| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/10/2015 01:23:05 PM · #26 |
| hmmm... not exactly the same... maybe we should just have a tnun challenge ;-) |
|
|
|
02/10/2015 01:44:36 PM · #27 |
| Long exposure sans water would be a nice challenge. |
|
|
|
02/10/2015 02:07:08 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Long exposure sans water would be a nice challenge. |
We just had a 30-second exposure challenge ... |
|
|
|
02/10/2015 02:19:57 PM · #29 |
| Mmm, guess so. It was so easy to ignore with weather like ours. Brrrr. Maybe best to suggest something similar in spring. |
|
|
|
02/17/2016 07:00:09 AM · #30 |
I'm resurrecting this thread only to ask this question here and not to start another thread.
I came across this article today and I wondered if a similar technique using a camera's multiple exposure setting would be valid in anything other than Expert? In the ruleset I cannot find something that specifically bans the use of it. It prohibits the use of more than one physical exposure, but not the in-camera combining of multiple shutter activations into a single photograph. Given that this is a "blind" technique and you see nothing until you see everything (a single image file is produced) I have a hard time understanding why it wouldn't be allowed, but after finding and reading this thread I am under the impressing that using the camera function would result in a DQ.
What is the ruling? I'm clear that I can manually fake it using Bulb mode and a lens cap. What I'm not clear on is why the use of a camera function would be any different if there is no actual manual combining (i.e. post-shot processing) of multiple images in the original file by the photographer?
Message edited by author 2016-02-17 07:00:40. |
|
|
|
02/17/2016 08:17:40 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
I'm resurrecting this thread only to ask this question here and not to start another thread.
I came across this article today and I wondered if a similar technique using a camera's multiple exposure setting would be valid in anything other than Expert? In the ruleset I cannot find something that specifically bans the use of it. It prohibits the use of more than one physical exposure, but not the in-camera combining of multiple shutter activations into a single photograph. Given that this is a "blind" technique and you see nothing until you see everything (a single image file is produced) I have a hard time understanding why it wouldn't be allowed, but after finding and reading this thread I am under the impressing that using the camera function would result in a DQ.
What is the ruling? I'm clear that I can manually fake it using Bulb mode and a lens cap. What I'm not clear on is why the use of a camera function would be any different if there is no actual manual combining (i.e. post-shot processing) of multiple images in the original file by the photographer? |
Not legal. This would be akin to adding new features/shapes. See rule excerpt below from the advanced rule set that explains. Yes if you can capture in one exposure can do double exposure, but those cameras that have this feature are taking two shots and combining into one. Two shots does not equal one exposure. If the composition changes during exposure, is not allowed.
You must:
create your entry from 1-10 captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose composition/framing does not change).
|
|
|
|
02/17/2016 08:43:47 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
I'm resurrecting this thread only to ask this question here and not to start another thread.
I came across this article today and I wondered if a similar technique using a camera's multiple exposure setting would be valid in anything other than Expert? In the ruleset I cannot find something that specifically bans the use of it. It prohibits the use of more than one physical exposure, but not the in-camera combining of multiple shutter activations into a single photograph. Given that this is a "blind" technique and you see nothing until you see everything (a single image file is produced) I have a hard time understanding why it wouldn't be allowed, but after finding and reading this thread I am under the impressing that using the camera function would result in a DQ.
What is the ruling? I'm clear that I can manually fake it using Bulb mode and a lens cap. What I'm not clear on is why the use of a camera function would be any different if there is no actual manual combining (i.e. post-shot processing) of multiple images in the original file by the photographer? |
Not sure about your camera but when I do multiple exposures on my camera I see the first exposure superimposed on the viewfinder, guess that's another advantage to mirrorless. I can also go back and pick any previous photo as the first exposure. |
|
|
|
02/17/2016 08:56:19 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Jules1x:
Not legal. This would be akin to adding new features/shapes. See rule excerpt below from the advanced rule set that explains. Yes if you can capture in one exposure can do double exposure, but those cameras that have this feature are taking two shots and combining into one. Two shots does not equal one exposure. If the composition changes during exposure, is not allowed.
You must:
create your entry from 1-10 captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose composition/framing does not change).
|
And this is where the confusion exists, because I'm only ever using one image - one capture - because while yes, the image exists in the camera buffer it never exists as a separate file on my camera.
The rules state explicitly that I may...
1... combine up to the allowable number of captures either in-camera or in post-processing.
2... use any feature of your camera while photographing your entry. In-camera features applied after the capture are subject to normal editing rules.
So where the disconnect, for me at least, lies is in the term "capture" and its lack of a clear definition. If Capture = Shutter Depression then this makes sense. But if Capture = Digital Negative (i.e. an image, uniquely produced within the camera with no available, independent piece parts) then I'm of the opinion that it should be allowed.
I understand why it might not be, and I'm not looking to be contrary and change the predominant understanding, but I spent the better part of an hour trying to get a clear understanding on why it would not be allowed and couldn't, so I needed to ask. So if I'm asking for anything it's something in the rules stating explicitly what defines a "capture". It does a fine job with "multiple captures", and precisely what they are meant to allow and not to allow, but it's "capture" that I get hung up on. |
|
|
|
02/17/2016 09:00:58 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by Kobba:
Not sure about your camera but when I do multiple exposures on my camera I see the first exposure superimposed on the viewfinder, guess that's another advantage to mirrorless. I can also go back and pick any previous photo as the first exposure. |
Not available on my Nikons, at least not that I know of. I haven't tried this on my Sony a6000 (I only really started playing with the function this morning in my insomnia after seeing the article). I suspect that having that function available would counter my argument above regarding what defines a single capture/digital negative (my assertion that everything is "blind" until combined), and be far more akin to post processing using in-camera functions.
Again, I'm not arguing to allow it, I just like when rules fully explain the rules, and I try and work hard to figure that stuff out before asking. |
|
|
|
02/17/2016 09:08:50 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
Originally posted by Kobba:
Not sure about your camera but when I do multiple exposures on my camera I see the first exposure superimposed on the viewfinder, guess that's another advantage to mirrorless. I can also go back and pick any previous photo as the first exposure. |
Not available on my Nikons, at least not that I know of. I haven't tried this on my Sony a6000 (I only really started playing with the function this morning in my insomnia after seeing the article). I suspect that having that function available would counter my argument above regarding what defines a single capture/digital negative (my assertion that everything is "blind" until combined), and be far more akin to post processing using in-camera functions.
Again, I'm not arguing to allow it, I just like when rules fully explain the rules, and I try and work hard to figure that stuff out before asking. |
Apparently the function is available with my a6000 as an added app, not "in camera" as it is with the Nikon. In this case it's a clearly not a single "capture" and I suspect that at least one of the single images might be available on the memory card after the fact. So at least I learned something in this exercise!! LOL |
|
|
|
02/17/2016 09:21:21 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
If Capture = Shutter Depression then this makes sense. |
I believe this is the correct interpretation -- for DPC purposes "exposure" or "capture" refers to opening and then closing the shutter a single time. |
|
|
|
02/17/2016 09:37:54 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
If Capture = Shutter Depression then this makes sense. |
I believe this is the correct interpretation -- for DPC purposes "exposure" or "capture" refers to opening and then closing the shutter a single time. |
Yeah, I'm pretty darn clear on that now. It would be great if that could be stated somewhere, even if it's the FAQ under miscellaneous...
How does DPC define "exposure" or "capture"? For DPC purposes "exposure" or "capture" refers to the opening and subsequent closing of the shutter a single time.
|
|
|
|
02/19/2016 04:38:14 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
If Capture = Shutter Depression then this makes sense. |
I believe this is the correct interpretation -- for DPC purposes "exposure" or "capture" refers to opening and then closing the shutter a single time. |
But if you use bulb mode and a lens cap you are only depressing the shutter once. (I'm not for or against this either. Just trying to make sense of it for myself.) |
|
|
|
02/19/2016 04:48:20 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Elaine:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
If Capture = Shutter Depression then this makes sense. |
I believe this is the correct interpretation -- for DPC purposes "exposure" or "capture" refers to opening and then closing the shutter a single time. |
But if you use bulb mode and a lens cap you are only depressing the shutter once. (I'm not for or against this either. Just trying to make sense of it for myself.) |
Correct, and that is perfectly legal as shown earlier in the thread that I dug up, though I suspect a lot harder to control in brighter situations (better bring an ND and know how to use it). |
|
|
|
02/19/2016 04:50:34 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Elaine:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by backdoorhippie:
If Capture = Shutter Depression then this makes sense. |
I believe this is the correct interpretation -- for DPC purposes "exposure" or "capture" refers to opening and then closing the shutter a single time. |
But if you use bulb mode and a lens cap you are only depressing the shutter once. (I'm not for or against this either. Just trying to make sense of it for myself.) |
Correct, and that technique is perfectly legal in all rule sets. Likewise leaving the shutter open in a dark room and using a light/strobe multiple times during the exposure.
If you want to leave the camera on with the shutter open with the lens cap on for an hour while you travel to the location of your "second exposure" you are free to try ... |
|
|
|
02/19/2016 05:33:06 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by nam:
Originally posted by tnun:
. . .
And,  nam, anything brighter than something else wipes out that something else when applied globally. |
Ah.
I still don't get it :( |
+1 |
|
|
|
02/19/2016 06:26:49 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by nam:
Originally posted by tnun:
. . .
And, nam, anything brighter than something else wipes out that something else when applied globally. |
Ah.
I still don't get it :( |
+1 |
During the exposure, each pixel on the sensor records the maximum intensity for a specific primary color. So if the intensity changes during the exposure, as in the case of doing a long exposure, especially with varying light levels or changes in the composition, only the maximum intensity during that whole exposure is what will be recorded. |
|
|
|
02/19/2016 08:36:54 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by FromDaRock:
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by nam:
Originally posted by tnun:
. . .
And, nam, anything brighter than something else wipes out that something else when applied globally. |
Ah.
I still don't get it :( |
+1 |
During the exposure, each pixel on the sensor records the maximum intensity for a specific primary color. So if the intensity changes during the exposure, as in the case of doing a long exposure, especially with varying light levels or changes in the composition, only the maximum intensity during that whole exposure is what will be recorded. |
I actually think I just figured out the answer to my implied question. tnuns explanation was in reference to an applied texture. S/he was saying that one could apply and blend a texture over an image that had one part way overexposed and the texture would not show there - so there would be no need to "erase" the texture from that part in order to maintain a clean area next to a textured area in the image. And I do get that now - but I didn't when I asked and when it was explained. It just came to me as I reread the entire thread. |
|
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: 08/03/2025 01:53:14 PM EDT.
