| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/29/2005 11:02:14 AM · #1 |
If you have a photo that you really like, but it is kind of dark for what you want to portray, can you (using advanced editing) dodge not all, but a good portion of maybe the corners and sides to give it some pizzazz? Or is that against advanced editing in changing too much of the background?
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 11:03:36 AM · #2 |
I think advanced lets you do any spot editing you like?
might be wrong tho
edit* just checked and you can as long as you are not cloning or moving anything
Message edited by author 2005-12-29 11:04:47. |
|
|
|
12/29/2005 11:10:58 AM · #3 |
Thanks. I was just wondering. I think its another site in which if too much of the background is tampered with it is considered against advanced editing.
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 11:12:43 AM · #4 |
| you can get away with cloning sometimes, but you can't remove major elements of the photo. Yes, moving this is a big no no! Dodge and Burn to your hearts content :-) |
|
|
|
12/29/2005 11:47:05 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by kyebosh:
you can get away with cloning sometimes, but you can't remove major elements of the photo. Yes, moving this is a big no no! Dodge and Burn to your hearts content :-) |
Nope, I didn't clone anything at all, or remove anything, much less major elements. I only want to enhance the background a bit in order to give it the feel of the shot I really wanted and couldn't get with the lighting I used.
I want to use sharpen, smudge, soften and soft focus, dodge/burn, and then your usual crop, brightness/contrast, and clarification along with gamma. If those are all allowed with advanced editing, then I have an idea for a photo to do in the future.
Usually I don't use a lot of advanced editing allowances, so that is why I am a bit green. I usually do very minimal, if possible, to my photos. But this one really needs the work for the best results in what I am trying to portray.
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 11:57:20 AM · #6 |
From my interpretation of the Advanced Editing rules, you can dodge & burn as much as you like, as long as what you're doing isn't breaking the 'Major Elements' rule, ie you're not creating an object that wasn't there originally, nor removing one by say burning the entire background out.
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 12:07:12 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Manic:
From my interpretation of the Advanced Editing rules, you can dodge & burn as much as you like, as long as what you're doing isn't breaking the 'Major Elements' rule, ie you're not creating an object that wasn't there originally, nor removing one by say burning the entire background out. |
\
Well, see? Now these are where the fine lines come in on advanced editing. If I could show the photo ahead of time to council, I would be able to get this straight before hand. If its just a matter of background dodgeing, then I can leave it out. No biggy, but it just won't have the added "umph" I want it to have. The entire background is not gone, but I did do dodgeing and then blended it in to the background with the smudge tool. Gives it a bit of smokey effect, but the bottom is not dodged; however, it is also blended for evening it out.
So I would "think" this falls in the rules. No major elements were added. No major elements were taken out. Just an enhancing of what is there.
Council?
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 12:21:43 PM · #8 |
Ok, here is a decent example of what I mean. Let's say that there is a bird or something in the middle of the photo somewhere, just for the heck of it.
The first photo would have a background that looks like this - all dark and boring:
The second - after adding dodge and blending it in:
Now, is something like this acceptable in advanced editing?
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 12:33:45 PM · #9 |
Rose,
this doesn't look legal to me. the background was just plain dark ( on my monitor ) and you have added elements ( smoke/cloud ) in it by selective dodge/burn
dodge/burn can only be legal if its used to enhance the details, not to create or remove them |
|
|
|
12/29/2005 12:41:10 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by gaurawa:
Rose,
this doesn't look legal to me. the background was just plain dark ( on my monitor ) and you have added elements ( smoke/cloud ) in it by selective dodge/burn
dodge/burn can only be legal if its used to enhance the details, not to create or remove them |
This is what I am wondering. It says selective dodge/burn to enhance. Another person says dodge burn to your hearts content, and now it is adding an element. I just want to make sure, so if I can get a council member to reiterate? Hopefully manic will come back or someone else will see this and let me know. I get a little confused on this "enhancing verses adding thing".
Rose
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 12:41:54 PM · #11 |
| try take it up with sc because all that is said here are veiws I think it would be legal so??? |
|
|
|
12/29/2005 12:53:08 PM · #12 |
| To get clarification ahead of time you'll probably have to send the original and your souped up version. You can do this through the contacts page. |
|
|
|
12/29/2005 01:01:21 PM · #13 |
I'd aggree but I'd also say wait and make it official. Rose, I was in your profile and saw the pictures and wondered what they were.
Originally posted by gaurawa:
Rose,
this doesn't look legal to me. the background was just plain dark ( on my monitor ) and you have added elements ( smoke/cloud ) in it by selective dodge/burn
dodge/burn can only be legal if its used to enhance the details, not to create or remove them |
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 02:25:50 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Rose8699:
Ok, here is a decent example of what I mean. Let's say that there is a bird or something in the middle of the photo somewhere, just for the heck of it.
The first photo would have a background that looks like this - all dark and boring:
The second - after adding dodge and blending it in:
Now, is something like this acceptable in advanced editing?
Rose |
In these the 'smoke' is not present in the original -- so it would not be legal. If there is any hint of smoke in the background, enhance it to your hearts content.
There was a thread gradient ND filters a while back in which the SC took steps to make a very similar question clear. I'll see if I can find it.
David
/edit: found the thread I was looking referring to -- here.
They are mainly discussing using a gradient to affect an otherwise plain background, but spoke mainly in general terms.
Message edited by author 2005-12-29 14:31:58.
|
|
|
|
12/29/2005 04:30:34 PM · #15 |
Thank you everyone! I am going to do it without enhancing the background for now until I get this straight, but I don't think I can create this background. There is no smokey effect in the original, so it would be a type of creation. Thanks though for everyones input!~
Rose
|
|
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: 09/10/2025 05:26:52 PM EDT.
