« We Hear from Adobe | Main | Sony A7III: IS »

Tuesday, 17 April 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I can't complain too much about the idea of a Younger Photographers Group -- well, actually, I can: the little twerps have a whole lifetime of photography ahead of them, during which they should get better, so what's the point of a celebration now? -- but I suggest you also have an Older Photographers Group, for people, say, 70+. Best photo of a lifetime, maybe? That should give you nightmares. "Dear Sir: The best photo of your lifetime just wasn't quite good enough..."

I'm surprised you didn't mass convert them all to b&w and removed those that still work as a first pass filter.

Be careful that you don't make a mountain out of a molehill.

During my years in the corporate world such a preamble was called “sand bagging”, to which my superiors would have quickly said, “Just get on with it.”

I for one am in no hurry. I loved the B&W BD, and realised then how much thought you'd put into the final selection. The problem with setting a high standard is then it takes a lot of effort to keep to it.

No worries Mike as you’ve had other challenges recently. It seems this BD has been particularly challenging given the amount of virtual-ink you’ve devoted to it. With this latest thinking an idea that struck me is to take the current submitted photos and edit them into your own defined sub-categories. And the results certainly don’t need to be a BD; six photos or even one or two along with your thoughtful insights would be interesting. Not that I want to increase your already taxing workload. Perhaps, at heart, you’re just a B&W kind of guy!

I thought the idea was pretty simple.
Images that just don't work in B&W compared to seeing them in Color. Full color, partial color, muted color, saturated color - whatever mass of color there is. Images that rely partly on the use of Color for their impact or effect. Images that, if in B&W - lose the feel and character that has them as images worth looking at in color.
Not necessarily Color for the sake of Color. Not a gimmick. Just images that do not look nearly as good without the color.

I don't think any of us would mind if you split the field in two based on approach, whether that results in two baker's dozens or two baker's half-dozens.*

That said, I think Daniel and Dori are on to something.

* Is that even a thing? I mean seven, but I suppose it could be 6+6+1.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007