New Mandates! Get 'em while they're hot!
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: There's an app for that: NNTP news reader for Android
Next: Freeware to trun photo subjects around
From: Paul Furman on 5 Jul 2010 22:47 tony cooper wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 10:34:14 -0700, Savageduck > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: > >> On 2010-07-05 10:21:59 -0700, tony cooper<tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> said: >> >>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 12:04:50 -0400, "Peter" >>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >>> >>>> "tony cooper"<tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>> news:8it336h90kikds4pgopj1m5p04v7vmr1bj(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 10:59:31 -04 >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I have one shot already that was in a quarter mile of the pin. The >>>>> actual pin would have put me in an area where I would either be mugged >>>>> or arrested for attempting to buy drugs. I may re-stick. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm sure that was an unintended pun. >>> >>> I won't fall for that line. You're just trying to needle me. >> >> Stuck up pricks! > > We should end this discussion. It will never be a mainline thread. Bleeding edge can be fun...
From: otter on 5 Jul 2010 23:50 On Jul 5, 8:42 pm, Robert Coe <b...(a)1776.COM> wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter <bighorn_b...(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: > : I don't mean to be judgemental, but do you guys golf or fish? :-) > > How would a serious photographer possibly have time to golf or fish? :^| > > : Since it is not any kind of real competition, I won't raise any more > : stink. But maybe people should indicate how closely they followed the > : rules when they submit. > : > : As for someone saying the pin would have put them in a bad > : neighborhood, hey at least there might have been something interesting > : to shoot there. Better than the housing development or empty field > : that I ended up with. But maybe I should just keep sticking more > : pins. > > In the empty field, get out your macro lens and shoot weeds. No, I'm serious. > The Boston Globe did an article a few weeks ago on how biologists are starting > to take an entirely different view of weeds, even some previously considered > invasive, seeing them now as useful contributors to the ecology of a city.. > This may be your chance to be in the forefront of a new trend! ;^) The empty lot does have the most potential. I don't have a macro lens, but maybe I'll take one of my dogs out there and photograph it.
From: otter on 6 Jul 2010 00:54 On Jul 5, 9:09 pm, tony cooper <tony_cooper...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter > > > > > > <bighorn_b...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >On Jul 5, 9:59 am, Robert Coe <b...(a)1776.COM> wrote: > >> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:35:57 -0700 (PDT), otter <bighorn_b...(a)hotmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> : On Jul 5, 8:21 am, Robert Coe <b...(a)1776.COM> wrote: > >> : > On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:07:54 -0700, Paul Furman <pa...@-edgehill.net> wrote: > >> : > : Bowser wrote: > >> : > > >> : > : > First Rerun: The Pinhole Photo, Due July 18th, 2010 > >> : > : > This is a looser rerun of the very first mandate, which requires the > >> : > : > shooter to flip a map upside down, stick a pin in it, and then grab a > >> : > : > shot at that location on the map. However, I've expanded the mandate > >> : > : > to "your area," which can be town, city, state, etc. Use the whole > >> : > : > earth, if you dare. Drive to Yosemite, stick a pin in a map of the > >> : > : > park, and see if need to hike to the Diving Board. And, with the new > >> : > : > rules about submissions, you can use three pins for three locations > >> : > : > and submit three photos. > >> : > : > >> : > : Here's one way to choose your map pin spot: > >> : > : > >> : > :http://irc.peeron.com/xkcd/map/map.html?date=2010-07-04&lat=37&long=-... > >> : > : > >> : > : explanation: > >> : > :http://wiki.xkcd.com/geohashing/Main_Page > >> : > > >> : > I've recently been assigned to photograph all the points of interest in the > >> : > city for which I work. So I've been visiting a variety of locations, some of > >> : > them pretty obscure, that I've never seen before. For me the assignment > >> : > functions as the pin. ;^) > >> : > >> : That is a liberal interpretation of the mandate. > >> : > >> : Those are points of "interest", not random points. I think the point > >> : of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting > >> : (random) locations. > > >> A few observations on that: > > >> - Some of those "points of interest" are not, in themselves, particularly > >> interesting. The challenge is to go there and find a shot that makes the site > >> as interesting as it can be. Whether the site was chosen at random or by some > >> other method that's effectively beyond the photographer's control is not that > >> relevant, arguably. > > >> - By their nature, SI mandates favor those in the group who are retired or > >> otherwise blessed with a lot of free time over those of us who are not.. In my > >> case it's often find a way to incorporate the mandate into my normal > >> activities or sit this month out. And I have sat out several mandates because > >> I simply didn't have the time to get involved in a type of photography that I > >> normally don't do. > > >> - An overly narrow interpretation of the mandate lessens participation and > >> reduces everyne's enjoyment of the process. I'd claim that the recent > >> Wallpaper mandate is a case in point. While some very nice pictures were > >> submitted, participation was much lower than I would have anticipated, with > >> several highly competent regulars absent. I suspect that two factors were > >> primarily to blame: (1) The required aspect ratio accommodated a screen shape > >> that many of us rarely see, forcing us to omit or modify pictures that we were > >> actually using as wallpapers; and (2) Several people had weighed in with their > >> idiosyncratic opinions on what constituted a good (or even acceptable) > >> wallpaper, effectively narrowing the mandate and practically assuring that > >> some entries would be dismissed or ridiculed for not meeting those criteria. > > >> The Shoot-In's strength is its inclusiveness, and the point of a mandate > >> shouldn't be to exclude those who have trouble meeting it. Rather it should be > >> to challenge participants to take a broader view of their photographic > >> horizons and to use the mandate to see their work in a different light.. I > >> think Bowser understands that and usually allows a broad interpretation of the > >> mandates he issues. I believe the only time I've ever seen him reject a > >> picture was when it was too big. > > >> Bob > > >I don't mean to be judgemental, but do you guys golf or fish? :-) > > >Since it is not any kind of real competition, I won't raise any more > >stink. But maybe people should indicate how closely they followed the > >rules when they submit. > > If you follow the comments after the Shoot-In is made available, many > people provide information about how they got the shot. > > > > >As for someone saying the pin would have put them in a bad > >neighborhood, hey at least there might have been something interesting > >to shoot there. Better than the housing development or empty field > >that I ended up with. But maybe I should just keep sticking more > >pins. > > I made that comment. Most of what I shoot is candid "street" > photography. I do a lot of shooting in not-so-nice neighborhoods. > > However, there are neighborhoods where I'm not welcome. I know these > neighborhoods, and I know when not to be intrusive and when not to go > into an area where there might be trouble. I can get away with taking > candids in some situations, but it's not a good thing to walk into a > project and start snapping photos. The more people around, the more > likely it is that someone will object. When one person objects, the > crowd follows. > > This was taken not far from the pin, but in an area not so crowded. I > took prints of this picture to the two players a few days later, and > several other people wanted their photo taken. I'm now welcome in > this area. > > http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Sports/sports/Sports-Checkers-TonyCoope... That's an interesting picture. I like it, even though it looks surreal.
From: Chris Malcolm on 6 Jul 2010 01:46 In rec.photo.digital otter <bighorn_bill(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Those are points of "interest", not random points. I think the point > of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting > (random) locations. If the locations are truly random then some of them will be interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to unlucky photographers. -- Chris Malcolm Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.
From: otter on 6 Jul 2010 02:47
On Jul 6, 12:46 am, Chris Malcolm <c...(a)holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > In rec.photo.digital otter <bighorn_b...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Those are points of "interest", not random points. I think the point > > of the mandate is to try to take interesting pictures at uninteresting > > (random) locations. > > If the locations are truly random then some of them will be > interesting by lucky accident. Which would seem to be unfair to > unlucky photographers. So, anything goes? I have some interesting pictures (at least I think so) that I took over the weekend that were within 10 miles of my pin holes. Can I use those? |