Ok. I'll ask...legal? How? (Expert Editing discussion)

07/13/2009 11:27:18 AM · #26

And, as long as we're on the topic, how's THIS one from Judi gonna fare?

The birds/bats look like graphics, the castle looks like a graphic, the Michael Jackson figures would seem to fall afoul of the rule "composed only from photographs taken after the challenge is announced and before the deadline" inasmuch as the man was *dead* when the challenge was announced... :-/

R.

jeger

Canon EOS-5D

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

07/13/2009 11:29:20 AM · #27

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

the Michael Jackson figures would seem to fall afoul of the rule "composed only from photographs taken after the challenge is announced and before the deadline" inasmuch as the man was *dead* when the challenge was announced... :-/

R.

Hint: That's not Michael Jackson or a figurine. (from what I can tell anyhow)

MattO

Nikon D4

07/13/2009 11:29:39 AM · #28

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

And, as long as we're on the topic, how's THIS one from Judi gonna fare?

The birds/bats look like graphics, the castle looks like a graphic, the Michael Jackson figures would seem to fall afoul of the rule "composed only from photographs taken after the challenge is announced and before the deadline" inasmuch as the man was *dead* when the challenge was announced... :-/

R.

My guess is since we never see the face, and Judi isn't exactly dumb, that those are models dressed like MJ.

Matt

JulietNN

Canon EOS R7

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

07/13/2009 11:33:01 AM · #29

it is a model, cos it looks like there are boobs.

JulietNN

Canon EOS R7

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

07/13/2009 11:35:11 AM · #30

okay relooking at all the images, this is going to be a nightmare for the SC to handle 'if' the graphic thing is illegal.

07/13/2009 11:39:31 AM · #31

Originally posted by JulietNN:

it is a model, cos it looks like there are boobs.

Well, if that's true then she did a HELL Of a job finding a model whose face looks like Michael's and who can also ape his body language, and more power to her. But there's still the castle and the birds...

Don't get me wrong, though, I love the image; I'm just having a hard time seeing how it's primarily photographic in nature. But that's SC's job, not mine.

R.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

07/13/2009 11:44:51 AM · #32

Originally posted by JulietNN:

okay relooking at all the images, this is going to be a nightmare for the SC to handle 'if' the graphic thing is illegal.

Actually, not so many really.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

07/13/2009 11:51:13 AM · #33

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

It was all photos (19, to be exact)- the model, the castle, the bats... even the fog. You're jumping to conclusions.

Sirashley

Nikon D7200

07/13/2009 11:52:55 AM · #34

Wow, I'm so glad I stayed away from this challenge :0

As far as Judi's pic goes, I think it could be legal because the birds look as though they were cut out of the background and the castle looks like a piece of aquarium decoration. If that is true, then the photo would certainly be legal.

The way I read the rule, mind you, I have never participated in an Expert Challenge, was you could use as many captures as you wanted to, so long as you took the photos and they were taken during the challenge date. Beyond that, anything that was placed into the photo, had to come from your captures, anything else, such as clip art... etc... would be illegal.

I'm going to make some popcorn, sit back and watch this thread now, because I think this one is going to get interesting

houstonian

Sony DSLR-A200

Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical ED Zoom Lens for Sony Alpha

07/13/2009 11:54:01 AM · #35

Originally posted by JulietNN:

it is a model, cos it looks like there are boobs.

Upon first glance, I kinda figured its her daughter.

Quadrajet

Canon EOS-40D

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM for Canon

07/13/2009 11:54:59 AM · #36

The castle could also be a child's toy and then altered in PS as well.

jeger

Canon EOS-5D

07/13/2009 11:55:43 AM · #37

I love all the speculation..lol

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

07/13/2009 12:03:11 PM · #38

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Well, if that's true then she did a HELL Of a job finding a model whose face looks like Michael's and who can also ape his body language, and more power to her. But there's still the castle and the birds...

It was all photos (19, to be exact)- the model, the castle, the bats... even the fog. You're jumping to conclusions.

Nah, no conclusions, just wondering. I sure do hope it IS legal, 'cuz it's a great shot :-)

R.

ETA: I hope the same of the blue ribbon shot. IMO, the use of created artwork OUGHT to be legal in expert editing. I mean, we could definitely print out a shot of Michael, cut it out, paint it black, photograph it, and use it in the image, right? But that's so old-school, in "expert" editing; why not be able to just create the danged thing?

I'm definitely not being a hardass here, just askin'....

Message edited by author 2009-07-13 12:05:48.

K3Master

Pentax K-3

07/13/2009 12:12:59 PM · #39

For my money, Judi's example is a classic reason why I HATE expert editing.

Each to their own, of course, but it's the kind of thing I only want to see once in a million years on here.

senor_kasper

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

07/13/2009 12:19:20 PM · #40

I guess I must defend myself from the public lynching.

I am not as stupid as to knowingly violate an editing rule. As far as I know the rule has never been changed, there has never been an official announcement by SC disallowing hand drawings in future expert editing challenges and there has never been a photo DQ'd due to that issue in any of the several expert editing challenges despite the use of drawings in a number of entries; the ones I posted are just 2 examples of validated entries in 2 different challenges.

Bear_Music's picture was not in 'the first' expert editing challenge (contrary to what he suggested in a recent thread, which was just called to my attention by this thread) but in a subsequent one. Nobody has perfect memory, but Bear_Music's appears to be playing tricks on him, he seems to remember now that he 'burnt in his birds with the burn tool', but this is the way he described his process at the time: ....."gull selections hand-drawn in PS on this layer, painted with black brush at opacity 70% to create gull silhouettes." (see his description under 'photographer's comments'). Thank you Bear.

The rules as they exist clearly state: "You may apply a full range of editing tools to all or part of your entry." full range means all of the tools, including brushes, pens, paths, paint, EVERYTHING. With that said, it is clear and obvious that the 'you may not add graphics or clip art images to your entry or its border during editing.' refers to outside art not created by yourself. That is clearly the way SC has been interpreting the rules and I would hope that they will remain consistent.

Whether or not drawings should be allowed in future expert editing challenges will depend on whether or not the SC changes the rules or make an official announcement changing their interpretation of the rules, until such time any entry containing hand drawings should remain legal based on the ample existing precedent.

freakin_hilarious

Canon EOS-550D Rebel T2i

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

07/13/2009 12:20:07 PM · #41

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

I hope the same of the blue ribbon shot. IMO, the use of created artwork OUGHT to be legal in expert editing. I mean, we could definitely print out a shot of Michael, cut it out, paint it black, photograph it, and use it in the image, right? But that's so old-school, in "expert" editing; why not be able to just create the danged thing?

You make an interesting point. It's expert editing. Why not allow the easy way when the same thing could be accomplished the hard way? On a related note, I'm wondering if you think my previous example should be legal?

Here it is again in case you missed it:

soup

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

07/13/2009 12:24:04 PM · #42

well - you're pretty tough. once or twice a year is too much ?

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

For my money, Judi's example is a classic reason why I HATE expert editing.

Each to their own, of course, but it's the kind of thing I only want to see once in a million years on here.

Message edited by author 2009-07-13 12:24:11.

d56ranger

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

07/13/2009 12:29:54 PM · #43

This isn't expert photography it is expert photoshop.

senor_kasper

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

07/13/2009 12:34:04 PM · #44

Originally posted by freakin_hilarious:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I hope the same of the blue ribbon shot. IMO, the use of created artwork OUGHT to be legal in expert editing. I mean, we could definitely print out a shot of Michael, cut it out, paint it black, photograph it, and use it in the image, right? But that's so old-school, in "expert" editing; why not be able to just create the danged thing?

You make an interesting point. It's expert editing. Why not allow the easy way when the same thing could be accomplished the hard way? On a related note, I'm wondering if you think my previous example should be legal?

Here it is again in case you missed it:

The rules state:
'You should:
keep your entry photographic in nature. Though violating this guideline is not grounds for disqualification, voters are encouraged to rate entries accordingly.'

So, I don't think it would be grounds for disqualification but I doubt it would get you beyond the brown ribbon :-)

skewsme

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

07/13/2009 12:34:38 PM · #45

naysayers, just avert your eyes or vote it down. we are all exposed to some techniques and subjects that we don't appreciate.

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

07/13/2009 12:36:04 PM · #46

Originally posted by senor_kasper:

Nobody has perfect memory, but Bear_Music's appears to be playing tricks on him, he seems to remember now that he 'burnt in his birds with the burn tool', but this is the way he described his process at the time: ....."gull selections hand-drawn in PS on this layer, painted with black brush at opacity 70% to create gull silhouettes." (see his description under 'photographer's comments'). Thank you Bear.

You're right about that, sorry. I was remembering a little obliquely, I did try it with the burn tool but then went to the brush instead. The "drawing" was a selection. Anyway, that's just a detail, it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

For the record, I'm 100% in favor of your image being legal, I hope you understand that. If stuff like this ISN'T legal, then we ought to fold the "expert" editing up and discard it for once and for all. My point of entry into this discussion was by way of response to others (including you) who had brought up my birds as a precedent for the legality of your MJ, and I was affirming what others have said, that way back then we got the impression from SC that what I'd done would no longer be legal.

Personally, I don't agree with that at all... So good luck in the validation process :-)

R.

K3Master

Pentax K-3

07/13/2009 12:36:22 PM · #47

Originally posted by soup:

well - you're pretty tough. once or twice a year is too much ?

Originally posted by K10DGuy:
For my money, Judi's example is a classic reason why I HATE expert editing.

Each to their own, of course, but it's the kind of thing I only want to see once in a million years on here.

Yup, :D Once or twice a year too much.

But hey, I can ignore it. Doesn't mean I won't bitch about it, but I can ignore it. I haven't looked at the challenge itself at all.

houstonian

Sony DSLR-A200

Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical ED Zoom Lens for Sony Alpha

07/13/2009 12:37:21 PM · #48

Originally posted by d56ranger:

This isn't expert photography it is expert photoshop.

100% agreed. And, like others stated, to each their own.

freakin_hilarious

Canon EOS-550D Rebel T2i

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

07/13/2009 12:56:33 PM · #49

I love me an expert editing challenge as much as the next guy, but since it's still a "trial" I think now's the perfect time to try to make the rules as unambiguous as possible. I stated in my first post to this thread that I wasn't sure how I felt about allowing non-photographic content. The more I read and the more I think about it, I think it's a good idea to essentially allow anything and let the voters decide. I don't think that's how the rules read, however.

Take this piece of the expert editing rules for example:

Your submission must be: composed only from photographs taken after the challenge is announced and before the deadline, based on the Current Server Time (US Eastern Standard/Daylight Time) displayed at the bottom of every page on this site.

Contrast that with the similar rule from advanced editing:

Your submission must be: taken after the challenge is announced and before the deadline, based on the Current Server Time (US Eastern Standard/Daylight Time) displayed at the bottom of every page on this site.

Why the addition of the phrase "composed only from photographs" in expert? This implies that anything that ends up in your entry that didn't start out as a photo would be cause for DQ. Is that the intent? Or is this part just about the dates and that implication is completely unintentional?

The other part of the rules that seems relevant to the discussion on hand is:

You may not: add graphics or clip art images to your entry or its border during editing.

A few posts back Andres said "it is clear and obvious that [this rule] refers to outside art not created by yourself." I think this is true in the context of past precedent, but it certainly doesn't state that in the rule itself.

And this takes us right back to glad's OP. As written, it is possible to interpret the drawn in MJ as a DQable rule violation. As other's have shown, it's possible to interpret it as totally legal.

Let's decide what should be allowed and change the wording of the rules to better reflect that goal. Hey, it's happening over in the artwork thread! It could happen here!

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II