| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/09/2012 07:52:08 PM · #176 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I'd have no problem going minimal, advanced, and expert -- if you allow cropping in minimal. When you do wildlife, it's extremely rare not cropping. For most other types of photography, you can get yourself into place so you don't need to crop. Much more difficult with wildlife. |
Just confine your wildlife to a light tent. :P |
|
|
|
03/09/2012 08:43:39 PM · #177 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I'd have no problem going minimal, advanced, and expert -- if you allow cropping in minimal. When you do wildlife, it's extremely rare not cropping. For most other types of photography, you can get yourself into place so you don't need to crop. Much more difficult with wildlife. |
I would expect it would be tough to capture wildlife without cropping Wendy :)
But you might be surprised how hard it is to line up a clean frame without cropping in a crowded city where I so often have to shoot. In an attempt to give criminals less to hide behind, the city has now made it mandatory for all trash to go into these ugly green plastic bags that get stacked up everywhere. At least old school metal trashcans can sometimes have character.
There are lots of people around in the city and quite frankly some of them are not very photogenic. I can go to the local flower market for example and try to get a nice shot of a lady bundling flowers. More often than not though, every time I try to frame that flower lady into the rule of thirds/golden ratio there will be some unappealing tourist stuffing their face in one corner of the frame. So what do I do, leave in the tourist or move in centered on the flower lady to avoid that distraction and then get comments on how I should not have centered on the lady? So being able to crop even one side would be so much less frustrating...
And let's not forget what Carole brought up. Many viewfinders do not have a 100% view. So what looks like a perfect frame when you make the capture ends up having something nasty peeking into it quite often.
I really don't know how to address your concerns about a need to crop wildlife as that would require cropping from all sides quite often. I feel compassion for your concern :)
My issue however could be solved with an allowance for just one or two sides to be cropped, which would likely prevent people from being able to snap wide and crop a perfect scene later.
Many cameras have an ability to choose many aspect ratios too. Giving everyone some cropping latitude would take away the advantages of those cameras and make things more fair for all. |
|
|
|
03/09/2012 08:53:03 PM · #178 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
Out of the 5 open challenges, at the moment, 4 are advanced, 1 is basic. Out of the three in voting, none are basic. That is too much to bear?
Basic is too hard? Maybe that is why this is called DPChallenge... |
exactly.. it seems to me that those either good at editing photos or prefer a highly edited photo are out to scare away newcomers and feel the need to scream for more choices of editing their images because there might be the chance that as photographers they possibly lack confidence in their ability to set a camera properly before they hit the button. That comment isn't aimed at anyone in particular before anyone takes the huff and starts spitting the dummy out.
As stated, hardly any challanges are basic each week and yet still lovers of lots of editing want to take basic away from those who might enjoy those challanges.. which I think are a great place to start as a free member before jumping in to a paid account where you will mostly have the choice to compete against those on the site who can edit better and hence will involve upping your editing game should you choose to do so.. Yes editing is a large part of photography these days but what basic challenges help do is keep you reminded that sometimes more thought needs to go into your initial setup, lighting and camera settings to acheive a great photo.. and great photos are acheivable this way, photoshop didn't invent great photos, they were around before it.
|
|
|
|
03/09/2012 09:13:50 PM · #179 |
Originally posted by Brent_S:
Originally posted by vawendy:
I'd have no problem going minimal, advanced, and expert -- if you allow cropping in minimal. When you do wildlife, it's extremely rare not cropping. For most other types of photography, you can get yourself into place so you don't need to crop. Much more difficult with wildlife. |
I would expect it would be tough to capture wildlife without cropping Wendy :)
But you might be surprised how hard it is to line up a clean frame without cropping in a crowded city where I so often have to shoot. In an attempt to give criminals less to hide behind, the city has now made it mandatory for all trash to go into these ugly green plastic bags that get stacked up everywhere. At least old school metal trashcans can sometimes have character.
There are lots of people around in the city and quite frankly some of them are not very photogenic. I can go to the local flower market for example and try to get a nice shot of a lady bundling flowers. More often than not though, every time I try to frame that flower lady into the rule of thirds/golden ratio there will be some unappealing tourist stuffing their face in one corner of the frame. So what do I do, leave in the tourist or move in centered on the flower lady to avoid that distraction and then get comments on how I should not have centered on the lady? So being able to crop even one side would be so much less frustrating...
And let's not forget what Carole brought up. Many viewfinders do not have a 100% view. So what looks like a perfect frame when you make the capture ends up having something nasty peeking into it quite often.
I really don't know how to address your concerns about a need to crop wildlife as that would require cropping from all sides quite often. I feel compassion for your concern :)
My issue however could be solved with an allowance for just one or two sides to be cropped, which would likely prevent people from being able to snap wide and crop a perfect scene later.
Many cameras have an ability to choose many aspect ratios too. Giving everyone some cropping latitude would take away the advantages of those cameras and make things more fair for all. |
I guess I don't understand the need to forbid cropping. When you do, you're basically turning minimal challenges into "setup" challenges. Is there a reason to avoid cropping? You're still composing the scene, you can just get rid of some extra, and that's not changing any of the development aspects of the challenge. Cropping on 2 sides would be sufficient in most cases, it would be much better than not cropping at all. :)
Message edited by author 2012-03-09 21:17:26. |
|
|
|
03/09/2012 09:15:30 PM · #180 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by vawendy:
I'd have no problem going minimal, advanced, and expert -- if you allow cropping in minimal. When you do wildlife, it's extremely rare not cropping. For most other types of photography, you can get yourself into place so you don't need to crop. Much more difficult with wildlife. |
Just confine your wildlife to a light tent. :P |
Ooooh!!! squirrels in a light tent!! Awesome!! (oh wait, I frequently don't have to crop the squirrel shots. Drat!!)
Wheeee!!! Great blue herons in a really big light tent -- that would be awesome!! :)
Message edited by author 2012-03-09 21:15:43. |
|
|
|
03/09/2012 09:19:28 PM · #181 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
From a personal standpoint, I dislike Basic. Intensely. I won't enter basic Editing challenges, since I would never shoot specifically with Basic in mind. What I dislike even more than Basic, though, is Minimal. I simply have no idea why we would ever regard the out-of-camera image as something that should be a finished product. |
Have you forgotten that we used to have to do that all the time, with color slides? Back in my world, in those days, there was often a clear divide between those who excelled at straight-from-the-camera slide work and those, like me, who were at their best when the darkroom came into play. That's how I think of Minimal Editing: color slides for the digital age.
And it's good discipline; we can't help but benefit, as photographers, by learning to be more in control of our raw output. I have no problem with that. My problem is with the current "basic" rules, which are anything BUT, and inhabit a never-never land somewhere well north of shoot-'n-print but just as far south of truly effective imaging.
R.
|
|
|
|
03/09/2012 09:37:01 PM · #182 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by kirbic:
From a personal standpoint, I dislike Basic. Intensely. I won't enter basic Editing challenges, since I would never shoot specifically with Basic in mind. What I dislike even more than Basic, though, is Minimal. I simply have no idea why we would ever regard the out-of-camera image as something that should be a finished product. |
Have you forgotten that we used to have to do that all the time, with color slides? Back in my world, in those days, there was often a clear divide between those who excelled at straight-from-the-camera slide work and those, like me, who were at their best when the darkroom came into play. That's how I think of Minimal Editing: color slides for the digital age.
And it's good discipline; we can't help but benefit, as photographers, by learning to be more in control of our raw output. I have no problem with that. My problem is with the current "basic" rules, which are anything BUT, and inhabit a never-never land somewhere well north of shoot-'n-print but just as far south of truly effective imaging.
R. |
ah, bear, I can live with that explanation: minimal is slides. I kept thinking of photographs, and anyone can pick up a pair of scissors and trim it down without any knowledge.
Slides.
I can live with that. |
|
|
|
03/09/2012 10:00:13 PM · #183 |
Honestly, the amount of each type of challenge feels about right. I don't think there's anything wrong with the basic and minimal challenges (as long as you can crop in minimal) and taking these out wouldn't be the best idea. Everyone certainly has a different view, that's what makes the art of photography to me. Do I typically enter these challenges, not very often, but that doesn't mean I'm a bad photographer because I don't participate in the minimal and basics usually, it's just not my style and that's half the fun of photography.
(Wow, that was sort of a stream of consciousness thought, sorry if it's in-cohesive.) |
|
|
|
03/09/2012 10:09:53 PM · #184 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Have you forgotten that we used to have to do that all the time, with color slides? Back in my world, in those days, there was often a clear divide between those who excelled at straight-from-the-camera slide work and those, like me, who were at their best when the darkroom came into play. That's how I think of Minimal Editing: color slides for the digital age. |
That's a very good analogy... and may I say, I am *so* glad to get shut of slides! But that's a personal preference, of course :-)
|
|
|
|
03/09/2012 10:19:19 PM · #185 |
I'm not an editor by any means, but I can get on board with minimal (not sold on cropping - more in a second), advanced, and expert. Robert made an excellent point earlier that the truly advanced editors can do much more in basic than the rest of us. And some of us, our "advanced" editing is pretty darn basic anyway. Just nice to be able to use some blending modes and maybe a vignette now and then.
As for cropping in minimal - I do like the slide analogy. We get to see photographs warts and all, so to speak. It allows us to see just what the camera saw, and to perhaps see the possibilities! One man's distraction is another's treasure. You just never know...
If cropping is allowed, and this would be hard to enforce, I'd like to see a limitation of how much could be cropped. No more than 5-10% or something like that. Not sure how to measure it for "validation", though.
But believe it or not, as a basic editing person, I could live without that set and just go with advanced. |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 08:53:35 AM · #186 |
I believe that the Basic and Minimal rulesets level the playing field and are both nice to have.
Just my $0.02 USD.......YMMV.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2012 09:05:42 AM · #187 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I believe that the Basic and Minimal rulesets level the playing field and are both nice to have.
Just my $0.02 USD.......YMMV. |
I think advanced levels the playing field more so than basic. Being able to selectively get rid of noise, due to either a crappy camera, crappy lens, or just environmental issues is a big one for me. I can't compete in basic with someone with a 5D and someone with a p&s can't either. My images will never look that good no matter how much fore thought, composing, etc. Advanced lets you at least make it up in pp. |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 09:12:05 AM · #188 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I believe that the Basic and Minimal rulesets level the playing field and are both nice to have.
Just my $0.02 USD.......YMMV. |
Originally posted by Kelli:
I think advanced levels the playing field more so than basic. Being able to selectively get rid of noise, due to either a crappy camera, crappy lens, or just environmental issues is a big one for me. I can't compete in basic with someone with a 5D and someone with a p&s can't either. My images will never look that good no matter how much fore thought, composing, etc. Advanced lets you at least make it up in pp. |
Yah, well......I get left in the dust by the editing jocks.......8~)
|
|
|
|
03/10/2012 10:23:33 AM · #189 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
As for cropping in minimal - I do like the slide analogy. We get to see photographs warts and all, so to speak. It allows us to see just what the camera saw, and to perhaps see the possibilities! One man's distraction is another's treasure. You just never know...
|
You need to think of cropping as having a longer lens in your bag. Cropping is the equivalent of digital zoom on a P&S.
Tim |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 10:55:48 AM · #190 |
Originally posted by Kelli:
I can't compete in basic with someone with a 5D and someone with a p&s can't either. |
There is an advantage to the clarity that a FF brings to the table, but I have ribboned multiple times with pics from my G11, under both minimal and basic rules. It has a small sensor and image quality inferior to your 40D. Granted, it shoots in RAW, so it's not exactly P&S either. My point is, you CAN compete with a lesser camera.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2012 11:19:06 AM · #191 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by Kelli:
I can't compete in basic with someone with a 5D and someone with a p&s can't either. |
There is an advantage to the clarity that a FF brings to the table, but I have ribboned multiple times with pics from my G11, under both minimal and basic rules. It has a small sensor and image quality inferior to your 40D. Granted, it shoots in RAW, so it's not exactly P&S either. My point is, you CAN compete with a lesser camera. |
OK, maybe I should rephrase that, as I've also ribboned in minimal. What I meant was, my images are definitively not as good as I want them to be under basic rules. I can make them look better and it frustrates me that I'm not allowed to. This is a photography site, and I think you should be able to at least make your images as good as your pp-ing skills will allow. I believe advanced has the best ruleset for that. I'm not referring to expert. I don't even like the expert rules because they still don't include as legal certain ways I like to pp (and it has nothing to do cutting & pasting images together). |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 11:54:50 AM · #192 |
I'm not sure how much a camera gives advantage in basic but, as it stands now, using better lenses that have less distortion is definitely an advantage. I think the ruleset should be changed to allow for that.
But....
In the end, I would agree with what  Bear_Music posted. Get rid of basic or at least rename it. Can it really be basic if it's allowing presets? Do most of us even know what those buttons do? Maybe not, but they're legal because it applies whatever it does to the whole image (we hope anyway). When I think of the word basic I think fundamental - primary - essential.
Minimal editing is way closer to those basic words than basic editing is. |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 02:14:17 PM · #193 |
Are people afraid of the word "advanced"? Its really just enhancing since you arent really allowed to severely alter the image integrity. You still have to have a great image setup to start in order to end up with a great image.
In the end what are you doing that scares people so much? |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 02:19:42 PM · #194 |
Edit, deleted duplicate post.
Message edited by author 2012-03-10 14:20:21. |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 02:27:04 PM · #195 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Are people afraid of the word "advanced"? |
... the answer to that direct question is a resounding YES. There are people like me who know diddle about PhotoShop and truth be told it is only recently that I realized that my fears were (are) totally unfounded.
I would like to thank  Beetle who explained a great deal of things to me, and Bear_Music who in a recent post informed me and many others of the error of our ways.
Ray
Message edited by author 2012-03-10 14:27:45. |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 02:37:13 PM · #196 |
| I fear the word "minimal". It runs counter to my motto, which is "Excess" |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 02:44:58 PM · #197 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
i have made the argument before in other threads and now its time for its own. I just dont understand why we can topaz the crap out of a picture and not give some dodge and burn to give the eyes some pop, or smooth out the skin, or selectively desaturate an image without planning the colors only to circumvent a rule anyhow, why cant we clone out out minor imperfections besides dust or hot pixels?
sign below: |
Sorry I`m late to the party - but why can`t you `topaz the crap` out of any photo you like Mike? Surely you shoot for pleasure and not solely for DPChallenge? DO what you like to your photos - we wont judge you on it - its just some can`t be entered into challenges - surely thats not a big issue when photography is a love & passion of yours. DPChallenge isn`t a photography contest anymore anyway - which is why I don`t really come here much anymore - I just visit to see the winning entries a couple of times a week and thats about it. Coming to DPC is like visiting a stagnant pond - i.e. nothing much changed since last time and slowly draining away to a shadow of its former lush self.. Hell, even half the site council cant be bothered with photography anymore - some probably haven't taken a photo on much more than an iPhone for the past 4/5 years. I give the site a maximum of two years before it either implodes or Langdon sells up and it becomes a sea of adverts and sponsorship...
Still, good luck on getting your changes! |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 02:48:20 PM · #198 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
...
I guess I don't understand the need to forbid cropping. When you do, you're basically turning minimal challenges into "setup" challenges. Is there a reason to avoid cropping? You're still composing the scene, you can just get rid of some extra, and that's not changing any of the development aspects of the challenge. Cropping on 2 sides would be sufficient in most cases, it would be much better than not cropping at all. :) |
I don't disagree with your point. However, the technique of composing my image through the viewfinder, especially wildlife images, has been very helpful to the success of my images. I try to remember to move my feet and shift left or right to align a desirable background with subject and move into a position with desirable light angle. These good management practices originated for me from a few experiences with the constraints of Minimal Editing. The best images come from captures which don't require any (or much) cropping. Sure, I do crop images in the real world (as opposed to the surreal world of DPC), but I am always happy to be able to use most of the pixels exposed on my sensor.
Message edited by author 2012-03-10 14:49:30. |
|
|
|
03/10/2012 02:59:53 PM · #199 |
I think the point being made is that advanced editing does, in fact, level the playing field more than basic/minimal editing. Also that there are inconsistencies in the latter rule set(s).
But what is so great about leveling the playing field? There will always be inequalities of one kind or another, perceived, imagined or real...The spirit of these less than advanced rule sets is a sort of time condensation: your consciousness is also more intense as you wield your instrument in the moment - previsualizing to be sure, but not endlessly into the dream world of postprocessing. And here is the beauty: you DON'T control EVERYTHING: you do what you can and let the rest happen. What are you doing that scares people so much?
At a deeper photographic level, St. Melethia has pointed out that one man's distraction is another man's treasure.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2012 03:09:49 PM · #200 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
... What I dislike even more than Basic, though, is Minimal. I simply have no idea why we would ever regard the out-of-camera image as something that should be a finished product. |
I think this misses the point, much as this whole discussion does. It's a "contest" with a set of arbitrary rules, as every contest must have. The goal isn't to produce a "finished product" so much as to make the best one can within the given rule set.
I fail to see why anything one can learn about photography from trying to make a good picture under restricted conditions will harm their ability to take pictures intended for other purposes than this little contest.
If you don't want to shoot "for" the contest, then don't. The vast majority of challenges are run under the Advanced rules anyway, I don't see what the big deal is. |
|
