| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/10/2005 02:55:04 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by hopper:
In your case, the lines run right down the center of the image :) |
Checkmate! LOL |
|
|
|
05/10/2005 03:57:54 PM · #52 |
Well stalemate anyway.
I only added a border or 3....
 |
|
|
|
05/10/2005 04:11:40 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by BradP:
I only added a border or 3.... |
COMPLETELY understandable. There was a kink in the rules and you just triptyched over it.
Message edited by author 2005-05-10 16:12:05. |
|
|
|
05/10/2005 04:22:21 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
There was a kink in the rules and you just triptyched over it. |
Boooooo |
|
|
|
05/10/2005 09:47:42 PM · #55 |
Reading this thread feels like one of those dreams where you keep running and running in slow motion and don't move an inch. There's clearly a subgroup here that's essentially saying that if an effect can be attained in camera, a special effect, then it should be forbidden to accomplish it out-of-camera. Yet for effects that cannot be (currently) done in camera, it seems to be OK to do them out-of-camera. That's a gross over-simplification, I admit, but we're getting close to that and it's worth examining for the sheer logic of the position, or lack of same.
They're all tools, and the tools are evolving. Anyone who wants to be a serious "professional" photographer, IMO, had damned well better learn how to do all this stuff in PS or s/he's gonna get left behind. The digital image is now state of the art, and it brings new rules with it. I make a distinction, as indeed the site does, between digitally "created" images and digitally "enhanced" images, and this seems a valid and enforceable distinction to me.
It seems reasonable to hold the line regarding the compositing of several images into one digitally; this moves beyond photography into something else altogether. But I have a hard time getting worked up over people going to town manipulating single, digital photographic exposures in pursuit of whatever vision they have.
That's my basic sense of what the site's trying to do as well, in the advanced editing ruleset; pretty much whatever you can do to the original image is allowed, but there are some strange exceptions that seem inconsistent to me.
This discussion on the desirability of adding motion blur seems like one of those inconsistencies from my perspective. It's as if some of us are supporting a meritocracy where if an image is produced entirely in-camera it's "better" or "purer" than the exact same image produced by post-processing in photoshop. This seems silly to me; surely the defining nature of the image should be what it IS, not how it was obtained?
Maybe I'm just out of step, but I do wonder about these things.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
05/10/2005 11:14:59 PM · #56 |
There is no doubt that digital editing is a major part of photography in the real world. It could be used for fine tuning, enhancing or manipulating an image or many images to the desired end result of a paying customer.
However, it is my understanding, the rules at dpc have been established to encourage the in-camera skill. The post processing rules, whether basic or advanced, limit the post processing editing to only enhance the existing photo to maintain said photo's integrity.
If the trend has shifted, as the first place winner indicates, then maybe the rules SHOULD be re-evaluated. Go ahead and make it anything goes.
As a newcomer, Robt., you have a great following and you seem to be using your influence to promote editing beyond the established rules.
I only wish you felt as strongly about camera skills.
Personally, I'm tired of the constant discussions and tired of those that constantly test the rules.
I'm done with the member challenges.
|
|
|
|
05/11/2005 05:04:05 PM · #57 |
members challeneg with basic editing...
lots of people seem to want subdivisions within challanges already...i think this would be a good place to start.
|
|
|
|
05/11/2005 05:14:25 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by Marjo:
There is no doubt that digital editing is a major part of photography in the real world. It could be used for fine tuning, enhancing or manipulating an image or many images to the desired end result of a paying customer.
However, it is my understanding, the rules at dpc have been established to encourage the in-camera skill. The post processing rules, whether basic or advanced, limit the post processing editing to only enhance the existing photo to maintain said photo's integrity.
If the trend has shifted, as the first place winner indicates, then maybe the rules SHOULD be re-evaluated. Go ahead and make it anything goes.
As a newcomer, Robt., you have a great following and you seem to be using your influence to promote editing beyond the established rules.
I only wish you felt as strongly about camera skills.
Personally, I'm tired of the constant discussions and tired of those that constantly test the rules.
I'm done with the member challenges. |
Rules are always being tested, it's the nature of people and rules. They are tested just as much in basic editing, just less obviously because the pallette is more limited, so to speak. I'm completely in favor of DPC's empahsis on photography over digital art. I just think that some of the distinctions being drawn are arbitrary. Anyone hwo looks at my work will see that I'm VERY conventional; even my rare forays into weirdness are not weird at all, in terms of digital weirdness. And I go out of my way to help teach basic skills here, and I do NOT attempt to teach photoshop weirdness, or promote it in this site.
So if I DO have a "following", which I doubt, this should make everyone happy; I stand for relatively "pure" photography, and I stand for clarity in the rules so there can be no confusion. THIS discussion is about just such an issue. In my mind, when you take very simple PS operations that emulate camera techniques and make them illegal in advanced editing, you're creating a strange sort of ambiguity.
And that's ALL I'm trying to say. I think it's time to stop tabbing me as a "newcomer"; I've entered 38 challenges, made over 1400 comments, and posted to the forums over 3000 times. I'm not the devil incarnate, I'm just another voice, and an active and involved one to boot.
I resent it when I'm labeled like this and dismissed to my corner like a bad boy.
Robt.
Challenges Entered: 38
Votes Cast: 11403
Avg Vote Cast: 5.0466
Votes Received: 10105
Avg Vote Received: 5.2050
# Comments:Made: 1453
# Helpful: 1208
# Received: 818
Forum Posts: 3101
Profile Viewed: 11080 times
|
|
|
|
05/11/2005 05:16:55 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by Marjo:
Just checked out a recent winner. Great work, however, DPChallenge should change their name to DEChallenge. Digital Editing Challenge. |
AGRRRRREEEEE! |
|
|
|
05/11/2005 05:17:36 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
(...)And that's ALL I'm trying to say. I think it's time to stop tabbing me as a "newcomer"; I've entered 38 challenges, made over 1400 comments, and posted to the forums over 3000 times. I'm not the devil incarnate, I'm just another voice, and an active and involved one to boot. |
You forgot to mention that you have a ribbon! ;-) Congradulation by the way! |
|
|
|
05/11/2005 05:18:57 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by grandmarginal:
Originally posted by bear_music:
(...)And that's ALL I'm trying to say. I think it's time to stop tabbing me as a "newcomer"; I've entered 38 challenges, made over 1400 comments, and posted to the forums over 3000 times. I'm not the devil incarnate, I'm just another voice, and an active and involved one to boot. |
You forgot to mention that you have a ribbon! ;-) Congradulation by the way! |
For a virtually unmanipulated shot, too... :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
05/11/2005 05:20:28 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
For a virtually unmanipulated shot, too... :-)
R. |
Good stuff! |
|
|
|
05/14/2005 01:50:41 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by Marjo:
However, it is my understanding, the rules at dpc have been established to encourage the in-camera skill. The post processing rules, whether basic or advanced, limit the post processing editing to only enhance the existing photo to maintain said photo's integrity.
|
Hmmm....in camera skills....Joey used a 1.4mp digital camera, set the camera angle, focused on a nearby tree, set the timer, ran into position, contorted his face in to a great look of anger and angst while holding a sheet of white paper to reflect light on to his face
.....No you are most assuredly correct, M'am....no in camera skills here at all. Or did just not read that part cause you barely bothered to acknowledge them....schade!
"I always thought that photography skills and uniqueness would win on this site." They are and this was one of them.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2005 02:59:27 PM · #64 |
I never said it wasn't great work. After doing all that...it was finished by:
Editing consisted of things like dodging and burning, heavy contrast, a duotone of black+red+yellow, an abused unsharp mask for a funky glowing effect, zoom blur with history brush and ect ect...
Seems on the border of digital art, but it's the best I can do to obscure the lacking quality of my camera (1.4 mp) (posted in comments by artist).
I'll bet the original was pretty good, too.
What does schade mean? Doesn't sound very nice. Should I be upset? |
|
|
|
05/14/2005 03:08:46 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by banmorn:
M'am....no in camera skills here at all. Or did just not read that part cause you barely bothered to acknowledge them....schade!
|
|
|
|
|
05/14/2005 03:55:12 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by Marjo:
What does schade mean? Doesn't sound very nice. Should I be upset? |
I think that's the chick that sang that "Smooth Operator" song from like the 80's. I wouldn't be upset. ...well, I would, but you shouldn't. ;-)
|
|
|
|
05/14/2005 04:01:09 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by Marjo:
What does schade mean? Doesn't sound very nice. Should I be upset? |
"Schade" means pity (in German). Heaven knows what it might mean in another language..... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 09:24:36 AM EDT.
