| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/31/2006 06:08:39 PM · #1 |
The recent "Soft Focus" challenge highlighted an issue that I think is disheartening to many. That is how "technical" challenges often are not.
Time and time again it seems like a challenge like Shallow DOF, soft focus, etc. comes up and most of all the top entries are photoshopped effects.
To me, this rather defeats the purpose of a technique based challenge. It also is frustrating as I see these challenges as opportunities to learn or hone specific techniques but when most of the competition is just PS'ing it makes for a poor comparison.
I would really like to see the addtion of a monthly "Technical" challenge. A technical challenge would focus on a photography technique. It would have a specialized set of rules. Including some aspects of advanced challenge (namely limited spot editing for the removal of dust, props, etc.) but it would also have additional restrictions above and beyond basic challenges.
No effect, whether it applies to the entire image or not, be it hue, blur, etc. may be applied in order to achieve in post-processing a similar effect to the challenge's technique.
These challenges would be focused on learning and utilizing techniques. And would start on the first and go till the end of the month.
I personally think it'd work well to have eight of these are year. Along with 4 free studies.
So we'd have a Winter, Spring, Summer, Fall free study (total of 4) and the other months we'd have a "Technical" challenge.
Example:
January (Free Study)
February (Technical)
March (Technical)
April (Free Study)
May (Technical)
June (Technical)
July (Free Study)
August (Technical)
September (Technical)
October (Free Study)
November (Technical)
December (Technical)
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
08/31/2006 06:20:47 PM · #2 |
| I like this idea a lot. I think if it were to be implemented, the rules for each technical challenge would need to be extremely clear in advance. I like the schedule you've proposed because it does not replace any current challenges, but add to them. So people who are not huge fans of this idea can choose to not participate and they're not losing out on anything currently. |
|
|
|
08/31/2006 06:24:37 PM · #3 |
Sounds good. How bout some of these?
Close Up! (min focal length 500mm, no crop allowed)
Tilt Shift! (you must use lense, no perspective shifting allowed)
Stack It Up! (you must stack 1 ND, 1 polarizer, and 1 Red filter for your shot, no PP filters allowed).
I've got two incomes and no kids. When can we start? |
|
|
|
08/31/2006 06:24:47 PM · #4 |
to be honest, I like the surprise of a free study..
|
|
|
|
08/31/2006 06:26:43 PM · #5 |
I agree with biteme, surprise free study's are always awesome. But I agree with having month long technical challenges. Awesome idea.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2006 06:28:34 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by LERtastic:
But I agree with having month long technical challenges. Awesome idea. |
yep, me too. didn't realise it was a month long challenge.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2006 06:30:45 PM · #7 |
This suggestion is based on the assumption that post-processing is not "technical" in nature, and I disagree with that. In my mind, the important thing is the end result, and I don't much care how it was achieved as long as it's done within the rules. One of the great things about digital photography is that it makes "techniques" more accessible to everyone.
Can you give some examples of technical challenges that you believe would be more valid if they were divorced from post-processing?
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/31/2006 07:02:31 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
This suggestion is based on the assumption that post-processing is not "technical" in nature, and I disagree with that. In my mind, the important thing is the end result, and I don't much care how it was achieved as long as it's done within the rules. One of the great things about digital photography is that it makes "techniques" more accessible to everyone.
Can you give some examples of technical challenges that you believe would be more valid if they were divorced from post-processing?
Robt. |
Gold Challenge: Description -
Without using jewelery, find something gold and shoot it.
Why was this distinction made? Isn't jewelery valid as a photography subject? Well, sure it is!
I don't think a technical challenge has to mean that we don't find photoshopping an acceptable technique. It's just to try something different once in a while.
edit: Call it something rather than "technical challenges". Have it be less often than the proposed schedule. I'm not saying that everything is perfect with the original proposal, but I personally feel that the idea behind it (as I understand it, i.e. to provide some challenges that have more of a different focus for people who prefer them while not taking anything away from people who don't) is a solid one.
Also, re-reading the original post, there is definitely some anti-photoshopping there that Bear is responding to - I just want you to know that I do not think you are overreacting or taking things out of context or anything like that. I just feel that the idea of the "technical challenge" doesn't necessarly *need* to be "anti-photoshopping".
I hope all this makes sense.
Message edited by author 2006-08-31 19:06:36. |
|
|
|
08/31/2006 07:08:42 PM · #9 |
I'm gonna vote for Kelly for President. :-)
|
|
|
|
08/31/2006 07:15:22 PM · #10 |
|
|
|
08/31/2006 07:23:40 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
This suggestion is based on the assumption that post-processing is not "technical" in nature, and I disagree with that. In my mind, the important thing is the end result, and I don't much care how it was achieved as long as it's done within the rules. One of the great things about digital photography is that it makes "techniques" more accessible to everyone.
Can you give some examples of technical challenges that you believe would be more valid if they were divorced from post-processing?
Robt. |
How about the Depth of Field challenges. Easy to simulate DOF in post processing (although harder to do it convincingly). |
|
|
|
09/01/2006 10:23:10 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
This suggestion is based on the assumption that post-processing is not "technical" in nature, and I disagree with that. In my mind, the important thing is the end result, and I don't much care how it was achieved as long as it's done within the rules. One of the great things about digital photography is that it makes "techniques" more accessible to everyone.
Can you give some examples of technical challenges that you believe would be more valid if they were divorced from post-processing?
Robt. |
Post-processing IS a technical art. But it is NOT "Technical Photography" it is "Technical Development". Yes, it is involved with printing IMHO as opposed to the photography. To me the difference is what is done with manipulation and effect of light thru lenses and receiving element (be it film or CCD). The point of these "Technical Photography" challenges is to focus and hone on the composition end of the photography process as opposed to the development process.
We've had quite a handful of challenges which have allowed more open ended development. Why is it such a barrier for some to allow challenges that swing the opposite way a limite the development process.
And that is what I and a lot of other members would like to see a challenge dedicate too.
Technical challenges that are more valid aside from post-processing:
- Motion blurr
- Shallow DOF
- Long Exposure
- Using flash
- Lens Barrel Distortion
Just to name a few...
Originally posted by Dr.Confuser:
How about the Depth of Field challenges. Easy to simulate DOF in post processing (although harder to do it convincingly). |
I am not sure I agree. At least not for the commonality of viewers/voters. I've seen many post-processed entries in such challenges as motion-blur, shallow DOF, etc do quite well.
Now please don't get me wrong. I am not opposed to photoshopping photos. However, you can do that on a multitude of challenges every week. Some of us would like a few challenges a year where the focus is on traditional photographic methods as opposed to development techniques or simulating post-process methods.
Message edited by author 2006-09-01 11:03:37. |
|
|
|
09/01/2006 10:48:24 AM · #13 |
Did I see mention of a potential third ruleset, "Straight from the camera" that would essentially be what you're proposing?
I like this idea a lot.
Some challenges focused solely on photographic abilities, a throw back to pre-digi.
|
|
|
|
09/01/2006 11:08:40 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by rswank:
Did I see mention of a potential third ruleset, "Straight from the camera" that would essentially be what you're proposing?
I like this idea a lot.
Some challenges focused solely on photographic abilities, a throw back to pre-digi. |
Some what similar, except it would allow for dust/red-eye removal, etc.
|
|
|
|
09/01/2006 11:22:31 AM · #15 |
I read the original suggestion to mean that if it is a shallow DOF challenge we could not use gausian blur or other method to give the impression of shallow DOF, but that curves levels conrast etc would be allowed. This would allow concetration on the technique of the challenge. Perhaps by the end of the year there could be a straight from the camera challenge to allow us to use everything we have learned. And while I love processing and its effects, it is not the same as learning how to do something new with your camera.
I wouldn't have a problem with 12 technical challenges and leaving the free studies random. I really like this idea. |
|
|
|
09/01/2006 12:48:22 PM · #16 |
I don't think there's any need to create a new challenge category that requires more programming. Just have one member challenge (and maybe one open challenge) per month be a "Technical Challenge" (it doesn't even need to be labeled as such) that has Extra Rules. For example, the Soft Focus challenge would have a rule stating that the soft focus effects have to be created in-camera, or can even be more specific, created with a filter or something covering the lens.
|
|
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 07:15:38 PM EDT.
