Jorginho: 50 entries is clearly not enough...
The host usually changes the limit during the week, sometimes in more then 1 step, up to max 100.The reason (I think) is that this challenge often fills up fast, even with a limit of 100 entries (any more, and there will be some comments bemoaning it...), and, this being a worldwide challenge, this penalizes would be entrants in some timezones -- for me, the challenge starts at 1:00 am Saturday morning, meaning there's often half a day before I am able to upload an entry...
"thank" you dpreview photo "processing" for ruining the picture...It was perfectly fine before the upload (the softness was intentional), now the bottom looks like a cheap 80's video effect...
Bwah, humbug.Evolution is a far more elegant and difficult ( = > needing way more intelligence) way to create things than the drudgery of designing an everchanging array of different parasites and bugs (there are far more of them as of the pretty, pretty flowers, you know?), every single kind for itself.
Those proponents of ID just want to drag down God's intelligence down to their level of understanding, a rather insulting believe, if you think about it.(great, now bible thumpers and extreme atheists will be angry...)
Thank you!And all that with a very cheap lens...
This was my favourite, very dreamlike.
CG33: As per the "sample", the challenge is not about "macro photography", it is about close ups.
Only one, maybe two of the not withdrawn entries I would classify as a macro, some are not even close ups imo.
There seems to be much, well, let's call it negative emotions over samsung daring to enter the system camera market while one favourite and/or owned brand is also there competing...Why is there such a strong emotional investment in a brand? There are more mature thing to derive self-worth off...
A point in favour of the NX line are the 16mm and especially the 30mm pancakes, which, for me, make it a better complement to my dslr than the other brands.But then I am not everyone (and let's all be grateful for that), so it's good, not at least when it comes to innovation and prices, that there are other brands.
eivissa1: More on less on par with the panasonic LX5, regarding photo quality. So why bother buying this thing?
yeah, because competition and diversity is bad.If there's one model, nobody else should ever bring out a similar one...
boar: That series of 1 demonstrates that this site it's full of ignorant people!How can be assigned such a low vote when there isn't a specific thematic!?I'm very sorry for you dear friend.However it's a fantastic entry for me! :)
Thank you, but photos like this seem to trigger "this isn't photography" in many, so I don't expect to win in, uh, non-specific challenges like this with them.Furthermore, place 10 in this challenge is something special, too ;-)
Well, the Instagramm filter stuff won't be interesting for more than 5 minutes, making it just a party gag, but there are serious applications for this "augmented reality" stuff, like integrating it with google or an combined ocr and translation program -- translating chinese into your language on the fly (well, in 10 years or so...) for example.OTOH, our corporate overlords will then know at what we're looking at for how long, every good thing has bad side to it...(at least Google and I guess some still unknown startups are already working at this)
Still, as a child I was reading science fiction, now i'm living it.
The challenge is now full, but there are some entries that don't follow all the rules (b/w or sepia, or the naming rules)Examples:http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/Entry.aspx?ID=643821http://www.dpreview.com/challenges/Entry.aspx?ID=644187
It would be good to dq them before the submission phase ends, to enable others to enter.
Mostly Lurking: It's easy to see why this one was voted into 1st place, and it has NOTHING to do with photographic or atistic ability. That this photo is not a nude is debatable. I don't know the photographer, and if this 'non-nude' is representative of his or her thinking, then I'm sure we'd disagree on many subjects.
If that's a nude for you, you are looking too close...
John Ball John: 30% of the pictures to not represent CORN !
They do. Your definition of corn is just exclusivly US-American.In Great Britain corn stands for wheat.
chrime55: Hi, Zuph,my pic of Rye was disqualified because it is no corn? In my opinion corn is a general term for every mode of grain, not only sweet corn. Perhaps I've got a wrong dictionary. Next time I'll be more careful, so you might be more exactly in your description. Greetings
Well, my copy of "Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English" Oxford University Press, Nineteenth Impression 1985 (which was a official textbook at school) has the following to say:"corn: (..) 1 [U] (collective) (seed of) any of various grain plants, chiefly wheat, oats, rye and (esp. US) maize (...)"
So, while one can argue that the meaning of non-english words like the german "Korn" doesn't count, the meaning in british english is more or less wheat, calling maize corn is one of the great transatlantic differences.(And trying to make beer out of the stuff is going too far...)
As dpreview was, up to last year afaik, a british website, one could argue that the photos depicting maize are wrong :-)
John Ball John: Nice picture but this is not a corn field
If you are british, it is (or european, but only then most of us speak another language).Corn is always the main crop, it is just in the USA (and perhaps Canada) that corn == maize.
A Fujifilm X100 qualifies as a lensbaby?
Looks more like postprocessing -- one round sharp region, and the rest uniformly unsharp.With a lensbaby, there should be a more gradual loss of sharpness, that gets stronger.
Nice idea!But I would suggest an additional rule that the entry shouldn't have finished in the top 10 in any challenge; otherwise you might get entries that took part in more than one challenge, won one, but finished worse in another, and so are qualified by the rules (but I guess not by your intention) for this challenge. The entrants then can give you a hard time if you want to dq them.
And, if you have similar challenges for the future in mind, maybe you could make the, uh, qualifying rank relative?As in "not in the top ten percent" or "in the lower 50 percent".There is imho a little difference between a 11th place in a challenge with only 12 entrants, or a challenge with 500.