seriously, and start getting better at it, you tend to upgrade your equipment, no matter what the hobby is. These high-end camera owners who are winning ribbons they just did not jump into photography all of a sudden and bought the most expensive camera they found. This is just like any other hobby/profession, you often tend to upgrade as you get better at it.
It´s not the camera which makes the picture, it´s the man/woman behind it.
