| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/17/2004 03:41:08 PM · #26 |
Rotate, crop, downsize and sharpen would be the only manipulations allowed.
Along with "Contrast and Saturation" and you have all the basic tools necessary. Only then, I would go for this.... what about dust specks and dead pixels? Now you are right where we are anyway.
When I shoot film my goal is to achieve the brightest color along with the darkest blacks and whitest light areas without loosing details.
When I shoot digital, my goal is simply to capture the most useable data. If I set my digital camera up to shoot as you propose here, like I would film. I would simply not have as much data available and would not be able to get the rich colors and details I may want. With the flat unsharpened low contrast file to work with, I simply have more control of the image and a greater chance of getting to my desired result. If the data isn't there, I have nothing to work with. Changing the workflow is counter productive. What would be gained by out-of the camera images? Less of a window to work with would only give me lower quality images. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 03:47:32 PM · #27 |
Even with slide film you need to make a choice of film because of its color and exposure properties. So you are already making an editing decision regarding the look of the final image. It is also common for slide users to use a special tape for cropping their images on the actual slide.
T
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:07:48 PM · #28 |
A no editing challenge doesn't have to be viewed as denying 125 years of photographic heritage. It can just be an exercise for those among us who have not yet mastered photoshop to the level of feeling comfortable competing on those skills. Most of the newer members don't have a film background yet they still desire to learn. Why can't there be a single challenge that doesn't appeal that much to the more successful among us? The photos in The Past are not substandard in any way.
I'd be willing to bet that there was a time when Ansel Adams showed one of his early unedited shots to someone else and asked for their opinion.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:16:23 PM · #29 |
| I'm not against having a "no edits" challenge once in a great while. I did enter the "Past" challenge and had fun with it. But it doesn't represent what I think is my best work. My entry for the impressionism challenge should be banned from my portfolio and simply not allowed to be seen on DPChallenge, But it was fun... once in a while. I will never be able to use either of those pictures again in my life. To take pictures I can't use or worse, not proud of, is a pointless waste of time. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:16:31 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
A no editing challenge doesn't have to be viewed as denying 125 years of photographic heritage. It can just be an exercise for those among us who have not yet mastered photoshop to the level of feeling comfortable competing on those skills. Most of the newer members don't have a film background yet they still desire to learn. Why can't there be a single challenge that doesn't appeal that much to the more successful among us? The photos in The Past are not substandard in any way.
I'd be willing to bet that there was a time when Ansel Adams showed one of his early unedited shots to someone else and asked for their opinion. |
I'm guessing that their opinion was that it needed editing :) It's really not a bad idea but the mass voters are going to make a lot of decision based on colors and vote higher for more saturated and contrasty photos. Incidently what is the difference between cranking up the saturation in-camera as apposed to your image editor? They are both forms of editing with the problem of in-camera settings being difficult or impossible to reverse if you are using jpeg or tiff. I just think that most people aren't going to vote with these considerations they are just going to vote highly for the ones they like.
T
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:21:14 PM · #31 |
I think in a no editing challenge people with advanced cameras will have advantages like using custom curves and all. You could shoot a scene and then do a curve for it and then load that into your camera. The result you get is straight from the camera. It will not be like something that's carefully processed later, but it would still be an advantage and legal in a no editing challenge. But if you think about it, you have already edited it before taking the shot :)
edit: typo typo & typo
Message edited by author 2004-11-17 16:21:49. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:36:17 PM · #32 |
Yah but the its less complex the editing than in photoshop. in photoshop you can almost do a miracle and the no editing one would be what came out of the camera, just tha. With the the arranjments made in photoshop to make the photo valid for the challenge, like, crop ,150k etc etc. And people would vote like they do on the other challenges, photos they like get higher and the ones they don't like get lower, theres no voting low for to much of photoshop use. I think that way its more like what people see without help of a program, just point and shot. that would be really cool. People how don't like that would not submit there photos. I do not particpipate in all challenges, some of them don't ring a bell to me. So i stay of. If this site started out with no editing rules from the begining people would participate any other way. and they would be asking for editing rules by now. I think it would be a nice challenge for the more atique people, who like that type of photography, just almost pure from the cam. Sorry my misspelled words.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 04:42:47 PM · #33 |
| I can hook my camera up to the computer and completly adjust all the settings and snap the picture without touching the camera. (I would call that un unfair advantage) The end result would be a picture that looks great on the monitor, but is lacking all the normal color and curves I would use to print. I wouldn't be able to put that data back into the file, so I wouldn't be able to use it for anything outside of DPChallenge. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:06:10 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
A no editing challenge doesn't have to be viewed as denying 125 years of photographic heritage. It can just be an exercise for those among us who have not yet mastered photoshop to the level of feeling comfortable competing on those skills. Most of the newer members don't have a film background yet they still desire to learn. Why can't there be a single challenge that doesn't appeal that much to the more successful among us? The photos in The Past are not substandard in any way.
I'd be willing to bet that there was a time when Ansel Adams showed one of his early unedited shots to someone else and asked for their opinion. |
Sure, but why? Why dumb down the contest? I mean, this site is about a friendly competition trying to produce your best work (work you can be proud of). it's not for money, it's not for fame. It's about bettering yourself through a little competition. What does anyone gain by putting handicaps on everyone? You certainly don't learn if you're not challenged to go beyond your present skill set |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:40:56 PM · #35 |
Hanlomba so your saying that photos that don't pass by photoshop don't have quality, only photoshop photos are good?
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 05:48:49 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by hanlomba:
...
You certainly don't learn if you're not challenged to go beyond your present skill set |
The challenge here is to improve your basic photography skills - i.e. exposure, composition, etc. If you can improve those think how much better your starting point for digital editing will be. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:05:07 PM · #37 |
I think knowing how to process your images once they come out of the camera is a basic photography skill.
If photography is about producing images then it doesn't stop once you press the shutter. It carries through to the presentation of the image.
Imagine if this was a film photography site where some members new how to use a darkroom and others sent their negs off to a department store for processing. Would the people using the department store say that the others had an unfair advantage and there should be a "department store challenge" or would they realise that they were lacking a basic skill in their chosen field. In the same way they saved or whatever to get a camera they would save or whatever to rectify the deficiency in their toolbox ie. organise some sort of access to a darkroom and learn how to get their images just right.
Originally posted by joebok:
Originally posted by hanlomba:
...
You certainly don't learn if you're not challenged to go beyond your present skill set |
The challenge here is to improve your basic photography skills - i.e. exposure, composition, etc. If you can improve those think how much better your starting point for digital editing will be. |
typo
Message edited by author 2004-11-17 18:05:57. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:07:28 PM · #38 |
I think this could also work in the reverse way. Point and shoot cameras often produce pictures that right out of the camera have better sharpness, contrast, saturation, etc., while a DSLR may be intended to need more postprocessing by design -- giving the photographer more control over the process instead of having it controlled by the camera's preprogrammed processing. It would be interesting to see, but I'm not so sure that the person using a good quality P&S camera wouldn't have an advantage.
Originally posted by xion:
I think in a no editing challenge people with advanced cameras will have advantages like using custom curves and all. You could shoot a scene and then do a curve for it and then load that into your camera. The result you get is straight from the camera. It will not be like something that's carefully processed later, but it would still be an advantage and legal in a no editing challenge. But if you think about it, you have already edited it before taking the shot :)
edit: typo typo & typo |
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:11:01 PM · #39 |
| To add to my previous post. In terms of digital photography a time came when I realised that buying the camera and lenses wasn't the end of the journey I had to learn how to post process and get hold of some decent software and I've learn't a great deal about that from this site. The Images that win ribbons here challenge we to learn all about photography all the way to the presentation of the final image. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:11:42 PM · #40 |
From a voting standpoint I can only see this being successful if every photographer used the very same camera with the very same color and exposure qualities. Otherwise most people are going to be trying to crank up settings in their cameras which is still a form of editing to me even if legal. One of the purposes of this site is to help us learn how to take a digital photo with the most information in it so that we can then process it in an image editor to produce the best image possible. Cranking up certain settings in-camera interferes with this approach and isn't promoting the best digital workflow. Restricing many things, which the challenge themes already do, helps us to become better photographers but restricting our ability to produce the best images possible only hurts us.
T
Message edited by author 2004-11-17 18:12:49.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:15:01 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by digitaldave:
I think this could also work in the reverse way. Point and shoot cameras often produce pictures that right out of the camera have better sharpness, contrast, saturation, etc., while a DSLR may be intended to need more postprocessing by design -- giving the photographer more control over the process instead of having it controlled by the camera's preprogrammed processing. It would be interesting to see, but I'm not so sure that the person using a good quality P&S camera wouldn't have an advantage.
Originally posted by xion:
I think in a no editing challenge people with advanced cameras will have advantages like using custom curves and all. You could shoot a scene and then do a curve for it and then load that into your camera. The result you get is straight from the camera. It will not be like something that's carefully processed later, but it would still be an advantage and legal in a no editing challenge. But if you think about it, you have already edited it before taking the shot :)
edit: typo typo & typo |
|
Well actually, the was my point. dSLRs can be used like that too. I mentioned custom curves for the same reason. You can do the same things a point and shoot can do in-camera with custom settings. Like Gringo mentioned, you could watch it on your computer and adjust the settings before you take the shot. The result would be out of the camera, but adjusted to your tastes.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:16:26 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by enigmania:
I think knowing how to process your images once they come out of the camera is a basic photography skill.
|
Maybe - but it is separable, why not separate to concentrate on one aspect?
Originally posted by enigmania:
Imagine if this was a film photography site where some members new how to use a darkroom and others sent their negs off to a department store for processing. Would the people using the department store say that the others had an unfair advantage and there should be a "department store challenge" or would they realise that they were lacking a basic skill in their chosen field. In the same way they saved or whatever to get a camera they would save or whatever to rectify the deficiency in their toolbox ie. organise some sort of access to a darkroom and learn how to get their images just right.
|
Actually, I have taken some photography classes - the ones I've taken want you to use slide film. The reason is that unlike prints, very little is done by the lab to correct for over/under exposure and such - so that what you get on the slide is as close to what you exposed as possible. This emphasizes learning correct exposure, which I believe is a valuable skill. Digital, like film, is capable of recording only a depth of about 5 stops of light - the eye can see something like 12. Learning these limitations and how to choose a scene that your camera can handle is, in my humble opinion, worth doing. A "no edit" rule set would, I believe, give people some interesting insight into their own skills and methods.
Message edited by author 2004-11-17 18:21:45. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:28:36 PM · #43 |
There are cameras at this moment that you can make multiple exposure and by the rules posted on this site its ilegal to do it on photoshop but since that camera does it its, legal. and there are cameras that have strobe flash and some don't so where all on the same boat some have more advantage than others in somethings at this point. Someone said on a thread befor that this site wasn't about winning anything but experience so if you like to play with the rules do but your just cheating your self and that breaks the fun.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 06:52:44 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Discraft:
Hanlomba so your saying that photos that don't pass by photoshop don't have quality, only photoshop photos are good? |
Well that's just silly. Of course not. However, to deny that part of photography is also silly. Basic skills such as shutter, aperture, composition...are the skeleton that photography is built on. They are essential. However, the fleshing out is also important. The cross processing, push vs pull processing, dodging, burning, printing, emulsions, the list goes on and on. All of these effects are applied AFTER the initial exposure. Digital photography is no different in that respect. I'm definitely not saying that the skeleton isn't important. It absolutely is. But it ain't all. Not by a long shot. |
|
|
|
11/17/2004 07:06:54 PM · #45 |
So there you go. That would be peoples choice on going to the challenge that has no editing, were you have to me more creative to take the picture and think in advance, by thinking already in the final product. After digital the common cameras people had where point and shoot they would go out shoot and wait for the result, i'm not talking about profissionals, or interested in the hobby. People had to go to the shop the have them developed. That was your final product so i guess it wouldn't hurt a try.
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 11:02:01 PM · #46 |
I agree with you that it is well worth learning how to expose properly in the first place. I'm still getting the hang of it myself.
However I'm not sure of the value in seperating from the editing stage. I sometimes shoot something intentionally dark to make sure I don't blow out the sky because I know it will be easier to bring the shadows back out in Photoshop than it would be to bring the sky back if I blow it out. You can improve your images in Photoshop but you can't replace detail in images that are overexposed. Therefore using editing software doesn't negate the need to know how to use the camera properly.
What I'm saying here is that I use an awareness of what I'm going to do with the image data when I download it as one of the factors when deciding what settings to use when I shoot the image. I don't believe that seperating the two processes for individual study has any real value.
Having said all that I'm not opposed to the idea of a "no-editing challenge" I just don't see it as being of much value.
PS: Actually, I've just thought of a reason. It would help me to learn how to set up my camera's presets for sharpening, contrast, saturation etc. This could be useful if I'm ever running out of memory and need to switch from RAW to JPEG to save space. :)
Originally posted by joebok:
Originally posted by enigmania:
I think knowing how to process your images once they come out of the camera is a basic photography skill.
|
Maybe - but it is separable, why not separate to concentrate on one aspect?
Originally posted by enigmania:
Imagine if this was a film photography site where some members new how to use a darkroom and others sent their negs off to a department store for processing. Would the people using the department store say that the others had an unfair advantage and there should be a "department store challenge" or would they realise that they were lacking a basic skill in their chosen field. In the same way they saved or whatever to get a camera they would save or whatever to rectify the deficiency in their toolbox ie. organise some sort of access to a darkroom and learn how to get their images just right.
|
Actually, I have taken some photography classes - the ones I've taken want you to use slide film. The reason is that unlike prints, very little is done by the lab to correct for over/under exposure and such - so that what you get on the slide is as close to what you exposed as possible. This emphasizes learning correct exposure, which I believe is a valuable skill. Digital, like film, is capable of recording only a depth of about 5 stops of light - the eye can see something like 12. Learning these limitations and how to choose a scene that your camera can handle is, in my humble opinion, worth doing. A "no edit" rule set would, I believe, give people some interesting insight into their own skills and methods. |
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 11:05:30 PM · #47 |
I'm all for a no editing challenge. NO EDITING! No cropping, no rotating...NOTHING!
|
|
|
|
11/17/2004 11:26:21 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by luv2photo:
I'm all for a no editing challenge. NO EDITING! No cropping, no rotating...NOTHING! |
I'm game, but better get your big monitors out as my pics are 3264x2448 out of the camera and better make room peeps cause they are 4 - 6 meg each.
Actually I'm ok with the no editing challenge. A lot of time I go out and shoot knowing that I can fix a pic to be whatever I need when I get home. Let's see some pics of what the photog and camera see at an instant in time.
Andy |
|
