http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/ Engadget Comments for Engadget photo contest gallery! http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
Lucky guy whoever gets one for free]]>Feb 1st 2007 1:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
I really wish I'd known about this when it started. Will there be a next time? Are they annual? Or just whenever there's a spare digital camera worth giving away layin around?:)]]>Feb 1st 2007 1:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h291/livingroomonthelawn/8d00645d.jpg

Quite a striking similarity, no?]]>Feb 1st 2007 1:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 1:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
My vote goes to David Browning, then AJ Mast as #2]]>Feb 1st 2007 1:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 1:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Ah well, whatever. Good luck to the top 10!]]>Feb 1st 2007 1:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/ac773/image/69204749/large

The large version:
http://www.pbase.com/ac773/image/69204749/original]]>Feb 1st 2007 1:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
You wanna cookie?]]>Feb 1st 2007 1:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.flickr.com/photos/listrophy/283102608/

I'm not complaining about missing the top 10, but how did we not make the top 120? Surely Phil's and my pics are better than a laptop in front of a chain link fence?

Note to self: time-lapse photos of humans tend to blur. d'oh!]]>Feb 1st 2007 2:00PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 2:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 3:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
This is the kind of clever photo that should have made the top 10:
http://www.engadget.com/photos/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/149026/

Or some of these, too:

http://www.engadget.com/photos/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/149028/

http://www.engadget.com/photos/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/149020/

I know a lot of hard work went into selecting the finalists, but I'm a little bummed to see so few photos that simply feature the, "finest, most creative photo of (or making use of) electronics or consumer tech." Understanding that "Slightly photoshopped images are ok," but half of the finalists go way beyond slightly photoshopped. Love engadget, love many of the photos, but these finalists leave me cold. Nevertheless, the top 10 pictures are all wonderful creations and do demonstrate a fine talent.]]>Feb 1st 2007 2:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 2:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 2:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 2:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 4:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 2:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 9:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 2:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
This is a link to a photo similar to my entry. The difference is my entry had a pupil which was much more dilated.

Enjoy http://www.flickr.com/photos/23091358@N00/376731825/]]>Feb 1st 2007 2:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/]]>Feb 1st 2007 3:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 3:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 7:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 3:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 3:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
I also really like the "Last Supper" submission. Even though the photo is terrible, what a great idea ... I wish that I had thought of it!]]>Feb 1st 2007 4:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
"and to take home the D80 we want you to send us your finest, most creative photo of (or making use of) electronics or consumer tech. We know it's open ended, but we want you to do something that stands out -- the key is to grab our attention and stand out from the crowd. (In other words, just having a dramatically lit, well framed shot of an iPod probably won't win you this camera.) Slightly photoshopped images are ok, but the source image(s) must be yours, but judging will be about the merit of the photo, and not of your ability to manipulate it."]]>Feb 1st 2007 4:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 4:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 6:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
I might (hell, I would) agree with you if the objective of this contest was supreme photographic quality, but it wasn't. R. Block asked for the most creative photographic representation of something involving consumer tech.]]>Feb 1st 2007 8:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 9:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
Aside form this issue it just boils down to opinion, so here's mine:

Aaron Rincover: Looks kind of cool, but I have no idea what this is supposed to be. The shot of a planet in the background implies heavy photoshop manipulation.

AJ Mast: Great idea, great lighting, fits the spirit of the contest and it is an actual picture that doesn't require photoshop to exist. If this doesn't win compared to the others than the world is crazy.

Anthony Yim: Cute. Well within contest boundaries, at least.

David Browning: Clever idea, not really well shot, but I have to ask if the cell phones had any point other than to qualify for a contest like this? The cleverness of this picture has nothing to do with technology, and the cleverness is all it really has going for it. I like the shot though.

Devin Bryant: An aesthetically pleasing picture of or involving technology. This picture is within the spirit of the contest, although it doesn't evoke much deeper meaning. Good.

Juan Carlos Lopez: If this is a real photo, it's amazing. If this is a photoshop composite then we have the same situation where the entire photo was photoshop dependent in that this was not a photo that was taken. This is seriously looking like a photoshop contest.

Kurt Heumiller: Good, but this should be the absolute boundary of photoshop trickery allowed. Once again: the photo was impossible without photoshop. This is not post-processing "touch-up"!

Patrick Fletcher: No offense Patrick, but this is horrible.1) Photoshop dependent 2) not even aesthetically appealing 3) the gimmick is poor. Macbooks everywhere... why and who cares? The fact that this is even visible, implying it is in the top 120, is crazy. Seriously, Ryan?

Paul Weaver: Good. Fits the spirit of the contest well. No photoshop trickery!

Scott Whiting: The photo is *completely* dependent on photoshop. Clever, but well outside the bounds that were at least implied by the rules

Anyway, as long as AJ Mast wins then all is well. But I still think a lot of people feel shafted by the photoshop thing, and I think we would all appreciate some explanation other than "You should have ignored the rules and used photoshop as much as you wanted".

Thanks in advance.
]]>Feb 1st 2007 5:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 5:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 9:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
The picture is visually great, but ideally below the bottom. Anyone can take an
iPod, scribble chalk on the floor and get some small spotlights, but who can actually go to a backwater Africa village, and see an iPod there? Granted, it could be the photographer's iPod, but the idea is lightyears away.

Mast's picture is too dramatic, and tries too much.]]>Feb 2nd 2007 3:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
http://www.artwanted.com/artist.cfm?ArtID=21087&SubGal=&Page=0

]]>Feb 1st 2007 6:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/or do I have to search all 120 pics to find which one is which
so that I can cast my vote?]]>Feb 1st 2007 6:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://web.mac.com/brendan_eaton_/iWeb/Images/Mag%20Lines.html (bottom of the page). I won't pretend I'm not bummed at not being in the top 16% of entries. I probably was on the nature-ish side of the spectrum, but maybe one of the gracious Engadgeteers will hit me with the clue stick. Finally to the eventual winner - you're going to get a great camera (as if you did not know that). I've been borrowing a d200 on and off for the past 6 months; I'm sure the d80 will rock. Off to think about contenders!]]>Feb 1st 2007 8:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 8:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 8:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 8:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 1st 2007 9:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
Sure you don't have an swag for the failing five? ;)

Best of luck to the leaders!]]>Feb 1st 2007 10:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 2nd 2007 12:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/Feb 2nd 2007 12:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
Yeah, Juan has come out of nowhere.]]>Feb 2nd 2007 1:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
Handing your iPod to some guy while you're on vacation or photoshopping a bunch of shit on the Eiffel tower hardly counts as inspired, in my opinion, and is way more "forced" as you put it. Since when is the quality of a photograph dependent on how far the photographer had to travel to take it? Every time I go on vacation I'm suddenly a great photographer?

A 5-second search turned up these pictures of ipods in Africa:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/endrevestvik/81537804/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/durran/27814505/

If having a sense of drama and showing signs of effort signal poor photography, then I pray that I'm a horrible photographer.

]]>Feb 2nd 2007 4:03AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
Mast's photo has plenty of artistic value - and if there was no effort in art, I wouldn't likely care to look at it as much as I do. Let's not confuse conceptualization or expenditure of time with "forcing" anything. I think you (Nelg) have a very close-minded perception of the artistic process.]]>Feb 2nd 2007 4:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/01/engadget-photo-contest-gallery/
But the one I think I like best so far is the one by Paul Weaver of the African man listening to an iPod. The expression on the man's face is fantastic.

The image overall is great - it has great color, and the stark contrast of the modern, new world iPod with the man's old world clothing and lifestyle speaks a lot about the world today in that technology has become so prevalent in our society, that it can be found even in the most remote regions on earth.]]>Feb 2nd 2007 9:18AM