Forums › Forums › Farktography General Chat › This week’s contest › 07-22-09 – Industrial Arts
- This topic has 55 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 8 months ago by orionid.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 22, 2009 at 7:34 pm #23395nobigdealParticipant
orionids dog seems pretty happy to see him 😉
I don’t have any issues with a link to a gif
July 22, 2009 at 7:35 pm #23396nobigdealParticipantI have way to many choices this week. Getting a headache looking at them…
July 22, 2009 at 7:49 pm #23397bucky_baconParticipantIt doesn’t really bother me.
The animation, not the lipstick.
July 22, 2009 at 7:50 pm #23398CuriousParticipanti have two. they suck even in the large size. i’m afraid to see them at 640 pixels.
[strike]but they are personal and will have a caption.
they still won’t get votes.
but i will enjoy sharing them.[/strike]having now seen them at 640 they won’t be entered. bad photos doesn’t begin to adequately describe the suckage.
time to work on next week 🙂
July 22, 2009 at 8:42 pm #23399orionidParticipantI’ve got three other photos that I can use. The one in question I had ranked 3 of the 4 total anyways, so it won’t bother me to not use it. The biggest reason I asked, and may be needed as a new thread for more discussion or rules clarification later, is based on the linking thing. We’ve always allowed linking to bigger shots for photos that look better at higher resolution, but this falls more into a software edited version. Honestly, my first impulse is to argue against it, but I can also see it’s merit in being able to show the 3D effect for people who can’t see it the normal way.
July 22, 2009 at 8:55 pm #23400olavfParticipantMy thought is that we’re really voting on the images in the thread. Honestly the linked image could have dancing polar bears for all most people would know.
I’d link both – the ‘pops larger’ and the animation.
July 22, 2009 at 9:14 pm #23401ElsinoreKeymasterI think since no one has a strong opinion against it, I wouldn’t worry too much about it. My argument against it was more the “hey that’s a software edited version that might unfairly benefit your entry over others” but on the other hand I see the argument for helping people see the 3D. Again, I don’t see any strong opinions against it, so do what thou wilt in this case 🙂
July 22, 2009 at 10:17 pm #23402millera9ParticipantI’m against it (though I’ve mellowed in my iron-fisted rules abiding ways). Another way to think about it is to ask yourself what your reaction would be if I posted a rules-abiding version in the thread and then linked to a version with an audacious border. I would object if someone did that and this seems like the same thing; taking the source image and linking to a modified version that’s enhanced in some way to allow viewers to ‘see what the photographer saw’ and thus bring more votes. The argument that some people (myself included) can never see the 3-D photos correctly is not a valid reason to link to something that’s outside the rules. Again, what would your reaction be if I told you that people never appreciated the compositions of my photos and that I was therefore going to be linking to versions where I had selectively desaturated everything but the focal point?
Having said all that, I won’t be too annoyed if you post it in the thread and beat my entries with it. Not like we’re competing for money or fame here! 🙂
/Red rocket boy! Red rocket!
Edited to add: olavf‘s solution seems to be a good workaround. Link to both versions with a note saying the gif is for those of us who are 3-D challenged.
July 22, 2009 at 10:49 pm #23403UranusParticipanta bit buggered on this one…have 4, like them all.
have to sink one myself, before the voting sinks the rest and makes me wish I’d kept it….decisions, decisions.July 22, 2009 at 11:00 pm #23404sooshParticipantI’m kind of against it, too. It seems to me kind of like posting a regular image and then a link that says “here’s what it looks like in HDR”.
July 22, 2009 at 11:01 pm #23405ElsinoreKeymasterThat’s kind of where I was going with my objection, but I’m just not feeling bitchy enough tonight, I guess, to be that concerned with it 😆
July 22, 2009 at 11:46 pm #23406orionidParticipantI’m kind of against it, too. It seems to me kind of like posting a regular image and then a link that says “here’s what it looks like in HDR”.
That’s kind of where I was going with my objection
And where I was going with my own reservations about it. No worries, I’ll just save the stereographics for photos that are so magnificent that they look great without the 3d effect, and the extra dimention is just a bonus.
/That might be a while. 😀
July 23, 2009 at 12:03 am #23407ElsinoreKeymasterContest linky: http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4527566
July 23, 2009 at 12:32 am #23408U-ManParticipantI have no real input about the above (in a meeting…supposed to be paying attention) but I felt a little queasy last week posting the other pics of drops of cream and coffee. Obviously, not queasy enough to not do it.
July 23, 2009 at 12:48 am #23409nobigdealParticipantOverabundance of B-Sidage http://www.flickr.com/photos/21629306@N00/sets/72157621461927826/
The brick building in my shots is the Narragansett Electric power plant in Providence RI.
I really really really wanted to shoot that at night, but alas, it never happened.(stoopid procrastination!)
The green thing is an asphalt making plant.
-
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘07-22-09 – Industrial Arts’ is closed to new replies.