DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Advanced Editing Contest
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 183, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 12/12/2005 01:08:23 AM · #51
got it! sorry for not mailing you, I was allready in bed! (it was past midnight over here ;))
 12/12/2005 01:19:29 AM · #52
I have a late request for contestants: Please try to keep track of your processing and send a synopsis to me with the photo.

I will eiher post it with the photos, or post it later. I think as a learning exercise, others will want to study what you have done!
 12/12/2005 01:27:30 AM · #53
Couldn't you have picked something a little HARDER? Sheesh... This is going to be a really tough edit :-)

R.
 12/12/2005 01:30:50 AM · #54
Originally posted by bear_music:
Couldn't you have picked something a little HARDER? Sheesh... This is going to be a really tough edit :-)

R.

Great, now you have the rest of us quivering with suspense to see what's going on : )
 12/12/2005 01:35:55 AM · #55
I'd be interested in doing this, if you're taking people from a queue of who was interested so far. If not I'll wait around and try and post when I have to :P
 12/12/2005 01:39:19 AM · #56
Originally posted by bear_music:
Couldn't you have picked something a little HARDER? Sheesh... This is going to be a really tough edit :-)

R.


Sorry, I can't tell if you are being sarcastic and it was too easy or if you think it was hard. Hoping it's at least a little challenge!
 12/12/2005 01:41:09 AM · #57
Originally posted by MadMan2k:
I'd be interested in doing this, if you're taking people from a queue of who was interested so far. If not I'll wait around and try and post when I have to :P


We've closed it for now at 12 people. Stay tuned for the next one, starting Friday probably (since this one is supposed to be finished on Thursday), but depends on who wins and thus who's running the next one!
 12/12/2005 01:42:25 AM · #58
Very interesting idea, can't wait to see the results.
12/12/2005 01:46:43 AM · #59
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Couldn't you have picked something a little HARDER? Sheesh... This is going to be a really tough edit :-)

R.


Sorry, I can't tell if you are being sarcastic and it was too easy or if you think it was hard. Hoping it's at least a little challenge!


Oh, I'm very serious. That's an extremely difficult editing problem you've given us.

Robt.
 12/12/2005 08:31:59 AM · #60
Glad to have presented a challenge ;)

I'm sure the RAW image would be a bit easier to work with, but some can't do RAW, so I sent a converted JPEG to all.
 12/12/2005 08:54:48 AM · #61
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Glad to have presented a challenge ;)

I'm sure the RAW image would be a bit easier to work with, but some can't do RAW, so I sent a converted JPEG to all.


It will be "interesting"
I'm happy you didn't send RAW, I only have an ORF converter.
 12/12/2005 11:13:00 AM · #62
I opened up me e mail this morning and got a little scared. This will be a hard edit. Good luck to all participating.
 12/12/2005 11:21:06 AM · #63
Since you mentioned RAW, that would certainly be the best way to deal with this. This looks like an unaltered RAW image, and the way those come out of the camera is pretty hard to rescue from jpg. I found myself wondering why you hadn't done basic RAW processing before sending it on, since it had to be jpg for us...

Robt.
 12/12/2005 11:33:35 AM · #64
I toyed with the idea of doing processing to simulate what the camera would do processing raw. But I wasn't sure exactly where to draw the line. And I didn't want to do something that would actually limit what you could do with this.

What processing do you think essential as a base for everyone?

One option is to send the embedded JPEG, which would have the camera settings at the time and would be "as if" I were shooting JPEG, but it would be a lower resolution. (I don't shoot JPEG+RAW, but there is a preview JPEG normally embedded in the RAW.)


12/12/2005 11:39:31 AM · #65
Originally posted by nshapiro:

What processing do you think essential as a base for everyone?


Never having worked in RAW, I'm not sure what the answer should be. But it does seem to missing lots of "information"... It seems to pixelate quickly on adjustment and I'm having to toy with levels a lot more than I think I would if it came from my camera as the highest quality jpeg possible. Still "workable" but it is a difficult image to rescue.
 12/12/2005 11:55:56 AM · #66
Why not send it as a tiff rather than jpeg. Does everyone have the capability of editing 16 bits/channel?
 12/12/2005 12:02:36 PM · #67
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Why not send it as a tiff rather than jpeg. Does everyone have the capability of editing 16 bits/channel?


I think PS Elements can handle that...I know I can save to and convert from tiff. They are rather large, though. Size may be a problem for some. I'm o.k. with it. (this week...)

Message edited by author 2005-12-12 12:03:04.
 12/12/2005 12:05:41 PM · #68
Originally posted by KaDi:
Originally posted by nshapiro:

What processing do you think essential as a base for everyone?


Never having worked in RAW, I'm not sure what the answer should be. But it does seem to missing lots of "information"... It seems to pixelate quickly on adjustment and I'm having to toy with levels a lot more than I think I would if it came from my camera as the highest quality jpeg possible. Still "workable" but it is a difficult image to rescue.


What Kadi said. It's blocked up in the dark areas, it pixelates easily, it's a very "edgy" image to work with. Most unsatisfactory IMO. If I were you, I'd process this out of RAW to standard camera settings and exposure and this would probably be an imporvement. I don't think an unprocessed RAW-to-TIFF file would be much of an improvement. The problem is that NONE of the normal parameters have been set. RAW files are not meant to be worked on as straight jpg images, and I don't think the exercise, as established thus far, is really proving much.

Robt.
 12/12/2005 12:10:53 PM · #69
Originally posted by bear_music:

What Kadi said. It's blocked up in the dark areas, it pixelates easily, it's a very "edgy" image to work with.

You're just spoiled and too picky bear - LOL.
Lemme at it - I'll show you what a real man can do.

12/12/2005 12:18:29 PM · #70
I am not sure which of two philosophies for the contest should be then. 1) Make the best of it, like we do in the threads where someone posts an image to improve, or 2) facilitate the advanced editing (e.g., provide the CR2 file) so that people can really strut their stuff and the absolute best image occurs.

BTW - I don't think the default conversion will help you unless I compress the histogram and enable noise reduction. But that's an option too.

I don't want to make it unfair, but on the other hand, it's just a little game.

Votes from participants? If need be, we can add a day to the deadline. But note that I already received one image from a participant, so maybe that argues for #1 above.


12/12/2005 12:18:59 PM · #71
Originally posted by BradP:
Originally posted by bear_music:

What Kadi said. It's blocked up in the dark areas, it pixelates easily, it's a very "edgy" image to work with.

You're just spoiled and too picky bear - LOL.
Lemme at it - I'll show you what a real man can do.


Hell, Brad, it's not that I CAN'T do anything, it's just that it's not the most sensible way to work. It's like trying to fix an American transmission with metric tools.

Robt.
 12/12/2005 12:23:07 PM · #72
Originally posted by bear_music:

Hell, Brad, it's not that I CAN'T do anything, it's just that it's not the most sensible way to work. It's like trying to fix an American transmission with metric tools.

Hence the challenge - no biggie - I use american OR metric hammers anyway...
 12/12/2005 01:09:26 PM · #73
Either way you choose to do it is fine with me Neil. If we leave it as is, it just makes it that much more challenging. And that it is. :-)
 12/12/2005 01:13:10 PM · #74
Anyway at all is fine with me... I'm pretty easy...

(That's what all my ex wives say....)
 12/12/2005 02:02:32 PM · #75
CRAP!!!!!!!! I was so busy with the Gauntlet threads that I completely missed this one! Oh well, better luck next time!
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 01:53:30 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 08/27/2025 01:53:30 PM EDT.