David J Brooks wrote: > I often wonder what judges look for myself. Photos 100's of people > like, seem to be dismissed, and photos i throw in at the l;ast minute, > seeem to do well.
The thing I came away with was that even a small technical glitch can undermine a solid or image - I think I tend to lose track of that with my own shots. The body of photos as a whole also sets up a direction or expectation that can result in otherwise good shots being ruled out. The portraits that we were looking at were largely formal, studio-lit shots, which really put the relatively small number of candids and informal portraits at a disadvantage. That was simply because after looking at 20 studio portraits in a row, and then seeing one candid, it's hard to change gears mentally and evaluate the shot differently. The same thing was the case in the nature judging - the quality of the bird shots was really high, which resulted in some really excellent bird shots falling by the wayside. The macros were good, but not quite as good as the birds, and more macros got in than I expected. The very few number of scenics / landscapes were really at a disadvantage. In a perfect world the categories would probably be more narrowly defined. - MCC -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, Michigan www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
