 Posted 5/30/2007 12:53:05 PM
|
|
|
|
| A while back there was a discussion of posting photos for discussion. The consensus was that half of the people thought it was a great idea for any image on the site and the other half thought they should only be archived images. The issue fell through the cracks though as no one ever submitted any images to me for discussion. So...that leaves it up to me. And since I don't vote as much as I should it's not happening all that often that I find one that I think is way underrated. Well, it happened yesterday. The photographer has agreed to have the image discussed and has archived it to satisfy those that think it would be contrary to the "voting privacy act of 2007." Here it is:
My Profile Top 12 Image Stats
Canon 40d, Canon 10-22, Tamron SP AF 17-50, Canon 70-300 IS, Canon 100mm Macro
|
|
|
Posted 5/30/2007 12:56:02 PM
|
|
|
|
I'll start. I love this image. I gave it a 9 and was very surprised to see it was in the mid 6's. I love the placement of the vase and the light source at the top right 1/3 intersections. I love that the shadows are coming down the diagonal and give a great depth to the image. The exposure is good because there are still details in the shadows so I can see the table beneath it. I am very impressed with this image and was very stunned to find it was so low.
My Profile Top 12 Image Stats
Canon 40d, Canon 10-22, Tamron SP AF 17-50, Canon 70-300 IS, Canon 100mm Macro
|
|
|
Posted 5/30/2007 4:48:29 PM
|
|
|
|
Zeke Smith (5/30/2007)
A while back there was a discussion of posting photos for discussion. The consensus was that half of the people thought it was a great idea for any image on the site and the other half thought they should only be archived images. The issue fell through the cracks though as no one ever submitted any images to me for discussion. So...that leaves it up to me. And since I don't vote as much as I should it's not happening all that often that I find one that I think is way underrated. Well, it happened yesterday. The photographer has agreed to have the image discussed and has archived it to satisfy those that think it would be contrary to the "voting privacy act of 2007." I don't think I have voted on this image yet, but I would probably give it an 8. Like Zeke, I like the placement of the vase and the casting shadows. Textbook rule of thirds. I find the lighting on the vase and in the vase to be intriguing and mysterious. The shot shows careful consideration of light, background and DOF. I also want to add that I think this is a great idea. I would like to see this continue, perhaps even a different image everyday. Maybe members could nominate images for consideration.
|
|
|
Posted 5/30/2007 5:43:43 PM
|
|
|
|
I have to say that my gut reaction would be to vote 6 here. However after reading the comments and considering the rule of thirds, etc., I think I would vote 7. Now, if I could see a bit more of the vase (higher up), I might go 8. I will also say that I increased my resolution to 1200x1600 and looked at the image and it didn't look as good.
I think I just proved to myself my own theory (not that others haven't contributed this same idea) that a lot of things go into a vote (or a lack of a lot of things). I get the feeling a large majority of people that vote make a snap decision and don't consider things like rule of thirds, etc.
Although it says on the voting page, "Consider things like aesthetics, difficulty, etc.", I doubt most do. In this particular case, I would have gone right past all that because the image looked too high contrast, not very creative and like someone took a snapshot of a vase casting a shadow, not very difficult.
I think the point is moot. There are some images that are going to appeal to a larger variety of people that will get more or less consistent votes like Nature/Wildlife, etc. If taken well, these images will get consistent high votes. If not taken well, they will get consistent low votes. There may be a vote thrown in that is not average and that will maybe be someone who doesn't like I dunno...Monkeys or Alligators or whatever.
There are technical issues too. When I didn't have my monitor calibrated I was getting a certain type of score on a certain type of image. Now that it is I am getting different scores on that type of image.
I guess, the point I am trying to make here is that this image isn't a "main stream" image that will appeal to a large number of people. Certainly if I had seen this image 2 months ago, knowing little to nothing about how to take pictures, I may have thought something different about it. Also, seeing images like Richard Hahn's, Glynn M's, Mortgage Girls, etc., etc., kind of raises the bar for people. This image wouldn't do well using images like theirs as a reference. Maybe if this was the first image I ever voted on, the vote would be higher. Again, it's moot. I stopped worrying about this once I got my monitor calibrated FINALLY and now I am just concentrated on learning to take better photos.
|
|
|
Posted 5/30/2007 9:37:42 PM
|
|
|
|
I would probably vote this a seven. I agree with everything Zeke said. However, there is one thing that I feel takes away from the image. The bright empty spot in the foreground of the image. I feel that there should have been another shadow of a flower there as the exposure of the back of the table is great, but at the front it is a bit brighter and my eye tends to get stuck there.
I am surprised this had a six average. I didn't vote on it when it was in the pool, but again...would give it a seven!
Susan 
________________________________________
Find pleasure in the simple things! 
Susan's Top 24
Susan's Profile
|
|
|
Posted 5/30/2007 9:39:03 PM
|
|
|
|
Forgot to say...it would be nice to have a picture per week to discuss!  I think it allows for us all to share our opinions so everyone can learn!
Susan
________________________________________
Find pleasure in the simple things!
Susan's Top 24
Susan's Profile
|
|
|
Posted 5/30/2007 9:40:14 PM
|
|
|
|
I actually feel that if there had been another shadow in the center it would've detracted from the image. That triangle formed by the two shadows coming from the corners leads my eye into the image very nicely. I admit that the hotspot on the table is distracting and could maybe be cleaned up with some highlight reduction in photoshop to really improve things.
I'm surprised there hasn't been more discussion what with how popular this idea was a while back.
My Profile Top 12 Image Stats
Canon 40d, Canon 10-22, Tamron SP AF 17-50, Canon 70-300 IS, Canon 100mm Macro
|
|
|
Posted 5/31/2007 6:22:28 AM
|
|
|
|
My previous comments have yet again been reinforced. If you read my previous post, you will have a reference point. I have an image that is doing rather well. It only has 8 votes and until yesterday it was in the high 7s (almost 8). Well a certain high weighted individual who has NEVER given me more than a 7 voted a 7. I asked for comments and got a reply. The reply was that there was a certain distraction a vignette of blur around the edge. Well, the description clearly says "edges intentionally blurred". I am pretty sure this person doesn't spend a lot of time on images before voting. Granted the rest of the votes have been 7 and 8 so it's not an extreme vote in either direction but the the weight factor kills half a point on this thing. My goal for about the last 6 weeks on this site has been to get above 7 from this person.
Anyway, point once again, everyone has their quirks and interpretations.
|
|
|
Posted 5/31/2007 6:59:43 AM
|
|
|
| | |
