 Posted 5/17/2007 5:09:37 PM
|
|
|
|
I think that some of this might have to do with the change in the buffer size - especially in the category buffers going to 200 images. Heavy voters are now forced to vote the ALL Category style instead of voting in favorite categories. And, as long as they continue to vote in the ALL category field, the category buffers will never fill fill for them - heavy voters are almost prevented from voting in individual categories. This may have people voting away from their "comfort zone" ??? WE
_________________________
Profile - Top 24 - All Images Nikon D70 - Nikon N90 - Nikonus III - Nikkor 20mm - Nikkor 50mm - Nikkor 24-120mm - Nikkor 28-70mm - Nikkor 85mm - Nikkor 70-300mm - Sigma 400mm
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 8:36:41 AM
|
|
|
|
| I think it might be interesting to learn what everyone sees when they view an image, and just how they would score it. I am posting this photo (and I hope I am not breaking any copyright laws) of Judy Garland, taken by George Hurrell. Mind you, it is an old photo, but if it were posted here at DA, how would you rate it, what do you like/dislike, and what about technical qualities? Bear in mid that the quality of resolution isnt great, but I do not know how to post it at full size. I think it will be fascinating to see the different opinions, and also a learning experience. 
::Get wRIGHT or get wLEFT::
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 9:03:31 AM
|
|
|
|
| I think this is a great idea MG and I will be glad to give it my opinion.. Now you all know I basically have 9 months of experience and did not know what ISO or aperature was before...or anything else but point and shoot  . I do not know of this photographer at all.. What I see here , and if I were scoring this pic as is right here in this post, Is an 9 or 8.. Here is why...I view spectacular lighting imo. emphasis is directly on the subjects face, with equal lighting on her chest area but the way the subject is posed, this light just leads my eye right back to her face..lighting is just subtle enough for my eye to see both arms in the whole pic but not so much as to take my attention off of her body/face. Her expression is very fitting and very well captured in my opinion as well..The most impressive thing for me about this pic is the lighting together with the pose and I think the colors are very complimentary throughout as well.. But what I see in this example is the pic is fuzzy just a bit..quality is not sharp nor does it look soft on purpose to my eye..now since you told us I know this is the quality of the photo you posted but not knowing this,,I would have taken off 1 point or maybe two at the most for this image..here in the forum this size and quality....Oh and I was going to say that this looks like a painting to me as well. Now I will be excited to see what I missed and what other's rate this image.. and their opinions of it....
I may not always be wRIGHTbut I am never wrong Profile -  Top 24 - 
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 9:08:18 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 9:20:22 AM
|
|
|
|
| Thats very interesting, Tonka! The funny thing is, I am a HUGE Hurrell fan, yet in all honesty, I do not think I would score this image higher than an 8. That surprises even me! I think I have been "trained" to see certain things, which can definitely be a fault! I mean, this is a beautiful image of a beautiful woman, taken by a famous, expert photographer, and yet there are some technical aspects that I don't like: -The shadow on the neck --and-- -The hair at the bottom of the frame slightly severed I love the colors, pose and expression....and at first sight, I find it to be just perfect. It is only under scrutiny that I see the details I mentioned. Makes you wonder just how thorough you should be when viewing! =)
::Get wRIGHT or get wLEFT::
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 9:45:17 AM
|
|
|
|
| That is interesting about the shadow MG cause you know what I think?.. I think the shadow separates beautifully so that you don't get so caught up on her chest area...her expression is beautiful and for me the shadow avoids my eye from being caught up on the rest...but I am a face person anyway!! lol..
I may not always be wRIGHTbut I am never wrong Profile - Top 24 -
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 10:12:26 AM
|
|
|
|
| Interesting! I first looked at the shadow and the hair touching the bottom frame too. And there are also the reflection of the light in her dress. The color look washed out and grainy, but I think this is from the scanning. I really like how she is holding her hand, and how it all is fading into the dark background. I think the photo would be more powerful in are square crop. Taking most of the left and just a hint of the right away. This would give more the feeling of a close up and it would be ok for the hair to touch the bottom frame, at least it would not be so distracting. As for how I would vote: Not taking in consideration the washed out and the grainy look, I would give it a 7.
HL's P h o t o g r a p h y R e c o u r s e s
Oboy's Profile - Top 12 - Images - My Website
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 10:19:14 AM
|
|
|
|
I like very much the observations offered so far. Good job and good eyes, MG, Tonka and oboy. I'll try to contribute some words here to offer some criteria denoting excellence that I always look for in any image. My two top criterion would be: composition and exposure.
1. Composition
Oh, rule of thirds is only a guideline, not a rule, but this image is a classic and magnificent adherence to the r-o-thirds guideline. I call this an eye and heart alignment. Observe how precisely the artist has located the eye and the heart at the intersection of rule of thirds lines. This works so well because of the very attractive horizontal pose, which is aligned with the horizontal angle of the side lighting. I try to use this kind of harmonious composition in my wildlife photos, but never have achieved such an elegant result.
2. Exposure
I was actually surprised when I looked at the histogram of this image. My first take was that the shadowy areas were close to being too dark. On closer examination, there is exquisite detail in the shadows. And the range of tones is wide. Most importantly, there are no significant numbers of pixels at 0 or 255. This is a wonderful exposure and I wish we saw more images in our contest that had histograms just like this.
It actually should be a goal in our photography to use a broad tonal range, without losing details in blown out highlights and black shadows. I admire this photo greatly because of the careful control of exposure. It's mostly done with the camera, but the darkroom processing was important here, too. Study Ansel Adams and you'll find the same remarkable histograms... a desirable outcome from precision camera capture and savvy dodging and burning in the darkroom.
For these reasons, and several more, I'd vote a "10" on this image and I'd leave some comments of admiration. (10)
edited to correct typographical errors.
|
|
|
Posted 5/18/2007 10:56:42 AM
|
|
|
| | |
