| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/31/2005 07:39:34 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by ralphnev:
just tested it (possibly should have befor posting the can o'worms ;)
raw - untouched photos works as advertised .. (weird though )
jpgs No
raw edited in Nikon capture No
what i haven't tested is copying older files from a differnt media
(I.E. go shoot a Moon on one card, copy it to another then attempt to overlay on a fresh image ..) |
While your testing, would you check the Exif information of the final file? I would think the camera would have to provide exif info for the final file for it to be legal -- othewise, how would you prove it was done 'in-camera'?
David
|
|
|
|
12/31/2005 07:56:45 PM · #27 |
I am speculating because I haven't tested it (yet). If I take photo 1 (say DSC0157) then take a new photo (say DSC0158) and overlay it on DSC0157 ... The new photo will be DSC0179 and will inherit the Exif data from DSC0157. If so, it will still be possible to distinguish it as a multiple exposure based on Exif data and the technique would be technically detectable.
Btw, this feel no different to me from some forum threads and mentor groups constructing aparatus with mirrors and lenscap proceedures to create double exposures inside their digital cameras. And it's no different from what some Fuji owners can do inside their cameras.
Since the underlying principle has always been "if you do it in the camera, it's legal," and since it mirrors a technique using external aparatus; I believe it is currently legal. Clarification or a rule change could change that.
Edit: after some testing ...
Here's a trivial example I composed in-camera a few minutes ago:
And the EXIF data from the new image:
Nikon D200
2005/12/28 13:32:50.5
JPEG (8-bit) Fine
Image Size: Large (3872 x 2592)
Color
Lens: VR 24-120mm F/3.5-5.6 G
Focal Length: 24mm
Exposure Mode: Aperture Priority
Metering Mode: Spot
1/500 sec - F/9
Exposure Comp.: 0 EV
Sensitivity: ISO 100
Optimize Image: Vivid
White Balance: Auto
AF Mode: AF-S
Flash Sync Mode: Not Attached
Color Mode: Mode III (Adobe RGB)
Tone Comp.: Normal
Hue Adjustment: 0°
Saturation: Enhanced
Sharpening: Medium high
Image Comment:
Long Exposure NR: Off
High ISO NR: Off
Image Overlay: ON
Note EXIF data is inherited from 1st image, but there's a new EXIF field available ... Image Overlay.
Message edited by author 2005-12-31 20:59:08. |
|
|
|
12/31/2005 08:43:27 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:
... And it's no different from what some Fuji owners can do inside their cameras. ... |
I have one of those Fuji cameras that is capable of double exposures, the Finepix S602Z, and I respectfully beg to differ with your statement that the Nikon's 200D's capability is "no different". It may not be much different but the fact that the two images being used are not necessarily sequential is an important point.
Perhaps the notion of "anything done in camera is legal" has been left in the dust by advancing technology. I am listening intently to what ralphnev, Digital Quixote, and any other 200D owners have to say as they discover all the intricacies of this new feature from Nikon.
|
|
|
|
12/31/2005 08:56:57 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:
... And it's no different from what some Fuji owners can do inside their cameras. ... |
I have one of those Fuji cameras that is capable of double exposures, the Finepix S602Z, and I respectfully beg to differ with your statement that the Nikon's 200D's capability is "no different". It may not be much different but the fact that the two images being used are not necessarily sequential is an important point.
Perhaps the notion of "anything done in camera is legal" has been left in the dust by advancing technology. I am listening intently to what ralphnev, Digital Quixote, and any other 200D owners have to say as they discover all the intricacies of this new feature from Nikon. |
Here is a second test, where I used the D200 multiple exposure feature to take two photos in succession as a multiple exposure. This would be more analagous to the Fuji example.
And here's the EXIF data:
Nikon D200
2005/12/31 17:45:29.6
JPEG (8-bit) Fine
Image Size: Large (3872 x 2592)
Color
Lens: VR 24-120mm F/3.5-5.6 G
Focal Length: 28mm
Exposure Mode: Aperture Priority
Metering Mode: Spot
1.50 sec - F/9
Exposure Comp.: 0 EV
Sensitivity: ISO 100
Optimize Image: Vivid
White Balance: Auto
AF Mode: AF-S
Flash Sync Mode: Not Attached
Color Mode: Mode III (Adobe RGB)
Tone Comp.: Normal
Hue Adjustment: 0°
Saturation: Enhanced
Sharpening: Medium high
Image Comment:
Long Exposure NR: Off
High ISO NR: Off
Multiple Exposure: 2 shots (Auto Gain)
In this case the EXIF data clearly shows that 2 images were combined as a multiple exposure.
It seems to me we have an EXIF data-based way to distinguish compositing (which we might argue would be illegal) from multiple exposure (which ought to be legal if it's legal with external aparatus or in other cameras (e.g. Fuji)).
Obviously, my thinking is still evolving. This is fun! And obviously I have no specific plans for New Years Eve ... Happy New Year everybody!
What are your thoughts?
Message edited by author 2005-12-31 21:04:55. |
|
|
|
12/31/2005 09:10:10 PM · #30 |
| Oh, man, I have to get a D200! That is so cool. |
|
|
|
12/31/2005 10:40:14 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by kyebosh:
//dpchallenge.com/challenge_rules.php?RULES_ID=10
"Your entry must come from a single photograph, taken during the specified challenge timeframe. You may not combine multiple exposures. You may not post-process your entry from or to include elements of multiple images, graphics or text such as multiple exposures, clip art, computer-rendered images, or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week). A photograph may only be used in one challenge, even if it is cropped or altered differently to fit another challenge. Duplicate photos will be disqualified.
Any modification done inside the digital camera itself is considered acceptable for challenge submission." |
"Your entry must come from a single photograph"
"[b]You may not combine multiple exposures."
".....or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week)."
Seems to me the rules are very clear.
Why is it some always want to get around the rules?
Is it really that hard to understand "Your entry must come from a single photograph" and the other in plain English rules?
Use your artistic interpretation composing a single frame instead of trying to bend the rules of DPC. |
|
|
|
12/31/2005 11:01:55 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Originally posted by kyebosh:
//dpchallenge.com/challenge_rules.php?RULES_ID=10
"Your entry must come from a single photograph, taken during the specified challenge timeframe. You may not combine multiple exposures. You may not post-process your entry from or to include elements of multiple images, graphics or text such as multiple exposures, clip art, computer-rendered images, or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week). A photograph may only be used in one challenge, even if it is cropped or altered differently to fit another challenge. Duplicate photos will be disqualified.
Any modification done inside the digital camera itself is considered acceptable for challenge submission." |
"Your entry must come from a single photograph"
"You may not combine multiple exposures."
".....or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week)."
Seems to me the rules are very clear.
Why is it some always want to get around the rules?
Is it really that hard to understand "Your entry must come from a single photograph" and the other in plain English rules?
Use your artistic interpretation composing a single frame instead of trying to bend the rules of DPC. |
yes but in my eyes the rules conflict - thus my inquiry ...
i would love to use all the capibilities my camera allows inside the rules
|
|
|
|
01/01/2006 12:20:34 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Originally posted by kyebosh:
//dpchallenge.com/challenge_rules.php?RULES_ID=10
"Your entry must come from a single photograph, taken during the specified challenge timeframe. You may not combine multiple exposures. You may not post-process your entry from or to include elements of multiple images, graphics or text such as multiple exposures, clip art, computer-rendered images, or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week). A photograph may only be used in one challenge, even if it is cropped or altered differently to fit another challenge. Duplicate photos will be disqualified.
Any modification done inside the digital camera itself is considered acceptable for challenge submission." |
"Your entry must come from a single photograph"
"You may not combine multiple exposures."
".....or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week)."
Seems to me the rules are very clear.
Why is it some always want to get around the rules?
Is it really that hard to understand "Your entry must come from a single photograph" and the other in plain English rules?
Use your artistic interpretation composing a single frame instead of trying to bend the rules of DPC. |
At the risk of killing the thread ... I suspect we will need SC ruling on this. Since any modification done inside the camera is considreded acceptable and since the combination did not occur in post processing (anymore than jpg encoding or in-camera sharpening) and since the camera produces a single photograph ... I could argue that a multiple exposure is legal. I can also argue that combining 2 previously existing images constitutes post processing in the spirit of Photoshop post processing and should be illegal.
SC??? |
|
|
|
01/01/2006 12:58:01 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Originally posted by kyebosh:
//dpchallenge.com/challenge_rules.php?RULES_ID=10
"Your entry must come from a single photograph, taken during the specified challenge timeframe. You may not combine multiple exposures. You may not post-process your entry from or to include elements of multiple images, graphics or text such as multiple exposures, clip art, computer-rendered images, or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week). A photograph may only be used in one challenge, even if it is cropped or altered differently to fit another challenge. Duplicate photos will be disqualified.
Any modification done inside the digital camera itself is considered acceptable for challenge submission." |
"Your entry must come from a single photograph"
"[b]You may not combine multiple exposures."
".....or elements from other photographs (even those taken during the challenge week)."
Seems to me the rules are very clear.
Why is it some always want to get around the rules?
Is it really that hard to understand "Your entry must come from a single photograph" and the other in plain English rules?
Use your artistic interpretation composing a single frame instead of trying to bend the rules of DPC. |
The rules are far from clear. For starters, the basic terms of 'photograph' and 'exposure' are never defined. It is easy to be flippant and shrug it off with an 'everyone knows what they are' ... but in the context of the rules they are not clear. Are RAW files the only access to an 'exposure'? When does it become a 'photograph'?
The rules make up the foundation the site is built upon, but at times they seem like sandstone crumbling under the dancing at each victory party.
I'm glad the rules are so clear and perfect from your point of view, but that doesn't make anyone else's perspective wrong. I know how I see the rules reading, but I know others don't agree with me. Others see the rules reading a different way, but know I and others don't agree. But that doesn't mean we are trying to 'bend' them or to 'get around them'. We just want the rules to be clear from every perspective.
David
|
|
|
|
01/01/2006 12:42:47 PM · #35 |
Maybe I'm being dense this morning but I don't understand.
Originally posted by ralphnev:
from the manual:" Image overlay: two existing RAW photographs are combined to form a single picture which is saved separately from the originals. The originals must be on the same memory card." |
Yet in a later post regarding what the exif data on the combined image said, it had jpeg. So does it shoot in raw and combine to make a jpeg when it processes the two images? |
|
|
|
01/01/2006 01:14:59 PM · #36 |
I don't see the big deal. Cameras have allowed multiple exposures for years. It's done in camera very simliar to that.
Originally posted by tjandjwsmith:
Maybe I'm being dense this morning but I don't understand.
Originally posted by ralphnev:
from the manual:" Image overlay: two existing RAW photographs are combined to form a single picture which is saved separately from the originals. The originals must be on the same memory card." |
Yet in a later post regarding what the exif data on the combined image said, it had jpeg. So does it shoot in raw and combine to make a jpeg when it processes the two images? |
|
|
|
|
01/01/2006 01:57:04 PM · #37 |
Okay i am a little confused now:
The rules clearly state `"you may not combine multiple exposures"
But double exposures inside the camera (like cabas challenge enteries) are okay?
I thought double (meaning 2) would be synonymous with multiple (meaning more than one).
Regardless of where the images are combined (in camera or out) you are opening the shutter (and thus making an exposure) more than once.
What am i missing here, because i don`t understandÉ |
|
|
|
01/01/2006 02:17:13 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by mesmeraj:
Okay i am a little confused now:
...
What am i missing here, because i don`t understandÉ |
I'm with Elli - what's the deal? Exposure is open/close of shutter. Multiple expose is more than one of these occurrences. Seems simple enough to me.
-or-
exposure has never been defined so people define it exceedingly loosely for their purposes. I recall a recent entry that had done the "in camera multiple exposure" technique and it was legal because of the exif. I don't happen to agree with that decision because I believe one exposure is one exposure. Unless exposure is defined as exposing on *part* of the sensor. Good lord, I'll stop here and not question it becuase it'll turn into a holy war.
I'll just play as exposure is one open/close of the shutter.
enough rambling, I'm done :)
Happy new year!
Elli for president.
edit to make it look like I spead inglish
Message edited by author 2006-01-01 14:18:30. |
|
|
|
02/08/2006 03:55:25 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:
... And it's no different from what some Fuji owners can do inside their cameras. ... |
I have one of those Fuji cameras that is capable of double exposures, the Finepix S602Z, and I respectfully beg to differ with your statement that the Nikon's 200D's capability is "no different". It may not be much different but the fact that the two images being used are not necessarily sequential is an important point.
Perhaps the notion of "anything done in camera is legal" has been left in the dust by advancing technology. I am listening intently to what ralphnev, Digital Quixote, and any other 200D owners have to say as they discover all the intricacies of this new feature from Nikon. |
Just to resurrect this, for fun.
It is certainly possible to shoot film multiple exposures and combine non-sequentially shot frames. I've even seen various gallery exhibits where the photographers shot multiple exposures on different continents, at different times, of different subjects - but all on the same roll of film. |
|
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: 09/23/2025 12:03:33 PM EDT.
