Quick qeustion for sc - DPChallenge Forums

11/06/2005 02:45:11 PM · #1

Is adding/removing vignetting in photoshop camera raw legal in basic editing?

gloda

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM

11/06/2005 02:50:44 PM · #2

It doesn't affect the whole image, so it's not legal in basic edting. You might try getting rid of vignettes with curves, but that's tricky.

Manic

DJI Air 3

Kamlan 28mm F1.4 MF for APS-C

11/06/2005 02:50:52 PM · #3

Quick answer - probably not. Longer answer - any (relative) moving of pixels and/or distorting of the image in Basic is not permitted, which I presume is what your add/remove vignette would do.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

11/06/2005 03:00:39 PM · #4

Removal of vignetting is not moving of pixels relative to each other, nor is it distorting the image, but...
By definition, vignetting removal applies exposure adjustment preferentially to the corners of the image. Any technique that does this would likley be considered illegal. There is, however, the clause regarding filters intended to preserve "photographic itegrity", and the fact that the vignetting correction does not require the photographer to make an explicit selection. The situation is not completely clear.

Following is my personal take on this:
Since the vignetting correction is intended to "preserve photographic integrity", and is only correcting for artifacts introduced by the optical system, it should be allowed. Same for correction of CA, which also can be done in the ACR converter, and possibly others. Although CA correction (slightly) distorts individual color channels to realign them, its sole purpose is to correct distortions introduced by the lens, and so should, IMO, be deemed legal. I want to emphasize again that this is my personal opinion ONLY.

11/06/2005 03:03:54 PM · #5

Originally posted by Manic:

Quick answer - probably not. Longer answer - any (relative) moving of pixels and/or distorting of the image in Basic is not permitted, which I presume is what your add/remove vignette would do.

It doesnt move or distort any pixels, it makes the image darker or lighter... i was wondering whether like gilles said it is considered a selective tool since it infact affects the whole image, some parts just more than others and there isnt a mask or layers involved since it is in raw processing.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

11/06/2005 03:05:49 PM · #6

any chance site council can reach a resolutioin on the issue by tuesday in time for the open challenge? :-)

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

11/06/2005 03:06:00 PM · #7

I've openend a SC discussion on the matter. It certainly is not a clear-cut case, and we'll need to discuss to get a consensus. Y'all already know what my opinion is...

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0 L IS

11/06/2005 03:17:23 PM · #8

Originally posted by kirbic:

I've openend a SC discussion on the matter. It certainly is not a clear-cut case, and we'll need to discuss to get a consensus. Y'all already know what my opinion is...

thanks!

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

11/06/2005 03:50:21 PM · #9

Should be legal. Isn't NeatImage legal in Basic?

David.C

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

11/06/2005 04:13:38 PM · #10

Originally posted by kpriest:

Should be legal. Isn't NeatImage legal in Basic?

NeatImage and other noise removal programs are explicitly allowed -- vignetting (and sensor dust, for that matter) are not so lucky.

FWIW: I have no problem with it being allowed, it is adjusting tone not position and doesn't select anymore than the shadow/highlight tool does -- which is allowed.

David