| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/12/2004 12:11:49 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by Britannica:
I didn't say art had nothing to do with photography, art can and should be a part of every activity. But the stated purpose of the challenges is photography, 'just taking pictures after all', not art.
David |
Ah - my mistake then. I thought when you said that art has nothing to do with it, that you meant art has nothing to do with it. Sorry for any confusion caused.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 12:13:09 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by Nazgul:
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Totally agree,this place is slowly becoming digital artsy fartsy ! |
Well, I thought photography WAS art.
And I guess this sky was pink/peach when you shot it, huh? Artsy fartsy-er is as arty fartsy-er does.
 |
That is not a challenge shot so butt-off! |
Now that pink sky is awsome! what feature in the camera did you use to capture that mister pitsaman? |
Can you read above?
It is not a challenge photo so live it!
Changing the hue is not creating a major subject in the photo,subject is allready there ! |
Are you saying the sky in Heiða´s submission wasnt there?
is darkening the sky thats already there creating a major subject in the photo?
She´s just better then you so live it! c," )
Message edited by author 2004-07-12 12:13:51.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 12:17:14 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Britannica:
I didn't say art had nothing to do with photography, art can and should be a part of every activity. But the stated purpose of the challenges is photography, 'just taking pictures after all', not art.
David |
Ah - my mistake then. I thought when you said that art has nothing to do with it, that you meant art has nothing to do with it. Sorry for any confusion caused. |
Hehe ;)
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 12:22:50 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Britannica:
I didn't say art had nothing to do with photography, art can and should be a part of every activity. But the stated purpose of the challenges is photography, 'just taking pictures after all', not art.
David |
Ah - my mistake then. I thought when you said that art has nothing to do with it, that you meant art has nothing to do with it. Sorry for any confusion caused. |
No problem. Pronouns can get confusing when multiple subjects are being discussed.
David
Hint: the 'it' was refering to the challenges, challenge entries and the rules governing them -- not photography. As I thought was made clear in the paragraph that followed that statement.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 12:23:19 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Britannica:
I didn't say art had nothing to do with photography, art can and should be a part of every activity. But the stated purpose of the challenges is photography, 'just taking pictures after all', not art.
David |
Ah - my mistake then. I thought when you said that art has nothing to do with it, that you meant art has nothing to do with it. Sorry for any confusion caused. |
Hehe ;) |
+
Man thats just pure Brilliant!
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 12:27:53 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
...Photography has nothing whatsoever to do with art. How could people be so confused ? Its just taking pictures after all. |
LOL! How about a challenge where the object is to shoot a photo that ISN'T considered art? Good luck.
Part of becoming a better photographer is learning that the photo is not finished when you click the shutter. I still consider Heida's use of burning fairly minimal on this image- the change isn't that big a departure form the adjusted original. The cloud was always there (as opposed to adding a window). She just darkened the surrounding area to focus more attention on the figure.
The difference between  and  probably wouldn't have been enough to warrant a discussion on the overuse of Photoshop, and certainly wasn't the purpose of this thread. Sooo....
My very first batch of favorite photos included Heida's, as did my first set of favorite photographers. Not a whole lot of thought required there. Heida has one of the most distinctive styles on this site, and I can usually recognize her photos on sight (exhibit A: my comments on her last two entries). If I can get even close to her level of talent, I'll take all the criticism you can throw at me. ;-) |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 12:57:38 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by Nazgul:
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by Nazgul:
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Totally agree,this place is slowly becoming digital artsy fartsy ! |
Well, I thought photography WAS art.
And I guess this sky was pink/peach when you shot it, huh? Artsy fartsy-er is as arty fartsy-er does.
|
That is not a challenge shot so butt-off! |
Now that pink sky is awsome! what feature in the camera did you use to capture that mister pitsaman? |
Can you read above?
It is not a challenge photo so live it!
Changing the hue is not creating a major subject in the photo,subject is allready there ! |
Are you saying the sky in Heiða´s submission wasnt there?
is darkening the sky thats already there creating a major subject in the photo?
She´s just better then you so live it! c," ) |
You would look a bit smarter if you stop personal attacks!
Who are you to judge here who is wrong or better.
Message edited by author 2004-07-12 13:01:30. |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:00:45 PM · #58 |
I'm just jealous.
Heida, I remove my hat and bow.
Well Done.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:03:41 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by Britannica:
But, as long as the basic concepts the rules are based on, such as 'photographic integrity', are left intentionally NOT defined within the context of the challenges, their interpretation is left to the whim of the site council on a case by case basis. |
Photographic integrity is not even mentioned in the rules any more. I applauded the SC when they enforced the spirit of the rules against some entries a few months back, but they appear reluctant to do so on an ongoing basis. As predicted, with the advent of the "Advanced" rules, we are drifting away from digital photography and toward digital art. Heida's work is not as extreme as those that were DQ'ed in the past but it does move in that directon. It is hard to define exactly where the line should be drawn, but we all have our own tastes, mine tend to the more traditional side and less processing.
I wish people would stop comparing things digital to what could or could not be done in the old world of film and the chemical darkroom. We don't need to be limited in our thinking by that. Ansel Adams is dead. He never saw a Rebel or used Photoshop. RIP.
That said I do like Heida's work for it's surbeb quality of workmanship. I haven't put anyone on my list of favorite photographers but have selected 3 of Heida's images to my list of fav photos. Her shots display a trait which seems to run thru the works of many of the Icelandic photographers who participate here. I find that they tend toward darker images, including a lot of B&W, while my tastes lean toward the more colorful. Regardless if you consider it digital art or not, and whether it fits your own personal tastes or not, Heida is certainly one of the very best we have here at dpc, she has the record to prove it.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:03:51 PM · #60 |
I agree with the anti-photoshoppers. Personally I quit entering challenges when they changed the rules to suit the "touching up" crowd. Granted I know that the non-members challenges have limited touching up rules, and I am all for levels changes, contrast and desaturation, but even when I did enter I felt I was `cheating` when changing the above. I guess its all down to personal taste, but I would love to see a "WYSIWYG" challenge where there is no cropping, no USM, no levels changes, a purists challenge, straight out of the camera and upload to DPC (resizing allowed for bandwidth reasons).
On a side note the "angel" picture is a fantastic picture teased from a distinctly average photograph, definetly deserved to win within the context of the rules though.
Wow, my first post in months!!! A diehard lurker. |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:04:47 PM · #61 |
I have Heida favorite since 11/2003 and bunch of her photos !
But after rules change we have to change the website logo:
DPCHALLENGE
A digital Photoshop contest |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:08:41 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
DPCHALLENGE
A digital Photoshop contest |
That's like saying your stuff is hanging in a darkroom gallery.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:32:58 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
You would look a bit smarter if you stop personal attacks!
Who are you to judge here who is wrong or better. |
Hey its nothing personal and I am not attacking you!
I´m simply giving you my honest opinion..
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:34:50 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
I have Heida favorite since 11/2003 and bunch of her photos !
But after rules change we have to change the website logo:
DPCHALLENGE
A digital Photoshop contest |
Man if it was a photoshop contest we wouldnt need cameras would we?
would you like to see only StraightOutoftheCamera submissions?
Man I think that would be crap
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:38:07 PM · #65 |
| Heida is awesome. Its not THAT much photoshop...just a bit of burning. The same affect could be achieved in a darkroom. |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:40:00 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by BradP:
I'm just jealous.
Heida, I remove my hat and bow.
Well Done. |
Me too!!! You keep on burning, girl...and smoke the competition!!! 
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:40:54 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by grigrigirl:
Heida is awesome. Its not THAT much photoshop...just a bit of burning. The same affect could be achieved in a darkroom. |
Exactly. Nothing in the film world is ever 'straight from the camera' so why would you expect it for digital. Yes, slide film is pretty close though it can be tweaked a bit.
This discussion has gone on before and will probably happen several more times.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:43:27 PM · #68 |
Am I the only one who thinks this continuous squabling over what constitutes digital art/digital photographs is pointless and exists only to massage the egos of the lazy?
If you want to make art you have to put some time and thought into it. Personally, it doesn't matter to me if it's before or after you press the shutter button.
I think Heida's final image is brilliant and when I saw it I knew it would win. I could care less how she achieved it, but I knew she put time and effort into it. I love movement of the clouds and the ground up perspective she captured, and I'm completely blown away by the effectiveness of her post processing. I can only hope to one day have the clarity of vision that she has!
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:45:56 PM · #69 |
To me all this postprocessing issue is verry simple. When we were primitives we were walking by foot then by horses, now ith cars planes, some even went on the moon. Photographers always used tehniques to enhance the final result of a photo. In the early agess it whas darkroom today in the digital age it's photoshop. It's as simple as that, and it has a name it's called "evolution". Digital art is when you create something in prhotoshop, like new elements added or moved elements around. If you just use photoshop to enhance an image, even if not just to remove little distracting spots, but compositionaly and visualy is the image that came form the camera that's photography to me.
For example here is one of my straight from camera images:
Give me one good reason why should I leave it so flat and washed out when with a little work I can make it more attractive like this:
But is this digital art? C'mon...
Message edited by author 2004-07-12 13:56:46. |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 01:51:55 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by Britannica:
But, as long as the basic concepts the rules are based on, such as 'photographic integrity', are left intentionally NOT defined within the context of the challenges, their interpretation is left to the whim of the site council on a case by case basis. |
Photographic integrity is not even mentioned in the rules any more. I applauded the SC when they enforced the spirit of the rules against some entries a few months back, but they appear reluctant to do so on an ongoing basis. As predicted, with the advent of the "Advanced" rules, we are drifting away from digital photography and toward digital art. Heida's work is not as extreme as those that were DQ'ed in the past but it does move in that directon. It is hard to define exactly where the line should be drawn, but we all have our own tastes, mine tend to the more traditional side and less processing. ... |
Yeah, I know 'photographic integrity' is not specifically stated anymore, but the rules have not 'drifted' so much that it is no longer one of the basic concepts of the challenges. It is also not the only basic term that has been left intentionally undefined or defined in a very fuzzy manner. For example, the terms 'exposure' and 'in-camera' have definitions that vary depending on what camera, and even what mode, is used. These terms need a very solid defining for the stability of the site.
The drifting that is occuring isn't because of the 'advanced' rules, but because the lack of willingness to take a stand on the difficult terms. They can be defined, for the purpose of the challenges, so decisions based on them are as black and white as the date issue. The lack of a firmly defined foundation causes the inconsistencies in the validations.
There is one other thing that I see causing instability in the site, though it is over a much larger time period. When a photo, that does not break the letter of the rules, but stretches the spirit enough, to get DQed it is removed from the site. Changes are made to ensure the rules are more clear in the future, but without the defining examples the reason behind the changes become less and less clear over time. As the SC changes membership, the rules will continue to change -- back and forth -- as they are not firmly rooted with the reasons why they are the way they are. It is for this reason I do not feel entries that challenge to undefined aspects of the spirit of the rules should be DQed, unless a long-term record of why the changes are made is also kept.
David
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 02:55:20 PM · #71 |
The long term record, as imperfect as it is, exists in these forums.
The drift, at the very least, is accelerated by the new rules. The forces that were predicted to stem the drift by those promoting the changes have proved to be inadequate. We were told that if an image were too "digital art" it would be voted down. Now those who speak out against such images, especially when they do well, are shouted down as contrarians, "hate voters", and "morons"; and there is a generalized animosity toward anyone who dares to vote a one. The DQs for violating the "Advanced" rules by using too much editing technique are few and far between. Only when the violations are carried to an extreme and/or there is a public outcry does the SC act. I concede some minor "back and forth" but the drift is moving in one direction over time- away from digital photography and toward digital art. |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 02:56:28 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by Pedro:
Sorry, I have to include this link. This guy shoots film, and edits the bejesus out of them (airbrushing mostly) for magazines and the like.
I get a kick out of people who are naive enough to think that extreme editing is either new, or a product of digital. the only thing digital did was put these abilities into the hands of people like us. The pros have been doing it for longer than you apparently want to believe.
P-ness |
Great Link! The work he did with the Latino looking model was Amazing!!!!
|
|
|
|
07/12/2004 03:03:38 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by Nazgul:
...would you like to see only StraightOutoftheCamera submissions?
Man I think that would be crap |
The Past allowed only resizing (and I think 90-degree rotation?) and actually ended up giving me one of my better images. |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 03:51:17 PM · #74 |
it seems odd to me that this discussion has risen again during this challenge and not the selective desaturation challenge.
i think a few things factor in to the no "digital art" thinking:
first, some people like what they perceive as "normal/realistic" pictures. there is nothing wrong with this at all. however, i feel that many people don't realize how many pictures outside of dpc that seem "normal/realistic" are highly edited. most of the time (at dpc and outside) people never see the original and just assume it was similar to the final picture.
secondly, there seemed to be a slight jealousy factor to toward PS skills in the past when this came up before. which creates resentment. people either feel left out because they don't have PS or they don't have the skills, and instead of trying to get better they just disagree with it. it's to your advantage to use dogging/burning, because digital cameras have a limited dynamic range compared to film. flat pictures aren̢۪t fun to look at no matter how realistic they are. |
|
|
|
07/12/2004 04:05:40 PM · #75 |
Well put, Nick.
Except for the suggestion to use "dogging." Ewww! One of Beagleboy's techniques, I assume? ;-)
Message edited by author 2004-07-12 16:15:17. |
|
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: 08/16/2025 08:43:03 AM EDT.
