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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Thoughts about 'digital art'
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 71 of 71, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 05/08/2007 03:02:08 PM · #51
I figure the limits themselves are set within the Rules Set of each challenge.

Each challenge allows for a different type/style/edit of image. All based off a photograph, or in certain areas multiple photographs. But all start with a captured image from a camera.

The way I see it personally,

Minimal - Allows one to test their camera skills with composition, colour, white balance and originality with no modifications allowed.

Basic - minimal plus minor corrections to colour, saturation, composition and spot editing for dust.

Advanced - Minimal and Basic plus more major editing for minor imperfections and advanced colour operations and ability to duplicate layers in effects to enhance the image to greater levels.

Expert - minimal, basic, advanced plus now use of composites and multiple exposures to create a vision more true to the artists eye.

I pushed the limits and my placing shows it was not excepted... however, being as fantastical as my image it, what sets it apart from say, a gloriously fantastical image from the surface of pluto? complete with large asteroids and water falls? Seeming on how the pluto image is not pushing the 'illustrative' edge and appears 'photographic' it is generally more excepted.... though more fantastical.

What am I trying to say? Pretty much just everything has its place and we should really not care when we see the oranges on the orange tree and the apples on the apple tree.

Yet, like people area saying... where do we draw the line? Well you can not, well not unless some group of people want to be the ones who 'accept or decline' each challenge entry based on their own best assumption of weather or not it is a photograph.

Do you want to be part of that group?
 05/08/2007 03:03:39 PM · #52
OK.

Here is a thought.

As far as DPC is concerned, maybe the Expert Editing rules should be for the artist that wants more flexibility in their photography.

And, here is the juice, maybe have an occasional "Digital Art" rules set.

NO HOLDS BARED, ANYTHING GOES, DO WHAT YOU WANT, make that photo a non-photo competition.

Just a thought.
 05/08/2007 03:08:09 PM · #53
Originally posted by American_Horse:
OK.

Here is a thought.

As far as DPC is concerned, maybe the Expert Editing rules should be for the artist that wants more flexibility in their photography.

And, here is the juice, maybe have an occasional "Digital Art" rules set.

NO HOLDS BARED, ANYTHING GOES, DO WHAT YOU WANT, make that photo a non-photo competition.

Just a thought.


Ok, sounds like a plan... so what is and is not allowed in the new 'Expert' editing rules? How should this be determined?

Like I said, I think batman was within advanced editing rules....
05/08/2007 03:13:55 PM · #54
Ok. Good questions. Glad to see this can be discussed. :D

littlegett's image ==> could have been validated under the Advanced Editing ruleset - Yes/No? I think yes.

Probably the same could be said for sev's image as well ==>

The voters recognized the images for what they are. Highly processed images (photo's?). Hard to tell for certain with littlegett's with the cartoonish look to it. Could be a painting/drawing.

By allowing only 1 photo (no multiples - with likely HDR exception) the viewer/voter can decide what to rate the photo as is - no fabrication to worry about. No wondering if that seagull or airplane is photoshopped in, or did the photographer catch a really cool image by being in the right place at the right time.

Let me re-emphasize, I think mixing expert editing images (with multiple photos, collages, etc...) with standard photos (advanced editing ruleset or below) in a premier challenge like a Free Study is not fair to the photographers nor to the voters.

Want to create 'Digital Art' collages/combos/fantasy type images, then go ahead, have a monthly event for that type of imagery by itself if need be.
 05/08/2007 03:23:20 PM · #55
Originally posted by glad2badad:


Want to create 'Digital Art' collages/combos/fantasy type images, then go ahead, have a monthly event for that type of imagery by itself if need be.


That's what I said. More or less.
 05/08/2007 03:27:28 PM · #56
Hmmm What about, keep the expert rules as they are.. but allow them to include digital art,...

Than also have an HDR rule set. You keep wanting an 'exception' to allow multiple images for HDR... just have an HDR rule set

I think this would hopefully solve a lot of problems.

Expert will be for those who want to push the boundaries with style and composites,

HDR are those whom want to use multiple exposures to create their images.

Would this make more people happy ????
 05/08/2007 03:32:59 PM · #57
Originally posted by American_Horse:
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Want to create 'Digital Art' collages/combos/fantasy type images, then go ahead, have a monthly event for that type of imagery by itself if need be.

That's what I said. More or less.

Yeah. Sorry. I was too lazy to go back and edit my post. I had the 'Post Reply' box up for a bit while I finished a work task...took me awhile to "Post" it.
 05/08/2007 03:37:28 PM · #58
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Define 'digital art'.

This is at the crux of the issue.

It was suggested earlier that 'digital art' and 'real' photography be separated into their own respective challenges.

But how do we do that?

Eliminate the combination of multiple photos (with exceptions *). That will take care of the question of whether it is a real photograph or a fabricated one.

OK, I get it, one picture got with one click of the shutter is 'real' photography.

Now, at the risk of repeating myself...

Why should HDR multi-image compositions be allowed? What is so special about them? In your opinion, are there other forms of composites that should be allowed as well and why should they be allowed? What are the limits?
 05/08/2007 03:37:55 PM · #59
Originally posted by littlegett:
Hmmm What about, keep the expert rules as they are.. but allow them to include digital art,...

Expert Editing already includes digital art. :)

The HDR thing for me can go either way because personally I get decent results using 'psuedo' HDR that are legal under Advanced Editing rules.

HDR that would fall under Expert Editing would allow multiple exposures of the same location without adding new elements to the photo (although I imagine someone, somewhere, would try and exploit that).
 05/08/2007 03:41:11 PM · #60
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Now, at the risk of repeating myself...

Why should HDR multi-image compositions be allowed? What is so special about them? In your opinion, are there other forms of composites that should be allowed as well and why should they be allowed? What are the limits?

No risk of repeating yourself, I do it all the time. :D

HDR is the only composite that comes to mind for me. Some could argue for panoramic stitching I imagine. ???

I'm not a rule writer. I do know that this came up in the Expert Editing ruleset thread (Administrator Announcements) - I think maybe Scalvert mentioned it (multiple photos, HDR consideration, etc...).
 05/08/2007 03:56:21 PM · #61
Edited under advanced rules (and to be fair I could have done it under basic with just a little more care).


Composited under expert rules


"Digital art" doesn't need expert rules to produce. Nor does it take Min Ed rules to produce a "photograph". I think some people would think the disembodied head is not "photographic in nature" or call it digital art.

Scalvert produces images of children flying under Basic rules.

Expert editing doesn't give anyone an unfair advantage. To the contrary, it merely gives one more tools with which to hang themselves. But, it does give those of us that don't have large format plotters a bit of a chance.

Ask the people in Hollywood. Software is the poor man's hardware. They green-screen for the same reason we composite. It cost a lot less to make one appear to fly than it does to actually place them in the sky.

That said, if you're scared of EE rules. Hey, there's always ME, BE, AE... pick the one with which you are comfy. I'm sure those that can't meter or compose are scared of ME too (but are probably a bit more scared to bitch about it).

Message edited by author 2007-05-08 15:58:57.
 05/08/2007 04:08:55 PM · #62
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Now, at the risk of repeating myself...

Why should HDR multi-image compositions be allowed? What is so special about them? In your opinion, are there other forms of composites that should be allowed as well and why should they be allowed? What are the limits?

HDR is the only composite that comes to mind for me. Some could argue for panoramic stitching I imagine. ???

Why do you feel that HDR or possibly panoramas should be allowed? Both violate your single image definition of 'real' photography. What is so special about them that they should be allowed as exceptions to your fundamental definition?
05/08/2007 04:22:16 PM · #63
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
... Expert editing doesn't give anyone an unfair advantage. ...

Respectfully, I disagree. The advantage/disadvantage isn't so much in the image/art production as it is when it comes time to vote and the viewers' reaction.

If a digital art type image (as you've nicely illustrated with examples) is in a challenge running under Advanced Editing rules, the voters know that this is one image they are looking at. It may be fantastic, they may say, wow, I wonder how that was done. Put that same image in a challenge running under Expert Editing rules and the reaction is ok, pretty cool - good photoshopper.

Now, let's consider some images that if put in a challenge under Advanced Editing (or Basic/Minimal) the viewers look at it and say, wow, great capture/great timing, etc...

Let me use a couple of my own images for example:
Example 1 -
Example 2 -

Running under Expert Editing rules the viewer/voter could be inclined to look at these photos entirely different than under Advanced Editing rules.

Under Expert Editing Example 1 is "nice job of photoshopping in the man and the horse"
Under Advanced Editing Example 1 is "wow, great timing - juxtaposition, etc..."

Same with Example 2 - Expert Editing, "nice job putting in that flock of geese".
Example 2 under Advanced Editing is "great timing - way to be in the right place at the right time, etc..."

Can you see the difference? I'm running out of ways to explain my feelings on this. In once case you have a photographer that goes out, captures a photograph of a great moment. Put that photo in with the various collages in an expert editing ruleset challenge and it loses that "moment" and becomes a potential photoshopping result.
 05/08/2007 04:29:38 PM · #64
No, I can't see what you are saying because all you are doing are making General assumptions of what 'MIGHT or MIGHT NOT' be said.

Maybe you should go through all of the expert editing challenges, read all the comments... and make sure to write a message asking the owner of the image if they 'added' an element in the image that was commented on. Once you do that, come back to me and give me statistical information on how the voters react and not just assumptions.
 05/08/2007 04:35:52 PM · #65
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Can you see the difference? I'm running out of ways to explain my feelings on this. In once case you have a photographer that goes out, captures a photograph of a great moment. Put that photo in with the various collages in an expert editing ruleset challenge and it loses that "moment" and becomes a potential photoshopping result.


I do understand your argument, but I'm more of a results voter than a method voter. So, I'm going to give ya the same score no matter what.

Let's put it this way. If it's overly obvious that it's PS'd then it's not PS'd well. In the examples you showed the results would look so natural that I would assume that you got a great shot or you were a Photoshop genius, either way I'd give you props for your skill.

Anyway, I think the Free Study results speak volumes. It doesn't look like "digital art" is threatening the "pure" photos. dwterry nailed it with very little editing.


In retrospect, I failed in adding the seagulls in this photo. They don't complete the illusion and stand out. It was commented on and I do believe that I got dinged for it a bit.

Message edited by author 2007-05-08 16:39:09.
 05/08/2007 04:43:31 PM · #66
Originally posted by littlegett:
No, I can't see what you are saying because all you are doing are making General assumptions of what 'MIGHT or MIGHT NOT' be said.

Maybe you should go through all of the expert editing challenges, read all the comments... and make sure to write a message asking the owner of the image if they 'added' an element in the image that was commented on. Once you do that, come back to me and give me statistical information on how the voters react and not just assumptions.

I see you're quite the comedian. :)

The onus of proof works both ways my friend.
 05/08/2007 05:37:20 PM · #67
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by littlegett:
No, I can't see what you are saying because all you are doing are making General assumptions of what 'MIGHT or MIGHT NOT' be said.

Maybe you should go through all of the expert editing challenges, read all the comments... and make sure to write a message asking the owner of the image if they 'added' an element in the image that was commented on. Once you do that, come back to me and give me statistical information on how the voters react and not just assumptions.

I see you're quite the comedian. :)

The onus of proof works both ways my friend.


Ok, I seriously don't know what you are talking about now. both ways? what both ways?

You gave me assumptions of 'what may or may not' happen. I merely stated that instead of assuming, to do the research to come up with solid facts. However, if you think that actual data compared to assumed data is more valuable... then It is YOU who are the comedian and not I.

Seriously though, that is all this moaning about? I think the Voters are going to continue to Vote the way they want to vote anyway.

'Enter as you will and suffer as you do' should be the motto.

Message edited by author 2007-05-08 17:38:06.
 05/08/2007 05:46:39 PM · #68
I have an assumption that everyone hates my work and they are all worthless crappy images, maybe I am just being paranoid, but here is some historical data..

Challenges Entered: 96
Votes Received: 21,636
Avg Vote Received: 4.7522

Now you see, after 96 challenges, and an average vote of 4.7 I find my assumption to be correct. So my assumption changed from being paranoid to statistically speaking my work is subpar and many voters do not care for it.

So, in this case my assumption was proven correct, However, without the actual data, I am just thought of as a paranoid nutjob.

Do you see the difference ?
 05/08/2007 06:11:02 PM · #69
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Let me use a couple of my own images for example:
Example 1 -
Example 2 -

Running under Expert Editing rules the viewer/voter could be inclined to look at these photos entirely different than under Advanced Editing rules.


I think that you caught a great moment with your horse, but in sub-optimal lighting conditions. I am afraid to say that I think that your image scored roughly right - perhaps a bit low, but not very low, given the importance of lighting in an image. There was some extraordinary competition in that compo.

Now if you had switched the skies and blended it seamlessly, you would have a better image (IMO).

The bar is raised with EE - it is not simply enough to take a single well caught image. Instead, you have a bigger toolbox and tolerances for image shortcomings are reduced accordingly. It's a tougher crowd and you have to learn some new tricks, but since those new tricks are useful ones at the very least to be aware of (if not use) in the outside world, why shy from them?
 05/08/2007 06:15:44 PM · #70
Originally posted by Matthew:
but since those new tricks are useful ones at the very least to be aware of (if not use) in the outside world, why shy from them?


That is exactly WHY I like EE. It's a real world editing set. Other than PJs, almost every working photog will need some of the EE tools from time to time. Why not learn them here. And how better to test if you are learning than in competition.

Sorry, but those that are "griping" about EE, IMO are scared of the rule set. I really think they just need to buck up and learn the tools. But, I also think the same thing about Min. Ed. No reason to complain there either, because if you can't compete there, you need to learn your camera skills.

BTW, I don't want anyone to think I am downing their skills. And as I said in the other thread, it doesn't take PS skills to compete. dwterry for example proved good enough to compete in an EE challenge and ribbon with basic editing.

Message edited by author 2007-05-08 18:20:55.
 05/08/2007 06:34:53 PM · #71
I have rather simple thoughts on "digital art".

I love it when well done. I've been known to dabble, and I love viewing galleries of great work.

I *don't*, however, love it *here*. That's personal opinion. I don't wish to see it on this website outside of specialized occasional challenges, nor do I think it's really *needed*. My suggestion is to start up and run a companion website for that kind of thing...

However, I also am realistic enough to know that whatever happens here happens here, and if the site and the majority of users feel that it's a natural progression to have more full-time digital art friendly editing rules/challenges/etc. It's just something I'll learn to live with. Even if I'm outspoken against it ;)

I think a new set of editing rules to allow more leeway in situations such as HDR, better distraction removals, clean-ups, etc, etc, etc, are a damn fine idea. I'd love to see the Expert Editing continue to be tweaked and refined to allow more realistic yet powerful editing continue. However, (and I'm sorry Judi, but yours is the best recent example), images like Judi's Free Study entry I don't believe really have a place here *in* a challenge like a Free Study or any challenge that isn't *specifically* designated for digital art. I *appreciate* the talent and effort that goes into the creation of an image like that.. but I want to see it somewhere else.

Again, it's entirely personal opinion, and I understand it's going against the grain... but I just feel there needs to be a separation. Would I love to see a companion site.. Digital Art Challenge or somesuch? Damn straight, but I just wish it would stay separate.

Whether it does or not is in the hands of the community, not me, but I'll have my say :)

Message edited by author 2007-05-08 18:36:47.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/22/2025 09:10:01 AM

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: 07/22/2025 09:10:01 AM EDT.