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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Suggestions >> 100% Crop
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 21 of 21, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/23/2006 04:11:56 PM · #1
Challenge: The finished size of your entry should be achieved by cropping only - no resizing. For example, if you want to enter a 640x640 shot, you must crop a 640x640 section from the original for your entry.

Every time we have a technical challenge someone complains that their camera cannot perform the feat. This is technical in a slightly different way - composition. You are going to have to place your subject or shoot your subject such that a 100% crop will produce the result you want.

I think everyone can handle this one regardless of camera.
 10/23/2006 04:12:41 PM · #2
Interesting Idea!
 10/23/2006 04:15:43 PM · #3
Hmm, how to police it short of a couple hundred originals getting submitted along with the entries? I like the idea, also like the idea of no crop at all, but don't know how workable it is.
 10/23/2006 04:16:45 PM · #4
Hmmm. Have to check my camera and see if I can still shoot RAW and have the smallest pixel dimension. Don't think so - thinking it has to be in JPG mode.

Noise could be a big factor for some depending on the camera they are using...to pull a 640x640 crop out of the image, etc...

Not opposed to the idea. Just kind of bouncing around a couple of thoughts.
 10/23/2006 04:23:04 PM · #5
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Hmm, how to police it short of a couple hundred originals getting submitted along with the entries? I like the idea, also like the idea of no crop at all, but don't know how workable it is.


I thought about this and there is a way. When you crop, before hitting the crop button, take a screen shot. This you do anything you want to but make sure the crop size and area are visible. You upload this to your workshop folder. If/when validation is required, you can send a link to the workshop photo along with the original.

(I tested this last night and it works fine and takes only like 2 mminutes to work a screen shot and upload it)
 10/23/2006 04:23:44 PM · #6
I've actually done that for a challenge before:



I like the idea. It forces you to have the right subject that allows for you to crop cleanly.
 10/23/2006 04:30:20 PM · #7
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Hmmm. Have to check my camera and see if I can still shoot RAW and have the smallest pixel dimension. Don't think so - thinking it has to be in JPG mode.


I tried this last night as well. Shot in RAW+jpg and cropped out a 640x640 shot from each (same area). The jpg suffered much more than the raw did and the converted RAW was still much better.

Originally posted by glad2badad:
Noise could be a big factor for some depending on the camera they are using...to pull a 640x640 crop out of the image, etc...


This is why I thought this was more technical than it sounds. I did about a dozen experiments and subject placement is very critical to avoid excessive noise. I used the same item in a football field and had 5 yards between placements with camera on tripod. From this I can say that a few feet make quite a difference after a certain point. But I would assume this would depend on camera, lense, settings, subject size.
 10/23/2006 04:40:44 PM · #8
Originally posted by larryslights:
I've actually done that for a challenge before:



I like the idea. It forces you to have the right subject that allows for you to crop cleanly.


Nice shot! Just left comment and you picked up a favorite.
 10/23/2006 04:42:22 PM · #9
awesome idea. sounds crazy tricky.
 10/23/2006 04:48:40 PM · #10
Originally posted by Alienyst:
Originally posted by larryslights:
I've actually done that for a challenge before:



I like the idea. It forces you to have the right subject that allows for you to crop cleanly.


Nice shot! Just left comment and you picked up a favorite.


Why, Thank You!
 10/23/2006 04:58:50 PM · #11
What about posting original dimensions of the picture and what detail settings you used? It would give us some idea whether you are telling the truth or not without having to inspect each picture.

I like the idea by the way...
 10/23/2006 05:38:20 PM · #12
This is going to be a killer for the 5D owners. An original shot comes in at 4368 by 2912. We would lose 80% of the original image ;-)

OK my maths stink !!
 10/23/2006 05:41:50 PM · #13
Why is this any harder to police than any other challenge?

Top 5 would be validated the usual way.

If the original doesn't have a 640 x 640 area that matches the entry, DQ.

What am I missing?
 10/23/2006 05:57:20 PM · #14
Originally posted by Falc:
This is going to be a killer for the 5D owners. An original shot comes in at 4368 by 2912. We would lose 80% of the original image ;-)

OK my maths stink !!


yeah, but we get a whole lot more detail in that small section, so I think it's a wash
 10/23/2006 06:55:20 PM · #15
I'm afraid that this would put a huge premium on camera quality. With the XT I could do this, but for p&s users, noise, compression artifacts and other image quality issues would result in generally poor results.

It also means that we are forced to frame WAY too wide for a particular shot-something that one would never normally have a reason to do.

10/23/2006 07:23:37 PM · #16
Seems like a macro challenge without using a macro lens.
10/23/2006 08:12:34 PM · #17
i will just use my batman camera which is about that size anyway or shoot at the smallest jpeg and just use the full photo:P
 10/23/2006 08:31:01 PM · #18
Originally posted by photoheathen:
Originally posted by Falc:
This is going to be a killer for the 5D owners. An original shot comes in at 4368 by 2912. We would lose 80% of the original image ;-)

OK my maths stink !!


yeah, but we get a whole lot more detail in that small section, so I think it's a wash

Um, couldn't you just shoot in jpeg (I know I know, blasphemous) at a smaller setting?
 10/23/2006 08:45:52 PM · #19
Originally posted by MrEd:
Originally posted by photoheathen:
Originally posted by Falc:
This is going to be a killer for the 5D owners. An original shot comes in at 4368 by 2912. We would lose 80% of the original image ;-)

OK my maths stink !!


yeah, but we get a whole lot more detail in that small section, so I think it's a wash

Um, couldn't you just shoot in jpeg (I know I know, blasphemous) at a smaller setting?


Heh, smallest JPEG setting on the 5D is 2496 x 1664... cropping to 640x640 loses about 90% of the image area 8-o
 10/23/2006 09:13:00 PM · #20
I find it somewhat ironic that it is usually the P&S people who complain about camera limitations and here it is the opposite.

Geez...it was only an idea.
 10/23/2006 09:20:57 PM · #21
Originally posted by Alienyst:
I find it somewhat ironic that it is usually the P&S people who complain about camera limitations and here it is the opposite.

Geez...it was only an idea.


I found it more of a slightly humorous observation than a complaint... I imagined myself trying to frame the miniscule subject (1/7 of the frame height)... anyhow, if I entered such a challenge, I'd prolly grab the trusty ol' 995, or my 'phone ;-)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 10/05/2025 07:28:39 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: 10/05/2025 07:28:39 PM EDT.