Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: [SI] New Mandates! Get 'em while they're hot!

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: [SI] New Mandates! Get 'em while they're hot!

 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter <(E-Mail Removed)>
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! ;^)

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Jul 5, 9:59*am, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:35:57 -0700 (PDT), otter <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>> : On Jul 5, 8:21*am, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> : > On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:07:54 -0700, Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)> 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.h...&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...2_edxmV-XL.jpg



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:42:51 -0400, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter <(E-Mail Removed)>
>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? :^|


I live on a golf course and my house faces a tee box. I've never
photographed a golfer even though I could sit in my front yard and do
it all day. Too easy.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
otter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
On Jul 5, 8:42*pm, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter <(E-Mail Removed)>
> 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.
 
Reply With Quote
 
otter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
On Jul 5, 9:09*pm, tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter
>
>
>
>
>
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >On Jul 5, 9:59*am, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:35:57 -0700 (PDT), otter <(E-Mail Removed)>
> >> wrote:
> >> : On Jul 5, 8:21*am, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> : > On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:07:54 -0700, Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)> 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.h...&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...kers-TonyCoope...


That's an interesting picture. I like it, even though it looks
surreal.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Malcolm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
In rec.photo.digital otter <(E-Mail Removed)> 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.
 
Reply With Quote
 
otter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
On Jul 6, 12:46*am, Chris Malcolm <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In rec.photo.digital otter <(E-Mail Removed)> 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?

 
Reply With Quote
 
NGBarfart
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
RichB <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Mon, 05 Jul 2010 22:09:37 -0400, tony cooper
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT), otter
> ><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >>On Jul 5, 9:59*am, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 06:35:57 -0700 (PDT), otter <(E-Mail Removed)>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> : On Jul 5, 8:21*am, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>> : > On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 08:07:54 -0700, Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)>
> >>> : > 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.h...&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...yCooper/717655
> >592_edxmV-XL.jpg

>
> Had your DSLR in P&S mode did you? I don't see one photo there that
> couldn't be taken with a superzoom P&S camera just as well with the same or
> better image quality and with far less hassle.
>
> What a waste of money in the wrong hands.


There you are! You had to pull that old "RichB" sock out of the drawer,
some of those you were using over the weekend must be a little moth
eaten. We haven't seen that one for a while.

So are you going to be letting us view a few of your thumbnail
masterpieces soon, or are you going to continue to use other peoples'
shots which suit your purpose?

You are a pathetic POS? No, no, no, not pathetic, just a POS.

--
Just another troll tracker
 
Reply With Quote
 
MothboyHunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
RichB <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:47:58 -0700, NGBarfart <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> <crickets chirping>
>
> Hmm.... I could have sworn I heard the piggy squeals of a basement-life
> pretend-photographer roll-playing troll that has never posted even one
> photo to any newsgroup ....
>
> I guess not. Must have been my imagination. Oh well ....


So you have some porcine company along with those moths.

Your aren't the only one who can play the nymshift game, so you have no
idea for what I have, or have not posted.

I am just going to play you for all you are worth, and that isn't much.
--
Just another troll hunter.
 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-06-2010
On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT), otter
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Jul 6, 12:46*am, Chris Malcolm <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> In rec.photo.digital otter <(E-Mail Removed)> 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?


It's OK with me. If you are comfortable with it, then I'm not going
to object. A ten mile radius is perfectly acceptable to me if it
takes a ten mile radius for you to find an interesting subject.

What you have to decide is not what the "official" radius of the zone
is, but how challenged you want to be.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
While deploying application on AIX I got this error. while it's working fine on windows Sam Java 0 06-21-2006 06:26 AM
while loop in a while loop Steven Java 5 03-30-2005 09:19 PM
Help while error "Error while trying to run project:" David ASP .Net 1 07-19-2004 08:41 PM
Got error msg while Debugging : Error while trying to run project: ... ^CrazyCoder^ ASP .Net 3 09-15-2003 09:40 AM



Advertisments