Archived and Closed
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members. The community moderator provided the following reason for archiving: Answered
The Link to the Image http://www.pixoto.com/images-photogra...
The title even alludes to the ant: "To have a sip"; what is having a sip? The ant!
Michael .... If there are just 4 Water drops hanging I would not have created this Topic !!!!!
If two Subjects are prominent in an Image, I think the Category can be chosen by the person who posts the Image, I guess..........
Would like to hear from the Admins........
And by the way it's a nice picture
who is having a sip? the ant.
Michelle.... I quoted earlier If it is the title That is Bothering you people I can Change it.
By the Way a girl relaxing in a Sunset scene is posted both in Landscape with Sub Category Sunsets/ Sunrise and Also in Category people with Sub Category "Portrait of Women" How come the Photographer has the Right to place such Images in Categories as They wish? ( I have seen Umpteen images of this type in Both Categories)
Here I am just asking the Prerogative to be chooser in which Category one can place ones Image taken with some pain ( A drop image can be taken with half the effort I made for this image)
An image of an ant can be considered fine art solely dependent upon it's composition and quality. We must reserve the Abstract category for actual Abstract images.
I hope you understand
I agree with you Aroon - for the simple reason that both the ant and the waterdrops are in perfect focus and both could conceivably be the subject.
It is the same for a flower (in perfect focus) with an insect attending (also in perfect focus) - it could be in either flowers or in insects and spiders. Or for a web with a spider (both in perfect focus) - these photos are able to be in more than one category.
The only time I feel that players are taking chances are when they post a great photo of an insect on a VERY out of focus flower in the Nature - flowers section for example.
For these dual subject photos - I vote with Aroon that the photographer should be allowed to submit in the category of their choice.
Existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence.
And Yes it is Stunning Photo !
In this case all i was meaning is, it is very dificult to fit some very good images in a set box when the lines are blurred
Yes the photographer should be entitled to pick his category but it is unfair on others if it dosnt really fit ?
I would however like to know why there's a paper crease one third of the way between the two curves of the plant, this is obviously a photo of a picture (the exif proves it's not a scan).
I will Edit my Images,Yes. mainly because my Sensor has dirt. No editing was done with the Drops and Ant.......
the Drops used here is Glycerin placed very carefully on the hairs of the plant using a syringe. the Ant as I said was unintentional, But when It came to investigate,I took the Opportunity........
I have made a tutorial on Red Bubble how I take Drop shots with Refractions.
Here is the Link http://www.redbubble.com/groups/the-p...
I think you should take a look at work of this man on Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuntbea...
and also this Lady http://www.flickr.com/photos/venkane/...
Sad That people like Derrick and Darren can show off thier expertise so Blatantly without fully knowing the Facts
Gaia And JoAnn...... Thank you for the Support.......
You are a brilliant artist and a great digital editor. There is no denying that. My point was that the category is "Water Drops" and your photos, by your own admission, do not include "Water Drops". If that is questioning your integrity than I am guilty. Regardless of what I say, you will continue to win duals and awards. I personally believe they should be in digital as altered images rather than the pure categories. Maybe they need a "Staged Studio" category?
Now explain to us again how you do not modify your photos.
P.S. and " The Ant came as an Unexpected Visitor." is kind of amusing as ants seem to make "unexpected" visits in a lot of your photos. I would also like to point out that allowing that lil guy to drink glycerin is cruelty to animals. I know it is only an ant but endangering an animals life, for you photography, is UNACCEPTABLE.
the Drops in this image of cource consists of glycerine. but the drops are not faked, is the point I want to make.the ant of cource came and went after sniffing some times without any discomfort.
Yes I used a leaf and a Flower as Background for the images.hence BG in two images are different.
what I am saying is that at least 95% of my drop shots are water and you should not point out they are fakes.
Water does not = glycerine
In this Image I may have made a misclassification in Classification on Water Drops.And I myself will change it into macro or Something. Just want you to know That The Drops I take are real and more than 95 % with Water. I dont Photoshop Them
Done. Changed The Category.
Just as a matter of interest Derrick - if you look online (Google, etc) for photographic forums, tutorials, etc. to assist with taking photos of "waterdrops" - you will see that a large percentage of the "waterdrops" in the abstract category (and in other sub-categories - such as Nature up close: water ) are in fact glycerin. What are you proposing then - that all the photographers who use this method (I am not one - so am not being defensive) "own-up" to a technique? Then Pixoto needs to change its policy and state categorically that only pure water (with no additives of any sort) may be used for the abstract waterdrops category?
Darrell, the paper folding (also highly visible in the droplets) is part of ensuring focal distance for multiple drops as far as I know. Aroon might be able to correct me. I tried some of this droplet photography and (partly because I tried to stick with water only) decided to remain with "natural" rain-droplet photography only - it is seriously time-consuming to get all the bits in focus.
This photo (http://www.pixoto.com/images-photogra...) is pretty much guaranteed to be glycerin droplets. Top photo of all time in abstract: waterdrops.
Lastly, glycerin is largely non-toxic, although it might give that ant a bit of a runny tummy... I suspect that nature is not suffering greatly (if at all) from having glycerin splashed around wildly.
Aroon - kudos for raising the topic - darn shame that the photo has been placed in the animals category (unless you chose to place it there). Still believe that it has a completely firm place in the abstract category!
According to Drugs.com glycerin can cause "serious side effect such as:
severe stomach pain or cramping
bloody diarrhea; or
severe rectal pain, bleeding, or irritation.
Less serious side effects of glycerin may include:
nausea or stomach discomfort; or
mild rectal pain or burning.
This is not a complete list of side effects and others may occur. Tell your doctor about any unusual or bothersome side effect. "
And that is in people, just imagine what is can do to an insects digestive system. Although I appreciate your input, just because it is a common practice does not make it acceptable. The harming of animals for photographic purposes is never acceptable.
Nobut seriously - getting back to the topic - are you requesting that Pixoto redefine the policy regarding droplet photography to exclude glycerin?
And seriously, back to the topic, I am not requesting Pixoto ban or redefine policies. I am suggesting they consider a "Staged and Studio" category for the "specialist" photographers who shoot in a staged or controlled environment. I think that would level the playing field for the realist photographers who follow the rules. That way they could submit hundreds of similar photographs without effecting the chances of the people who are trying to compete and follow the rules at the same time.
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.
This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.