'Valentine's Photo II' Challenge Results Recalculated

02/28/2013 11:36:48 AM · #26

in Wendy's case yes, in the other DQ, not so much. i think there is a clear line here and it would be nice to see the rule set changed, but yeah that aint gonna happen.

mrchhas

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

02/28/2013 12:24:39 PM · #27

we need one rule to rule them all...

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

02/28/2013 12:32:42 PM · #28

Originally posted by mrchhas:

we need one rule to rule them all...

true, i guess we don't want some members of SC making rulings on interpretation of text, they can barely handle borders.

nam

Sony DSLR-A580

02/28/2013 12:34:50 PM · #29

Originally posted by sjhuls:

. . . I can understand this rule for advanced, basic and minimal. But for expert I think the rule should just be that no watermarks or copyright marks with the persons name should be allowed.

This makes sense to me.

markwiley

Fujifilm X-Pro2

Fujifilm XF 10-24mm f/4 R IOS

02/28/2013 12:46:18 PM · #30

I would also favor modifying this rule for the Expert Rule set. For this image I printed the letters and then took a picture of them. This seemed like a silly way to circumvent the rule, but it got validated.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/28/2013 12:58:10 PM · #31

Originally posted by vawendy:

I could have sworn that I've drawn in letters previously -- that's what I meant by tracing them. Maybe I'm dreaming. But I'm assuming that drawing is art and text tool is text? (or maybe I've just always had it in the back of my mind that drawing is fine... )

SC?

The rule states that you can't add text or any legible characters during editing. It doesn't matter HOW you add them. The rule could be changed in the future, but the current one is pretty clear.

CNovack

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

02/28/2013 01:01:11 PM · #32

Originally posted by nam:

Originally posted by sjhuls:
. . . I can understand this rule for advanced, basic and minimal. But for expert I think the rule should just be that no watermarks or copyright marks with the persons name should be allowed.

This makes sense to me.

Originally posted by markwiley:

Since this is Expert Editing it does make sense to adjust the ruleset in the future to state no watermarks or copyright marks. I am wondering if the rule is there for the purpose of keeping the line between photo& photo-manip distinct and separate from graphic arts where no photos are used at all?? But then on deeper thought given some of what I've/we've seen in prior Expert Editing challenges if that is reason could be tossed out the window.

Message edited by author 2013-02-28 13:07:57.

nam

Sony DSLR-A580

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

02/28/2013 01:06:24 PM · #33

Originally posted by scalvert:

. . .
The rule states that you can't add text or any legible characters during editing. It doesn't matter HOW you add them. The rule could be changed in the future, but the current one is pretty clear.

Not trying to be contentious at all, but it's not clear to me yet. Is it legal, in Expert, to take a photograph of something you have printed, bring it in on a layer over another image, and then size, position, and erase everything but the letters so you can use that lettering (text) in your work?

The reason I'm confused is that it seems that this is legal (and I think it should be) but you are clearly bringing in lettering (text) during editing. Under Expert, composites are allowed and however you put those two or more photos together is editing.

CNovack

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

02/28/2013 01:09:31 PM · #34

Originally posted by nam:

Originally posted by scalvert:
. . .
The rule states that you can't add text or any legible characters during editing. It doesn't matter HOW you add them. The rule could be changed in the future, but the current one is pretty clear.

Not trying to be contentious at all, but it's not clear to me yet. Is it legal, in Expert, to take a photograph of something you have printed, bring it in on a layer over another image, and then size, position, and erase everything but the letters so you can use that lettering (text) in your work?

The reason I'm confused is that it seems that this is legal (and I think it should be) but you are clearly bringing in lettering (text) during editing. Under Expert, composites are allowed and however you put those two or more photos together is editing.

Mark's example shows that a photo was used to create the word freedom on the sweater...a text tool or graphic arts tool to create the word using a computer program would then move it one step out of the realm of it being a photo-manip or composite created solely from photos. Perhaps that is the reason for the rule as it now stands????

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/28/2013 01:10:26 PM · #35

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by vawendy:
I could have sworn that I've drawn in letters previously -- that's what I meant by tracing them. Maybe I'm dreaming. But I'm assuming that drawing is art and text tool is text? (or maybe I've just always had it in the back of my mind that drawing is fine... )

SC?

The rule states that you can't add text or any legible characters during editing. It doesn't matter HOW you add them. The rule could be changed in the future, but the current one is pretty clear.

Well, in expert editing, when we composite multiple photos into a single image, that is done "during editing"; therefore, presumably it ought not be legal to composite in a photograph of text, which is what Mark did, because as you say "it doesn't matter HOW you add them (letters)". In fact, strictly speaking, it seems to me you ought not to be allowing ANY multi-image compositing in which the added images happen to contain, say, street signs or billboards ot newspaper headlines, whatever.

Now I know that's ridiculous, but I think it underscores that in the Expert ruleset it makes no sense to ban added text, except specifically to ban certain SORTS of text like copyright statements.

Message edited by author 2013-02-28 13:11:00.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/28/2013 01:12:25 PM · #36

Originally posted by nam:

Is it legal, in Expert, to take a photograph of something you have printed, bring it in on a layer over another image, and then size, position, and erase everything but the letters so you can use that lettering (text) in your work?

The reason I'm confused is that it seems that this is legal (and I think it should be) but you are clearly bringing in lettering (text) during editing.

In that case, the text was already in the photo(s), not added during editing. (<-- same answer to Bear)

Message edited by author 2013-02-28 13:13:13.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/28/2013 01:16:08 PM · #37

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by nam:
Is it legal, in Expert, to take a photograph of something you have printed, bring it in on a layer over another image, and then size, position, and erase everything but the letters so you can use that lettering (text) in your work?

The reason I'm confused is that it seems that this is legal (and I think it should be) but you are clearly bringing in lettering (text) during editing.

In that case, the text was already in the photo(s), not added during editing. (<-- same answer to Bear)

Yes, I hear you, BUT: This means we can do whatever we want with text, photograph the screen or a printout to gain exif data, then insert the photo as a layer and we're good to go. This is downright silly. Wildly inconsistent.

02/28/2013 01:23:34 PM · #38

Originally posted by scalvert:

It is kind of silly that I can draw anything that I want in expert editing, but that I have to photograph text. There seems to be some disconnect there.

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

02/28/2013 01:24:31 PM · #39

im confused

Message edited by author 2013-02-28 13:24:40.

littlemav

Nikon D90

02/28/2013 01:34:00 PM · #40

OMG... Thats about the dumbest rule to uphold in Expert Editing ... I would not have even thought of this being illegal in expert, and it needs to be gone!!! I remember the picture of (the Heath Ledger) batman vilian, what a crazy outstanding shot, an it got dq'd for the same reason, I think it wasn't in expert but if it had been it should not...

Sooo I can take my pen took and pick up a color n the shot and hand draw the words but no text tool is that correct??

Still dumb rule in expert

SaraR

Sony Alpha a7R III

Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM

02/28/2013 01:36:55 PM · #41

Originally posted by littlemav:

OMG... Thats about the dumbest rule to uphold in Expert Editing

My one and only DQ for was for adding text in an expert editing challenge. My own fault for not refreshing my memory of the rules, but initially came as quite a surprise to me.

02/28/2013 01:38:09 PM · #42

Originally posted by littlemav:

nope -- can't draw it in either. But you can photograph it and then layer it in.

02/28/2013 01:42:27 PM · #43

so i can take a picture of a white background, bring it in Photoshop, draw my entire picture with a paintbrush and its legal, but the second i insert a piece of text its illegal?

02/28/2013 01:49:02 PM · #44

Originally posted by mike_311:

so i can take a picture of a white background, bring it in Photoshop, draw my entire picture with a paintbrush and its legal, but the second i insert a piece of text its illegal?

Yup. Unless you photograph the text.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/28/2013 01:50:14 PM · #45

just confirming I'm still at DPC.

mikeee

Canon EOS-550D Rebel T2i

02/28/2013 01:52:33 PM · #46

Originally posted by mike_311:

just confirming I'm still at DPC.

Whining about the rules? Yep, it's DPC.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

02/28/2013 01:55:02 PM · #47

if they made any sense we wouldn't whine. :P

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

02/28/2013 02:05:17 PM · #48

Originally posted by mike_311:

if they made any sense we wouldn't whine. :P

1. History belies this claim.
2. The rules don't have to make sense, they just have be followed.
3. Any set of arbitrary rules won't make sense to someone.
4. You are all free to write and post proposed rule sets -- just make sure they make sense and are enforcable within the limited site resources.

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

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

02/28/2013 02:09:30 PM · #49

Originally posted by mike_311:

just confirming I'm still at DPC.

yes, it' s digital PHOTOGRAPHY challenge, not a design contest.
And I'm sure it is not legit to draw your entire image, too.