Forums › Forums › Farktography General Chat › This week’s contest › 11-23-11 – Triptych Portraits
- This topic has 310 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by
Farktographer.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 30, 2011 at 6:54 pm #41911
Kestrana
ParticipantI actually rather liked the difficulty because it pushed me out of my comfort zone but it will make the theme inviting to more people if the difficulty is removed. I can still personally work on the ideas I had in mind.
I also support your distinction that the photos should be parts that together show a whole subject as opposed to three whole pictures of the same subject arranged together. If I read you right, you don’t want entries that look like a seamless arrangement or whole photo broken into pieces, even if it is from multiple frames. – This distinction would answer aspidites, yoyo, and gambitsgirl‘s questions.
I might rewrite the theme description as:
“Take three photos of different parts of a living thing or object and combine them in a triptych for a single fark-sized creation. As usual, you can submit three entries.”October 30, 2011 at 7:14 pm #41912Uranus
Participantliking it, Kes.
I somehow like the difficulty. I like the idea of getting people to try different things. Heck, I’d add a further difficulty of no cats or dogs 😈
October 30, 2011 at 10:00 pm #41913ennuipoet
ParticipantI think including the inanimate is a good idea to increase participation. Face it, a lot of people are uncomfortable shooting portraits and most of us don’t have understanding and/or photogenic family 😆 I will be shooting the Village Halloween Parade tomorrow so I’ve got a lot of street photography opportunities where I plan on shooting trips for this theme, but most people don’t.
As usual, I think broader themes make for better threads.
October 31, 2011 at 1:26 am #41914Yugoboy
ParticipantI’m a bit happier with allowing inanimate, due to the fact that photographing the majority of the people I encounter on a daily basis requires a waiver (shooting my students might also be interpreted as a bit creepy).
October 31, 2011 at 1:54 am #41915U-Man
ParticipantThanks for the input so far. I’m letting this percolate a bit longer. Further input is welcome.
October 31, 2011 at 6:31 am #41916kashari
ParticipantColor me confused. 😆
I love that one guy’s stuff, where he has the head shot, hands, then feet. So is this more of what you’re wanting is three parts of one thing, rather than shooting something in thirds? For example, would shooting a car from the side, in thirds, not fit? But, if you took a shot from the front, then maybe a tire and then a rear view, would that be ok?
I guess one things that’s confusing me is the term ‘making it whole’, does that mean show the whole thing or a ‘whole as a concept’?
October 31, 2011 at 7:36 am #41917ravnostic
ParticipantI’d like inanimate included, please. It’s a new theme premise; the less difficulty, the better, as a good many will have not done anything along these lines before. Just my $.02
October 31, 2011 at 8:08 am #41918Farktographer
ParticipantAnd throwing my $.02 in, I rather liked the difficulty…
October 31, 2011 at 9:39 am #41919gambitsgirl
Participantsome of those photos are really cool.
October 31, 2011 at 10:32 am #41920Participant…. a good many will have not done anything along these lines before.
kind of the point, isn’t it?
Yugoboy, ennuipoet – who says it has to be people?
This was what I wanted to achieve with suggesting projecting something over a 3D object…it is as much as what can make of the creative challenge as it is about simply shooting a subject…one would hope that enough people would be challenged that participation would still be high, it encourages shooting new stuff in new ways.
I’d like to see something equally challenging at least once a month.
October 31, 2011 at 11:27 am #41921ParticipantUranus wrote:Yugoboy, ennuipoet – who says it has to be people?
Nobody.
If the difficulty stays, I’ve got a few critters running around my house as well as a yard full of plants, so I’d still be in, but there’s some stuff hanging around from the Urban Art contest I’d go back and re-shoot for this if they’re allowed.Just me being selfish…
October 31, 2011 at 12:50 pm #41922Pope_Larry_II
ParticipantI’m all for the added difficulty, mostly because it takes me out of my confort zone.
/I do Farktography to expand my skills, getting votes is just a by-product.
October 31, 2011 at 5:58 pm #41923Participantkashari I think when I wrote “whole subject” that was something of a misnomer. I don’t think the whole subject needs to be displayed in the three photos but you do want your photos to give you the sense of what the subject is – for example if you were photographing a pair of dice and you just shot the sides rather than a side, an edge and a corner you lose the dimension of the subject.
October 31, 2011 at 11:57 pm #41924Participantkashari I think when I wrote “whole subject” that was something of a misnomer. I don’t think the whole subject needs to be displayed in the three photos but you do want your photos to give you the sense of what the subject is – for example if you were photographing a pair of dice and you just shot the sides rather than a side, an edge and a corner you lose the dimension of the subject.
Ok, gotcha, thanks Kestrana!
November 1, 2011 at 3:38 am #41925ParticipantFor example, would shooting a car from the side, in thirds, not fit? But, if you took a shot from the front, then maybe a tire and then a rear view, would that be ok?
I guess one things that’s confusing me is the term ‘making it whole’, does that mean show the whole thing or a ‘whole as a concept’?
Correct. Splitting the car into three panels isn’t what I have in mind. Three parts that show the ‘personality’ of the car or ‘whole as a concept’ is right on. Or, two parts and then a wider view of the whole subject could work.
For example, a cheerleader could be shown as a close-up of school logo face paint, and hands holding pom-poms, and a wider angle of the whole subject cheering.
-
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘11-23-11 – Triptych Portraits’ is closed to new replies.