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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> I got a DQ and now I'm all confused
Pages:  
Showing posts 176 - 186 of 186, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/06/2006 05:53:46 AM · #176
Originally posted by Titia:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Practical information: I don't know about PSP, but in PS we have a layers palette, and each new layer shows up as a new row on that palette.

Non-adjustment layers have a single thumbnail image on them, showing what is "contained" on that layer.

Adjustment layers have TWO thumbnails: the first one shows a graphic of some sort that corresponds to the type of adjustment layer it is; double click on that graphic and you get you hue/sat dialogue box for the layer back up, or your levels dialogue box, whatever it is.

If the SECOND thumbnail on an adjustment layer is anything BUT plain white, it's not a legal adjustment layer in basic editing, because it shows there are actual pixels, or a selection, on that layer. For example, if I select the sky and make a hue/sat adjustment layer of that, the foreground will show as black and the sky as white in the thumbnail.

So, in basic editing, your only "legal" layers show two thumbnails, the second of which is always pure white, indicating NO pixels and NO selections.

R.


Thanks Robert, due to your explination I just discovered the tool in PSP which gave me the second white thumbnail after changing the contrast.

Question: when you've used different non-ajustment layers (all of them show a white thumbnail) and want to safe the photo (different name or you'll overwrite the original) all layers are flattened as one. How can one tell afterwards which layers have been used? Or how can one proof that only non-ajustment have been used.


You all may ramble on on my thread, as long as one will give me an answer to my question if possible.
 06/06/2006 07:49:40 AM · #177
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
So if I drew a mask that covered half my face and turned the skin there dark brown, then made the other side albino-white, would this be unacceptable?

I think it would make you one of Batman's arch-villains.


No, it's those guys from the original Star Trek.
 06/06/2006 07:51:59 AM · #178
Originally posted by HBunch:
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Simple Question: Advanced Editing - Legal or DQ ?

...ok, I am trying to stir the pot. But I really would like to know if it would be DQ'd and if so, what specifically would be the grounds?


I would vote DQ. Reason is simple. You created spots on the dog, where spots did not originally exist. Creation of major elements. Had you color shifted the entire dog one color...then I would probably have to vote no DQ...
But as is, if this doggie were legal...then people would be allowed to draw in rainbows in blank skies.


But they can create three different areas of colored smoke on one smoke cloud...

Message edited by author 2006-06-06 07:53:07.
 06/06/2006 09:18:25 AM · #179
I believe your question was answered pretty thoroughly in the first dozen or so messages of this thread (before it began to unravel - sorry for the bad pun), with messages by myself, MK, and others. Read over those messages and let us know if there are specific things you still don't understand.

-J

Originally posted by Titia:


You all may ramble on on my thread, as long as one will give me an answer to my question if possible.
06/06/2006 09:37:00 AM · #180
Originally posted by Titia:
Question: when you've used different non-ajustment layers (all of them show a white thumbnail) and want to safe the photo (different name or you'll overwrite the original) all layers are flattened as one. How can one tell afterwards which layers have been used? Or how can one proof that only non-ajustment have been used.

Firstly, you should save a copy as the flattened image, so you still have the layered original.

If you send us the original and a complete set of editing steps, anyone of us should be able to replicate (or come close to) your entry by following the same procedure; if we can't, that's a possible DQ.

It's also possible to save a series of screenshots to show the editing progress, like this.
 06/06/2006 10:34:35 AM · #181
Originally posted by HBunch:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

So if I drew a mask that covered half my face and turned the skin there dark brown, then made the other side albino-white, would this be unacceptable?

R.


This sounds legal to me. (again, only MY vote, and without seeing the photo) But if the face were already divided by the mask, and you color shifted the mask, and seperately color shifted the face...seems legal enough. But like I said, I've not seen it, so that's just a guess.

Bummer, Heather. There is a fundamental inconsistency in what you said involving the multicolored dog vs. Bear_Music's hypothetical color shifted face. One you'd DQ but the other you would not. Clearly only the "major element" arguement applies here, not the technique used to achieve an effect.

Shelf the masking type issue, it is irrelevant. The "major element" rule is not technique based, it is image based. You are not allowed to add a "major element" that did not previously exist no matter how you do it.

In the case of the dog you said it would be OK to color shift the whole dog, but not parts of the dog. You said you'd consider the later a "major element", but not the former.

Color shifting half of a face is fundamentally the same as making a dog multi-colored. Both are individual elements whose subparts are color shifted separately. That either is or is not a "major element". But it can't be both unless you specifically define how many color shifts to subparts of an object define a "major element" change. It is doubtful anyone wants to do that.

Therefore, either both the dog and the face changes are acceptable or both are unacceptable.
 06/06/2006 10:47:30 AM · #182
Now I̢۪m confused some many months ago we were asked to contribute to the rule change/upgrade/review/rewrite whatever.

Now we have been asked if the rule change is a priority via the current poll. I thought the rule change/upgrade/review/rewrite whatever was happening although it has been a very slow project when will it be finished or has it been put on the back burner.

I only ask so maybe threads like this will be a thing of the past.

06/06/2006 10:53:57 AM · #183
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by HBunch:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

So if I drew a mask that covered half my face and turned the skin there dark brown, then made the other side albino-white, would this be unacceptable?

R.


This sounds legal to me. (again, only MY vote, and without seeing the photo) But if the face were already divided by the mask, and you color shifted the mask, and seperately color shifted the face...seems legal enough. But like I said, I've not seen it, so that's just a guess.

Bummer, Heather. There is a fundamental inconsistency in what you said involving the multicolored dog vs. Bear_Music's hypothetical color shifted face. One you'd DQ but the other you would not. Clearly only the "major element" arguement applies here, not the technique used to achieve an effect. ...

Color shifting half of a face is fundamentally the same as making a dog multi-colored. ...


As mentioned before, it seems Heather was thinking of a different type of mask than the photoshop tool....more along the lines of a Phantom of the Opera Mask, I think.
 06/06/2006 10:56:57 AM · #184
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Color shifting half of a face is fundamentally the same as making a dog multi-colored.


I believe Heather thought Bear was referring to a physical mask on the face- a separate object. IMO, the multi-colored dog and artifically divided face would both be unacceptable. The issue as I understand it is this: you can shift colors in Advanced, but (like other legal tools) you can't create new objects or shapes in the process. A face or a dog are single objects which can only be color shifted in their entirety, unless there is some pre-existing division (i.e.- shooting with a blue light on one side and a red light on the other, for example).

In the case of RGB Smoke, there were three clouds of smoke that blend together at the top, and that's exactly how the color was treated- no hard edges or artificial shapes drawn in. I wasn't around for that discussion, but I can understand the rationale behind it. Just my two cents.
 06/06/2006 06:37:36 PM · #185
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Titia:
Question: when you've used different non-ajustment layers (all of them show a white thumbnail) and want to safe the photo (different name or you'll overwrite the original) all layers are flattened as one. How can one tell afterwards which layers have been used? Or how can one proof that only non-ajustment have been used.

Firstly, you should save a copy as the flattened image, so you still have the layered original.

If you send us the original and a complete set of editing steps, anyone of us should be able to replicate (or come close to) your entry by following the same procedure; if we can't, that's a possible DQ.

It's also possible to save a series of screenshots to show the editing progress, like this.


Thanks for your answer, but I don't use PS and I've never seen things like this in PSP. Guess I have to figure it out myself.
 06/06/2006 06:52:10 PM · #186
Originally posted by Titia:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Titia:
Question: when you've used different non-ajustment layers (all of them show a white thumbnail) and want to safe the photo (different name or you'll overwrite the original) all layers are flattened as one. How can one tell afterwards which layers have been used? Or how can one proof that only non-ajustment have been used.

Firstly, you should save a copy as the flattened image, so you still have the layered original.

If you send us the original and a complete set of editing steps, anyone of us should be able to replicate (or come close to) your entry by following the same procedure; if we can't, that's a possible DQ.

It's also possible to save a series of screenshots to show the editing progress, like this.


Thanks for your answer, but I don't use PS and I've never seen things like this in PSP. Guess I have to figure it out myself.

This Tutorial on Duotones uses adjustment layers (in a specific way) in PSP, but it should give you enough of an idea of how they work to let you start experimenting.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 03:42:01 AM

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: 08/29/2025 03:42:01 AM EDT.