A Bunch of Softies - Post Scores HERE

09/27/2007 05:56:39 PM · #101

My first entry for ages and I Got DQ'ed, didn't realise only adjustment layers could be used...

Was in in the 6's too :(

Message edited by author 2007-09-27 17:59:23.

09/27/2007 06:31:18 PM · #102

Hmmmmm, should I feel slighted since I haven't had my original requested? Geesh, seems like a lot of validation requests this time around. Kinda crazy....

not quite 100 yet but close enough.
Votes: 98
Views: 150
Avg Vote: 6.0000
Comments: 3
Favorites: 0

Agaricus

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

09/27/2007 07:29:59 PM · #103

Originally posted by jenesis:

Geesh, seems like a lot of validation requests this time around. Kinda crazy....

There are already 8 DQ's in this one...seems like more than normal. I am still waiting on the SC to yea or nay mine. I am above a 6 though, and feel confident my photo won't be deemed as a DQ :-)

Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-120 f/4 S

09/27/2007 08:13:47 PM · #104

Originally posted by datcat:

My first entry for ages and I Got DQ'ed, didn't realise only adjustment layers could be used...

Was in in the 6's too :(

I wish to know how you apply Gaussian blur in adjusment layers as it is not available in adjustment layers PS2, I used the equivelant duplicate locked background layer to apply gaussian Blur and adjusted with fill opacity which does not change the original image pixels, but was dq'd as well, and this method is in a photoShop Simple tutorial,applying soft focus, and no advanced editing methods are used.

bassbone

Nikon Z8

09/27/2007 08:22:55 PM · #105

I think you can enter gaussian blur as a standard filter on the entire image and not as a separate layer.

Originally posted by hywind:

Originally posted by datcat:
My first entry for ages and I Got DQ'ed, didn't realise only adjustment layers could be used...

Was in in the 6's too :(

I wish to know how you apply Gaussian blur in adjusment layers as it is not available in adjustment layers PS2, I used the equivelant duplicate locked background layer to apply gaussian Blur and adjusted with fill opacity which does not change the original image pixels, but was dq'd as well, and this method is in a photoShop Simple tutorial,applying soft focus, and no advanced editing methods are used.

09/27/2007 08:23:23 PM · #106

You'd have to apply it to the background layer and then use the "fade gaussian blur" option instead of creating a duplicate of the background and reducing the opacity, then it would be legal. It does pretty much the same thing.

Sorry to hear about the DQ. :(

Sony Distagon T* FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

09/27/2007 10:17:37 PM · #107

Originally posted by jenesis:

The rules say Adjustment layer or Equivelent, so why is not a duplicated layer legal.

I experimented with your theory and there is absolutly no diference the image came out exactly the same, so no pixel changes occur in the way I applied it. this seems to be very very nit picking.

I wonder how many ribbon photos are done by duplicating the background and processing, I would say all those that do not understand adjustment layers.

Message edited by author 2007-09-27 22:32:22.

gotlucky

Sony Alpha a7 II

09/27/2007 10:33:13 PM · #108

Just uploaded my original for review. Wish me luck. Did anyone else use the "Vaseline on lens" to create the soft focus?

Votes: 98
Views: 137
Avg Vote: 6.0918
Comments: 5
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0
Updated: 09/27/07 10:10 pm
Status: Thank you for submitting your proof file. Your submission is being reviewed by the administrators and is pending further action.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

09/27/2007 10:35:26 PM · #109

I'm still not happy but it's ever so slowly creeping upward.....

Soft Focus III
Votes: 100
Views: 137
Avg Vote: 5.6300
Comments: 3
Favorites: 0

09/27/2007 10:37:55 PM · #110

From what I've read in other threads, it adds pixels or information (albeit the same pixels) which is a no-no. I personally hate making changes to the background layer and only do so during basic challenges. Otherwise, I make a duplicate and do my edits on that layer so that I can change them or delete them if I don't like them.

I don't quite understand why we can't just use a duplicate and make adjustments on that in basic, but that's the rules I guess.

09/27/2007 11:04:39 PM · #111

Originally posted by jenesis:

I think SC in the past has ruled that you can make a dup layer and make your adjustments to that, but only for the purpose of preserving the background layer, ie. that dup layer must remain in normal blend mode and remain at 100% fill/opacity. I may be wrong, though, or the wind may have changed, so don't take me at my word in a challenge without checking first. It's not something I do, since I keep copies of all my originals anyway.

Message edited by author 2007-09-27 23:05:49.

09/27/2007 11:07:47 PM · #112

Originally posted by jenesis:

Thank you for your feed back and as you say you are only duplcating the same pixels from the background, not creating more, if this the case maybe the words equivelent should be removed from the rules so an equivelent is not used. Many Thanks.

09/27/2007 11:09:48 PM · #113

Originally posted by hywind:

Originally posted by jenesis:
From what I've read in other threads, it adds pixels or information (albeit the same pixels) which is a no-no. I personally hate making changes to the background layer and only do so during basic challenges. Otherwise, I make a duplicate and do my edits on that layer so that I can change them or delete them if I don't like them.

I don't quite understand why we can't just use a duplicate and make adjustments on that in basic, but that's the rules I guess.

Thank you for your feed back and as you say you are only duplcating the same pixels from the background, not creating more, if this the case maybe the words equivelent should be removed from the rules so an equivelent is not used. Many Thanks.

I think the "equivalent" term was meant to acknowledge that software other than PhotoShop may have a similar concept to adjustment layers but not call them the same thing.

09/27/2007 11:17:03 PM · #114

Originally posted by Rebecca:

Originally posted by jenesis:
From what I've read in other threads, it adds pixels or information (albeit the same pixels) which is a no-no. I personally hate making changes to the background layer and only do so during basic challenges. Otherwise, I make a duplicate and do my edits on that layer so that I can change them or delete them if I don't like them.

I don't quite understand why we can't just use a duplicate and make adjustments on that in basic, but that's the rules I guess.

I think SC in the past has ruled that you can make a dup layer and make your adjustments to that, but only for the purpose of preserving the background layer, ie. that dup layer must remain in normal blend mode and remain at 100% fill/opacity. I may be wrong, though, or the wind may have changed, so don't take me at my word in a challenge without checking first. It's not something I do, since I keep copies of all my originals anyway.

This is very interesting, if that is so when you duplicate and to that duplication you add your processing and adjust the fill opacity the integrity of the image remains in the background image and you are only processing your addition, this is no different than adding blur to the background and then fadeing blur, when merging a duplication you are only setting your processing back to the original.

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro for Canon

09/27/2007 11:23:50 PM · #115

Originally posted by hywind:

Originally posted by Rebecca:

Originally posted by jenesis:
From what I've read in other threads, it adds pixels or information (albeit the same pixels) which is a no-no. I personally hate making changes to the background layer and only do so during basic challenges. Otherwise, I make a duplicate and do my edits on that layer so that I can change them or delete them if I don't like them.

I don't quite understand why we can't just use a duplicate and make adjustments on that in basic, but that's the rules I guess.

I think SC in the past has ruled that you can make a dup layer and make your adjustments to that, but only for the purpose of preserving the background layer, ie. that dup layer must remain in normal blend mode and remain at 100% fill/opacity. I may be wrong, though, or the wind may have changed, so don't take me at my word in a challenge without checking first. It's not something I do, since I keep copies of all my originals anyway.

This is very interesting, if that is so when you duplicate and to that duplication you add your processing and adjust the fill opacity the integrity of the image remains in the background image and you are only processing your addition, this is no different than adding blur to the background and then fadeing blur, when merging a duplication you are only setting your processing back to the original.

But the point is that if you use this method, you (1) can't make changes to the background layer, (2) can't adjust the opacity or fill of the duplicate layer, and (3) are still limited to adjustment layers and direct layer changes in processing the duplicate layer.

Basically, the background is never actually seen - it's completely hidden by the duplicate layer and serves just a safety net for the person processing the photo. Whether or not illegal processing can be duplicated using legal methods is irrelevant and always has been.

But like I said, SC is free to shoot this down. I do recall it being discussed as a valid method many moons ago, before several of the current SC denizens began their tenure. The feeling on this may have shifted since then.

Message edited by author 2007-09-27 23:26:37.

Jutilda

Canon EOS-7D

09/27/2007 11:45:24 PM · #116

Originally posted by gotlucky:

Did anyone else use the "Vaseline on lens" to create the soft focus?

Nope, off black Hanes pantyhose ;~D

Votes: 96
Views: 146
Avg Vote: 6.1250
Comments: 3

09/27/2007 11:48:23 PM · #117

Originally posted by Jutilda:

Originally posted by gotlucky:
Did anyone else use the "Vaseline on lens" to create the soft focus?

Nope, off black Hanes pantyhose ;~D

Votes: 96
Views: 146
Avg Vote: 6.1250
Comments: 3

I engaged in some heavy breathing.
On the lens, of course. >D

Moatz

09/28/2007 12:00:54 AM · #118

Finally 100 votes =) Not doing any better though... looks like it may also be a no comment entry.

Votes: 103
Views: 136
Avg Vote: 4.4951
Comments: 0
Favorites: 0
Wish Lists: 0

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

09/28/2007 12:04:50 AM · #119

Broke the 100 mark, got another comment, have the same score.
Votes: 106
Views: 159
Avg Vote: 6.0000
Comments: 4
Favorites: 0

@hywind - You're welcome Brian. :) I just hate to see someone get DQ'd for such a small technical thing such as that. I'd really like to see that rule changed. I mean, who edits on the background layer anyways?? :)

Neil

Fujifilm X-T30

09/28/2007 12:18:29 AM · #120

Originally posted by hywind:

The trick to do this is to apply Gaussian blur, then use the Edit->Fade command to back the effect off in normal blend mode. This is functionally equivalent to adding a gaussian blur layer and then reducing its transparency, which is how you can produce a soft focus effect. HOWEVER: it is LEGAL in basic to do Edit->Fade, whereas the layer approach is not.

However, I think the best way is to put a filter in front of the lens that's been sprayed with hairspray. I learned this technique from the Patterson and Gallant Impressionism book. I used it for my impressionism entry, and I think it really does a soft focus effect beautifully.

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

09/28/2007 02:56:29 AM · #121

Originally posted by jenesis:

I just hate to see someone get DQ'd for such a small technical thing such as that. I'd really like to see that rule changed. I mean, who edits on the background layer anyways?? :)

What's the problem with editing the background layer? I always do it, but I work on a copy of the file.

bassbone

Nikon Z8

Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-120 f/4 S

09/28/2007 06:03:45 AM · #122

Originally posted by eyewave:

Originally posted by jenesis:
I just hate to see someone get DQ'd for such a small technical thing such as that. I'd really like to see that rule changed. I mean, who edits on the background layer anyways?? :)

What's the problem with editing the background layer? I always do it, but I work on a copy of the file.

I agree. I don't see any problems working on the background layer for the Basic Editing rules set. I think it is pretty clear that you are not allowed to add a second layer that contains any pixel information in Basic.

Mephisto

Nikon Coolpix A

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

09/28/2007 09:39:13 AM · #123

Originally posted by nshapiro:

However, I think the best way is to put a filter in front of the lens that's been sprayed with hairspray. I learned this technique from the Patterson and Gallant Impressionism book. I used it for my impressionism entry, and I think it really does a soft focus effect beautifully.

i smeared hair styling gel on my uv-filter, worked pretty well, too. ;)

current score:
Votes: 110
Views: 166
Avg Vote: 5.6818
Comments: 8
Favorites: 4

bassbone

Nikon Z8

Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-120 f/4 S

09/28/2007 10:22:45 AM · #124

Votes: 118
Views: 225
Avg Vote: 6.3559
Comments: 5
Favorites: 1

Christoph

Mephisto - I'd almost switch scores with you in trade for the favorites. Can't wait to see which image is yours - clearly you must have an interesting and unique take on the challenge!