| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/30/2003 12:16:44 PM · #1 |
I might be opening a can of worms, but I'll mention it anyway.
I'd think it would be good to amend the submission rules to set a minimum length for the longer side of a submission. There is an increasing number of photos that is sized excessively small (in comparison to the max. 640x640 allowed). It is hard to vote on and/or critique the photo because details are difficult to see. The person submitting the photo gets lots of "too small" and not much useful feedback.
Here's the rule as it currently stands: "Dimension: No dimension may be shorter than 160 pixels or longer than 640 pixels. "
I think it should ideally be reworded to: "Dimension: The longer dimension must be exactly 640 pixels. The shorter dimension may not be shorter than 160 pixels."
Failing that (if people find that too restrictive), reword to: "Dimension: The longer dimension must be between 500 pixels and 640 pixels. The shorter dimension may not be shorter than 160 pixels."
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 12:25:58 PM · #2 |
Not a bad idea. Smaller photos are difficult to judge, because, like you said, the details are often difficult to see.
500 on the long side as a minimum should not be too much to ask. |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 12:26:37 PM · #3 |
I agree. However, a point should be made to allow for ranges of 500>640 for the longest dimention and 160>300 for the shortest dimention. It is not being "restrictive", but allowed for more flexible crops and final presentation.
Personally, I want to outlaw the use of borders and any text that wasn't in the original photo ... those things just annoy me a little too much.
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 12:31:00 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by alexmfin:
I agree. However, a point should be made to allow for ranges of 500>640 for the longest dimention and 160>300 for the shortest dimention. It is not being "restrictive", but allowed for more flexible crops and final presentation.
Personally, I want to outlaw the use of borders and any text that wasn't in the original photo ... those things just annoy me a little too much. |
if 300 was the longest you could use on the short side, all the pictures would look like wall hangings or panoramics.
We can't use text in 99% of the challenges anyway so that is basically a non-issue. Borders should be allowed IMO, but there are always some shots where it would of been a better choice not to have one. It's actually tapered off a lot since the inception of dpc2 in december. When it was new, it was the thing to do. I think there should be some limits placed there though. I can understand how you feel it's annoying.
Message edited by author 2003-06-30 12:35:30.
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 12:39:19 PM · #5 |
I have to say sometimes getting the exact 640 on one side just isn't possible. If my entry is the standard 640 x 480 that means I either was able to resized by 50% or I cropped and then chopped it down to make the perfect size. I do though have to agree that there has been a number of TOO SMALL images lately. Usually a new member to who just needs a little help. Although keep in mind some of the low end cameras shoot at 320 x 240 and to say they have to be 640 those images can become excessively grainy when enlarging by 200%.
I have had a few of the too small images to critique in CC and I usually send a personal note if it is a new member telling them that they can go as large as 640, and tell them if they are need some help with resizing to just ask. |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 02:27:35 PM · #6 |
Yes, there are some cameras that will have a hard time to meet the 640 requirement, but they had to with the previous set of rules (where it was fixed 640x427 or 640x480) and it seemed to work ok. They are also by now in a very small minority I believe.
As for not being able to hit 640 exactly when you crop, I don't quite understand what you mean. You can crop your image the way you want it to look, then you resize by specifying a length of 640 for the longer side, thus exactly meeting the requirement. What am I missing?
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 02:28:07 PM · #7 |
I think the rule is fine as-is. If a photo is too small for you, vote it as such/comment.
I sometimes choose to crop a photo, and then leave it smaller and clearer rather than re-sampling up. I sometimes also choose a somewhat smaller image than the maximum to allow me to save at higher-quality without going over the size limit.
Borders can also be useful to save data-space. If you don't like someone's border, just add a note "I would have scored this ___ points higher without the border."
That's what the voting is for, to express your opinion of a photo. I don't think you need to change the rules over it. |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 02:56:10 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by FranziskaLang:
Yes, there are some cameras that will have a hard time to meet the 640 requirement, but they had to with the previous set of rules (where it was fixed 640x427 or 640x480) and it seemed to work ok. They are also by now in a very small minority I believe.
As for not being able to hit 640 exactly when you crop, I don't quite understand what you mean. You can crop your image the way you want it to look, then you resize by specifying a length of 640 for the longer side, thus exactly meeting the requirement. What am I missing? |
I am using PSP 7 and I can give it exact figures to meet such as 640 x 480 after I have cropped and resized it down to something close to that but in doing so it chops off equal amounts from the left and right side and from the top and bottom and can end up loosing something that made the photo which had I just resized it a little smaller I would still have and maybe the deminsions would end up being 627 x 512, or some really strange numbers but rarely do I have the exact 640 x 480 when I submit. |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 03:04:13 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I am using PSP 7 and I can give it exact figures to meet such as 640 x 480 after I have cropped and resized it down to something close to that but in doing so it chops off equal amounts from the left and right side and from the top and bottom and can end up loosing something that made the photo which had I just resized it a little smaller I would still have and maybe the deminsions would end up being 627 x 512, or some really strange numbers but rarely do I have the exact 640 x 480 when I submit. |
Anna,
The period key is located 2 keys to the right of the "M" key. ;-)
-Terry
Message edited by author 2003-06-30 15:04:33.
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 03:05:36 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I have to say sometimes getting the exact 640 on one side just isn't possible. If my entry is the standard 640 x 480 that means I either was able to resized by 50% or I cropped and then chopped it down to make the perfect size. I do though have to agree that there has been a number of TOO SMALL images lately. Usually a new member to who just needs a little help. Although keep in mind some of the low end cameras shoot at 320 x 240 and to say they have to be 640 those images can become excessively grainy when enlarging by 200%.
I have had a few of the too small images to critique in CC and I usually send a personal note if it is a new member telling them that they can go as large as 640, and tell them if they are need some help with resizing to just ask. |
Whats cool about PSP7, is that you can use the crop tool anyway you like to get the picture to look good. Then go to resize and put in the width of 640 and leave the height box to whatever the program selects( if doing portrait oreintation shot, you would of course put the 640 in the height box). Your image will then be resized and look exactly like the cropped version. At this time, you should run your USM to sharpen the pic. Hope that helps :)
Message edited by author 2003-06-30 15:11:48.
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 03:05:49 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I am using PSP 7 and I can give it exact figures to meet such as 640 x 480 after I have cropped and resized it down to something close to that but in doing so it chops off equal amounts from the left and right side and from the top and bottom and can end up loosing something that made the photo which had I just resized it a little smaller I would still have and maybe the deminsions would end up being 627 x 512, or some really strange numbers but rarely do I have the exact 640 x 480 when I submit. |
Anna,
The period key is located 2 keys to the right of the "M" key. ;-)
-Terry |
LOL |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 03:06:26 PM · #12 |
holy long sentence! :)
i think that if you just type in 640 or whatever on either the length or height, and keep your constrained proportitions box checked, then it should just resize for you with not much effort on your part! |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 03:17:57 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Alecia:
holy long sentence! :) |
I high school, I was the class's acknowledged master of the R/S (Run-on Sentence), and thought I was pretty good until I read about James Joyce. |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 03:18:10 PM · #14 |
| A lot of the photo dimension issues sort themselves out in the voting. Pure Darwinism...if you can't read, don't have proper software or can't use your software properly, there's a possibility of lower scores for you. Personally I think there should just be a file size limitation. I'd really like to be able to post at 800 on the horizontal axis. 640 on a side is just a bit too small if you're cropping heavily on the vertical axis (ie for panorama shots). |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 03:21:18 PM · #15 |
The way it is in Photoshop 7 (and all PS editions for as long as i can remember) that you need to have the boxes Constrain Proportions and Resample Image Bicubic checked off when you resize. Then, when you specifiy 640 px for the largest side, the other side will automatically be determined for you. So, crop to get what you want and then resize. Resizing is just about the simplest step in the digital darkroom. Suppose that other editing software has similar features.
I like the current rule just fine. Smaller images will get lower scores because you cannot see enough of the image to evaluate it properly. Ditto if you want to submit a pixel for pixel crop of a bigger image (just grabbing, say, 300 x 250 px). Really small images always lead me to believe that there's something wrong with the bigger image and therefore really isn't a successful image. |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 04:07:10 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Alecia:
holy long sentence! :) |
I high school, I was the class's acknowledged master of the R/S (Run-on Sentence), and thought I was pretty good until I read about James Joyce. |
so true! :) also the same for Tom Robbins. love his books, but man, is he verbose! ;) |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 04:08:20 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by FranziskaLang:
I think it should ideally be reworded to: "Dimension: The longer dimension must be exactly 640 pixels. The shorter dimension may not be shorter than 160 pixels."
Failing that (if people find that too restrictive), reword to: "Dimension: The longer dimension must be between 500 pixels and 640 pixels. The shorter dimension may not be shorter than 160 pixels." |
I've submitted the occasional 400-pixel-wide picture, and y'know why? Because if I hadn't shrunk it that last little bit it would have had crappy focus and sharpness, because my camera just cannot cope with some of the stuff I try to do with it. Would you rather HUGE and with weird blotchy pixelation around the edges of everything from sharpening artifacts, or a little smaller and crystal-clear?
I sure as hell know which *I'd* give a better score to.
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 04:12:54 PM · #18 |
The 3rd place shot in Magazine was done with a point and shoot 1.2 Megapixel camera. I believe that if you do serious cropping and try to push the camera past the limits it can handle, then you are going to get pixelation and bad images. If you work within your camera's limits and provide enough light, even the lower end camera's can produce stunning images.
Image sizes of 640 shouldn't be a problem for most modern 1.2 cams on up! You need to think of good framing, composition and lighting when you take your shot, as you will not have as much image to crop off later.
Originally posted by eloise:
Originally posted by FranziskaLang:
I think it should ideally be reworded to: "Dimension: The longer dimension must be exactly 640 pixels. The shorter dimension may not be shorter than 160 pixels."
Failing that (if people find that too restrictive), reword to: "Dimension: The longer dimension must be between 500 pixels and 640 pixels. The shorter dimension may not be shorter than 160 pixels." |
I've submitted the occasional 400-pixel-wide picture, and y'know why? Because if I hadn't shrunk it that last little bit it would have had crappy focus and sharpness, because my camera just cannot cope with some of the stuff I try to do with it. Would you rather HUGE and with weird blotchy pixelation around the edges of everything from sharpening artifacts, or a little smaller and crystal-clear?
I sure as hell know which *I'd* give a better score to. |
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 05:00:22 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by crabappl3:
The 3rd place shot in Magazine was done with a point and shoot 1.2 Megapixel camera. I believe that if you do serious cropping and try to push the camera past the limits it can handle, then you are going to get pixelation and bad images. If you work within your camera's limits and provide enough light, even the lower end camera's can produce stunning images.
Image sizes of 640 shouldn't be a problem for most modern 1.2 cams on up! You need to think of good framing, composition and lighting when you take your shot, as you will not have as much image to crop off later. |
Well, yes, obviously. But all my challenge shots are taken 'en passant,' as it were - I don't have the time to devote to spending an hour or two on each challenge laboriously setting up and lighting shots, so I do what I can once I get it in the computer.
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 05:12:37 PM · #20 |
I can appreciate your taking pictures while out and about, but that still doesn't prevent you from taking a minute to find the best angle and composition before snapping. What level of shot you submit is usually equal to the effort put forth getting your composition and framing right. A snapshot feel to an image will usually score lower then one where you provide the viewer a unique perspective of the same scene. Go high, go low, find complimentary shapes or colors for the background... have fun, but also venture past the idea that any snap is better then none. If you're trying to improve and provide an interesting image for the viewer then it will take some time and dedication.
Originally posted by eloise:
Originally posted by crabappl3:
The 3rd place shot in Magazine was done with a point and shoot 1.2 Megapixel camera. I believe that if you do serious cropping and try to push the camera past the limits it can handle, then you are going to get pixelation and bad images. If you work within your camera's limits and provide enough light, even the lower end camera's can produce stunning images.
Image sizes of 640 shouldn't be a problem for most modern 1.2 cams on up! You need to think of good framing, composition and lighting when you take your shot, as you will not have as much image to crop off later. |
Well, yes, obviously. But all my challenge shots are taken 'en passant,' as it were - I don't have the time to devote to spending an hour or two on each challenge laboriously setting up and lighting shots, so I do what I can once I get it in the computer. |
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 05:35:15 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I am using PSP 7 and I can give it exact figures to meet such as 640 x 480 after I have cropped and resized it down to something close to that but in doing so it chops off equal amounts from the left and right side and from the top and bottom and can end up loosing something that made the photo which had I just resized it a little smaller I would still have and maybe the deminsions would end up being 627 x 512, or some really strange numbers but rarely do I have the exact 640 x 480 when I submit. |
Anna,
The period key is located 2 keys to the right of the "M" key. ;-)
-Terry |
LMAO Terry......
That's what happens when I'm working. hehehe see I know where the period key is .............................
Anna |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 05:41:12 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by scab-lab:
Whats cool about PSP7, is that you can use the crop tool anyway you like to get the picture to look good. Then go to resize and put in the width of 640 and leave the height box to whatever the program selects( if doing portrait oreintation shot, you would of course put the 640 in the height box). Your image will then be resized and look exactly like the cropped version. At this time, you should run your USM to sharpen the pic. Hope that helps :) |
Only works if you are only dealing with either just width or length. But, if you have a second size you have to meet say 480, that just isn't going to happen without PSP chopping more off the edges.
LOL...Terry, how's that? I used both periods and commas!
WOW! Now I am using question marks and exclaimation marks, too. I might just figure out english composition thanks to Terry. =o)
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 05:44:31 PM · #23 |
I just got to say this...
Ever notice how you can have very good typing skills, and you correct your errors when you see them...but just once be in a rush and all of DPC catches ya!
Message edited by author 2003-06-30 17:56:57. |
|
|
|
06/30/2003 05:49:09 PM · #24 |
:-) we catch them ever time!
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I just got to say this...
Every notice... |
|
|
|
|
06/30/2003 05:55:00 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by crabappl3:
:-) we catch them ever time!
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I just got to say this...
Every notice... |
|
every
|
|
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: 08/19/2025 06:23:29 AM EDT.
