| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/22/2010 04:59:18 AM · #1 |
I know this has been discussed ad nauseum before, but I can't seem to find it after several searches in the forum.
The rules specify that you can take up to 10 shots of one scene (defined as a scene whose composition/framing does not change).
BUT, if a tree branch moves slightly in the wind (as an example), then what? The HDR software does have the ability to correct for ghosting that appears in these cases. But in my case my moving object left a very diffuse but still barely visible line behind one of the two movements. It can easily be touched up in PS but I'm not sure what the rules are here.
There are of course no intentions of creating any effects or adding anything new to the image. And the image does not change much from the original - or at least one them... |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 05:12:29 AM · #2 |
| I'm interested in the answer as well, but funnily enough it seems like eliminating the movement would be more legal than leaving it, as that would actually be creating an effect that shouldn't be there. In my understanding HDR can be used to capture, well, HDR, but certainly cannot be used to create time-lapse motion or multiple exposure effect. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 06:57:16 AM · #3 |
| It's perfectly legal to merge up to 10 photos even if elements such as branches move slightly in the wind. What you are not allowed however is a changing of camera position or the introduction of a new element. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 06:59:41 AM · #4 |
| True, but his question is if you can then clone out the blurry bits. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 07:21:23 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
True, but his question is if you can then clone out the blurry bits. |
I would think so, you can clone out incidental power lines, twigs, dust specks, stray hairs, and similar minor imperfections within any capture used.
you can argue they are twigs or minor imperfections.
could you also remove some of the captures where the branches moved the most, maybe the "remove ghosting" would work better.
Message edited by author 2010-11-22 07:22:49. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 08:21:38 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by jeger:
It's perfectly legal to merge up to 10 photos even if elements such as branches move slightly in the wind. What you are not allowed however is a changing of camera position or the introduction of a new element. |
I hear you jeger and agree with you interpretation. But I'm sure there is a line somewhere. For example: if a bird flies through the scene while you take your 5 shots and you make an HDR out of it; can you then choose which bird position you like best and then clone out the other positions? |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:05:51 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by TrollMan:
Originally posted by jeger:
It's perfectly legal to merge up to 10 photos even if elements such as branches move slightly in the wind. What you are not allowed however is a changing of camera position or the introduction of a new element. |
I hear you jeger and agree with you interpretation. But I'm sure there is a line somewhere. For example: if a bird flies through the scene while you take your 5 shots and you make an HDR out of it; can you then choose which bird position you like best and then clone out the other positions? |
The rules are definitely not crystal clear, and in my opinion the rules should be less restricting. In the example you give, I don't think it would be allowed because the composition is changing due to the fact the birds are in different positions.
Trees swaying, grass blowing in the wind, water moving in a stream are all acceptable in terms of what the rules allow. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 09:33:56 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by jeger:
In the example you give, I don't think it would be allowed because the composition is changing due to the fact the birds are in different positions.
Trees swaying, grass blowing in the wind, water moving in a stream are all acceptable in terms of what the rules allow. |
^ What he said. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 11:07:13 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by TrollMan:
I hear you jeger and agree with you interpretation. But I'm sure there is a line somewhere. For example: if a bird flies through the scene while you take your 5 shots and you make an HDR out of it; can you then choose which bird position you like best and then clone out the other positions? |
There has been precedence set on that situation:
and the response was to DQ the image. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 12:24:08 PM · #10 |
Thanks guys. That explains it and is in line with what I thought. I guess I'm just paranoid! :)
Message edited by author 2010-11-22 12:25:04. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 01:11:16 PM · #11 |
| just interpret the rules as best you know how, most are foggy especially with more advanced techniques. If you get DQ'd you can join our special club. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 01:16:36 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by paynekj:
Originally posted by TrollMan:
I hear you jeger and agree with you interpretation. But I'm sure there is a line somewhere. For example: if a bird flies through the scene while you take your 5 shots and you make an HDR out of it; can you then choose which bird position you like best and then clone out the other positions? |
There has been precedence set on that situation:
and the response was to DQ the image. |
I don't think that's quite the same thing. As far as I recall that was DQ'd because flash was used in one exposure, not because the bird moved. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 01:20:42 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Originally posted by paynekj:
Originally posted by TrollMan:
I hear you jeger and agree with you interpretation. But I'm sure there is a line somewhere. For example: if a bird flies through the scene while you take your 5 shots and you make an HDR out of it; can you then choose which bird position you like best and then clone out the other positions? |
There has been precedence set on that situation:
and the response was to DQ the image. |
I don't think that's quite the same thing. As far as I recall that was DQ'd because flash was used in one exposure, not because the bird moved. |
Read the comment in the DQ section: You may not combine captures of different scenes, move or change a feature between frames, or combine different captures to create a new scene. The swan is a feature that only existed in one frame. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 01:20:46 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Originally posted by paynekj:
Originally posted by TrollMan:
I hear you jeger and agree with you interpretation. But I'm sure there is a line somewhere. For example: if a bird flies through the scene while you take your 5 shots and you make an HDR out of it; can you then choose which bird position you like best and then clone out the other positions? |
There has been precedence set on that situation:
and the response was to DQ the image. |
I don't think that's quite the same thing. As far as I recall that was DQ'd because flash was used in one exposure, not because the bird moved. |
I thought it was because the bird moved.
You should be able to use a flash in one exposure and not in the others, because nothing is changing in the composition of the scene. With the bird moving, there's definitely a change in the composition.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2010 01:28:02 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
Originally posted by paynekj:
Originally posted by TrollMan:
I hear you jeger and agree with you interpretation. But I'm sure there is a line somewhere. For example: if a bird flies through the scene while you take your 5 shots and you make an HDR out of it; can you then choose which bird position you like best and then clone out the other positions? |
There has been precedence set on that situation:
and the response was to DQ the image. |
I don't think that's quite the same thing. As far as I recall that was DQ'd because flash was used in one exposure, not because the bird moved. |
I thought it was because the bird moved.
You should be able to use a flash in one exposure and not in the others, because nothing is changing in the composition of the scene. With the bird moving, there's definitely a change in the composition. |
The thing is that the flash would highlight a bird that wasn't visible in the other exposures even if it was there. That was my understanding anyway. |
|
|
|
11/22/2010 01:44:40 PM · #16 |
| The bird was only present on one frame of the series. Had it been stationary throughout (unlikely), a flash would have been OK since it's only adjusting the exposure on a static scene. A little random movement on leaves, water, or even a handheld burst is allowed, but you cannot combine multiple captures with changing elements to get one frame with the right pose and another with a flying plane in the right place. |
|
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 05:53:11 PM EDT.
