Reply To: website CC

[cameraclicker]

Several web sites have right click disabled, which I find funny.  It is a bit like watermarks, though I understand and agree with a tasteful watermark for photos posted to Facebook since that site strips EXIF data.  Web browsers have to download files from the server in order to display them.  The downloaded files are stored in a set of folders on the machine viewing the content.  Like right click, you can disable Print Screen, but the file will still be sitting in cache so you can get it from those folders if you want it.  I suppose there is a population disabled controls and watermarks will defeat and perhaps those are the ones who should be the target of such controls.  I seldom watermark, and so far have not posted photos to Facebook.  If I start posting to Facebook, I will definitely add watermarks first.

Entering contests is a way to see where you fit in, but a lot of contests only offer feedback if you are in the top three, or five.  Contests that get a lot of submissions just announce First, Second, Third and sometimes Honourable Mentions.  If you are in that group, you are told what the judges thought.  If you aren’t, you don’t hear anything.  Here, some local camera clubs have member’s contests where everything is critiqued during judging.  Volume is smaller and members are encouraged to improve.

That the photo is loved or hated suggests different viewer priorities.  On one level there is the little human who is in a sleeveless T shirt an old man might wear, looking a bit like he just woke up and is both vulnerable and curious.  On another level the exposure is good, with catch lights in both eyes.  But the ear seems to flare out, the near cheek appears quite large and the far cheek gives the appearance the lower face extends well beyond the plane of the forehead.  The other curious feature is the plane of focus.  The background pattern on the left side is very sharp.  The fabric looks quite coarse in the lower left corner and loses focus to varying degrees across and up the photo.  By the crown of his head, the background fabric is quite soft, yet around the neck above his left shoulder the texture of fabric is coming back into focus while his hand is quite soft.  The right shoulder seems closer to the camera while the conflicting impression is the baby is lying flat with the camera above.  Sigma’s 30 mm seems to be a standard prime lens for crop sensor bodies.  I can’t get my head around the depth of field unless you used a tilt-shift lens or there was some post processing with a blur tool.   Possibly those who don’t like the photo see, or feel, conflict?

The new Facebook link does not work for me, either.  I still end up looking at my Facebook news feed.