HOME | DD
Trueblood β
sport trio
Published: 2005-04-24 00:54:22 +0000 UTC; Views: 9163; Favourites: 98; Downloads: 3559
Redirect to original
Description
God bless the dog-park,... God bless Halloween... God bless my digital Nikon.Related content
Comments: 122
AHHHHHHAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... I canΒ΄t belive it! YouΒ΄re a monster! Congratulations
π: 0 β©: 0
oh my god i laughed so hard at this. purely fantastic.
those dogs are hilarious. the freaking football and basketball crack me up.
π: 0 β©: 0
after reading most of the comments you or someone else mentioned about using a tighter lens to cut the people out. i personally LOVE the people. look at the couple to the right pointing to the dogs. even they're amazed at the ridiculous outfits these dogs are wearing. to the left you see many people. one on a cell phone, another holding her dog, and yet another dog dressed in a ridiculous outfit. i think this picture's great.
regarding the snaphot-esque quality of the photo. to me, a good photographer knows how to capture a moment in time that will preserve it forever. so what if it's not a studio shot? so what if it's not posed? the fact that you had no control over the situation just adds to your talent to capture something so ludacris and make us realise that some people....well......aren't playing with a full deck (because they dressed their dogs up like this)
sorry if this dosent completly mke sence to you..i spent alot of time writing this, TRYING to say what i want to say..
you're amazing
π: 0 β©: 1
thanks for your kind, long thought out words. yeah I like to see things wide to see the whole environment, see the world these critters exist in, and not just single out the subject with a long lens,
π: 0 β©: 0
i'm confused. is that a basketball with a dog growing out of it, or a dog with a weird mutation???
...what some people will do to their dogs for a holiday's sake
π: 0 β©: 0
Awww! This is SO CUTE. xD My dogs are too big (one is too fat) to make these kinds of costumes for. ;; I wish I could though.
π: 0 β©: 0
i love your whole gallery, every single quirky photograph. i'm a fav whore when it comes to your gallery.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think it's funny a few people have accused you of doing this with "photoshop" when your digital camera readout information is there to the right of the description. *rolls eyes* I think this is clever and cute and a wonderful capture; animals are so hard to photograph, especially in a setting like this. I LOVE the "hot flash", it makes everything look bright and surreal... and this is most certainly surreal. I look at this and my mind floods with thougths for the dogs, the situation, what kind of people would do this to dogs, everything. I love it. It sits up and speaks volumes to me (and never rolls over and plays dead, no matter how long I look at it). No wonder you're friends with Cweeks; you both have a great eye for capturing the truth in moments.
π: 0 β©: 0
It is truely awful, why this is DD is beyond me.
I'd like to know an indepth reason into why this was chosen, and take a look at other images that were considered DD for today.
π: 0 β©: 1
"I'd like to know an indepth reason into why this was chosen"
Because an admin liked it.
π: 0 β©: 1
And what has that got to do with anything being meritable for distinction?
By your logic, if an admin likes it - then they all deviations that are liked by admins should be DDs at very worst, and at very least it undermines every other DA awarded in the past.
π: 0 β©: 1
Your logic is flawed, because DDs aren't "awards".
They're merely administrative features.
π: 0 β©: 0
While this is cute and everything it's not worthy of a DD. It appears that the only reason you got it is because Cweeks is your friend.
π: 0 β©: 2
yeah. your're right. It was a grab shot. my flash was on manual, and too strong. perhaps a longer lens would be better to throw the humans out of focus, but what can I say.. The dog started standing, I reacted. man I suck.
π: 0 β©: 2
You do not suck in the least. I just don't understand why this photograph in particular was sooooooooo great. I think that it is funny that Tachy-on said the whole thing about "picking apart an image we don't even understand". There is nothing secretive about your photo. There is no message behind it either. If there was then you would've put it under conceptual. You even said yourself "The dog started standing, I reacted". It's a snapshot. It's cute.
Nikons are so expensive! I wish that I could afford one. Actually I am thinking about getting and olympus C-8080.
π: 0 β©: 2
My response contained in the middle paragraph was a generality... sometimes ppl trash deviations before they've studied the image and learned what it is about... sometimes they can study it for hours and never get it... applies to myself as well... sometimes I see images and I can't figure out for the life of me what the deal is with it... then I see comments from others who obviously see something in it I don't... they think its a great photograph, I just don't get it - but guess what, I keep my mind open and my mouth shut because I might just learn to see in a different way.
Your original comment for this image was out of line. It wasn't constructive criticism. You're entitled to your opinion, but perhaps it wasn't good judgement to post it on HIS page. It was unsolicited and rude.
π: 0 β©: 1
"I see comments from others who obviously see something in it I don't"
Yes, I am sorry that I didn't click my heels to his photo like you did.
This right here is what you need to look at:
"This user has specified no particular preference in regards to the critique intensity of the comments received for this deviation. Both critical and non-critical comments are welcome equally."
It says nothing about leaving ONLY constructive criticism. There is really nothing that he could do to better this photo. It wasn't posed or studio shot. There is no way to duplicate this photo exactly. That is why I call it a snapshot. There are many great snapshots here on DA. Does the fact that I called it a snapshot make you think that I meant the picture sucked? I left my little critique on what I thought of his photo. I left it for him, and not you. Sorry that you didn't like it. I left it under his photo and not on his page. He replied to me and didn't seem overly insulted. iI didn't leave it to insult him. I am a photographer so I picked out the errors in the photo that I figured that he would understand. If he was insulted then he would've defended his photograph himself. I feel that I have made myself clear and am therefore done with this conversation.
π: 0 β©: 1
I was talking about your original comment...
Yes, I'm done now too.
Have a good day.
π: 0 β©: 0
Do you think all his photos are "snapshots"? Just curious...
π: 0 β©: 1
The ones that I have seen so far, yes. That is my opinion though. Out of all of them I think that the duck following the lady is the best. In fact, I am really fond of that one. It just looks like he wants to be human.
π: 0 β©: 0
um ... well ... nikons suck ... but whatever...
if you made it with a mark 2 ... well ... ya' know.
don't worry about anything that was said, seriously.
π: 0 β©: 1
Nikons suck? Oh shit, I bought the wrong camera.
Seriously, what is it with these people?! For one day they should pick the DD, then we can all go and trash it (under the pretense of "constructive criticism". Then after we finish picking apart an image we don't even understand, we can go after them and demand why they picked it as a DD...
"Too much of a snapshot"... mon dieu, I guess we'll never see a journalistic photo as a DD then... Then again, maybe she's right... Cartier-Bresson's "snapshots" suck, right?
π: 0 β©: 1
nikon suck in the context of how they progressed with their digital platform. film-wise ... they're alright. the pro-services guys for nikon were COMPLETELY out of touch with reality as well. now, there is not one wire service in the world that issues nikon.
ya' know what ... you just can't please everyone mate. i've got my opinions of those that continually bash dd's. ya' know ... WHATEVER.
i'm sure their snapshots are this good.
NOT!
π: 0 β©: 1
Okay, so I got a D70 and an N80 - so I guess only half my cameras suck (tongue in cheek)
Are those the reasons you switched to Canon?
π: 0 β©: 1
lots of reasons to switch.
the competitive edge mostly.
nikon doesn't have it.
they probably never will.
and they're assholes to deal with.
canon has it ... and will keep it for the foreseeable future.
in fact, they're going to kill the medium format digi-back market as well. just watch.
cheers mate!
π: 0 β©: 1
*salivating* Medium Format....*drool*
Take it easy,
Pete
π: 0 β©: 1
medium format is "NOW" very overrated.
no need to salivate or drool.
cheers,
chris
π: 0 β©: 1
I just always enjoyed the DETAIL you can get with medium format...especially in landscapes...
π: 0 β©: 1
try 16mp!
try velvia thru leica glass ... just as much resolving power as any medium.
cheers,
chris
π: 0 β©: 1
DD's are an administrators choice, to feature artwork they believe deserves recognition. You don't have to agree, but there's also no need to leave this kind of comment.
Do you have any comments, or constructive criticism for the photographer? Itβd be far more appropriate.
Thank you.
π: 0 β©: 2
There is nothing to be said that hasn't already deen said. But if you think that this is deserving of some constructive criticsm.....
It does deserve a critique. The middle dog look washed out from the flash. I don't see why the flash needed to be used-it looks like a pretty sunny day to me. Plus the shadows on everything else are way more bolder than those of the three dogs. Because of the flash the middle dog looks like he was pasted in. There is just something that doesn't look right about him. While the dogs stand out a little when I look at it fullview, they don't stand out in the thumbnail. All of the people in the background make it distracting to focus on the dogs. All of the people are mildly in focus. Now if they were blurred or the dogs were a bit sharper then this might be a little more interesting. There are just too many bright colors other then the ones on the dogs so that takes away from them. This is too much of a snapshot, and wouldn't have gotten this attention had it not been a DD. It is a cute photo and everything, but that is about it.
π: 0 β©: 0
The same reply you sent me.
I'd say smashingpumpkins86 reply was far more relevant than a generic cut and pasted comment.
π: 0 β©: 1
I guess that I am not special enough to receive a new comment...I have to take your leftovers
WAHHHHH!!!
π: 0 β©: 1
Tell you what. I'll keep all the E's you can have every other letter of that comment, fair?
π: 0 β©: 0
Haha, I love it.
What size lens did you use for this?
π: 0 β©: 0
ok...the 2 none furry dogs look liek they were totally photoshopped in...outlining is very dark shadowing is messed up...the basketball dog kinda looks liek it belongs tehre buh might also not...buh the basketball DEFINATLEY does not look liek it was tehre when yew took the picture...same with the football...n the leash wouldnt yew slgithly see it leading off to the middle dog? n i dont see oen on teh football dog either...no offense but i truly dought that the picture was originally like this.good photoshopping tho.
π: 0 β©: 1
thnaks. no fakery. dogs were really really in those outfits, etc. I didn't do it to them. what I did do iss overexpose them with my flash, so I brought it down in photoshop. That's maybe why they seem fake cuz they're so much hotter than everyone else around them.
π: 0 β©: 1
haha ok i see what yew mean sorry fer teh mistake.
π: 0 β©: 0
best friends with the admin who picked them, 2 deviations out of a gallery thats 3 images total, both within the same week. Da need new admins period. And to add if you really think this is DD worthy then i suggest you get your eyes checked.
π: 0 β©: 3
we're not best friend's ....we're dating.
just kidding. Sorry. How bout this dog pic from the Venice Boardwalk...?
π: 0 β©: 1
ch'e BASTARDO!
that's supposed to be a secret!
π: 0 β©: 0
DD's are an administrators choice, to feature artwork they believe deserves recognition. You don't have to agree, but there's also no need to leave this kind of comment.
Do you have any comments, or constructive criticism for the photographer? Itβd be far more appropriate.
Thank you.
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>