OT: Photo Competition - Unsuccessful



"stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| Hi there,
|
| I entered my first photo competition last week, but I was
| unsuccessful of course. :) It was with Practical
| Photography magazine, and the theme was 'animal
| attractions.' I thought I had a good chance, as I got two
| dragonflies mating, and they were making a nice heart
| shape, but it wasn't to be.
|
| I sent in this photo:
| http://www.sm9.co.uk/test/dragonflies.jpg
|
| They sent me a card back that had the following check box
| ticked: "Technically good, but lacks impact." Oh well, in
| other words, it means 'boring shot Ste!' :)
|
| I took it whilst walking around Thrybergh Country Park, in
| Rotherham, last year. It's a nice walk around there, about
| 1.7 miles around a reservoir. At the moment, half of the
| path around the reservoir is closed off due to nesting
| birds or something like that.
|
| Oh well, next month's theme is 'Shapes,' so I'll see what
| I can come up with; and what walks I'll have to do to find
| a suitable image. Ideas welcome of course. ;-)
|
| Ste

Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the latest
Practical Photography magazine, for April, and the selection
of winning and commended photos was a complete disgrace! The
theme, 'animal attractions' seems to have been lost to the
judges, and the majority (bar 2 or 3) are just nice shots of
animals. And the winning shot was awful.

Hmmmmm.... :-S

Ste
 
"stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:eYp1c.7780$ai2.109108431@news-
> text.cableinet.net...
> | Hi there,
> |
> | I entered my first photo competition last week, but I
> | was unsuccessful of course. :) It was with Practical
> | Photography magazine, and the theme was 'animal
> | attractions.' I thought I had a good chance, as I got
> | two dragonflies mating, and they were making a nice
> | heart shape, but it wasn't to be.
> |
> | I sent in this photo:
> | http://www.sm9.co.uk/test/dragonflies.jpg
> |
> | They sent me a card back that had the following check
> | box ticked: "Technically good, but lacks impact." Oh
> | well, in other words, it means 'boring shot Ste!' :)
> |
> | I took it whilst walking around Thrybergh Country Park,
> | in Rotherham, last year. It's a nice walk around there,
> | about 1.7 miles around a reservoir. At the moment, half
> | of the path around the reservoir is closed off due to
> | nesting birds or something like that.
> |
> | Oh well, next month's theme is 'Shapes,' so I'll see
> | what I can come up with; and what walks I'll have to do
> | to find a suitable image. Ideas welcome of course. ;-)
> |
> | Ste
>
>
> Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the
> latest Practical Photography magazine, for April, and
> the selection of winning and commended photos was a
> complete disgrace! The theme, 'animal attractions' seems
> to have been lost to the judges, and the majority (bar 2
> or 3) are just nice shots of animals. And the winning
> shot was awful.
>
> Hmmmmm.... :-S
>
> Ste

WELL MY DAD AND HIS FRENDS HAVE ASKED ME TO TAKE PHOTOS OF
HIM FISHING
 
On 22 Mar 2004 03:53:55 -0800, THOMAS HILL wrote:

>"stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]
>berlin.de>...

>> Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the
>> latest Practical Photography magazine, for April, and
>> the selection of winning and commended photos was a
>> complete disgrace! The theme, 'animal attractions' seems
>> to have been lost to the judges, and the majority (bar 2
>> or 3) are just nice shots of animals. And the winning
>> shot was awful.
>>
>> Hmmmmm.... :-S
>>
>> Ste
>
> WELL MY DAD AND HIS FRENDS HAVE ASKED ME TO TAKE PHOTOS OF
> HIM FISHING

Shhhhhh! If you shout like that you will scare the fish.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the
"Westminster Gasworks"
 
Your picture is a winner in my books. Small consolation I
know but I thought I'd tell you that I like it. I always try
to capture wildlife in action but they never work!

see an example at
http://www.walkingenglishman.com/coastb4.htm#Day%20Seven

Regards, Mike

"stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
berlin.de...
>
> "stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:eYp1c.7780$ai2.109108431@news-
> text.cableinet.net...
> | Hi there,
> |
> | I entered my first photo competition last week, but I
> | was unsuccessful
of
> | course. :) It was with Practical Photography magazine,
> | and the theme
was
> | 'animal attractions.' I thought I had a good chance, as
> | I got two dragonflies mating, and they were making a
> | nice heart shape, but it
wasn't
> | to be.
> |
> | I sent in this photo:
> | http://www.sm9.co.uk/test/dragonflies.jpg
> |
> | They sent me a card back that had the following check
> | box ticked: "Technically good, but lacks impact." Oh
> | well, in other words, it means 'boring shot Ste!' :)
> |
> | I took it whilst walking around Thrybergh Country Park,
> | in Rotherham,
last
> | year. It's a nice walk around there, about 1.7 miles
> | around a
reservoir.
> | At the moment, half of the path around the reservoir is
> | closed off due
to
> | nesting birds or something like that.
> |
> | Oh well, next month's theme is 'Shapes,' so I'll see
> | what I can come up with; and what walks I'll have to do
> | to find a suitable image. Ideas welcome of course. ;-)
> |
> | Ste
>
>
> Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the latest
> Practical Photography magazine, for April, and the
> selection of winning and
commended
> photos was a complete disgrace! The theme, 'animal
> attractions' seems to have been lost to the judges, and
> the majority (bar 2 or 3) are just nice shots of animals.
> And the winning shot was awful.
>
> Hmmmmm.... :-S
>
> Ste
 
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 01:19:55 -0000, "stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the latest
>Practical Photography magazine, for April, and the
>selection of winning and commended photos was a complete
>disgrace! The theme, 'animal attractions' seems to have
>been lost to the judges, and the majority (bar 2 or 3) are
>just nice shots of animals. And the winning shot was awful.

Couldn't agree with you more. Its quite galling to read the
occassionally pretentious clap trap written by a journalist
when what they are saying is just plain bollox(tm).

Second only to the occassional cr*p reader submissions being
lauded when they are plainly c*ap is the rubbish supposedly
"Expert Photoshop Techniques"; for me to recognise the
"expert advice" as flawed is saying something!

Admittedly the above is the minority situation but I'd
suggest significant minority today when it was much less so
in times of yore! (or was it that we each knew less then ;-)
I reckon it comes from the editorial drive to fill pages
with pseudo-knowledgeable dribble simply to get something on
the shelf.

So the next time you're out on the hill, looking for the
perfect magazne submission perhaps you should be less
circumspect... that shot you took of your foot that you
didn't know you'd taken (nice boot, btw) might just do
it for you!!

SteveO

NE Climbers & walkers chat forum;
http://www.thenmc.org.uk/phpBB2/index.php

NMC website: http://www.thenmc.org.uk
 
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:58:43 +0000, Steve Orrell wrote:

>So the next time you're out on the hill, looking for the
>perfect magazne submission perhaps you should be less
>circumspect... that shot you took of your foot that you
>didn't know you'd taken (nice boot, btw) might just do it
>for you!!

How about this one?

http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/shanks-pony.htm
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the
"Westminster Gasworks"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Phil Cook <[email protected]> writes
>On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:58:43 +0000, Steve Orrell wrote:
>
>>So the next time you're out on the hill, looking for the
>>perfect magazne submission perhaps you should be less
>>circumspect... that shot you took of your foot that you
>>didn't know you'd taken (nice boot, btw) might just do it
>>for you!!
>
>How about this one?
>
>http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/shanks-pony.htm

You could have painted them red to look like toenails :)
--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
Thanks Michael, you're too kind! ;-) Your bird shot looks
like my bird shots - nice enough, but we're both lacking a
good zoom lens! Of course, with a zoom lens, we'd both have
winning images of course... ;-)

Ste

"Michael Brockhurst" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
|
|
| Your picture is a winner in my books. Small consolation I
| know but I
thought
| I'd tell you that I like it. I always try to capture
| wildlife in action
but
| they never work!
|
| see an example at
| http://www.walkingenglishman.com/coastb4.htm#Day%20Seven
|
| Regards, Mike
|
| "stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
| berlin.de...
| >
| > "stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:eYp1c.7780$ai2.109108431@news-
| > text.cableinet.net...
| > | Hi there,
| > |
| > | I entered my first photo competition last week, but I
| > | was unsuccessful
| of
| > | course. :) It was with Practical Photography
| > | magazine, and the theme
| was
| > | 'animal attractions.' I thought I had a good chance,
| > | as I got two dragonflies mating, and they were making
| > | a nice heart shape, but it
| wasn't
| > | to be.
| > |
| > | I sent in this photo:
| > | http://www.sm9.co.uk/test/dragonflies.jpg
| > |
| > | They sent me a card back that had the following check
| > | box ticked: "Technically good, but lacks impact." Oh
| > | well, in other words, it
means
| > | 'boring shot Ste!' :)
| > |
| > | I took it whilst walking around Thrybergh Country
| > | Park, in Rotherham,
| last
| > | year. It's a nice walk around there, about 1.7 miles
| > | around a
| reservoir.
| > | At the moment, half of the path around the reservoir
| > | is closed off due
| to
| > | nesting birds or something like that.
| > |
| > | Oh well, next month's theme is 'Shapes,' so I'll see
| > | what I can come
up
| > | with; and what walks I'll have to do to find a
| > | suitable image. Ideas welcome of course. ;-)
| > |
| > | Ste
| >
| >
| > Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the
| > latest Practical Photography magazine, for April, and
| > the selection of winning and
| commended
| > photos was a complete disgrace! The theme, 'animal
| > attractions' seems
to
| > have been lost to the judges, and the majority (bar 2 or
| > 3) are just
nice
| > shots of animals. And the winning shot was awful.
| >
| > Hmmmmm.... :-S
| >
| > Ste
| >
| >
|
|
 
<Steve Orrell> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 01:19:55 -0000, "stemc ©"
| <[email protected]> wrote:
|
|
| >"stemc ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message
|
| >Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the latest
| >Practical Photography magazine, for April, and the
| >selection of winning and
commended
| >photos was a complete disgrace! The theme, 'animal
| >attractions' seems to have been lost to the judges, and
| >the majority (bar 2 or 3) are just nice shots of animals.
| >And the winning shot was awful.
|
|
| Couldn't agree with you more. Its quite galling to read
| the occassionally pretentious clap trap written by a
| journalist when what they are saying is just plain
| bollox(tm).

And I agree with what you say too! ;-) They must think
that if they write enough arty-fartyness, we'll all be
fooled into thinking they must know what they're talking
about, and that what they're saying is beyond us because
we don't get it.

Saying that though, in this months magazine, there were some
excellent images that I couldn't have taken, but they just
didn't fit the category!
:-O Perhaps they'd be more suited to a 'nice wildlife shots'
:category...

| Second only to the occassional cr*p reader submissions
| being lauded when they are plainly c*ap is the rubbish
| supposedly "Expert Photoshop Techniques"; for me to
| recognise the "expert advice" as flawed is saying
| something!

One of the things that's annoying in some of these magazines
is when they print 'before' and 'after' images, showing what
their digital wizardry has done. I'm sure it's all to do
with the printing, but I can never tell the difference! And
if I can, it's not always the 'after' shot that I prefer!
:)

| Admittedly the above is the minority situation but I'd
| suggest significant minority today when it was much less
| so in times of yore! (or was it that we each knew less
| then ;-) I reckon it comes from the editorial drive to
| fill pages with pseudo-knowledgeable dribble simply to get
| something on the shelf.

And you get all the die-hard film fans writing into the
letters page each month, complaining about the two pages out
of a hundred that are now devoted to Photoshop tutorials!
:) Though they do have a point when they say there's
already too many digital photography magazines out there.

| So the next time you're out on the hill, looking for the
| perfect magazne submission perhaps you should be less
| circumspect... that shot you took of your foot that you
| didn't know you'd taken (nice boot, btw) might just do it
| for you!!

Tell me about it! I need to change my whole photography
competition mentality, thanks for sure. ...Either that, or
realise what quality really is, and then learn how to do it
myself! ;-)

| SteveO

Ste
 
stemc © wrote:

> Just a quick follow up: I've just got sight of the
> latest Practical Photography magazine, for April, and
> the selection of winning and commended photos was a
> complete disgrace! The theme, 'animal attractions' seems
> to have been lost to the judges, and the majority (bar 2
> or 3) are just nice shots of animals. And the winning
> shot was awful.
>
> Hmmmmm.... :-S

Well I haven't seen the pics but I think it proves that
point the concept of "the best photo" is extremely arbitrary
and dependant mostly on one's personal preferences and
artistic preconceptions (or pretentions).

That's one of the reasons why competitions don't appeal to
me. I don't see photography as a competitive sport. It's not
like a race where the guy who finishes first is clearly the
winner. A photography competition is more like a race where
the winner is chosen because he has a good running style, or
is wearing the best looking outfit, or because he does a lot
of work for charity, or because he's a good laugh in the
pub, or <insert any reason you like here>, not because he
finishes first.

Arguably "finishing first" in a photography competition
would mean taking a photo of the best technical quality,
irrespective of subject, lighting and composition. So the
guy who uses a large format camera on a half ton tripod
should win every time.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
stemc © wrote:

>> Couldn't agree with you more. Its quite galling to read
>> the occassionally pretentious clap trap written by a
>> journalist when what they are saying is just plain
>> bollox(tm).
>
> And I agree with what you say too! ;-) They must think
> that if they write enough arty-fartyness, we'll all be
> fooled into thinking they must know what they're talking
> about, and that what they're saying is beyond us because
> we don't get it.

Or maybe they've read so much arty-fartiness that
they've been brainwashed into believing it themselves
and can no longer look at photographs in the same way as
ordinary people.

> One of the things that's annoying in some of these
> magazines is when they print 'before' and 'after' images,
> showing what their digital wizardry has done. I'm sure
> it's all to do with the printing, but I can never tell the
> difference! And if I can, it's not always the 'after' shot
> that I prefer! :)

Not seen many of these, but of the few examples I've seen
on the net it seems to me that the differences are often
too subtle to make the effect obvious. Now in practice a
subtle effect may be exactly what's required, but in order
to demonstrate the effect the example should be anything
but subtle.

Either the effect should be overdone, to make it clear what
the effect is (with a disclaimer that you wouldn't normally
apply it this strongly) or they should choose a particularly
"bad" image that requires a lot of adjustment, so that the
difference is clear. It's no good picking a "good" image
that only requires slight tweaking to make a subtle
improvement.

> Tell me about it! I need to change my whole photography
> competition mentality, thanks for sure. ...Either that, or
> realise what quality really is, and then learn how to do
> it myself! ;-)

Quality is a technical thing. Beauty is in the eye of the
beholder. Winning competitions requires that you understand
how the judges think and then give them what they want.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
stemc © wrote:

>>> Taking semi macro photos of insects is damn tricky and
>>> needs a lot of practice so don't feel too bad about it.
>>
>> I doubt if I could take a shot that good.
>
> I'm sure you could if you had any interest in trying.

Ah, interest! That's the problem. I'm convinced that you
have to be really interested in something if you want to
become really good at doing it.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul
Saunders <[email protected]> writes
>Arguably "finishing first" in a photography competition
>would mean taking a photo of the best technical quality,
>irrespective of subject, lighting and composition. So the
>guy who uses a large format camera on a half ton tripod
>should win every time.

I wonder if David Bailey would agree? He uses an Olympus
Trip doesn't he?
--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
[email protected] said...
> In article <[email protected]>, Paul
> Saunders <[email protected]> writes
> >Arguably "finishing first" in a photography competition
> >would mean taking a photo of the best technical quality,
> >irrespective of subject, lighting and composition. So the
> >guy who uses a large format camera on a half ton tripod
> >should win every time.
>
> I wonder if David Bailey would agree? He uses an Olympus
> Trip doesn't he?
>
David Bailey? Who's he?
--
Fran If you need my email address please ask.
 
[email protected] said...
> W. D. Grey wrote:
>
> > I wonder if David Bailey would agree? He uses an Olympus
> > Trip doesn't he?
>
> If he does then he's way behind the times. Surely he
> should be using a microscopic digital by now?

Depends. How much are they paying him?
--
Fran If you need my email address please ask.
 
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 19:56:24 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>David Bailey? Who's he?
>
>One has to be of a certain vintage to remember him :)

And also to remember the reference Fran was making ;-)