| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/05/2003 10:58:05 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by karmat:
I think so. (How's that for a definitive answer). I have heard a lot about this technique, seen some results, and would definitely like to try it. |
PS -- This means YES, John.
|
|
|
|
06/05/2003 11:01:12 PM · #52 |
|
|
|
06/05/2003 11:03:17 PM · #53 |
I'm in the NO camp. I don't see a problem with lifting the editting rules occasionally though. Does that mean I'm on the fence?
|
|
|
|
06/05/2003 11:06:32 PM · #54 |
yes also to dodging and burning...
I don't think it should be allowed just because its a film darkroom technique... or else we might as well add vignetting, masking, spotting (removing specks of dust, etc), to the list :)
But as to a simple and effective way to improve contrast, and to allow the photographer to emphasize/demphasize certain parts of the image, then this is an important process...
Can this take away from the reality of the scene? Well, I still think photography is a form of communication and self expression and giving photographers a simple tool to get that message across by allowing local contrast contral, etc, is one step closer to being able to effectively communicate to an audience through a digital image....
Will it just make those apt at Photoshop to always win at contests? Are photos only judged by their technical merits alone? Of course not. Can artful dodging and burning turn a bad image into a good one? I don't think so...it can take a photo with great compositional elements but just perhaps some flat lighting and turn it into something dramatic...
What I'm trying to say is that I think people who choose not to dodge and burn their photos stand a good chance of winning anyway. There's more to getting high scores than technically perfect print...
Just my 2pence :) |
|
|
|
06/05/2003 11:16:35 PM · #55 |
I have to respectfully vote no. In the extreme use of the tool, it will allow complete removal of selected objects. For most of you, that's probably another arguement in favor of dodge/burn - not for me.
Jerry |
|
|
|
06/05/2003 11:19:46 PM · #56 |
|
|
|
06/05/2003 11:25:06 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by jerrft:
I have to respectfully vote no. In the extreme use of the tool, it will allow complete removal of selected objects. For most of you, that's probably another arguement in favor of dodge/burn - not for me.
Jerry |
Jerry, I'm glad you brought this up. This is true in some cases, but it will only serve to remove an object from a solid black backgroudn and it only works if the object you want to remove is not white. Removing an item from any other color will create a huge black spot in the image.
This could also be used to help remove hot pixels from an image. This was though out before hand :) I'm wondering if the burn tool could serve multiple purposes without going overboard on the editing... |
|
|
|
06/05/2003 11:49:14 PM · #58 |
I'm gonna say no.
A winner was taken down this week for using these tools, and I think it would be in very poor form to turn this rule around right now.
So, unless we are talking about "undoing" a DQ (which at this point would also be a bad idea) I just can't justify it.
That said, I am in favor of using these tools. But I feel that a rules revision like this needs to be planned ahead. (How far ahead? Now thats a good question... a month at least.) |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:04:57 AM · #59 |
So, mcmurma, if they said the rule change was to take effect August 1, 2003 (just hypothetically, mind you), would your vote still be no, or is that a yes?
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:06:22 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Jerry, I'm glad you brought this up. This is true in some cases, but it will only serve to remove an object from a solid black backgroudn and it only works if the object you want to remove is not white. Removing an item from any other color will create a huge black spot in the image. |
John, I'm not sure we can say this with much certainty. For example, I can lower the brightness of an image and burn what was white and then re-brighten. For sure, B&W shots would be open to extensive artistic alteration.
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
This could also be used to help remove hot pixels from an image. This was though out before hand :) I'm wondering if the burn tool could serve multiple purposes without going overboard on the editing... |
It would sure come in handy. I'm just trying to understand all the repercussions of unrestricted dodge/burn.
Jerry
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:12:30 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by mcmurma:
I'm gonna say no.
A winner was taken down this week for using these tools, and I think it would be in very poor form to turn this rule around right now.
So, unless we are talking about "undoing" a DQ (which at this point would also be a bad idea) I just can't justify it. |
I'm not whining, but just pointing out the fact that I had a pic DQ'd for having two borders. The next week border rules were changed to allow it. And that's fine. The rules that are posted now are what we must go by until they're changed. The pic that was DQ'd this week is the perfect example of why we should allow b/d. No one even questioned the photo, he stated the fact himself, only because he used it as a normal proccess for his photos, as others do.
Message edited by author 2003-06-06 00:12:52.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:13:32 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by karmat:
So, mcmurma, if they said the rule change was to take effect August 1, 2003 (just hypothetically, mind you), would your vote still be no, or is that a yes? |
For a rule change taking place on or after August 1, 2003 my vote would be a yes. |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:16:06 AM · #63 |
John -- As was mentioned, I think that was a lousy choice for a tutorial to illustrate the technique as you propose it be used.
That said, I'd be in favor of trying it out for four challenges, maybe with one B+W and one "Free" challenge, and seeing how it goes. All this hypothetical stuff is taking too long and will become significantly divisive if not dealt with expiditiously.
We've had challenges where all editing rules were suspended, and there was precious little "digital art." And if people go overboard with their technique, we are free to adjust our scores accordingly .... |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:18:53 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
That said, I'd be in favor of trying it out for four challenges, maybe with one B+W and one "Free" challenge, and seeing how it goes. |
That's what I want to do as well. It's the only way we are ever going to move this discussion to the next level, to see the proposed changes in progress
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:20:43 AM · #65 |
I really dont use this tool at all, and dont have problems with it, if its not used improperly, so Im kinda 50/50 on this one....yes it would be good to allow, but it could stir up some trouble....just what ever the majority decides I will be fine with.
James
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:26:13 AM · #66 |
BTW -- I mean Free choice of subject, not free use of any and all editing tools.
Just as the discussion became more focused with just one tool/rule discussed, we should try out the new things one at a time as well. |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:35:42 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
We've had challenges where all editing rules were suspended, and there was precious little "digital art." And if people go overboard with their technique, we are free to adjust our scores accordingly .... |
I guess the better question is, do you want the ability to spot edit using the dodge/burn tool? Do you want to be able to remove power lines, badly placed foilage, add catch-lights, remove red-eye, etc. Not hard to do in a B&W shot especially. |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:37:20 AM · #68 |
I'd have to say yes to using the dodge and burn tools.
Mark
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:39:26 AM · #69 |
As a rule change, NO.
For OCCATIONAL challenges, sure. |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:52:19 AM · #70 |
I agree that the dodge and burn tools would probably recieve a fairly small amount of use from a small number of users. Which is fine.
But using these tools is spot editing, no two ways around that. And if we can dodge and burn, then why not allow limited use of the clone tool?
Honestly, I don't have a problem with the rules as they stand. But I'm not afraid to allow some more "liberating" tools either, if that's what everyone else wants to do.
In fact, I'm beggining to feel that maybe we should just work off of the premise that your entry should retain the look of photograph, and just let the voters decide who has gone too far with editing. But without an original available for inspection during voting, it would make for an awful lot of controversy once the challenges are over. Too many unanswered questions would be stuck in the minds of the voters. Without originals to examine (despite the possiblity that even the originals were manipulated) they could become suspicious and distrustful, and might leave the site in droves... demanding their money back on the way out.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 12:59:33 AM · #71 |
Yes, please yes, let's allow dodging and burning. Take the two images below. Both would be DPC legal if we were to allow dodging and burning. I did the edit in about 5 minutes. Which would you rather have?
This be the original...
and this be the dodged and burned version
|
|
|
|
06/06/2003 01:19:38 AM · #72 |
| I say yes, because great photographers will still be great photographers with or without this rule. Plus I want to have an excuse to learn it. |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 02:35:26 AM · #73 |
Definately YES. We need more freedom with our photos. Its all about learning. Photography is not just about taking a picture. So many things are combined to produce a finished result. Why not let us learn all that we can from this site.
Brian |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 02:50:37 AM · #74 |
| See John, and you thought the DPC community was afraid of change! It just needs to be slow and gentle. (Insert your own inuendo...) |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 02:52:29 AM · #75 |
I've been a registered user here for about six months now. This is the third time this debate has come up. Why not put all of us out of our agony, and just allow spot editing as proposed in John's original post.
I vote Yes to dodge/burn.
Since I don't feel like going through this again in two or three months, I also vote yes to any and all other spot editing techniques which do not add external elements of any kind. In other words yes to "photo fix" edits, no to "photo change" edits.
|
|
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: 07/17/2025 01:53:36 PM EDT.
