The New Rules are in Place! - DPChallenge Forums

Sigma 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 Compact Hyperzoom Aspherical for Canon

11/16/2016 04:52:08 PM · #2

Does Standard Editing allow for adjustments on select portions of an image? For example, can I do the following to just a portion of the image: dodge, burn, adjust contrast, adjust curves, etc?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

11/09/2016 04:12:01 PM · #3

Originally posted by pixelpig:

Totalitarian: Anything not compulsory is forbidden.

Thanks -- I couldn't remember that one ...

Message edited by author 2016-11-09 16:32:50.

pixelpig

Sony Alpha a55

Sony DT 1.8/50mm SAM

11/09/2016 04:06:31 PM · #4

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Every time you sharpen your re-sized image you are using an option from the Filters menu. I don't think the rules specifically mention that cropping is allowed either, or Adjustment Layers, but I bet most people ASS|U|ME that if the rules don't prohibit it then it is allowed -- certainly those of us who frequently flirt with DQs and push the boundaries of any rule set think so ... :-)

Fascism: Anything not permitted is prohibited.

Social democracy: Anything not prohibited is permitted.

Totalitarian: Anything not compulsory is forbidden.

11/09/2016 03:54:00 PM · #5

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I think part of the problem here is that there is a combination of prohibited things and permitted things, and anything that falls between is up for us to guess - or, for some people to discuss on a thread where other people wouldn't know to look.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

11/09/2016 03:51:40 PM · #6

The rules are in the format of "you may..." or "you may not...", and there is nothing in the standard editing rules which suggests that you may use filters, or create new features/image areas.

Extended editing says, amongst other things, that you may "use any feature of image processing software to manipulate/enhance the images in your submission". Seeing as standard editing does not have such a clause, that would seem to me that you may not use any feature of image processing software, unless explicitly stated in the standard editing rules.

Seems to me like there is a group of regulars who know from experience what everyone else will allow or otherwise in voting - if filters and other post processing effects are allowed, then why can't the rules just say that?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

11/09/2016 03:51:36 PM · #7

Paul

Leica SL

Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical MF Wide Angle - Black

11/09/2016 03:27:40 PM · #8

It's straightforward. The filters are allowable under Standard Editing - by design.

We used to DQ for the creation of new features / image areas. Loads of case studies of controversy. Even members of SC disagreed on where the limits were. We simplified the rules and now there is nothing to prohibit their use; other than any disincentive that may come from voters!

So I support everybody's right to use them and I support everybody's right to score them down (or up) as they fit.

SC no longer quibble - can the wider membership please join us in non-quibblage?! :-)

11/09/2016 02:14:31 PM · #9

Originally posted by Cyrilda:

I got a critique from someone on one of my photos and it made me over think using Photoshop and I simply was hoping by using a filter on Photoshop I wasn't breaking rules in the impression challenge. :)

Yes, just because they are now allowed does not mean everyone will like them. The rules were changed so that the decision of what is "too much" was shifted off the shoulders of SC and into the voters hands.

Originally posted by theicequeen:

Good catch. I will bring this to the attention of SC and we will discuss this.

Cyrilda

Canon EOS-80D

11/09/2016 12:22:40 PM · #10

Not sure why you're confused. The current editing rule sets are here. They have been greatly simplified are MUCH easier to understand than the ones immediately preceding them.

And there's no need for a PDF. You can print them out if you need to see them on paper. [/quote]

Thanks for the link again. I will print them out for certain. I got a critique from someone on one of my photos and it made me over think using Photoshop and I simply was hoping by using a filter on Photoshop I wasn't breaking rules in the impression challenge. :)

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

11/09/2016 12:22:19 PM · #11

Originally posted by tanguera:

Originally posted by Cyrilda:
Okay, now I'm totally confused. I need a PDF manual to remember what is and what isn't accepted. I really and truly wish there could be clear set of rules. I hope I am not the only one who feels this way. If the SC would like I would be willing to work on something in PDF form we could go by that is clearly laid out.

Not sure why you're confused. The current editing rule sets are here. They have been greatly simplified are MUCH easier to understand than the ones immediately preceding them.

And there's no need for a PDF. You can print them out if you need to see them on paper.

Well what I'm struggling to understand is how the standard editing rules can possibly be interpreted to mean that a filter and other similar editing post processing can be allowed. Extended editing says you may "use any feature of image processing software to manipulate/enhance the images in your submission", while standard editing only really mentions cloning out unwanted objects and filling gaps.

I have now been shown where there are forum threads interpreting the rules, and have been told that filters are generally accepted as allowed within standard editing. If that is so, why don't the rules say that rather than implying the opposite?

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

11/09/2016 12:03:24 PM · #12

Originally posted by snaffles:

*rubbing eyes, yawning*....anyone got some coffee on? Finally escaped the two-month term of enslavement enforced by the Sirop d'Erabliers. Will have to go take a look at the shiny new improved rulesets.

Now I have to pick up that heavy black plastic thingy with some sort of strap on it saying NIKON and figure out how to use it and all those tubes with numbers on them. How do you put em on again? With an Allan key, right?

*slurrrrp gluggluggluglugglug* Ah....coffee. Good.

I am ever so glad I read this twice...hehehehe.... I really am twisted.

Ray

11/09/2016 11:53:30 AM · #13

Originally posted by Cyrilda:

Okay, now I'm totally confused. I need a PDF manual to remember what is and what isn't accepted. I really and truly wish there could be clear set of rules. I hope I am not the only one who feels this way. If the SC would like I would be willing to work on something in PDF form we could go by that is clearly laid out.

Cyrilda

Canon EOS-80D

11/09/2016 11:47:38 AM · #14

11/09/2016 11:04:17 AM · #15

Originally posted by riot:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
Bumping this because apparently some people are not aware that the rules were changes several months ago after much discussion -- maybe this will clarify the what/how/why of some of the changes.

If you're going to bump this thread as an intentional misrepresentation of my otherwise clear post in the other thread, it would be fair to also inform readers that the rules (as stated in Bear's original post at the top of this thread) are not actually being enforced.

There are a couple of inaccuracies about your interpretation. The portions of the rule you bolded refer to cloning out features from an image and replacing them "what would have been there" had the element not existed in the first place. Such as removing a garbage can on a lawn, and replacing it with the lawn "beneath" it. "Added features" has also been eliminated.

Filters have always been allowed. The new rules have moved us away from the gray areas where the burden of deciding where the "too much" line is on the shoulders of SC. It is now up to voters to decide what is and isn't "too much", and have your scores reflect that position.

The new rules were also rolled out with the caveat that if at any time membership felt the rules had become too lax, or other issues surfaced, that we would all discuss it and SC would make any amendments in the event the majority felt were needed.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

11/09/2016 08:18:11 AM · #16

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Bumping this because apparently some people are not aware that the rules were changes several months ago after much discussion -- maybe this will clarify the what/how/why of some of the changes.

I was perfectly aware that the rules had been changed, I can see that from the dates mentioned in the rules section of this website. What I was not aware of was the existence of forum posts where the rules have been interpreted by regulars, to become quite far removed from what is stated in the rules section.

riot

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Helios 40-1 85mm f/1.5

11/09/2016 08:02:02 AM · #17

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Bumping this because apparently some people are not aware that the rules were changes several months ago after much discussion -- maybe this will clarify the what/how/why of some of the changes.

If you're going to bump this thread as an intentional misrepresentation of my otherwise clear post in the other thread, it would be fair to also inform readers that the rules (as stated in Bear's original post at the top of this thread) are not actually being enforced.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

11/08/2016 08:49:48 PM · #18

Bumping this because apparently some people are not aware that the rules were changes several months ago after much discussion -- maybe this will clarify the what/how/why of some of the changes.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/22/2016 02:59:29 PM · #19

Originally posted by bvy:

Cloning this out because it's distracting and moving that over there to better balance the composition -- that runs totally counter to the reason I make pictures. It also plays a part in how I connect with other people's photographs. For that reason, I like the boundaries laid out by the rulesets as they were before.

The bolded part is still not allowed. In the Standard Editing Rules, there's currently no restriction on what you can clone OUT but it has to be replaced with what would have been visible had the offending object not been there in the first place. So you can't, say, move a tree from "here" to "over there". Hopefully people understand that one of the primary motivations for this change is to get away, as much as humanly possible, from rules that are subjective in their application. The old "major element" aspect of the rules was hugely problematical, it caused a lot of trouble in the application of it; and you can see an evolution, over time, in what SC considered "cloneable" under the earlier iterations of the Advanced Rules. Let's see how this works. If folks start going carzy and the community agrees, we can always rein things back in.

It just seemed to us that giving a little more freedom a fair go was a good idea at this juncture.

posthumous

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/22/2016 02:26:47 PM · #20

Originally posted by bvy:

I'm not looking to define photography or insult painters.

Now that you're saying it, insulting painters sounds like fun, actually.

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

04/22/2016 01:49:06 PM · #21

I think it takes a special effort to move beyond what we personally like and deem to be photography /art/documentation in order to appreciate, like, or even embrace someone else's vision of those things.

For those who prefer the telephone wires or the garbage cans in their images because they have meaning, there are others who fell they detract from the story they want to portray. There is merit in both approaches and I believe it is the author of the work who is in the best position to decide which approach works for them.

bvy

Sigma DP1x

04/22/2016 01:40:53 PM · #22

Fair enough. I'm not looking to define photography or insult painters. And I don't have a problem with manipulations if you�re the likes of

gyaban whose work is obviously based on it. For my own part, I consider myself a documentarian and the camera is my tool. Cloning this out because it's distracting and moving that over there to better balance the composition -- that runs totally counter to the reason I make pictures. It also plays a part in how I connect with other people's photographs. For that reason, I like the boundaries laid out by the rulesets as they were before.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/22/2016 12:10:20 PM · #23

Originally posted by posthumous:

As someone who has struggled with a blank canvas, I actually find it insulting when people say Photoshop is more like painting than photography. These are clearly people who've never painted.

Amen to that. In the late 60's I attended the New York Studio School and studied with some actual master contemporary painters, and of course was painting myself. A friend came by on his way home from a trip to South Africa and loaned me his Nikon F1. That was my revelation-period, let me tell you :-) I realized how poorly paint-on-canvas suited me (or perhaps how unfit I was for it) and how much photography resonated *in* me, and that was that...

For me, they are not even closely related, being similar only in the sense that "the art of seeing is the beginning of art", something Avedon said once.

posthumous

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

04/22/2016 11:44:42 AM · #24

The principles of some of my favorite street photographers, insteps, jagar, bvy, work very well as ars poetica for them, but I disagree with them as a definition of photography. Photography is the instant swallowing of a matrix of light, which is then manipulated at will. Photography is no more "real" than any other art form. Just because photography is used by journalists and lawyers doesn't mean it's "real" when it's used by artists.

The joy of street photography, as with all the arts, is the discovery of an artistic reality behind or to the side of the reality we normally discern. Their challenge is to discover this reality through angle, framing, exposure, shutter speed, etc., all of which are manipulations. To add a couple more manipulations does not preclude the act from being photography. Until you are moving a brush across a blank canvas, you are still well within the realm of photography.

As someone who has struggled with a blank canvas, I actually find it insulting when people say Photoshop is more like painting than photography. These are clearly people who've never painted.