Fortnightly competition #7: Scales
Posted 21/01/2009 - 19:14
Link
RichardC:
You started off the competition (thanks for that!) with an interpretation of the theme I hadn't thought of. And I like the idea. I can see why you put the depth of field the way it is but I'm not quite happy with it. The title would perhaps been better placed a bit more towards the centre, covering the blank space that would open up on the top with another copy or another leaf of musical scores (to make it perfect some scales again ). The contrast could be a bit higher.
Galoot:
As usual a good idea from you. These are certainly scales close to my heart, I have two calipers in my drawer. It seems the manual one is from a high performance ceramics (or is it plastics? I hope the 'guessing' in 'guesssing scale' only refers to the material).
I like the composition and the limited depth of field in this shot. I wasn't convinced by the background at first but it grew on me (and the squares certainly are fitting; it's the bright blue that disturbed me a bit).
The order could have been different, showing the progression from the 'simple' one over the analogue instrument to the digital instrument. I would have cropped a little wider on the left and perhaps pulled the background a bit more to the right.
Great entry!
Hyram (Scales on scales):
Another clever play with the theme. I hope that setting the theme I wasn't the one deciding the fate of the three fishy friends here. A good contrast between the bloody fish and the clean scales, reflected in the warmer colours of the fish's heads and the cooler colours of the scales (fishy and not fishy). I do like the composition, crop and lighting. I find, though, that overall it could be sharper. The letters on the scales are fine and I would have thought that at 105 mm and f/22 the depth of field should be sufficient to keep everything tack sharp.
Could it be that you lost a bit of sharpness when downsizing? And another question is bugging me: What was the weight of the fish?
Malo1961:
Eggcelent picture, certainly quite a few scales here. A very pleasing composition, good lighting (from the kitchen window, I assume). The scraper placed in the picture does convey the feeling that the cooking action does start now. It's hard to find fault with this one...
scottthehat (scales scales scales):
Yes, this picture does show some scales on more than one level. It could do with a bit of brightening up, though (when one does the teeth of the little buggers look even scarier). I find this picture a bit too cluttered, there is lots of background and the reflections in the pond
are also a bit distracting from the main subject. I guess you weren't able to direct the two models in any way and most likely you had not much choice of where to shoot from.
HowardJ (Aargh - it can't be right!!!):
A painfully familiar scene, it makes me want to look away. And that is where this shot succeeds, I think. The choice of footwear, while without doubt comfortable, is a bit questionable for this shot as the shoes and trousers are a tad too dark. (As this is the third time I find something
too dark I took a look at the histogram, just to be sure it's not just me).
The tiles (or pretend tiles) are not aligned with the frame, but I rather like this detail. I was a bit surprised that
you took the full photo rucksack with you on the scale (either that or it was way out of calibration).
hefty1 (Ford Escorts):
Ahh, the good old Escort. What a joy to see. I like this shot a lot, well composed and well thought out. It puzzles me a bit how the green model and the parts of the Escort to be are kept suspended in the air. But these are thoughts that arise only on the second glance and this shot does have its biggest impact at first contact. It's probably the fresh colours and the lighting that make the shot for me.
Bob and his Pentax (Scales of Justice):
Another take that I hadn't expected (though it is not that far fetched). Something bugs me with this one but I can't put my finger on it. Could it be that the focus is on the roof rather than on Justice? It seems that I cannot make out much detail on the statue, it could well be that this is a consequence of sitting too long at the monitor staring at various entries... (Sorry for not being able to be more specific)
GlynM (Different Scales):
This was a risky submission as Dr. Who is not well known in every corner of the planet. Luckily for you I lived in the UK for a period of such length that contact with the Daleks could not be avoided completely (plus I worked with a bunch of engineers, who seem to have a special affinity to Dr. Who).
So I know what they are called but that is as far as it goes (you can pity me now, if you like).
It's a good composite and the sharp edges work in your favour here as it seems the Daleks are hovering over the ground (I assume that that's what they do in "reality" but I don't know that).
Somehow I have the feeling, though, that I am seeing the same Dalek three times...
A sure winner for the die hard Dr. Who fan, but I'm not one of them.
Tony-O (Timescales):
Lovely entry, I like it a lot. A lovely collection of dials, good composition and very pleasing lighting. A very strong entry...
RR (Shed chameleon scales):
Not the first scales I would think of but certainly within the theme. I like the abstract nature of it (would have been hard to figure out what it is without having the description). A bit less contrast would have been better, I think. The highlights are clipped as are the shadows. I could be wrong but the bigger scales on the right look almost translucent. If they are, that would have been a property to bring out in the shot a bit more.
It really shines, though, when I look at it on full screen (though the interpolation doesn't do it justice anymore).
mikew:
Back to the musical scales. This time, though, we not only see the score but also the instrument. This certainly is a new twist and does leave a more lasting impression on the viewer. The violin and hand do look pin sharp, even at this resolution. So much so that it seems as if it is a composite image (but I think it's not). My guess is that the sheet was slightly out of the depth of focus. For me the crop is a bit unfortunate, I think it could have been a bit wider (perhaps with further music sheets sticking out of this exercise book).
I like the look of the score sheet, you can see that it has had some use.
Rob (Russian doll equality):
Brilliant idea that had me puzzled for a moment! I do like this idea and your shot is a competent realization of it, well thought out. Joe (or Joseph) seems a bit out of focus but that is the only niggle I have and I appreciate how difficult it must be to set this shot up. (I hope you have done a 'making of').
Dr. Mhuni (Fish eye scales):
Another good idea to finish off this round. Well set up, great lighting and a good fish eye view of your dining room (or so I assume). I like the crop (or framing) as well. Excellent shot.
And the winner is...
You know it wasn't easy to rate the shots. The six shots mentioned were close together and a tad ahead of a further two:
1. place: Malo1961
2. place: Rob
3. place: Tony-O
Honorary mentions: Dr. Mhuni, hefty1, Galoot
A very good crop of entries this round and I cannot express how difficult it was to judge.
Enough of what I was "sinking" about. Martin, it's over to you.
Prieni
You started off the competition (thanks for that!) with an interpretation of the theme I hadn't thought of. And I like the idea. I can see why you put the depth of field the way it is but I'm not quite happy with it. The title would perhaps been better placed a bit more towards the centre, covering the blank space that would open up on the top with another copy or another leaf of musical scores (to make it perfect some scales again ). The contrast could be a bit higher.
Galoot:
As usual a good idea from you. These are certainly scales close to my heart, I have two calipers in my drawer. It seems the manual one is from a high performance ceramics (or is it plastics? I hope the 'guessing' in 'guesssing scale' only refers to the material).
I like the composition and the limited depth of field in this shot. I wasn't convinced by the background at first but it grew on me (and the squares certainly are fitting; it's the bright blue that disturbed me a bit).
The order could have been different, showing the progression from the 'simple' one over the analogue instrument to the digital instrument. I would have cropped a little wider on the left and perhaps pulled the background a bit more to the right.
Great entry!
Hyram (Scales on scales):
Another clever play with the theme. I hope that setting the theme I wasn't the one deciding the fate of the three fishy friends here. A good contrast between the bloody fish and the clean scales, reflected in the warmer colours of the fish's heads and the cooler colours of the scales (fishy and not fishy). I do like the composition, crop and lighting. I find, though, that overall it could be sharper. The letters on the scales are fine and I would have thought that at 105 mm and f/22 the depth of field should be sufficient to keep everything tack sharp.
Could it be that you lost a bit of sharpness when downsizing? And another question is bugging me: What was the weight of the fish?
Malo1961:
Eggcelent picture, certainly quite a few scales here. A very pleasing composition, good lighting (from the kitchen window, I assume). The scraper placed in the picture does convey the feeling that the cooking action does start now. It's hard to find fault with this one...
scottthehat (scales scales scales):
Yes, this picture does show some scales on more than one level. It could do with a bit of brightening up, though (when one does the teeth of the little buggers look even scarier). I find this picture a bit too cluttered, there is lots of background and the reflections in the pond
are also a bit distracting from the main subject. I guess you weren't able to direct the two models in any way and most likely you had not much choice of where to shoot from.
HowardJ (Aargh - it can't be right!!!):
A painfully familiar scene, it makes me want to look away. And that is where this shot succeeds, I think. The choice of footwear, while without doubt comfortable, is a bit questionable for this shot as the shoes and trousers are a tad too dark. (As this is the third time I find something
too dark I took a look at the histogram, just to be sure it's not just me).
The tiles (or pretend tiles) are not aligned with the frame, but I rather like this detail. I was a bit surprised that
you took the full photo rucksack with you on the scale (either that or it was way out of calibration).
hefty1 (Ford Escorts):
Ahh, the good old Escort. What a joy to see. I like this shot a lot, well composed and well thought out. It puzzles me a bit how the green model and the parts of the Escort to be are kept suspended in the air. But these are thoughts that arise only on the second glance and this shot does have its biggest impact at first contact. It's probably the fresh colours and the lighting that make the shot for me.
Bob and his Pentax (Scales of Justice):
Another take that I hadn't expected (though it is not that far fetched). Something bugs me with this one but I can't put my finger on it. Could it be that the focus is on the roof rather than on Justice? It seems that I cannot make out much detail on the statue, it could well be that this is a consequence of sitting too long at the monitor staring at various entries... (Sorry for not being able to be more specific)
GlynM (Different Scales):
This was a risky submission as Dr. Who is not well known in every corner of the planet. Luckily for you I lived in the UK for a period of such length that contact with the Daleks could not be avoided completely (plus I worked with a bunch of engineers, who seem to have a special affinity to Dr. Who).
So I know what they are called but that is as far as it goes (you can pity me now, if you like).
It's a good composite and the sharp edges work in your favour here as it seems the Daleks are hovering over the ground (I assume that that's what they do in "reality" but I don't know that).
Somehow I have the feeling, though, that I am seeing the same Dalek three times...
A sure winner for the die hard Dr. Who fan, but I'm not one of them.
Tony-O (Timescales):
Lovely entry, I like it a lot. A lovely collection of dials, good composition and very pleasing lighting. A very strong entry...
RR (Shed chameleon scales):
Not the first scales I would think of but certainly within the theme. I like the abstract nature of it (would have been hard to figure out what it is without having the description). A bit less contrast would have been better, I think. The highlights are clipped as are the shadows. I could be wrong but the bigger scales on the right look almost translucent. If they are, that would have been a property to bring out in the shot a bit more.
It really shines, though, when I look at it on full screen (though the interpolation doesn't do it justice anymore).
mikew:
Back to the musical scales. This time, though, we not only see the score but also the instrument. This certainly is a new twist and does leave a more lasting impression on the viewer. The violin and hand do look pin sharp, even at this resolution. So much so that it seems as if it is a composite image (but I think it's not). My guess is that the sheet was slightly out of the depth of focus. For me the crop is a bit unfortunate, I think it could have been a bit wider (perhaps with further music sheets sticking out of this exercise book).
I like the look of the score sheet, you can see that it has had some use.
Rob (Russian doll equality):
Brilliant idea that had me puzzled for a moment! I do like this idea and your shot is a competent realization of it, well thought out. Joe (or Joseph) seems a bit out of focus but that is the only niggle I have and I appreciate how difficult it must be to set this shot up. (I hope you have done a 'making of').
Dr. Mhuni (Fish eye scales):
Another good idea to finish off this round. Well set up, great lighting and a good fish eye view of your dining room (or so I assume). I like the crop (or framing) as well. Excellent shot.
And the winner is...
You know it wasn't easy to rate the shots. The six shots mentioned were close together and a tad ahead of a further two:
1. place: Malo1961
2. place: Rob
3. place: Tony-O
Honorary mentions: Dr. Mhuni, hefty1, Galoot
A very good crop of entries this round and I cannot express how difficult it was to judge.
Enough of what I was "sinking" about. Martin, it's over to you.
Prieni
How inappropriate to call this planet earth when it is quite clearly Ocean. - Arthur C. Clarke
Prieni's PPG page
Prieni's PPG page
Posted 21/01/2009 - 19:38
Link
Congratulations to Martin and thank you Prieni for an unusual subject and well considered judging.
Hyram
Bodies: K20D (2), K10D, Super A, ME Super, Auto 110 SLR, X70, Optio P70
Pentax Glass: DA* 300, DA* 60-250, DA* 50-135, DA* 16-50, DA 70 Ltd, FA 31 Ltd, DA 35 Ltd, DA 18-55 (2), DA 12-24, DA 10-17, M 200, A 35-70, M 40, M 28, Converter-A 2X-S, 1.4X-S, AF 1.7, Pentax-110 50, Pentax-110 24
Other Glass: Sigma 105 macro, Sigma-A APO 75-300
Flash: Metz 58 AF-1 P, Pentax AF160FC ringflash, Pentax AF280T
Bodies: K20D (2), K10D, Super A, ME Super, Auto 110 SLR, X70, Optio P70
Pentax Glass: DA* 300, DA* 60-250, DA* 50-135, DA* 16-50, DA 70 Ltd, FA 31 Ltd, DA 35 Ltd, DA 18-55 (2), DA 12-24, DA 10-17, M 200, A 35-70, M 40, M 28, Converter-A 2X-S, 1.4X-S, AF 1.7, Pentax-110 50, Pentax-110 24
Other Glass: Sigma 105 macro, Sigma-A APO 75-300
Flash: Metz 58 AF-1 P, Pentax AF160FC ringflash, Pentax AF280T
Posted 21/01/2009 - 19:52
Link
Prieni wrote:
Hyram:
......................I find, though, that overall it could be sharper. The letters on the scales are fine and I would have thought that at 105 mm and f/22 the depth of field should be sufficient to keep everything tack sharp.
Could it be that you lost a bit of sharpness when downsizing? And another question is bugging me: What was the weight of the fish?
The original is sharper but still not perfect - I must keep working on my manual focus skills Hyram:
......................I find, though, that overall it could be sharper. The letters on the scales are fine and I would have thought that at 105 mm and f/22 the depth of field should be sufficient to keep everything tack sharp.
Could it be that you lost a bit of sharpness when downsizing? And another question is bugging me: What was the weight of the fish?
This particular set of scales switches off after a relative short period of time, hence the blank display. The fish were eaten shortly afterwards so I do not know their weight
Hyram
Bodies: K20D (2), K10D, Super A, ME Super, Auto 110 SLR, X70, Optio P70
Pentax Glass: DA* 300, DA* 60-250, DA* 50-135, DA* 16-50, DA 70 Ltd, FA 31 Ltd, DA 35 Ltd, DA 18-55 (2), DA 12-24, DA 10-17, M 200, A 35-70, M 40, M 28, Converter-A 2X-S, 1.4X-S, AF 1.7, Pentax-110 50, Pentax-110 24
Other Glass: Sigma 105 macro, Sigma-A APO 75-300
Flash: Metz 58 AF-1 P, Pentax AF160FC ringflash, Pentax AF280T
Bodies: K20D (2), K10D, Super A, ME Super, Auto 110 SLR, X70, Optio P70
Pentax Glass: DA* 300, DA* 60-250, DA* 50-135, DA* 16-50, DA 70 Ltd, FA 31 Ltd, DA 35 Ltd, DA 18-55 (2), DA 12-24, DA 10-17, M 200, A 35-70, M 40, M 28, Converter-A 2X-S, 1.4X-S, AF 1.7, Pentax-110 50, Pentax-110 24
Other Glass: Sigma 105 macro, Sigma-A APO 75-300
Flash: Metz 58 AF-1 P, Pentax AF160FC ringflash, Pentax AF280T
Posted 21/01/2009 - 20:17
Link
Congratulations to Martin & thanks to Prieni for his comments.
I went for the more abstract approach with the high contrast rather than a technically accurate macro as I couldn't achieve a sharp enough result. (Like Hyram, it's probably my focusing or part of my technique that's off - will be getting a proper macro soon so no excuses then !)
Subject was wide open to interpretation here & I enjoyed the varied entries.
I hope Martin can invent an equally inspiring theme to keep my brain ticking over.
I went for the more abstract approach with the high contrast rather than a technically accurate macro as I couldn't achieve a sharp enough result. (Like Hyram, it's probably my focusing or part of my technique that's off - will be getting a proper macro soon so no excuses then !)
Subject was wide open to interpretation here & I enjoyed the varied entries.
I hope Martin can invent an equally inspiring theme to keep my brain ticking over.
Posted 21/01/2009 - 20:19
Link
Congratulations from me as well to both the winner and the judge.
Let's hope we can increase the number of entries as these competitions with the time limit are fun.
Mike
Let's hope we can increase the number of entries as these competitions with the time limit are fun.
Mike
Posted 21/01/2009 - 21:01
Link
Congrats to Martin,Reminded me of our weekly potatoe pancake session,yum yum!I also liked Hefty's entry,it takes a lot of skill to avoid sticky finger marks.And i enjoyed Dr Mhuni's shot,with what looks a new DA17-70,Impressive! Thanks to Prieni for kind comments. Tony.
K7,DA*50-135, 35mmLTD Macro, 21mm Ltd, Voightlaender 58mm 1.4 NOKTON SL,Ricoh GRD,GRX, Zeiss 100mm f2 Makro Planar.Zeiss Ikon ZM,Zeiss f1.5 C Sonnar.
It ain't no sin to take off your skin,and dance around in your bones.Tom Waits.
It ain't no sin to take off your skin,and dance around in your bones.Tom Waits.
Posted 21/01/2009 - 21:12
Link
Great idea and well judged, thanks Prieni. I'm only sorry I didn't have time to process mine before the deadline, but then it wasn't of the quality of most of these entries.
One thing did strike me though, hefty's photo shows the little magic sparkle of the 43 ltd. I cannot quite put my finger on it, but the colours etc. have something about them. How does the saying go, "I can resist anything except temptation?"
Great stuff all, and I am glad I didn't have to judge it. Too many excellent ideas.
Best wishes, Kris.
One thing did strike me though, hefty's photo shows the little magic sparkle of the 43 ltd. I cannot quite put my finger on it, but the colours etc. have something about them. How does the saying go, "I can resist anything except temptation?"
Great stuff all, and I am glad I didn't have to judge it. Too many excellent ideas.
Best wishes, Kris.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
Posted 21/01/2009 - 22:03
Link
Thanks to the judge for his comments, some very impressive shots here. The winner just looks so natural and real. Hopefully this format of competition will continue and grow, it is quite a challenge to think of an idea, capture it and process it within the timescale.
Richard
Richard
Posted 21/01/2009 - 22:23
Link
Thanks Ralf, for the nice words and honouring me with this first place.
Although there weren't as many entries as hoped for, they were of a very high standard
You were right on the window light used on the subject. With two large windows facing East and South I can have a very pleasing set-up in my kitchen. I think 90 percent of my indoor shots are taken there, because of the quality of light.
Another reason I am happy is the fact that I used an M42 Takumar on my camera. Almost 40 years old and found for 30 usd on ebay.
These oldies keep amazing me.
Well......I am off now, trying to think something up for the next round. Will post the next theme soon.
Martin.
Although there weren't as many entries as hoped for, they were of a very high standard
You were right on the window light used on the subject. With two large windows facing East and South I can have a very pleasing set-up in my kitchen. I think 90 percent of my indoor shots are taken there, because of the quality of light.
Another reason I am happy is the fact that I used an M42 Takumar on my camera. Almost 40 years old and found for 30 usd on ebay.
These oldies keep amazing me.
Well......I am off now, trying to think something up for the next round. Will post the next theme soon.
Martin.
Posted 21/01/2009 - 23:04
Link
Congratulations to Martin for a lovely winning shot and to Prieni for a great subject and excellent and detailed judging - must have been harder than you thought it was going to be, and there were some inspired entries.
If anyone's interested I could do a "making of", but only if people break it to me gently when it turns out I did it the hard way.
What's next?
Robert.
If anyone's interested I could do a "making of", but only if people break it to me gently when it turns out I did it the hard way.
What's next?
Robert.
Posted 21/01/2009 - 23:40
Link
R o b wrote:
If anyone's interested I could do a "making of", but only if people break it to me gently when it turns out I did it the hard way.
Well I for one would love to know!If anyone's interested I could do a "making of", but only if people break it to me gently when it turns out I did it the hard way.
Cheers, Kris.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
Posted 22/01/2009 - 00:10
Link
Excellent shot Martin and a worthy winner - a good set of entries all round this fortnight in fact, so congratulations to Prieni for a tough judgement call well made!
Excellent fun though - kept me amused all afternoon!
This is the pre-cloning shot that shows the supports in place (most obviously across the grey roof):
[IMG]http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd37/hefty1969/IMGP5055.jpg[/IMG]
Prieni wrote:
It puzzles me a bit how the green model and the parts of the Escort to be are kept suspended in the air. But these are thoughts that arise only on the second glance and this shot does have its biggest impact at first contact.
This shot required (out of view obviously) a large sheet of perspex, six assorted clamps, two wire clotheshangers and several tens of yards of cotton thread. It took about two hours to set up, two minutes to photograph and a further hour cloning the supporting threads out again in Photoshop. The hardest bit was keeping it all still after it was set up as the slightest movement made the green car spin onto its nose...It puzzles me a bit how the green model and the parts of the Escort to be are kept suspended in the air. But these are thoughts that arise only on the second glance and this shot does have its biggest impact at first contact.
Excellent fun though - kept me amused all afternoon!
This is the pre-cloning shot that shows the supports in place (most obviously across the grey roof):
[IMG]http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd37/hefty1969/IMGP5055.jpg[/IMG]
Joining the Q
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
131 posts
18 years
Aberdeen,
Scotland
Taken on 20.1.09 at 12:38 AM
16mm, F22, 30 sec, ISO 100
Gimped for longer than I'll own up to...