Me thinks their might be some sour grapes behind this one.
if the majortity of voters vote think it deserverd to win then you should let it go
No sour grapes, my picture just wasn't good enough. The winning pictures in "Rural" are absolutely great shots - but do they meet the challenge description? So if the photogs don't care and the voters say they are the best shots, regardless of their connection to the challenge - why have topics in the first place? Would be fair IMO.
The winning pictures in "Rural" are absolutely great shots - but do they meet the challenge description? So if the photogs don't care and the voters say they are the best shots, regardless of their connection to the challenge - why have topics in the first place? Would be fair IMO.
Absolutely they meet the challenge description. I for one happen to live in a rural setting, I know for a fact that these images are indeed depictions of things that one sees in rural areas.
The sad truth is that often times we are so limited by our own life's experiences that we fail to see the bigger picture (sic).
The Challenge Topics are definitely a keeper in my books, as they provide an added feature that one needs to contend with when preparing for a challenge.
The winning pictures in "Rural" are absolutely great shots - but do they meet the challenge description?
Yes.
Now that explains a lot.
So, question to those with more intellect, what makes the #1 shot "rural"? The fact there are no signs of urbanity? And what makes the #2 shot a rural landscape? The fact it is taken outdoors? Imagine the winning shot without the main subject - the deers - , what you see is wilderness. What would the red ribbon winner be without the playing kids? Still a ribbon winner? Number 4, another great shot that I would have given a very high mark in a free study, as stated in the image description, was taken in the Highlands of Iceland - an absolutely unsettled area. Rural?
Don't get me wrong, all those photographers can have their ribbons and HMs, I just wouldn't feel comfortable if I ignored the challenge descriptions on purpose and just submitted the best shots I had taken that week.
I ask for leaving away the descriptions and let everyone have their own interpretation of the challenge title. Then I wouldn't have to vote down all the shots of amphetamine pills we will see in the "Speed" challenge (or the pulled network connectors in the "Working without a net" challenge).
u know what. People like you are ruining DPC. Please go away
My experience is that people like you ruin DPC, because they make others go away.
Why do you take it so personal that you even have to make a stupid and overly harsh comment on my entry?And why is it so hard for you to understand, that those of us whose goal it is to fulfill the challenge might be a bit disappointed when others, that ignore the description, make the highest scores?
Again, the voters have spoken and that's OK, obviously I'm in the minority. I never believed I was even in reach of a ribbon in this challenge so I don't take it personal. But what I know is, my shot perfectly met the challenge, I don't feel ashamed of my score, I already proved I can do better and I know I can do a shot for any challenge at will.
BTW: This wasn't planned as a discussion about your entry, my suggestions is serious. It could make things more fair. Alternatively, not meeting the challenge details could be grounds for DQ, but I don't like that idea.
fine - u are entitled to your opinion. Your comment about NOT being rural is invalid. Because rural means countryside. And yes it is richmond park - but if you didnt know that then it still would be rural.
rather than take away challenge descriptions, why not challenge people to vote more according to them?
(I think some challenge descriptions are necessary. Like "Working Without a Net," I would be kinda clueless on this one without the description)
yes, and? I was saying in the previous post that now you know it was shot in Richmond park, which isnt truely rural, but before you didnt. Hence it could be seen as rural.
All three of the ribbon winners look rural to me. Most definitely not city life that's for sure.
Is the issue here because Alex's shot was made at a park? Isn't a park a slice of the country for urbanites to enjoy? Even if that's considered a stretch from a pure country side view point didn't the challenge description allow for a wider interpretation? It said: "Of, relating to, or characteristic of the country."
Does a park not exhibit characteristics of the country? If not Alex did a hell of a job selling it.
I am more concerned about someone who uses the same image (different frame number) in two challenges and gets two ribbons out of it. I used to think I had no morals, but I think that is morally wrong.
Don't get me wrong, incredible shot, and well deserving of ONE ribbon. Makes the whole dpc front page look like a farce.
For me the problem with a small, but nonetheless relatively significant, proportion of the entries was that they did not meet my own personal pre-conceived ideas of what a landscape was. I recognise that to a certain extent that is my problem, and in this instance I just didn't vote on those that didn't match, at least to some extent, my own criteria. With regard to Alex's photo I instantly recognised it as a stunning photo, and indeed added it to my favourites, but initially felt it was a wildlife portrait of a herd of deer in which the limited visible landscape was relatively incedental. After reviewing it repeatedly over several days, I actually changed my mind and gave it a vote of 10 (for me it was always a 10 or nothing), recognising that I had perhaps been too narrow in my definition.
I tend to agree with Eyewave's opinion - at least part of it.
The red ribbon probably is rural - but to me it's not a landscape. So apparently challenge descriptions don't matter to the majority here (or others see it as a landscape?)
I like the shot a lot and I could easily see it ribbon in some other challenge - but I would never have expected it to ribbon in a landscape challenge.
All three of the ribbon winners look rural to me. Most definitely not city life that's for sure.
This is what I have to ask myself, is anything that is not of city, automatically becomes rural?.
I think no. What about jungles. They are not of city true, but are they rural?. I think no.
To me, Alex's entry is more of jungle than of rural. Its jungle where I would see animals. In rural area, people do live, population density may not be very much.
I think there is lot of weight in eyewave's argument. I have thought about it many times, that what is the use of taking challenge description seriously when we could always score high with eye candies.
Seeing this type of entries winning just discourage people (at least the people like me). And I am sure there will be many people who feel like me.
again. Rural means countryside.Animals do live in the countryside u know
Rural has a broader meaning than just countryside. It is for many of us connected with terms as "agriculture" and "pasture".
If the challenge topic had been "Wild Life" without challenge details or "Free Study", I had scored your shot a 10 for sure. If the challenge topic had been "Joy" or "Children" or "Natural Light" without challenge details or "Free Study", it would have got a 10 from me for sure.
This is not about the quality of the images! It's about winning ribbons with, as zxaar called it, eye candy, while the rest of us strives to take the description seriously.
And I'm gonna enter a gorgeous motionless lakescape into the "speed" challenge and call it "Beyond the fast life of the city" (j/k of cause)
