| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/14/2007 04:50:37 PM · #1 |
Iâm posting this to help others to better understand some subjective rules about âAdvanced Editingâ.
My entry âBoss Shoutingâ at Personification II challenge has been DQed because I used a technique usually accepted without problems - a Circular Gradient Map Layer â to create a vignette (the blue sky vignette). There are a lot of examples and some winning photos with that effect here at DPC without being DQed. So it was a surprise to me when I received the notification and the justification about the illegality I did in my entry.
Lets see in an easy way the interpretation of the rules â âAdvanced Editingâ.
Can I use a Gradient Map Layer? â Yes I can!
Can I use a Hue/Sat Layer to change colors in my pic? â Yes I can!
In the definition of a vignette, there is no reference to the size, color or perfection of the shape. The only reference talks about changes in the luminosity coming from the corners to the center, pushing the viewer attention to the center.
So⦠What was wrong with my pic??????
The easy answer: - You can use a vignette but donât let them notice you used it!
Does that makes sense?... Not for me.
Here is an example, in every ways, similar to what I did.
Example
Are you still confused?...
Ok, so lets put this in a more easy way... Lets talk using only black and white words.
If I cropped my image with an elliptical shape to push the attention to the center, should the pic be DQed?
Please note that Iâm posting this only with one propose in mind: - Warning to the DPC community about some subjective rules that can ruin your afford and work.
|
|
|
|
02/14/2007 04:53:12 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
02/14/2007 04:54:30 PM · #3 |
But looking at your image, you didn't apply an elliptical shape to it, did you ? it seems to have a lot tool shaped cut-outs in it, or is that just my imagination ? E.g., in the other shot you linked to, the vignette is applied equally over the foreground, subject and background, rather than cut-out to just add a background, around the foreground elements, which seems quite different ?
It'd be easier to discuss what was actually done, rather than tangential hypothetical cases, surely ?
Message edited by author 2007-02-14 16:56:00.
|
|
|
|
02/14/2007 04:55:46 PM · #4 |
Great.
Make all the changes you want unless it makes a visible impact. |
|
|
|
02/14/2007 04:56:32 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
It'd be easier to discuss what was actually done, rather than tangential hypothetical cases, surely ? |
but Advanced rules aren't based on what is actually done. They are results-based, not tools-based.
|
|
|
|
02/14/2007 04:57:59 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Gordon:
It'd be easier to discuss what was actually done, rather than tangential hypothetical cases, surely ? |
but Advanced rules aren't based on what is actually done. They are results-based, not tools-based. |
Yea... and that's not confusing. |
|
|
|
02/14/2007 05:00:43 PM · #7 |
| I always wondered about that example to... I'm not wishing any bad attention on it. It's a great photo and I love the effect. But it is a big vignette that certainly changes the composition to me. |
|
|
|
02/14/2007 05:01:44 PM · #8 |
| it's probably best to keep this discussion all in one thread. |
|
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: 08/14/2025 11:04:53 AM EDT.
