| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/03/2023 10:29:00 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I'm one who fought for the cropping -- because it does level the playing field. I do like the minimal challenges, because I do have to think through and not rely on processing. However, it's possible for landscape, portrait, still life, etc., photographers to crop in camera and get it right. But wildlife photographers can't. (unless you're working with very tame wildlife!) |
Seriously??? It's *NOT* a challenge theme.
So.....you're suggesting that because one possibility for subject matter makes the ruleset inconvenient that the ruleset should be adjusted to suit that one possibility????
Back to, if you don't like it, take a pass.
What about those who don't like wildlife challenges, suck at it, or like me, both.....screw us???
I'm sorry, but I just do *NOT* get this kind of position.
I will NEVER understand why people are so vehemently against the ruleset that is unequivocally the most challenging of a photographer's skills than the Minimal ruleset on a site called DP Challenge.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2023 10:39:25 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Disagree, politely ... composition is key to capturing a solid image. Learning to get it right (without cropping) is an important aspect of photography. The Minimal ruleset is basically an exercise in this endeavor (getting it right in camera). Is it always practical in real life? No. ... but, this is an exercise, and a very infrequently run one at that. :-) |
Exactly. And considering how infrequently they are offered, I don't understand the vehemence they garner when the subject is raised.
Those of us who do want it have just as much right to wishing that their wants are addressed.
I have little or no use for Extended editing. It's not "real" photography, it's digital art.
It shouldn't be on a photography site.
See how self-interested that sounds?
The bottom line is that I don't like it because I'm even worse at Extended than I am at Minimal, but there is absolutely no field leveler, if you will, to make it a more fair challenge for those of us with minimal skills, pun intended.
Originally posted by vawendy:
I have the composition -- they're just too far away, so I need to crop in. I'm definitely going for the composition. Always. |
No, you don't have the composition if you have to crop it.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Same goes for "candid" photography as well: no time to change lenses, beat feet to a closer vantage, whatever. Lots of times *the* composition is there withing the larger frame. |
Seriously????
What the heck is wrong with you guys??? You both know better than that!
Framing is one of the most important parts of composition.
If it wasn't, then there would never be a need to teach it to people looking to shoot. It would be considered within the parameters of editing.
I can edit composition for the framing.
I think people would be fibbing if they said they don't do it all the time.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2023 10:43:02 AM · #28 |
| Jeb - In their defense, I'm not sure that they're opposed to the ruleset entirely. Just the limit of cropping that is sometimes applied. For me, if cropping is allowed, why not straightening, or , etc. - it's a slippery slope. Let in one thing and the rest potentially become fair game. I prefer it straight-up out of the camera myself. :-) Is IS challenging this way, and that's why I like the exercise (Minimal ruleset). |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 10:58:43 AM · #29 |
| I find the minimal challenges do help me learn get it right in the camera. I've been shooting RAW+JPG for a few years now, so if I don't realize a topic is minimal, I might still have something. I tend to default to setting my composition and then zooming out just a little bit in case I need to make minor tilt/crop adjustments. So if I don't realize it is minimal, I may not have it exactly as I would prefer. |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 11:03:12 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Disagree, politely ... composition is key to capturing a solid image. Learning to get it right (without cropping) is an important aspect of photography. The Minimal ruleset is basically an exercise in this endeavor (getting it right in camera). Is it always practical in real life? No. ... but, this is an exercise, and a very infrequently run one at that. :-) |
LOL at âgetting it right in cameraâ ⦠so do I get it right after going thru 10âs of menu and sub-menu alterations of sat/contrast/exp comp/film sims/sharpening/exposure bracketing/focus bracketing/set number of focus points/aspect ratio/grain/white balance/dynamic range/tone curve/noise reduction/clarity â¦? Minimal is dead. Enough of this pining for the good old days. Psst ⦠they werenât that good! |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 11:29:45 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by oldbimmercoupe:
LOL at âgetting it right in cameraâ ⦠so do I get it right after going thru 10âs of menu and sub-menu alterations of sat/contrast/exp comp/film sims/sharpening/exposure bracketing/focus bracketing/set number of focus points/aspect ratio/grain/white balance/dynamic range/tone curve/noise reduction/clarity â¦? Minimal is dead. Enough of this pining for the good old days. Psst ⦠they werenât that good! |
Psst - that's called learning your camera. Also a good part of this exercise. :-) |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 11:45:46 AM · #32 |
| This thread belongs in "rant" |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 11:46:58 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by oldbimmercoupe:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Disagree, politely ... composition is key to capturing a solid image. Learning to get it right (without cropping) is an important aspect of photography. The Minimal ruleset is basically an exercise in this endeavor (getting it right in camera). Is it always practical in real life? No. ... but, this is an exercise, and a very infrequently run one at that. :-) |
LOL at âgetting it right in cameraâ ⦠so do I get it right after going thru 10âs of menu and sub-menu alterations of sat/contrast/exp comp/film sims/sharpening/exposure bracketing/focus bracketing/set number of focus points/aspect ratio/grain/white balance/dynamic range/tone curve/noise reduction/clarity â¦? Minimal is dead. Enough of this pining for the good old days. Psst ⦠they werenât that good! |
I don't bother with that type of camera settings, I figure that's the same as post processing. If you don't have enough contrast, change the lighting. |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 11:47:26 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by oldbimmercoupe:
LOL at âgetting it right in cameraâ ⦠so do I get it right after going thru 10âs of menu and sub-menu alterations of sat/contrast/exp comp/film sims/sharpening/exposure bracketing/focus bracketing/set number of focus points/aspect ratio/grain/white balance/dynamic range/tone curve/noise reduction/clarity â¦? Minimal is dead. Enough of this pining for the good old days. Psst ⦠they werenât that good! |
Psst - that's called learning your camera. Also a good part of this exercise. :-) |
I totally agree it is a great way to force people to learn their camera except that itâs another way to force people to just use their cell phones, which process photos with an algorithm inherently against the rules but done prior to capture so therefore legal but totally against the spirit of minimal. After being DQâd for funneling my image through Lightroom I now look to shoot for minimal with my phone. |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 11:50:21 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Jeb - In their defense, I'm not sure that they're opposed to the ruleset entirely. Just the limit of cropping that is sometimes applied. For me, if cropping is allowed, why not straightening, or , etc. - it's a slippery slope. Let in one thing and the rest potentially become fair game. I prefer it straight-up out of the camera myself. :-) Is IS challenging this way, and that's why I like the exercise (Minimal ruleset). |
Yes, I have nothing else against minimal editing. I like the rule set, and it saves time when entering. And I do learn not to be lazy when doing it.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2023 11:51:38 AM · #36 |
Lemme chime in here, just because I don't really understand how we can get our undies in a bunch over this. To those who want the Minimal Rules to continue to be truly Minimal, nothing is changing there, this is one challenge. To those who want cropping/rotation under Minimal, enjoy this one!
Personally, and this is truly one person's opinion, I don't see the point of the Minimal Ruleset requirements with respect to precise framing. If you can take the time, and can actually get the framing with the focal length(s) you have access to, then fabulous. But there are a *ton* of circumstances where shooting a bit wider gives you the insurance you need to make sure you get the shot, and is actually best practice. So the argument that if you haven't exactly framed the best composition in-camera, you've done something wrong is frankly wrong itself. The objective is to get the shot, and if framing can be improved in post, then fantastic! Agaain,IMO. |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 12:05:24 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Lemme chime in here, just because I don't really understand how we can get our undies in a bunch over this. To those who want the Minimal Rules to continue to be truly Minimal, nothing is changing there, this is one challenge. To those who want cropping/rotation under Minimal, enjoy this one!
Personally, and this is truly one person's opinion, I don't see the point of the Minimal Ruleset requirements with respect to precise framing. If you can take the time, and can actually get the framing with the focal length(s) you have access to, then fabulous. But there are a *ton* of circumstances where shooting a bit wider gives you the insurance you need to make sure you get the shot, and is actually best practice. So the argument that if you haven't exactly framed the best composition in-camera, you've done something wrong is frankly wrong itself. The objective is to get the shot, and if framing can be improved in post, then fantastic! Agaain,IMO. |
I agree I donât think cropping, incremental rotating is a bad thing AND (for me) it absolutely goes to the spirit of minimal which is to help learn. Composition isnât always achievable in camera sometimes it might be due to access physically to a spot, unpredictable, moving wildlife, etc. I do appreciate that the minimal challenges are fewer than in years past. I personally donât feel like they teach anything to anyone who doesnât already want to learn; too many work arounds. Either you want to master your camera or you donât â minimal wonât be the catalyst for that. |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 12:11:54 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
I totally agree it is a great way to force people to learn their camera except that itâs another way to force people to just use their cell phones, which process photos with an algorithm inherently against the rules but done prior to capture so therefore legal but totally against the spirit of minimal. After being DQâd for funneling my image through Lightroom I now look to shoot for minimal with my phone. |
If this ruleset gets people to explore / learn their camera gear even more, then I can't see how this is a bad thing. The basics have always been there (selection of aperture, shutter speed, white balance, ev and so on) and if the person behind the camera didn't know the basics, well, the results were less than stellar.
Photographers today still need the basics and then some. Gear can be quite complicated. My primary cameras are 9 years old now, and even then, have built-in features that can help achieve decent results under the Minimal rules.
If a person takes the time to really learn what cameras today can do, then I feel like the "spirit" of the Minimal rules have been maintained. You've learned and practiced something that is basic and essential to good photography - knowing your gear.
Grab your camera, and go have some fun! :-) |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 12:35:14 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by oldbimmercoupe:
LOL at âgetting it right in cameraâ ⦠so do I get it right after going thru 10âs of menu and sub-menu alterations of sat/contrast/exp comp/film sims/sharpening/exposure bracketing/focus bracketing/set number of focus points/aspect ratio/grain/white balance/dynamic range/tone curve/noise reduction/clarity â¦? Minimal is dead. Enough of this pining for the good old days. Psst ⦠they werenât that good! |
Mmm... Says the guy whose username is  oldbimmercoupe
Hey, you want to talk about how much that industry has changed and how many people grumble about that?
You want an old car that's reliable?
Swap in an LS with computer engine management and a late electronic climate control.
Or..... appreciate the occasional foray into the past with your classic.
Or just say screw that old junque and drive a late model, trouble free, vastly better engineered and built car.
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Psst - that's called learning your camera. Also a good part of this exercise. :-) |
Yep. And nobody's stopping anyone from setting the camera to not utilize its in-camera capabilities.
The rules just limit the editing.
And one more time if you don't like Minimal, don't enter.
Why do people feel that they have to change or eliminate it just because they don't like it?
Message edited by author 2023-05-03 12:52:14.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2023 12:41:48 PM · #40 |
Wouldnât it be fun to be able to check a box âminimal rules compliantâ and let voters know (and vote accordingly, as my vote would go up) or have the vote inherently weighted higher due to minimal compliance. Then if upon validation it didnât hold true there would be a lot of movement in results. Could be fun!
Because while I agree minimal âforcesâ people to learn their camera, I feel like people do that themselves already, IF they love the art of photography. Off to go find something 70âs-esque! |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 12:49:57 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Lemme chime in here, just because I don't really understand how we can get our undies in a bunch over this. To those who want the Minimal Rules to continue to be truly Minimal, nothing is changing there, this is one challenge. To those who want cropping/rotation under Minimal, enjoy this one! |
Okay, *I* started this thread because the description of the extra rules was WRONG.
I didn't even know that at the time, I just asked for clarification on what the incremental rotation meant.
The 90/180/270 degree thing was *NOT* applicable to this challenge.
There was no bunching except my (possibly snarky) comment about how the additional rules seemed slightly anathema to Minimal.
Originally posted by kirbic:
Personally, and this is truly one person's opinion, I don't see the point of the Minimal Ruleset requirements with respect to precise framing. If you can take the time, and can actually get the framing with the focal length(s) you have access to, then fabulous. But there are a *ton* of circumstances where shooting a bit wider gives you the insurance you need to make sure you get the shot, and is actually best practice. So the argument that if you haven't exactly framed the best composition in-camera, you've done something wrong is frankly wrong itself. The objective is to get the shot, and if framing can be improved in post, then fantastic! Again,IMO. |
To me, as far as photographers that I admire, a lot of their skill was being able to get the shot regardless of adverse conditions.
Framing is absolutely part of that.
Nobody is saying that if you don't get an image framed to the best advantage is wrong, just simply that it has, and truly should be part of the Minimal ruleset as it requires that maker to factor that in as well.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2023 01:02:57 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
Wouldnât it be fun to be able to check a box âminimal rules compliantâ and let voters know (and vote accordingly, as my vote would go up) or have the vote inherently weighted higher due to minimal compliance. Then if upon validation it didnât hold true there would be a lot of movement in results. Could be fun! |
Extra work for SC? Yeah, that'll be popular.
No, I don't see making extra steps in the regular challenges as a viable solution.
I'm assuming by that you're including the elimination of Minimal challenges altogether.
Why? For the umpteenth time, MINIMAL CHALLENGES ARE NOT MANDATORY.
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
Because while I agree minimal âforcesâ people to learn their camera, I feel like people do that themselves already, IF they love the art of photography. Off to go find something 70âs-esque! |
Here's where I feel there's no legitimate objection to most of the grumbling about the Minimal ruleset.
Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.
Minimal challenges are rare in the first place. They are OPTIONAL. If the challenge is optional, then nobody is forced into anything.
Just. Don't. Enter.
Why does there have to be so much resistance to something absolutely no one is required to do???
Just take a pass, and stop trying to make it difficult for the few people who still enjoy the challenge to their skills.
ETA: I shot over 50 images of my subject trying to get a static object centered and level before I got the ruling on the cropping.
It definitely made me feel like I wasted my time doing something I should be able to do as a competent photographer that was a requirement of my participation.
I ended up "fixing" an image I wouldn't have been able to use without the extra rules.
Which, IMNSHO, defeated the "spirit of the ruleset".
Message edited by author 2023-05-03 13:08:33.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2023 01:12:21 PM · #43 |
BTW, I give up now. I see the writing on the wall. If the majority wants to eliminate the ruleset, so be it, I'm obviously beating a dead horse. Carry on.....
|
|
|
|
05/03/2023 01:16:35 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
BTW, I give up now. I see the writing on the wall. If the majority wants to eliminate the ruleset, so be it, I'm obviously beating a dead horse. Carry on..... |
No, I don't think that's the case. There's still plenty of participation in Minimal challenges and they have a place here at DPC. Especially if you consider the roots of DPChallenge in being a learning site. ... and there is the "challenge" part in the name too! :-) |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 02:16:44 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
Wouldnât it be fun to be able to check a box âminimal rules compliantâ and let voters know (and vote accordingly, as my vote would go up) or have the vote inherently weighted higher due to minimal compliance. Then if upon validation it didnât hold true there would be a lot of movement in results. Could be fun! |
Extra work for SC? Yeah, that'll be popular. I was totally being tongue in cheek and donât even know if that is possible, I am sure it is but it was just a pie in the sky thing
No, I don't see making extra steps in the regular challenges as a viable solution.
I'm assuming by that you're including the elimination of Minimal challenges altogether. Not at all, while I personally donât think shooting a challenge with a phone as âteachingâ since phones auto correct in process and there is no learning involved and either people want to learn or they donât. Personally, a minimal challenge is not going to be the motivating factor. I literally rejoined DPC when I got a new model of my camera to help me learn my new model. Because I know exactly how I want to work my camera for portraiture but the SUBJECT is what pushes me. Landscapes, still life, etc involves a different composition, set up, everything and that is where I stretch myself with DPC.
Why? For the umpteenth time, MINIMAL CHALLENGES ARE NOT MANDATORY.
Originally posted by ErinKirsten:
Because while I agree minimal âforcesâ people to learn their camera, I feel like people do that themselves already, IF they love the art of photography. Off to go find something 70âs-esque! |
Here's where I feel there's no legitimate objection to most of the grumbling about the Minimal ruleset.
Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.
Minimal challenges are rare in the first place. They are OPTIONAL. If the challenge is optional, then nobody is forced into anything.
Just. Don't. Enter. Absolutely, or shoot with a phone or something else â now, that DPL is starting up there is always the pushback as the option to not enter has been removed if you are a competitive person (like many on here are).
Why does there have to be so much resistance to something absolutely no one is required to do???
Just take a pass, and stop trying to make it difficult for the few people who still enjoy the challenge to their skills.
ETA: I shot over 50 images of my subject trying to get a static object centered and level before I got the ruling on the cropping.
It definitely made me feel like I wasted my time doing something I should be able to do as a competent photographer that was a requirement of my participation.
I ended up "fixing" an image I wouldn't have been able to use without the extra rules.
Which, IMNSHO, defeated the "spirit of the ruleset". |
Message edited by author 2023-05-03 14:18:10. |
|
|
|
05/03/2023 03:47:59 PM · #46 |
Jeb, WE ARE NOT GOING TO ELIMINATE MINIMAL CHALLENGES. At least, not in the foreseeable future. Plenty of people love 'em and I even enjoy participating myself. *Personally* I'm not sure they're particularly useful, but that's just me.
Regarding your own comments in this thread, you've gone a bit off the rails, in the sense that we ALL understood your point of view way back in the thread, but you keep *challenging* folks who dispute it. It's getting sort of personal.
Either we move this thread to rant or shut it down entirely since the original purpose of it was to clarify a flagged rule.
And, BTW, we didn't "get it wrong", an increment is an undefined signifier. The Minimal Rules specify specific increments, 3 of them: 90, 180, 270. The flagged rules said "may rotate incrementally", which to MY mind clearly states you may rotate without restriction, i.e 2 degrees, 19 degrees, whatever. I acknowledged the ambiguity of using the same term in the flagged rule, but that doesn't mean it was *wrong*, and anyway we've used that exact wording for ALL flagged minimal challenges since we started loosening them.
So now I'm off MY rant :-)
In fairness I'll leave this open for another couple hours then I'll just close it to commenting, OK? If anyone wants to create a thread for politely discussing minimal rules in general and in specific, they should do that. But if and when it devolves to folks haranguing each other we'll close that one too. |
|
