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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> Flora II Challenge Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 126 - 142 of 142, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/22/2007 10:50:54 AM · #126
Originally posted by undieyatch:
From the current thread I am unable to determine if all of the filters are illegal in basic edit, it seems that they are.


It's a post-processing edit. If the edit is legal under a given rule set, then you can use it. Otherwise, you can't.
 10/22/2007 11:35:52 AM · #127
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by undieyatch:
From the current thread I am unable to determine if all of the filters are illegal in basic edit, it seems that they are.


It's a post-processing edit. If the edit is legal under a given rule set, then you can use it. Otherwise, you can't.


Reply is noted. The question in basic edit remains - Is a Pentax in-camera saved file eligible to be used for a challenge submission?

As I previously noted Pentax Digital filter options only allow implementation to an additional in-camera saved file. Does this violate basic edit rule "Files that have been saved or altered with any editing or transfer software are NOT originals."
Given that an original file is retained: Again my question in another way - Is it legal in Basic to edit & submit a saved Pentax filtered file as the challenge entry?

Message edited by author 2007-10-22 12:08:20.
 10/22/2007 11:38:22 AM · #128
Originally posted by undieyatch:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by undieyatch:
From the current thread I am unable to determine if all of the filters are illegal in basic edit, it seems that they are.


It's a post-processing edit. If the edit is legal under a given rule set, then you can use it. Otherwise, you can't.


Reply is noted. The question in basic edit remains is a Pentax in-camera saved file eligible to be used for a challenge submission?

As I previously noted Pentax Digital filter options only allow implementation to an additional in-camera saved file. Does this violate basic edit rule "Files that have been saved or altered with any editing or transfer software are NOT originals." Given that an original file is retained: Again my question in another way - Is it legal in Basic to edit & submit a saved Pentax filtered file as the challenge entry?


Copy the original to your hard drive before editing it in the camera.
 10/22/2007 11:42:00 AM · #129
So ...

the SC determined that the soft focus filter isn't just a global gaussian blur/fade? I thought routerguy called and was told that's what it was. What was different? Was it selective?

I just want to be sure I've got it straight. I strongly support the idea that the location of the CPU has nothing to do with whether an edit is legal.

Could an SC answer this? I'd rather hear it from the source, not set off 204 posts by well-meaning folks.

Thanks.

Message edited by author 2007-10-22 11:44:29.
 10/22/2007 11:48:11 AM · #130
Originally posted by levyj413:
So ...

Check scalvert's post made: 10/21/2007 01:07:20 PM
 10/22/2007 11:48:31 AM · #131
Originally posted by undieyatch:
As I previously noted Pentax Digital filter options only allow implementation to an additional in-camera saved file. Does this violate basic edit rule "Files that have been saved or altered with any editing or transfer software are NOT originals."


The answer should be self-evident: an edited file is not an original. You must retain the original capture file for validation, and the second, filtered file is subject to the same processing rules as one you process with Photoshop, Neat Image, Paint Shop Pro or any other editor.
 10/22/2007 12:20:37 PM · #132
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by undieyatch:
As I previously noted Pentax Digital filter options only allow implementation to an additional in-camera saved file. Does this violate basic edit rule "Files that have been saved or altered with any editing or transfer software are NOT originals."


The answer should be self-evident: an edited file is not an original. You must retain the original capture file for validation, and the second, filtered file is subject to the same processing rules as one you process with Photoshop, Neat Image, Paint Shop Pro or any other editor.


I perceive the answer to be - Pentax filtered saved copy of original is legal for submission in basic, viewed as a legitimate software edit (excluding some illegal filters such as soft focus) as long as an original is retained.

If I have misinterpreted scalvert's vague answer, the yellow ribbon Flora II dq has been incorrectly identified - and may be an illegal background copy, (rather than soft focus) regardless of what was on it, might more accurately represent the infraction. Which leaves all Pentax jpeg filtering illegal.

Message edited by author 2007-10-22 16:17:16.
 10/22/2007 12:25:35 PM · #133
No wonder there is so much crime in the world. Everyone sees the same rules differently, either by ignorance or stupidity. It's plain and simple rules, maybe a small loophole here and there, but if that loophole makes you unsure, ask SC before taking a picture. That way it will be cleared up for you BEFORE you take it. You won't have to worry about being dq'd then, and we wouldn't have to have so many threads like this where people piss each other off because simple rules can't be followed, and no one is willing to ask a question when they are not sure. Some would prefer to just beat the system. Those who do, get dq'd when caught. We're not talking rocket science here. If you can read, and have at least some common sense, you should be fine in any challenge. Jesus, can't we all just see things one way?

Message edited by author 2007-10-22 12:36:57.
 10/22/2007 03:04:58 PM · #134
I heard that "flipping" or "mirroring" a picture in post processing was against the rules !
 10/22/2007 03:10:31 PM · #135
Originally posted by kenskid:
I heard that "flipping" or "mirroring" a picture in post processing was against the rules !


I heard that frogs cause warts. ;-)

Mirroring an image WOULD be against the Minimal Editing rules.
 10/22/2007 03:10:38 PM · #136
Originally posted by kenskid:
I heard that "flipping" or "mirroring" a picture in post processing was against the rules !

What does that have to do with the current situation?

Just "flipping" or rotating the photo is legal under all rules except Minimal. If by "mirroring" you mean adding a mirror-image of the original to the final version (so you have the original and its "reflection" combined into a new image), that is not legal except under the Expert rule set.
 10/23/2007 09:22:57 AM · #137
Ok...this was dq b/c the blur technique was used "after" the shot was taken? For example, the shutter was clicked. Pic was in the camera ..."stored". Went back in to view shot. At that point a fliter was used over the pic. Uploaded...Win...DQ...

IMO the blur was legal b/c it was applied to the whole image in BASIC.

So what got the DQ in reality was that the Exif data changed and there was not a "real" original to upload?

Is this correct?

Skid
 10/23/2007 09:33:06 AM · #138
Originally posted by kenskid:
IMO the blur was legal b/c it was applied to the whole image in BASIC.


It wasn't a blur technique. It was a Soft Focus filter applied to a stored file in the camera. "No “effects” filters may be applied to your image, with the exception of Noise and Gaussian Blur." Soft Focus has always been considered an effects filter, although there is a workaround that can simulate the appearance of soft focus to some extent using other tools.
 10/23/2007 09:49:19 AM · #139
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by kenskid:
IMO the blur was legal b/c it was applied to the whole image in BASIC.


It wasn't a blur technique. It was a Soft Focus filter applied to a stored file in the camera. "No “effects” filters may be applied to your image, with the exception of Noise and Gaussian Blur." Soft Focus has always been considered an effects filter, although there is a workaround that can simulate the appearance of soft focus to some extent using other tools.


AH! Thanks, Shannon. So it wasn't
"SC determined the soft focus filter wasn't just gaussian/fade"
but rather
"no effects filters."

That's much clearer. I appreciate your continuing to respond to questions on this.

Message edited by author 2007-10-23 09:49:45.
 10/23/2007 08:04:07 PM · #140
Originally posted by kenskid:
Ok...this was dq b/c the blur technique was used "after" the shot was taken? For example, the shutter was clicked. Pic was in the camera ..."stored". Went back in to view shot. At that point a fliter was used over the pic. Uploaded...Win...DQ...

IMO the blur was legal b/c it was applied to the whole image in BASIC.

So what got the DQ in reality was that the Exif data changed and there was not a "real" original to upload?

Is this correct?

Skid


Pentax in-camera software does not alter an original, but rather it makes a copy of it.
The procedure to implement in-camera filter to an image in a current Pentax camera is as follows:

1. Make a jpeg exposure (raw files are not compatible)
2. Via menu or fn (quick select) button on camera, navigate to image & select a filter.
3. The Original exposure is retained, but a virtual copy (an equivalent to a photoshop background copy) of it is created with the selected filter implemented.
 10/24/2007 06:42:28 PM · #141
I have 2 issues /questions here:

Originally posted by scalvert:
Things like adjusting sharpness and white balance are legal in Basic (in camera or on the computer), while things like adding a soft glow or merging two files are not legal (in camera or on the computer).

In a cheap (OK free) photoedit program I have (PhotoFiltre), there is a button for "soften" right next to the one for sharpen. They are also in the same pulldown menu (Gaussian is farther down on the same one, I think). I've never used the soften, but apparently I'd be DQ'd if I did? From my point of view, they seem to be opposite sides of the same coin, so I really don't understand the distinction.

Originally posted by scalvert:
AFAIK, there is no camera that can add a soft focus effect internally at the time of capture. It would have to be done either with something physical over the lens or as a post-processing edit (and it would make sense for camera companies to keep it that way).


Again, not something I've tried to use (yet), but my camera has a setting for "Sharpness" which can be set to hard, standard, or soft. It is set BEFORE capture. Does this not count? Are you saying I could use the first 2 settings, but not the 3rd? (The camera is Fujifilm S9000, the setting is on page 69 of the manual which can be found in PDF at their site).
 10/24/2007 08:24:42 PM · #142
Originally posted by Donna21:
I have 2 issues /questions here:

Originally posted by scalvert:
Things like adjusting sharpness and white balance are legal in Basic (in camera or on the computer), while things like adding a soft glow or merging two files are not legal (in camera or on the computer).

In a cheap (OK free) photoedit program I have (PhotoFiltre), there is a button for "soften" right next to the one for sharpen. They are also in the same pulldown menu (Gaussian is farther down on the same one, I think). I've never used the soften, but apparently I'd be DQ'd if I did? From my point of view, they seem to be opposite sides of the same coin, so I really don't understand the distinction.

Since we don't know what your "soften" filter does or how it does it -- for example does it make selections or affect pixels of different tone values differently -- it would/should be illegal in Basic. Gaussian Blur is legal primarily because it affects all of the pixels to the same degree, regardless of their individual values, i.e. it is truly a "global" adjustment.

Originally posted by Donna21:

Originally posted by scalvert:
AFAIK, there is no camera that can add a soft focus effect internally at the time of capture. It would have to be done either with something physical over the lens or as a post-processing edit (and it would make sense for camera companies to keep it that way).


Again, not something I've tried to use (yet), but my camera has a setting for "Sharpness" which can be set to hard, standard, or soft. It is set BEFORE capture. Does this not count? Are you saying I could use the first 2 settings, but not the 3rd? (The camera is Fujifilm S9000, the setting is on page 69 of the manual which can be found in PDF at their site).

Your "settings" should all be legal in Basic, because they are put into effect at the time you press the shutter. What was ruled illegal was to apply a filter available in the camera to a previously-captured image, essentially using the camera as a portable computer/editing studio to post-process an existing image.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/19/2025 01:35:30 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: 09/19/2025 01:35:30 AM EDT.