DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Please help me get this; Light on White
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 46, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 03/09/2005 08:21:03 AM · #1
I never post to threads about challenge results - they are what they are. In this case, though, I am really thrown as to how nearly all the high scoring images were in direct opposition to how I read the challenge (which I did not have an entry in - I am simply interested in undertanding). Here is a direct quote from the challenge:

" . . . subject is predominately a "light" color."

Light color to me is a pastel, a light shade, a light hue, but color. Nearly all the high scorers were absent of "color". Did most people put the most weight on the title "Light on White" and run with that? Is it a difference in languages? Is it a more technical meaning of color as in coming from light rays?

Please - no arguments. I am not challenging or protesting; I just want to undertand better. Thank you!
 03/09/2005 08:29:11 AM · #2
My votes went mostly for overall aesthetics, unless something was plainly dark on white or not on white at all, which lost them points.

But I have a similar technical question: The challenge said:

"Take a photo in which the background is white and the subject is predominately a "light" color. Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights!"

I made sure there were no blown highlights in mine--I kept the right end of the histogram within margins and made sure you could see the detail in my snow.

I may misunderstand, but there seem to be a lot of shots (including the blue ribbon, which is a beautiful shot, don't get me wrong) which have washed out natural backgrounds. Aren't those considered overexposed highlights?
 03/09/2005 08:40:10 AM · #3
Originally posted by nshapiro:
My votes went mostly for overall aesthetics, unless something was plainly dark on white or not on white at all, which lost them points.

But I have a similar technical question: The challenge said:

"Take a photo in which the background is white and the subject is predominately a "light" color. Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights!"

I made sure there were no blown highlights in mine--I kept the right end of the histogram within margins and made sure you could see the detail in my snow.

I may misunderstand, but there seem to be a lot of shots (including the blue ribbon, which is a beautiful shot, don't get me wrong) which have washed out natural backgrounds. Aren't those considered overexposed highlights?


Yes - this also confused me.
 03/09/2005 08:51:22 AM · #4
Be mindful of over-exposing your highlights!

This statement didn't seem to come into play
 03/09/2005 08:51:36 AM · #5
I think the overexposed highlights refers to highlights on your subject, not the background.
 03/09/2005 08:55:15 AM · #6
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
I think the overexposed highlights refers to highlights on your subject, not the background.


This is my interpretation as well.
 03/09/2005 09:48:21 AM · #7
The voters are always right, they are the bottom line. They vote on their perceptions of the challenges, their idea of aesthetics, composition, and quality.
It is common for the voters to select images that are technically 'inferior' or do not 'meet the challenge' by someone else's standards. But their judgement if infallible by the definitions of this venue, invalid images notwithstanding.
 03/09/2005 09:55:47 AM · #8
White seemed pretty "light" to me.
 03/09/2005 10:01:31 AM · #9
It WAS a little surprising. I sort of 'assumed" you'd need a color on white. Silly me. My white on white would have finished very well, according to comments in outtakes. But when i saw the entries, I just went witht he flow; a preponderance of the "best" images are largely all white.

Robt.
 03/09/2005 10:13:30 AM · #10
The site as a whole seems to be moving away from specifics in the challenges. By that I mean all the political correctness and trying to second guess the intention of the photographer is moving the challenge description more and more into irrelevance. Even the challenge descriptions are taking a part in this -- or is just me that notices they are (very nearly) all free challenges with some minor distinction? And, of course, any thread discussing the challenge description has someone, usually quite early, point out that it is a free challenge.

This is compounded by the wording used; which is intentionally getting less and less specific regarding what is to be done -- with terms such as "might" and "should" and other vague terms.

Meanwhile, those of us who wish to actually be challenged by the challenge are not presented with any limitations that truly limit a photographer from submitting most anything at all.

And while I'm on the subject, this PC vagueness is also present in the challenge rules themselves -- where many terms are left intentionally vague. But vagueness is not enforceable -- what is not enforceable is not enforced -- and is soon ignored completely.

If I could change anything about this site it would be this lack of willingness to take a definite position on anything.

Along with that I would remove the challenge descriptions completely and put anything that needed to be in there in the extra rules section (clearly and concisely stated, of course).

But that doesn't directly answer the question, but makes it possible for me to say I feel the description is ignored due to the reasons and reasoning stated above.

David
 03/09/2005 10:16:23 AM · #11
I just assumed white was a color, it is you know. At least in a technical sense it is a color as much as yellow is a color. When we talk about color in a technical way we give it a x, y coordinate, well now a days you give it a u’,v’ coordinate but the idea is the same. For any color you can identify it with two numbers that locate it on the CIE color chart. There is no one spot on the chart that is considered white, rather an area that is in the center of the chart. sRGB, the color space we work in does define what white is when working in sRGB, it is x = 0.3457, y = 0.3585 BTW.

03/09/2005 10:19:48 AM · #12
I agree, the rules shouldn't have any terms as should and might in them. They need to be concise. Just imagine our laws were as vague. "You shouldn't steal, but a little bit is okay".
 03/09/2005 10:27:23 AM · #13
The rules should be concise, but they probably need to be verbose.
 03/09/2005 10:28:52 AM · #14
I do understand what you are saying, mine did have a hint of yellow/cream in it. But there were a few entrees which were really bright colours,and even more that The background was quite dark. Which I thought had to be white!
I did really bad even if I did meet the challenge. I had a couple of ones and 11 scored me 2...I do wish these people would leave comments, so I can learn from them. I do tick for criticism.
oh well, I had fun and thats the main reason why I do it.
debby
 03/09/2005 10:29:08 AM · #15
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
The rules should be concise, but they probably need to be verbose.

:)
 03/09/2005 10:34:45 AM · #16
Clearly some people don’t view white as a color and there seems to be a believe that somehow the rules should have demanded that the subject have some color in it. But if you ignore this last challenge and just look at the history of challenges people who enter photos that are off topic get hammered.

If you go through the past challenges I don’t think you will find any ribbon winner that was off topic. The idea of trying to make the challenge as part of the rules seems like something that we simply don’t need I hate to think of the DQ debates and arguments we would get into if a photo could be DQ for not meeting the challenge.
03/09/2005 10:37:03 AM · #17
First off this was a hard challenge. And may did a good job on their photographs. I think there were a lot of interpretations in this challenge both on the photographers and voters part. Some see Black and White as colors and others don’t. I felt there should have been some hue or light colors in the picture but that is how I interpreted the challenge. As for the winning photograph I think it is a valid and good picture worthy of the blue ribbon. As stated in above post I also believe that the “be mindful of blown out highlights” referred to the subject not the background. And if you look closely at the picture there is color in the subjects.
 03/09/2005 10:38:15 AM · #18
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
The rules should be concise, but they probably need to be verbose.


It would really bless my soul if the general populace of DPC would cease this confusion of "challenge description" with the "rules".

For the ten millionth time, it is NOT against the RULES to fail to meet the challenge. It is up to the VOTERS to vote images which do not meet the challenge out of contention for the wins. If Sonifo's image does not match the popular interpretation of the challenge description, it should not be voted high simply because it is an excellent image. If the "jury" of voters believe that Soni's photo deserves a high vote, that image will win.

That's why it's a VOTE, folks. There's not an absolute "yes/no" standard at work here as to whether a certain image meets the challenge. Each voter is responsible to make a decision based on his/her personal interpretation of both the challenge and the photo.

It's not a "right/wrong" question. It's a "I like this one better than that one" question.

One more time, with passion... It is not a DQable offense to fail to meet the challenge. It is legally possible for a photo that does not meet the challenge at all to win a challenge, and site council CANNOT disqualify it... even if it's BLACK on BLACK in a WHITE on WHITE challenge!

It's all about what the voters prefer!
 03/09/2005 10:40:43 AM · #19
Originally posted by nards656:
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
The rules should be concise, but they probably need to be verbose.


It would really bless my soul if the general populace of DPC would cease this confusion of "challenge description" with the "rules".


Sorry. 1. I was being funny (or, at least trying) 2. I meant challenge description when I wrote rules.
 03/09/2005 10:40:44 AM · #20
Britannica, to your point (The site as a whole seems to be moving away from specifics in the challenges. )

In the Passing time challange it said "Take a creative photograph that depicts something people do to pass the time."

There were a few wonderful photos of animals doing something, not people.
 03/09/2005 10:44:04 AM · #21
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
The rules should be concise, but they probably need to be verbose.


I haven't found any of the challenge rules confusing to-date. What DOES confuse me is everyone ELSE'S interpretation of them :-0
 03/09/2005 10:56:32 AM · #22
The DPC discussion is interesting, but I am still interested in the technical question of what constitutes "blown highlights" and when it's appropriate to do so in general practice.

My definition: having data within the picture fall off the right end of the histogram.

The blue ribbon winner, in my view, clearly has them, because detail was lost in the background. (Again, independent of the rules interpretation). This is used in an artistic manner, and outside of the challenge description, and maybe within, I assume it's an acceptable practice for a high key effect.

Now also, what about a trickier case: Jacko's shot. The background was a white sheet. I presume he kept the highlights to the left of the end of the histogram, but of course, if there were wrinkles in the sheet, they are gone, so does that suggest the highlights are blown (data to the right of the end of the histogram)?

Other studio type shots with white backgrounds, where the background is moved to pure white. Is it typical to go over the end of the histogram on purpose to get this white effect?

I hope that adequately describes my question, not meaning to hijack Kyle's thread.
03/09/2005 10:58:44 AM · #23
IMHO, an important aspect of being a good photographer is knowing when to break the rules. To be successful on this site it isn't necessary to stick with the challenge description. It's only necessary to get the highest score. :)
03/09/2005 11:04:06 AM · #24
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
Originally posted by nards656:
Originally posted by BikeRacer:
The rules should be concise, but they probably need to be verbose.


It would really bless my soul if the general populace of DPC would cease this confusion of "challenge description" with the "rules".


Sorry. 1. I was being funny (or, at least trying) 2. I meant challenge description when I wrote rules.


I actually wasn't intending to respond directly to you, just to the rules issue in general. Sorry if I sounded like I was climbing your frame :)
 03/09/2005 11:27:22 AM · #25
Originally posted by nshapiro:
... Now also, what about a trickier case: Jacko's shot. The background was a white sheet. I presume he kept the highlights to the left of the end of the histogram, but of course, if there were wrinkles in the sheet, they are gone, so does that suggest the highlights are blown (data to the right of the end of the histogram)? ...


"...if there were wrinkles in the sheet..." Maybe he used an iron? ;^)

Seriously, couldn't levels or curves manipulate the white a bit to remove any sight of wrinkles? Just a thought, still new to all of the post-processing capabilities...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/09/2025 08:35:54 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/09/2025 08:35:54 PM EDT.