|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/05/2010 10:17:45 AM · #76 |
Originally posted by love:
Originally posted by millsa:
Originally posted by salmiakki:
As has been stated already, you can change your settings in Nik Silver efex so it doesn't apply it on a new layer. It's in the settings option.
 |
Yes but there is no difference! It was stated in another thread you are allowed to keep your background layer untouched so you can revert back when you mess up, and edit on a second layer. Not selecting that option in NIK does exactly the same thing.
If I had it at work I'd try it, but I bet when you hit OK you see it create several working layers that get merged down to the background layer just like you see if you don't make the apply effect to current layer selection. |
I'm sorry, but this is a lame excuse. I have a degree in digital media and the first thing we were taught in working with images is to keep your originals in a separate folder. When you open your original, immediately save as something else. If you happen to mess up with Nik, it's a very easy UNDO. ; ) |
Hardly an excuse, just pointing out that inconsistency of what has been stated as legal by members of site counsel and the current discussion, regardless of whether its best practice or not. BTW I always keep my originals stored separately, but when working on a shot I like my base layer to be the untouched original so I can quickly refer back to it to make sure I haven't lost anything or gone the wrong way in my editing. |
|
|
|
05/05/2010 11:01:16 AM · #77 |
I was planning on posting almost the same thing this morning,  millsa. It's currently a fact that the exact same result can be achieved in multiple ways, but only some of those ways are legal. This is apparently the case with Silver Efex, and there are other situations where this occurs as well. For example, you can't duplicate the background layer, change something, then reduce opacity. Illegal. But you can change something and then go to Edit|Fade to reduce the opacity of the change (in Photoshop, this apparently isn't available in PSP and others). The results are identical, but one method is legal and the other isn't. I think this is a failure of the ruleset. This also seems like as good a time as any to attempt to find a solution to the problem. Anyone interested in an attempted re-write of the rules to allow all processes that produce identical, otherwise legal, results?
As a side note, I'd like to state that I officially condemn any attempt to knowingly cheat or to falsify any editing steps in an attempt to pass validation. That said, it's certainly possible to use the illegal method and simply state that the legal method was used. Since the results are identical, there's no way to actually know which method was used. I think this is ridiculous. If the identical end result can be achieved legally, then whatever path you took to get there should be legal. This would also eliminate the disparity between different software that may or may not have the (currently) legal way of doing it available. |
|
|
|
05/11/2010 06:29:42 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by love:
You can change the settings of the PS plugin so that it only applies the filter selected to the background layer and doesn't create a new layer. This was discussed at length in the recent landscape challenge. |
Hey Scalvert -- is this acceptable then? |
Ah I see it now. Yes, that would be legal. |
Well, after reading this thread 3 times, not to mention the other thread (which eludes me right now, I'm sure someone will be very helpful and supply it for me as I would like to re-read that one as well) during the Black and White Landscape...As to the Legality of Nik Silver Efex....I think someone said somewhere...it's clear as mud...well that couldn't be any truer....it not quite so simple.
I used the Silver Efex in the Team Sports without Players Challenge, I DID NOT USE the U-Point system, I DID NOT use a vignette (KNOWINGLY), I did USE the Antique Plate I which I have come to find out is considered to be a vignette layer..."I" did not create a layer either, BUT I guess the program does (unbeknownst to the user, I know ignorance is no excuse) so guess what I did....got Dq'd on my entry...it has taken me hours to think straight as I had thought that I had read, and re-read the two threads and I understood what the limitations were and what was illegal and what was not illegal...ya...guess not (one other footnote here, I've NEVER worked with vignettes that I'm aware of and I could before today picked one out of a crowd and said...ahhh that's a vignette...well I think I can now...hump)
So my purpose in posting this is to warn any other users out there so that this does not happen to you....I'm just really, really PO'd at myself for not understanding this correctly and shooting myself in the foot...
I'm not sure if I can post my picture yet or not...it is Dq'd...you guys let me know if I can
|
|
|
|
05/11/2010 11:39:28 PM · #79 |
| Sorry to hear that Ja-9, but the Antique Plate preset does add a very clear vignette. As do some of the other pre-set filters, such as the Holga, Pinhole etc, so you need to be quite careful when using in basic. |
|
|
|
05/11/2010 11:48:25 PM · #80 |
| In basic, I stick with the neutral setting, and avoid the presets with the exception of underexposed. |
|
|
|
05/12/2010 12:08:55 AM · #81 |
Originally posted by salmiakki:
Sorry to hear that Ja-9, but the Antique Plate preset does add a very clear vignette. As do some of the other pre-set filters, such as the Holga, Pinhole etc, so you need to be quite careful when using in basic. |
well, you think I might be able to ID a vignette now.....anyone what to bet on that one...hmmm
ETA: you can see my entry on the last page of Team Sports without Players II
Message edited by author 2010-05-12 00:10:21. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 09:22:42 AM  |
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: 08/30/2025 09:22:42 AM EDT.
|
