Originally posted by mrNewt "How many photographers you need to take a picture?
1 to take the picture and 10000 more to tell you how you should of done it"
Originally posted by Dr Orloff On the other hand I don't need to be informed that a deliberately blurred image is blurred. Some judges seem to struggle with the difference between shallow depth of field and entirely out of focus.
Just a thought but there is a certain very thin dividing line when judging any artwork, including photographs, if one is expected to offer constructive criticism.
Consider the general photograph we are most often called upon to rate and comment on. The vast majority of entries consist of some subject in front of some background. Usually the subject is in focus and the background is not.
Very often even parts of the primary subject are blurred to some extent which may, or may not, detract from the image.
Now, as a judge, you have to rate the image. Hypothetically just accept for a moment that you feel that the entire subject needed to be in sharp focus, and that the background is just too blurred into a kind of uniformly coloured splodge to an extent where there is virtually no continuity between the subject and its surroundings.
You, as the judge, make the comment that; "
The depth of field is too narrow because parts of the subject are blurred and the background has totally lost all definition destroying the continuity between the subject and its environment".
To me that is a valid comment, but taking Dr Orloff's view does it offend? Perhaps the photographer intended it to be exactly like it is for some artistic reason totally unknown to the judge?
But equally the photographer may have been trying to shoot the image in fairly low light conditions without access to a tripod, so was limited to a minimum shutter speed and a wide open lens setting - but neglected to consider that raising the ISO level a few stops may have solved the problem?
Judges are unaware of the artistic intent of the photographer, or the photographers level of competence.
As another example, photographers very often tilt the camera on street scenes to produce a particular and desired composition. It would really annoy them if some judge then said that their entry was technically flawed because the camera was not held level!
But if the judge truly feels that the image is "wrong" and needed a wider depth of field or the camera held level or whatever, then surely they have a duty make that comment?