| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/14/2012 12:29:10 AM · #1 |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 05:42:38 AM · #2 |
Thanks for the links Lydia.
Just a quick reminder to those who forgot to look - it's minimal editing.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2012 06:12:48 AM · #3 |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 08:37:09 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
bleh, minimal... |
that should inspire people |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 08:40:25 AM · #5 |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 08:45:01 AM · #6 |
good answer.
but seeing as participation is a little low these days how 'bout we try to encourage instead of discourage?
personally I find minimal editing quite a personal challenge and very fun |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 08:46:57 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by Dudski:
personally I find minimal editing quite a personal challenge and very fun |
+1
I have the same idea.
I like editing my photos, but I love this kind of challenges :) |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 11:01:49 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
Originally posted by Dudski:
personally I find minimal editing quite a personal challenge and very fun |
+1
I have the same idea.
I like editing my photos, but I love this kind of challenges :) |
+2
|
|
|
|
12/14/2012 12:07:33 PM · #9 |
| Im actually glad it is, I have zero skill in editing and def a beginner. Hopefully this way I can use my "skill" in photography to capture something.. ha :) |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 12:11:05 PM · #10 |
| Carrie, I know you are going from strenght to strenght and a ribbon will be yours before you know it. |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 12:15:48 PM · #11 |
| Oh good! I was hoping for a minimal soon so I could see what I could do with my new lx7 :) |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 01:18:33 PM · #12 |
Time to book a trip.
I know exactly what I want to shoot for this, but getting there could be nigh impossible. |
|
|
|
12/14/2012 03:12:35 PM · #13 |
Minimal for Textures means it is ALL about the right lighting from the get go... after my last Minimal fail (OK, it was a smidge above 50% at 5.4), i will be putting extra effort into the "WOW" look
only one of the past Texture challenges was Advanced, rest were Basic/Classic
-m
|
|
|
|
12/14/2012 04:42:09 PM · #14 |
got the perfect idea. I remember shooting something a few months ago... just "testing" different settings... time to shoot again.
inspired. :) |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 07:32:02 PM · #15 |
I love minimal editing challenges. Even though I usually apply a Basic Editing level of post-processing, it kind of makes me do my homework in a sense, by requiring me to manipulate the lighting beforehand, frame my shot exactly as I want it, etc.
About resizing, though, is "Save for Web..." still allowed? There are so many restrictions on customizable modifications that I thought maybe certain types of saving/resizing aren't kosher. Anyone know? |
|
|
|
12/17/2012 11:16:54 PM · #16 |
"SaveForWeb" affects the compression level and file size (in KB), not the size of the image in pixels (which is what "resizing" usually refers to).
In Minimal editing you can resize/resample the image (reduce to DPC entry size of 160-800 pixels/side) in ONE step only. You are free to use SaveForWeb to optimize the file size to just-under 300KB. |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 12:16:17 AM · #17 |
Just curious...
When you resize your image in Photoshop CS6 there are six different options to manage how the pixels will be treated. This selection, in my mind, would be a form of customization, and wouldn't be allowed in Minimal. Just my opinion based on the situation with Lightroom.
With Lightroom, on export (essentially save for web), you can select low, standard or high sharpening. I do know it is illegal and have had that confirmed by the SC.
So I can use Lightroom and have no ability to sharpen; or I can use Photoshop, and sharpen at two different steps, one of which has multiple options. Is that right?
Not trying to stir the pot... just looking to get the hard info so I have something lengthy and detailed to talk about on the bus to ensure no one sits near me. |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 12:41:46 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Just curious...
When you resize your image in Photoshop CS6 there are six different options to manage how the pixels will be treated. This selection, in my mind, would be a form of customization, and wouldn't be allowed in Minimal. Just my opinion based on the situation with Lightroom.
With Lightroom, on export (essentially save for web), you can select low, standard or high sharpening. I do know it is illegal and have had that confirmed by the SC.
So I can use Lightroom and have no ability to sharpen; or I can use Photoshop, and sharpen at two different steps, one of which has multiple options. Is that right?
Not trying to stir the pot... just looking to get the hard info so I have something lengthy and detailed to talk about on the bus to ensure no one sits near me. |
I'm very curious about this too. I tried all the six resize options and picked the one I thought looked best, is that legal? If not which one is legal? There didn't seem to be a default standard one, or at least the default one it always picks prefers gradients, which is a horrible choice if you are resizing to a smaller resolution. |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 03:15:11 AM · #19 |
why not use a cutom photo resize application like FastStone Photo Resizer or Free Picture Resize to take out the worry...
i personally use Irfnview to resize all my stuff for DPC and email and dont have any issues or lose quality that is noticeable at 800 pixels that way its not needing Photoshop at all and you can batch them and set the file size to 300kb and pixel length along the longest edge to 800 and its done in seconds without even touching photoshop which would be pointless in basic and minimal and saves possible problems with getting your entries queried or disqualified, problem solved and i think unless we change the title of this site to digital photoshop challenge then these types of basic and minimal challenges are great!!!
Message edited by author 2012-12-18 03:17:18. |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 03:22:32 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Just curious...
When you resize your image in Photoshop CS6 there are six different options to manage how the pixels will be treated. This selection, in my mind, would be a form of customization, and wouldn't be allowed in Minimal. Just my opinion based on the situation with Lightroom.
With Lightroom, on export (essentially save for web), you can select low, standard or high sharpening. I do know it is illegal and have had that confirmed by the SC.
So I can use Lightroom and have no ability to sharpen; or I can use Photoshop, and sharpen at two different steps, one of which has multiple options. Is that right?
Not trying to stir the pot... just looking to get the hard info so I have something lengthy and detailed to talk about on the bus to ensure no one sits near me. |
i would stay clear of both lightroom and photoshop and their equvalents for minimal and basic to be safe and rely on your camera skills full stop! imho |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 05:17:37 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by GAP2012:
why not use a cutom photo resize application like FastStone Photo Resizer or Free Picture Resize to take out the worry...
i personally use Irfnview to resize all my stuff for DPC and email and dont have any issues or lose quality that is noticeable at 800 pixels that way its not needing Photoshop at all and you can batch them and set the file size to 300kb and pixel length along the longest edge to 800 and its done in seconds without even touching photoshop which would be pointless in basic and minimal and saves possible problems with getting your entries queried or disqualified, problem solved and i think unless we change the title of this site to digital photoshop challenge then these types of basic and minimal challenges are great!!! |
Well, as for your question of why not, the reason is because I don't have that software and using what I do have is easier than downloading additional processing software. I agree with your honest opinion. I'm not interested in these challenges becoming photoshop contests either, which is why I inquired in the first place to ensure I'm within the regulations of Minimal Editing and keeping the playing field level. |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 06:56:33 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by samrusoff:
Originally posted by GAP2012:
why not use a cutom photo resize application like FastStone Photo Resizer or Free Picture Resize to take out the worry...
i personally use Irfnview to resize all my stuff for DPC and email and dont have any issues or lose quality that is noticeable at 800 pixels that way its not needing Photoshop at all and you can batch them and set the file size to 300kb and pixel length along the longest edge to 800 and its done in seconds without even touching photoshop which would be pointless in basic and minimal and saves possible problems with getting your entries queried or disqualified, problem solved and i think unless we change the title of this site to digital photoshop challenge then these types of basic and minimal challenges are great!!! |
Well, as for your question of why not, the reason is because I don't have that software and using what I do have is easier than downloading additional processing software. I agree with your honest opinion. I'm not interested in these challenges becoming photoshop contests either, which is why I inquired in the first place to ensure I'm within the regulations of Minimal Editing and keeping the playing field level. |
Infranview is free, small, and, to me, the best way to comply with the Minimal Editing ruleset.
-It has convert to greyscale with no customization
-The sharpening is not customizable
-The resize/resample is straightforward
-The save feature let's you select file size and quality AND remembers your most recent settings so you don't have to keep selecting
Google it, get it, and install it. You'll be set now and forever for Minimal challenges.
-m |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 10:05:55 AM · #23 |
I agree with you guys that there is software available to resize without fear of breaking the minimal rule set.
I'd wager, though, that at least 65% of submissions will be resized with Photoshop, and at that stage the user has six different options of how the pixels are treated. (By the way, these options are: bicubic, bicubic automatic, bicubic sharper, bicubic smoother, bilinear and nearest neighbor.)
Shirley this is worth discussion? Either there's a blunt force way to resize without applying one of these choices, or it seems like using Photoshop would be illegal in the Minimal rule set. |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 12:57:30 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
I agree with you guys that there is software available to resize without fear of breaking the minimal rule set.
I'd wager, though, that at least 65% of submissions will be resized with Photoshop, and at that stage the user has six different options of how the pixels are treated. (By the way, these options are: bicubic, bicubic automatic, bicubic sharper, bicubic smoother, bilinear and nearest neighbor.)
Shirley this is worth discussion? Either there's a blunt force way to resize without applying one of these choices, or it seems like using Photoshop would be illegal in the Minimal rule set. |
I think the same resize/resampling options also need to be selected from in InfranView, too... So hard to escape the general question. |
|
|
|
12/18/2012 01:36:36 PM · #25 |
Lets keep in mind that all these resize settings are standard interpolation algorithms that are not doing anything fancy. For the most part the results all look similar.
The problem is that there is no default resize interpolation, so are any of them valid?
What would make FastStone any more valid? I'm sure under the hood it just uses some variant of the Bicubic interpolation. |
|
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: 07/31/2025 02:22:21 AM EDT.
