MobiWorkshop MobiWorkshop - New for 2019

sinnerjohn said:
So macro can be summed up in one sentence. Get as close to your chosen subject as possible to still be able to focus, hold the phone steady, maybe use a tripod if you have one, press shutter.
Click to expand...
Plus pay attention to the out-of-focus background, if there is one? Does it need to be dark or light? And how do you get light on your subject when your phone is 3 inches away and blocking the sun? And what needs to be in focus? And what makes an interesting close-up? And probably most important, why didn't this one work, dammit?
 
terse said:
I think any workshop should be an opportunity -- or a goad -- to get out and do just that: shoot, focusing on one particular aspect of photography (close-up, etc.) and then having the chance to get critiques and talk over problems in execution with some people doing the same thing. (For ex: "When I try to shoot a close-up of something small, the focus keeps locking onto the background instead of the object." Ans: "Use a manual focus camera app.")

I think shooting is good and shooting + relecting/analyzing is better. Even if you shoot intuitively, in the moment, the things you learn by examining later eventually become part of your intuition. (Sez me.)
Click to expand...
Right.
 
terse said:
Plus pay attention to the out-of-focus background, if there is one? Does it need to be dark or light? And how do you get light on your subject when your phone is 3 inches away and blocking the sun? And what needs to be in focus? And what makes an interesting close-up? And probably most important, why didn't this one work, dammit?
Click to expand...
These are exactly the struggles of anyone who has spent some time making close-up photos. The problems and solutions are specific to this type of photography which is exactly what it makes a good topic as being different from landscape or street photography.
 
FundyBrian said:
List of suggested topics:

• How to achieve maximum image quality
• Macro Photography
• Bird Photography
• Using lens filters
• What makes a competition winner?
• How to be a good photo competition judge
• Contemplative Photography
• The Art of Seeing
•.Slow Shutter (long exposure)
.
Click to expand...

I’m in! I would love to learn more about macro photography since my Christmas Gift to me was a macro lense set from Olloclip. Instagram is full of gorgeous macro images, and I really want to post some gorgeous macro images. So far mine are just ok to nice. And that leads into my next area of interest...what makes a competition winner? I really like the stuff I post, yet I like stuff I see even better. My IG following is small, which leads me to think maybe my images aren’t as good as I think they are. What should I be doing different to make them “winners”? And I’m really interested in seeing if “seeing” can be taught. I had a world renown artist/teacher tell a friend that I “had it...the gift of vision” and she went on to say it was the one thing she couldn’t teach, “either you had it or you didn’t”. So I’d really like to know if it can, indeed, be taught. So I’m in for at least a few topics :)
 
Ryn S said:
I’m in! I would love to learn more about macro photography since my Christmas Gift to me was a macro lense set from Olloclip. Instagram is full of gorgeous macro images, and I really want to post some gorgeous macro images. So far mine are just ok to nice. And that leads into my next area of interest...what makes a competition winner? I really like the stuff I post, yet I like stuff I see even better. My IG following is small, which leads me to think maybe my images aren’t as good as I think they are. What should I be doing different to make them “winners”? And I’m really interested in seeing if “seeing” can be taught. I had a world renown artist/teacher tell a friend that I “had it...the gift of vision” and she went on to say it was the one thing she couldn’t teach, “either you had it or you didn’t”. So I’d really like to know if it can, indeed, be taught. So I’m in for at least a few topics :)
Click to expand...
Remember Ryn, Instagram is a bit of a game, the more people you follow the more likes you'll get. The more time you spend on there 'liking' other peoples stuff the more likes you'll get in return. You have to put a lot of effort to get the 1000's of likes some people get and its nothing to do, sadly in many cases, with the quality of the images. It all comes down to that age old conundrum, are you making images to please yourself or to please other people?
 
Keep on suggesting topics you would like to see the group focus attention on.

Based on current activity it looks like Close-up Photography it uppermost on people’s minds.

Guess what? MobiWorkshop 1 will focus on Close-up Photography. That will be a good test case to figure out how these workshops are going to work. I’ll start a new thread for MobiWorkshop 1.
Ryn S said:
I’m in! I would love to learn more about macro photography since my Christmas Gift to me was a macro lense set from Olloclip. Instagram is full of gorgeous macro images, and I really want to post some gorgeous macro images. So far mine are just ok to nice. And that leads into my next area of interest...what makes a competition winner? I really like the stuff I post, yet I like stuff I see even better. My IG following is small, which leads me to think maybe my images aren’t as good as I think they are. What should I be doing different to make them “winners”? And I’m really interested in seeing if “seeing” can be taught. I had a world renown artist/teacher tell a friend that I “had it...the gift of vision” and she went on to say it was the one thing she couldn’t teach, “either you had it or you didn’t”. So I’d really like to know if it can, indeed, be taught. So I’m in for at least a few topics :)
Click to expand...
I’m glad you decided to join us, Ryn. I think close-up photography will make a great starting topic and it is likely to have additional related topics in other weeks. “What makes a competition winner” is another topic up for discussion soon. Do you have other topics you would like to explore?

Can “seeing" be taught? I’m going to disagree with the teacher you spoke about because, yes, I believe it IS something people can learn. Or perhaps “awaken” is a better word. I’ve seen it happen. Over the years I have coached a great many beginning (and beyond) photographers and I heard one particular comment many times, often spoken with a sense of wonder. "I see so many things I never saw before. It’s like my eyes have been opened." Another thing often follows a bit later on. “I never before noticed the play of light and now I realize how important it is in making a good picture."

I’m not saying it is something I taught them but rather I set them on a course of action that led to that. I was simply teaching them how photography works and getting them to go out and take pictures. I showed them lots of pictures as examples of certain types of things as well as lots of pictures from other photographers in the overall group. Often they were seeing pictures made in a different way. I think is it more a particular type of awareness that awakened within them as a result of paying attention to the world around them in a new way. And I am sure there are other levels of seeing still awaiting their discovery.

It typically takes a year or so of seeing examples and going out looking at their surroundings with a more focused intention to make their own pictures. And then it happens. However, there is still a difference between learning to "see the light” so to speak, and being able to do something with that new vision. You may see something you want to show but still struggle with capturing it or depicting it through photography. Learning to express what you see artistically and technically. It also happens that people learn about photography but the new way of seeing doesn’t happen.

What if we deliberately set out to awaken this type of seeing in people rather than taking it for granted that it will eventually happen naturally?
Maybe you have had this type of experience. There is a certain type of picture you can share among your photographer friends that other people don’t seem to “get”. What is that exactly? It’s like they can’t see what’s in front of them or they don’t see its significance. We used to call them “photographer pictures", for lack of a better term, and I know many other people have had that exact same experience.
 
lkbside said:
Sounds interesting. I initially participated in Time Stamp but found that I wasn’t doing anything terribly interesting on many Saturdays.

Always up for learning more even if the topic is obscure to me. This is an ambitious project for you Brian.
Click to expand...
Welcome aboard, Leslie. I hope we venture into areas you find interesting. I welcome your suggestions for topics close to your personal interests.
 
terse said:
That could be interesting. It could be "What would it take to make this photo of mine a competition winner?" or "What makes this actual competition winner so good?" or even "Why was this one the winner and not this other one?"
Click to expand...
Or, what would it take to get the judge to pick my picture as the winner? Does my emotional attachment to my own pictures cloud my judgement when it comes to picking entries for photo contests?
Yes, it’s an interesting topic for discussion.
All these questions about contests and judging all seem to be part of the same discussion. One might also add “how to be a good photo contest judge” since that is part of the equation. Also, How to pick the sort of picture this particular judge is likely to favour.

Your question above “What would it take to make this photo of mine a competition winner?” is distinctly different from the rest. More nuts and bolts rather than philosophical. It is similar to “Edit This”. I think we each often wonder how someone else would have developed a particular photo we have. Would it be that different? Could my image editing techniques be at fault? Just how far should I enhance a particular image before people find it too much? Etc. We know that some people’s personal preference leads them to tone down an image, almost antiquing it, while others like an image punched up a lot more. By what standards do we judge?
 
FundyBrian said:
Or, what would it take to get the judge to pick my picture as the winner? Does my emotional attachment to my own pictures cloud my judgement when it comes to picking entries for photo contests?
Yes, it’s an interesting topic for discussion.
All these questions about contests and judging all seem to be part of the same discussion. One might also add “how to be a good photo contest judge” since that is part of the equation. Also, How to pick the sort of picture this particular judge is likely to favour.

Your question above “What would it take to make this photo of mine a competition winner?” is distinctly different from the rest. More nuts and bolts rather than philosophical. It is similar to “Edit This”. I think we each often wonder how someone else would have developed a particular photo we have. Would it be that different? Could my image editing techniques be at fault? Just how far should I enhance a particular image before people find it too much? Etc. We know that some people’s personal preference leads them to tone down an image, almost antiquing it, while others like an image punched up a lot more. By what standards do we judge?
Click to expand...
As I think more about this topic, I'm losing some enthusiasm for it, at least for the idea of "competition winner." When you enter a competition, your results always come from a collision between your particular image and one particular (unknown) judge. And as we see week after week in the color and b/w challenges here, different judges see different things in images. To me, "competition winner" puts too much stress on things outside our control and not enough on making a good image. Maybe "competition worthy" would be better?

It'd be exciting as hell to win or even place in a major competition, and it was a kick just to get a couple of HMs. But the continuing satisfaction comes from submitting images I feel are good enough to belong (and from the extra effort in tuning I put in to see that they are).
 
terse said:
As I think more about this topic, I'm losing some enthusiasm for it, at least for the idea of "competition winner." When you enter a competition, your results always come from a collision between your particular image and one particular (unknown) judge. And as we see week after week in the color and b/w challenges here, different judges see different things in images. To me, "competition winner" puts too much stress on things outside our control and not enough on making a good image. Maybe "competition worthy" would be better?

It'd be exciting as hell to win or even place in a major competition, and it was a kick just to get a couple of HMs. But the continuing satisfaction comes from submitting images I feel are good enough to belong (and from the extra effort in tuning I put in to see that they are).
Click to expand...


Same.

Plus, if the question really is as simple as ‘what makes a competition winner’, there’s no need to ‘workshop’ the idea.

Unless of course you wanted to workshop the specific standards/requirements of each competition: the preferences of each panel of judges. A review of previous winners and/or the judges’ webpages would provide sufficient orientation. I’m sure it was sinnerjohn who pointed out the plethora of ‘deformed female figures’, for instance, in the MPA winners’ gallery.
 
terse said:
As I think more about this topic, I'm losing some enthusiasm for it, at least for the idea of "competition winner." When you enter a competition, your results always come from a collision between your particular image and one particular (unknown) judge. And as we see week after week in the color and b/w challenges here, different judges see different things in images. To me, "competition winner" puts too much stress on things outside our control and not enough on making a good image. Maybe "competition worthy" would be better?

It'd be exciting as hell to win or even place in a major competition, and it was a kick just to get a couple of HMs. But the continuing satisfaction comes from submitting images I feel are good enough to belong (and from the extra effort in tuning I put in to see that they are).
Click to expand...
In a way you’re preempting the workshop where we would uncover that.
When participating in an outside competition you should try to find out what scoring system the judges use to evaluate the images. Established organizations certainly have adopted some sort of accepted scoring system with at least 3 judges.
Let’s say you have a total of 10 points for each image. The scoring might go something like this:
1 - Impact: the instant wow factor
2- Composition:
3 - Technical: (focus, exposure, depth of field, colour balance, perspective distortion, etc.)
2 - Creative expression: creative interpretation, fresh perspective, Lighting, etc.
2 - Theme: how well the image fits the theme.
And there could be any number of other criterion the , like: Subject matter. Commercial potential, universal appeal, humour, etc.
__ Total
So the judges look at the image and evaluate “Impact” does it have it or not. If it does you get the point. Your quiet misty scene may be beautiful but might not score on Impact.
Next they evaluate the composition. Hmmm, only 1 out of 2 points. The balance isn’t quite right.
Technical: Focus is a bit soft but everything else is OK, 2 out of 3 points.
And so on. All written down on score cards. Anytime one judges score deviates noticeably from the others they are called upon to explain why.
Of course if the competition category is portrait photography the points categories would include expression, pose, etc. Each different type of competition would have it’s own points categories.
So you can see that knowing the scoring system helps you a lot in deciding how well your picture might do in the competition.
When you know 3 points are awarded to technical concerns you wouldn’t bother submitting a picture that had many good points but had technical weakness, such as burned out highlights. The judge has to be able to put their own preferences aside and be impartial. They should be able to say, I really don’t like this picture but it should be the winner.
 
FundyBrian said:
In a way you’re preempting the workshop where we would uncover that.
When participating in an outside competition you should try to find out what scoring system the judges use to evaluate the images. Established organizations certainly have adopted some sort of accepted scoring system with at least 3 judges.
Let’s say you have a total of 10 points for each image. The scoring might go something like this:
1 - Impact: the instant wow factor
2- Composition:
3 - Technical: (focus, exposure, depth of field, colour balance, perspective distortion, etc.)
2 - Creative expression: creative interpretation, fresh perspective, Lighting, etc.
2 - Theme: how well the image fits the theme.
And there could be any number of other criterion the , like: Subject matter. Commercial potential, universal appeal, humour, etc.
__ Total
So the judges look at the image and evaluate “Impact” does it have it or not. If it does you get the point. Your quiet misty scene may be beautiful but might not score on Impact.
Next they evaluate the composition. Hmmm, only 1 out of 2 points. The balance isn’t quite right.
Technical: Focus is a bit soft but everything else is OK, 2 out of 3 points.
And so on. All written down on score cards. Anytime one judges score deviates noticeably from the others they are called upon to explain why.
Of course if the competition category is portrait photography the points categories would include expression, pose, etc. Each different type of competition would have it’s own points categories.
So you can see that knowing the scoring system helps you a lot in deciding how well your picture might do in the competition.
When you know 3 points are awarded to technical concerns you wouldn’t bother submitting a picture that had many good points but had technical weakness, such as burned out highlights. The judge has to be able to put their own preferences aside and be impartial. They should be able to say, I really don’t like this picture but it should be the winner.
Click to expand...



You are describing how a good judging panel works
 
zenjenny said:
Same.

Plus, if the question really is as simple as ‘what makes a competition winner’, there’s no need to ‘workshop’ the idea.

Unless of course you wanted to workshop the specific standards/requirements of each competition: the preferences of each panel of judges. A review of previous winners and/or the judges’ webpages would provide sufficient orientation. I’m sure it was sinnerjohn who pointed out the plethora of ‘deformed female figures’, for instance, in the MPA winners’ gallery.
Click to expand...
It really is an interesting topic and there are a lot of things people often don’t think about when picking images for competitions. But there are no “right” answers so a lot of it would be speculation.
You can be sure that organizations such as the professional photographers of America have a well thought out scoring system that has been fine-tuned over many years and everyone knows in advance how the points are awarded, and you can count on the judges to be fair and impartial.
 
zenjenny said:
You are describing how a good judging panel works
Click to expand...
Right. I don’t know anything about the MPA but any major competition that doesn’t have a fair and impartial system leaves itself open to criticism. It’s a different thing in MobiTog where competitions are more like friendly challenges between friends and striving to learn and do better and participating are the most important things. There’s no high stakes involved.
 
sinnerjohn said:
Remember Ryn, Instagram is a bit of a game, the more people you follow the more likes you'll get. The more time you spend on there 'liking' other peoples stuff the more likes you'll get in return. You have to put a lot of effort to get the 1000's of likes some people get and its nothing to do, sadly in many cases, with the quality of the images. It all comes down to that age old conundrum, are you making images to please yourself or to please other people?
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly, and that’s why I don’t have very many followers or get many likes... I just can’t be bothered. And unless I plan on being an “influencer”, what’s the point, really?
 
sinnerjohn said:
Remember Ryn, Instagram is a bit of a game, the more people you follow the more likes you'll get. The more time you spend on there 'liking' other peoples stuff the more likes you'll get in return. You have to put a lot of effort to get the 1000's of likes some people get and its nothing to do, sadly in many cases, with the quality of the images. It all comes down to that age old conundrum, are you making images to please yourself or to please other people?
Click to expand...
I guess I didn’t know the rules. I just follow the artists who inspire me. And ‘like’ what I like. Rosie’s account is absolutely just for fun. :lmao::lmao::lmao:

Besides, its way quicker to puruse and not nearly as political as Facebook.
 
sinnerjohn said:
Remember Ryn, Instagram is a bit of a game, the more people you follow the more likes you'll get. The more time you spend on there 'liking' other peoples stuff the more likes you'll get in return. You have to put a lot of effort to get the 1000's of likes some people get and its nothing to do, sadly in many cases, with the quality of the images. It all comes down to that age old conundrum, are you making images to please yourself or to please other people?
Click to expand...
I’m not on instagram or twitter or any others except very occasionally on Facebook so I’m not much of an expert. I read somewhere that careful use of plenty of hashtags or keywords makes it easier for more people to find your pictures. Lots of people use the hashtags or keywords to search for certain types of pictures they are interested in, like cute puppies, or crafts, or steampunk, or who knows what.
 
RoseCat said:
Yes, exactly, and that’s why I don’t have very many followers or get many likes... I just can’t be bothered. And unless I plan on being an “influencer”, what’s the point, really?
Click to expand...
My partner, Fabi, is on FB as much as I’m on MobiTog and has quite a big network. She also has a recipe page that is quite popular. I’ve discovered that if my objective in posting a picture is to get lots of likes all I have to do is post a picture of Fabi and I’m instantly getting likes from all her connections. Anything else I post just gets the usual response.
 
zenjenny said:
I plan on being an “influencer” — where do I start ?
Click to expand...

FundyBrian said:
My partner, Fabi, is on FB as much as I’m on MobiTog and has quite a big network. She also has a recipe page that is quite popular. I’ve discovered that if my objective in posting a picture is to get lots of likes all I have to do is post a picture of Fabi and I’m instantly getting likes from all her connections. Anything else I post just gets the usual response.
Click to expand...

Right. Step 1. Multiple pictures of Fabi.

I’m listening . . . :mobibabe:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom