Please, please spell out the rules more clearly

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

08/14/2002 05:21:52 PM · #55

Originally posted by jeremya:
I have found one of the most important things for the [i]digital camera user trying to learn to be a photographer instead of a snap shot taker is proper digital darkroom technique.... Many people fail to learn about JPG compresion and basic color corrections, which can make a snapshot a photograph or vise versa! This is like not learning about what film you are using and what processing techniques are avalible.

as for lowest common denominator.. the software is avalible to anyone who can use a computer.

As for photography for design 101
... 1/4 was darkroom tech, 1/4 composition etc, 1/2 critique.
Though I think as for personal time it was 50/50 between darkroom and shooting.[/i]

What I mean by "Lowest Commmon Denominator" is that the site has aimed at a target of people who can afford mid-line cameras and entry level software and have a desire to understand basic camera technique to get results with digitals.

I don't believe advanced darkroom technique would be beneficial for the challenge here.

When "Photography 101" classes are teaching basic darkroom technique I dare say they don't get into selective channel seperation, spot editing like selective blur, or other things beyond helping you get the exposure and cropping right.

Never the less. If you folks want to get into all that..cool by me..Just be prepared for the gap of the haves and have nots to get a lot bigger than it is already.

myqyl

Nikon D3100

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G DX VR

08/14/2002 06:09:13 PM · #56

I'm almost afraid to ask this, but I guess I should...

In Adobe Elements, there is a "Color Correction" where you click on a portion of your image that should be white, black or grey... The color for the image is then correct (white balance)...

Is this legal? If not, please DQ every entry I've made after the City Life challange :)

jeremya

Minolta DiMAGE 7i

08/14/2002 07:57:51 PM · #57

myqyl
This is the same as auto-levels or auto-curves feature in photoshop which is legal under the current rules.. and always should be.

Phileine

Pentax K100D Super

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

07/13/2004 11:58:02 AM · #58

I can't quite make out from the rules. In Advanced editing, is the healing brush allowed?

jodiecoston

Canon EOS-450D Rebel XSi

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

07/13/2004 12:19:48 PM · #59

Yes, the healing brush is allowed under the advanced editing rules.

One of the ONLY questions I can answer out of this. ;)

The complexities of what's available make it very difficult for those of us on the site council to come up with very specific rules. If for each new version of each software product that came out, we had to inspect each new feature and put in a list somewhere whether it was legal or not, we'd never have time to do anything else. It seems there's always something new that we hadn't anticipated coming up, and we put a lot of time and effort into thinking about all of this stuff and discussing it as it comes up. Hang in there, we're doing all we can. :)

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/13/2004 12:31:39 PM · #60

Jodie, I think i might have cheated on my freedom entry :(

I did spell out my edits in the comments area as I entered it because like some of the other folks here, I am not sure if I edited in a legal way. I use the clone tool all the time to get rid of small dust spots. But this entry they were quite large areas. ???? I also burned a large area beyond recognition. But burning tools are allowed (to what degree?)

I'm a little uncomfortable with the degree of my edits in this challenge, but it seems I'm the only one that likes the picture anyway
:(

Is there an easy way to have my own shot validated? just to make sure I didn't cheat?

Dr.Confuser

Nikon D800

07/13/2004 01:06:25 PM · #61

I am sometimes deliberately provocative to make a point. Maybe this is one of those times. So I'm probably going to get myself in trouble here.

I see a point of view that some people can't afford $600 for Photoshop. Which is true.

But some people can't afford $800 for a new lens. $90 for the next filter. $125 for a tripod. $1,000 for DSLR body. $2,000 - $3,000 all up for a comprehensive camera plus accessories.

I'm not sure why software which mimics advanced darkroom techniques should be different from advanced camera gear. Why can we spend extravagently on gear but not on software? If it's not truly different, then let's either allow Photoshop techniques, or limit to "affordable" camera gear.

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

07/13/2004 01:29:21 PM · #62

Just a note that this thread was started almost 2 years ago. A lot has happened since then.

David.C

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

07/13/2004 01:37:12 PM · #63

Originally posted by EddyG:

Just a note that this thread was started almost 2 years ago. A lot has happened since then.

and a look through the forums show the rules are still not clearly defined.

David

BobsterLobster

Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

07/13/2004 01:59:24 PM · #64

I have strong feelings about the fact that I am not allowed contrast masking under basic rules. This means that Photoshop CS users have a definite advantage, as they can rescue shadows and highlights legally, but Photoshop 7 users can't. The steps I would use in PS 7 for contrast masking are:
Duplicate layer
Invert layer
Desaturate layer
Change blending mode to 'Overlay'
Apply Gaussian Blur.
Reduce opacity.

So in this instance, Using another layer in overlay mode is against the basic rules. This seems pointless... I can't see why contrast masking would be against the spirit of the basic ruleset.

bmatt17

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

07/13/2004 02:04:24 PM · #65

I agree with everyone that the rules need to be clearer in what is/ is not allowed. As far as what's allowed, I don't really care as long at it is clear. However, I do think that as an added member benifit, there should be an additional rule set besides basic, and advanced. One for the photoshop gurus to shine, where the only rule is the original image has to meet the challange, and be be taken in the time frame. Free range in photoshop. As I believe photoshop is a major part of Digital Photography, and would really like to see what people are capable of.

StevePax

Canon PowerShot S50

07/13/2004 02:07:57 PM · #66

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

I have strong feelings about the fact that you can zoom in 10x with your camera, and I can only do about 3x with mine. Yet that isn't going to get any rules changed.

Nuno

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

07/13/2004 02:10:30 PM · #67

Hi there. Once more I see discussion in DP rules and what should be allowed or not.

It was with great pleasure that I saw yesterday a very exciting forum discussion about a winner photo that probably is pushing the rules a bit far. And the question isn't if it is or isn't pleasent to the eye, but if it is agains the rules or not.

Sorry for the generalization that I'm going to do next but I think that we have here 3 tipes of photographers: the pure photographers, the Photoshop geeks and a third kind that is a balanced mixture of both.

And I have more a question than rather a sugestion for the rules:
- If I make a big print and then paint in front of the photo something to bring out a part of my photo, like a cloud, etc., isn't this pretty much like if you alter the light or colour around my photo subject in Photoshop to enhance the subject? they are both art but is it straight photography?

this has nothing to do wiht other effects that you can aply to the hole image. Like dust cleaning to remove high iso noise. If some one took a shot at iso 800 and use a cleaning filter, isn't the same more or less than that photo has been taken at iso 100 for example?.

More than especifiing more the ruÃ§es or beein more permissive in them I think that having 3 tipes of contests should resolve the issue. One to pure photos just came out of the camera (like is basic editing), the abvance editing rules contest (and perhapes with a bit more rigid rules), and photo art or what you want to call, to people who likes to improve their photos altering a part or the all image.

And a great help would be if the photoshop geeks (it's not to offend you people, just a figure of speech) explained to us all how they do it in the Photoshop so we can learn too.

ElGordo

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Canon

07/13/2004 02:23:08 PM · #68

I think the rules are pretty good as they are, but some clarification is warranted, especially as to what is NOT permissable.
But that could take in a lot of territory!
As far as being on an equal footing is concerned, I have seen remarkable photos taken with some very elementary cameras. It is the photographer's skill in utilizing the capabilities of his equipment rather than an extensive set of capabilities.
The image size allowed on DPC does tend to level the field in that regard, but there simply is no substitute for an accomplished and skilled photographer.
My entries to date have not done well, but that is why I'm here, to learn better photography.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

07/13/2004 02:25:49 PM · #69

Originally posted by Nuno:

Sorry for the generalization that I'm going to do next but I think that we have here 3 tipes of photographers: the pure photographers, the Photoshop geeks and a third kind that is a balanced mixture of both.

I would consider myself in the balanced mixture of both, but in my honest opinion, DPChallenge is no place for digital manipulation work. There are plenty of other sites on the web where they will welcome that kind of thing. I think even the best Photoshop guru needs to begin with a well taken photograph. To me thats what DPChallenge is all about. (Working on improving the ability to see an excellent image and executing it so it is technically sound). My weird stuff is not photography no matter how much i like it.

Message edited by author 2004-07-13 14:27:47.

bmatt17

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

07/13/2004 02:35:04 PM · #70

Originally posted by Gringo:

Originally posted by Nuno:

Sorry for the generalization that I'm going to do next but I think that we have here 3 tipes of photographers: the pure photographers, the Photoshop geeks and a third kind that is a balanced mixture of both.

I would consider myself in the balanced mixture of both, but in my honest opinion, DPChallenge is no place for digital manipulation work. There are plenty of other sites on the web where they will welcome that kind of thing. I think even the best Photoshop guru needs to begin with a well taken photograph. To me thats what DPChallenge is all about. (Working on improving the ability to see an excellent image and executing it so it is technically sound). My weird stuff is not photography no matter how much i like it.

I disagree, look at the last 2 first placr ribbons from Heida. They are both wonderfull images, and with a large degree of "digital manipulation". Lokk at the before and after of Angel. If photoshop work is done right, the results can be outstanding.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

07/13/2004 02:45:03 PM · #71

Originally posted by bmatt17:

I don't consider this work from Heida digital art at all. Manipulated, yes. But the tools she's used have enhanced an already great photograph and she didn't superimpose image into her original photograph, she only altered the color of an already existing image.

I guess the degree of manipulation has a lot to do with where we all draw our own line of what is and isn't an acceptable edit. This is exactly why I am uncomfortable with my current entry. I've gone beyond my own limits, but I think it's within the rules. I'm not sure.

David.C

07/13/2004 02:53:24 PM · #72

The rules waste a lot of time determining what tools are legal and what methods or using those tools are not legal. But that is just a substitute for a clearly defined purpose of the challenges, and clear concise definitions of the key concepts of that purpose.

Right now, the most important key concepts that are not clearly defined are:

'photographic integrity': I know it is not explicitly mentioned in the rules anymore, but I see that as an indication it is not defined intentionally. Yet, it is still one of the most basic defining elements of the rules.

'exposure': This thread provided additional leeway to cameras that support the RAW format in terms of what is considered a single exposure. I personally have no problem with the technique used as an example, but it does cloud the definition a bit too much to be considered solid anymore.

'in-camera': I have heard in commented up (but not officially) that anything done to a RAW file is considered 'in-camera', which I find a bit hard to understand. It seems a lot like me argueing that I should be able to connect my camera to my computer, leave the card in it, open photoshop and edit the file on the card, save, remove the card and download the 'from camera' image.

The point I am trying to make is that the tools and techniques don't matter, the rules state this by saying that violations of the 'spirit of the rules' is grounds for DQ. Yet the spirit of the rules are not defined anywhere. Define this, and the task of determining what rules and techniques should or should not be allowed becomes much, much easier -- leave it undefined and it remains the mass of contridictions it has been for years (judging by this thread).

David

KaDi

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

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

07/13/2004 02:54:23 PM · #73

Originally posted by Gringo:

I guess the degree of manipulation has a lot to do with where we all draw our own line of what is and isn't an acceptable edit. This is exactly why I am uncomfortable with my current entry. I've gone beyond my own limits, but I think it's within the rules. I'm not sure.

The "degree" is where I always have problems. In advanced challenges, you might remove the telephone wires--but can you also remove the telephone pole? Or is that going too far? I can remove an object using the clone tool, or I can do it by creating a layer and erasing--which method is appropriate? Or are both acceptable methods?