[soosh]

The border is the straight scan of the medium-format film. It’s not a photoshop-added effect.

[soosh]

Thanks, Elsinore!

[soosh]

Hmm, one for, one against. Any more thoughts, or is my vote going to decide the matter? 😉

The rightmost one is towing the pylon line, but I think it’s ok. The field of them look wooden and thinner like poles and less like hulking towers/pylons.

It might be worth explicitly pointing out in the first post of the thread that bridge abutments, pilings, interstate sign poles, etc, are excluded.

Well, the headline and description both mention life on the grid, so I think it’s already pretty explicitly stated.

And honestly not to pick details, but would a pole with a light such as above where the light was non-functional or otherwise turned off be accepted? Or a cropped version of the above pole where the light was out of frame?

If it’s an obvious streetlight in the frame, I really don’t think it qualifies, sorry. Now if you took a shot of a wooden pole that happened to have a streetlight on top and you only photographed the pole itself without the streetlight in the frame, I think you’re ok. It’s not like anyone could prove it was a telephone pole and not a streetlight pole if the streetlight isn’t visible.

No need to say sorry. I was asking so that I could weed through my photos and pick ones that did qualify. All week I had been thinking of the contest in terms of just poles that weren’t only streetlights, until I read it a little closer today. I’m just glad I thought about it before I started posting my photos.

[soosh]

Also, if a utility pole and a streetlight are both in the shot, is that ok?

(looking through my photos I have on hand trying to figure out if they qualify or not)

[soosh]

Thanks for the clarification.

This is a pretty narrow field, but I can work within that.

It might be worth explicitly pointing out in the first post of the thread that bridge abutments, pilings, interstate sign poles, etc, are excluded.

And honestly not to pick details, but would a pole with a light such as above where the light was non-functional or otherwise turned off be accepted? Or a cropped version of the above pole where the light was out of frame?

[soosh]

also, this photo: no good because there’s a light on it?

[soosh]

what about the pilings that hold up a pier? They are long wooden cylindrical logs used as support. Do they count as utility poles? What about the waist-high concrete-filled pipes that are often used to designate parking?

[soosh]

I’m struggling with this theme as well.

Also, would something like cross-processing, done in photoshop, but evenly across the whole photo, leave a photo eligible for farktography? I’m guessing no, but was curious.

as an example:

[soosh]

I love my Tokina 12-24.

I’m trying to decide now between a 20mm f/1.8 and a 30mm f/1.4

[soosh]

congrats!

welcome to the world, little girl! sorry about the mess.

[soosh]

I had a lot of fun with this week’s contest. My shopping list included:

# 12 piece hose clamps
# 3 piece c-clamps
# cowboys and indians playset
# 2 piece mini-pliers
# jute cord
# plastic toy goat
# generic holy bible
# bag of good ‘n’ plentys
# 150 pack of bamboo skewers
# fashion doll in metallic outfit
# fashion doll in go-go boots

had hoped to work the cowboys and indians in, and to make a ball gag out of one of the good ‘n’ plentys.

more than anything, i was grateful to have an office door i could close so i could take the photos at lunch today.

[soosh]

Hey, where’s the thread where we apologize for being an ass last week and blame it on recent surgery/painkillers for making us all sorts of out of whack?

Cause I could use that place.

Apologies, y’all. I was out of line.

[soosh]

[Photograph something, anything, but use additional light, past an on-camera flash

Each of my entries manipulated light to produce an image in the camera that wasn’t what an observer at the scene would have seen. The way that was done was to accumulate additional light using time, which I think is every bit as valid a way to paint with light as a flashlight. Did I provide the moonlight? Nope. But I made sure it got into the box.

[soosh]

The shots I entered tonight, I picked because there was a difference in how the scene looked to the eye compared to how the scene turned out with accumulated light taken into consideration.

And what does that have to do with the theme? Just curious.

I’m guessing that’s how he interpreted the theme title “Painting With Light”

and how others did also. HOWEVER Photograph something, anything, but use additional light, past an on-camera flash. Bounce light, flashlight, lantern, or strobe- Be creative to my mind accumulated light, while creative, doesn’t fit the description. this contest has several entries that are nothing more than ambient light. nice photos but not on topic/theme.

and IMHO that’s a disservice to those that spent the time to actually add light to their entries. mine aren’t getting votes due to the suck factor but they at least had an outside light source. and when i did them i spent some time trying different angles and lighting. a pretty sunset or a dog back lit by the sun ……. well maybe it just bothers a few of us.

So some people’s additional light came from an electronic source, other people’s came from sitting around and waiting and collecting several minutes worth of light and combining them into one visual. I added additional light to my scene by leaving the shutter open long enough that the foreground was lit like day, not like the pitch black it really was.

If “painting with light” means I have to direct an artificial light source into a scene, then every time I’m turning on the damned porch light to look to see if it’s a porcupine or a bear in the garbage, I’m “painting with light”.

Suppose the subject of a contest was “chairs” and the person who envisioned the subject had a real love of seating furniture. Wicker-back rockers, plush club chairs, leather sofas, you name it. Would a toilet be out of the bounds of the contest? What about a portrait of Edmund Giambastiani, former chair of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council in the US Joint Chiefs of Staff?

Don’t let your vagina get all sandy.

[soosh]

even for the most carefully worded themes, we often find people will interpret it in an unanticipated way that isn’t really what was intended, yet can’t really be precluded (read: deleted) due to the wording of the description and/or title.

As always, it’s not photography, it’s Farktography. Your hard work on your photos is not negated by anyone else’s photos be they on theme, off-theme, or stretching the boundaries.

And this is exactly why I love Farktography. Because of how wide and various the interpretation of the theme can be.

The shots I entered tonight, I picked because there was a difference in how the scene looked to the eye compared to how the scene turned out with accumulated light taken into consideration.

[Author]

Posts