| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/30/2004 12:19:19 PM · #1 |
My image has just been DQ'ed for the following reasons. (was doing pretty well too)
"The use of tools to move, change, add, or remove major elements (including backgrounds) is not permitted."
Obviously this is correct and I am not posting this to disagree at all with the decission. Admittedly the BG changed, as did the eyes nose and mouth - however this has been done in several of my past entries which have all been OKed by the SC. Such as removing several trees from an otherwise blank photo, changing skies, altering color of main subject etc etc.
I wonder where the line is drawn sometimes..
Any takers?
 |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 12:25:00 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
I wonder where the line is drawn sometimes... |
It's not drawn per se, it's more like a somewhat slack rope floating on a pond, slowly meandering back and forth in response to the wind and waves of the moment. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 12:25:05 PM · #3 |
| i am not sure about the DQ aspect of the shot (out of interest, might be worth posting your original) but i'm deeply saddened that this was thrown out - it was one of only 4 that kind of made me laughed, and this mostly so. it was also the only ten i gave out of the whole challenge (though i've got just a few more to vote on). i thought this was stonkingly and expertly done, looks brilliant and is hilariously comic. you're a genius, matey. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 12:26:56 PM · #4 |
It seems to me that the comical effect of the eyes and the mouth have been created, probably, by pulling around elements in photoshop. This, for me, goes beyond 'photographic integrity' and into photographic manipulation.
A background, or unwanted element is a different matter. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 12:28:11 PM · #5 |
| I expected a DQ on that one, though I didn't request it- sorry! It's a judgement call sometimes, but there's little doubt here that you've moved/altered major elements. The primary feature of the shot relies on the facial distortions created in PS. That's only allowed on "anything goes" challenges like Halloween. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 12:35:51 PM · #6 |
First: Very funny. Well, I have been pleading for a change of the advance editing to have then moved up to creative editing. In their place rewrite the advance editing to close the loopholes. Look at what has taken place: we can now use framing variations, and in the masters' a pastel filter was used which changed the integrity of the actual pixels. It was done in good taste and I complain none of either, but my argument remains: where does it stop? The feeling is for us to go ahead and push the envelope and they will decide if it is going to fly or not. I am sorry, but there is too much ambiguity here.
In this case, they can say that you deformed, thereby changed. While this is very apparent what about those other images with filters that change the look but only in more subtle manner.
Well, until they address this there will be some ideas that will get accepted and some that will be rejected. It is a mess.
Message edited by author 2004-11-30 12:37:51. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 12:39:13 PM · #7 |
We should get these two kids together.
Can you imagine what their children would look like!
PS...yours was my highest rakned entry. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 12:58:31 PM · #8 |
well there goes my highest vote. I do have to admit however that i'm not suprised it was DQ'd. You did significantly modify the main subject of the photo. I would still like to see this one stick around on DPC, it was quite fun to look at. Sorry about the DQ' and nice work.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:00:22 PM · #9 |
TUTORIAL!!
I think every photographer's kid should have a photo that cool to show their friends! That's really neat, jon! |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:04:54 PM · #10 |
| What did you do with the poor girl? But,I like the effect :-) |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:09:21 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
TUTORIAL!!
I think every photographer's kid should have a photo that cool to show their friends! That's really neat, jon! |
Plllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllease post a tutorial on this!!! I would like to do this with animals too!! :-)
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:15:33 PM · #12 |
We've got a company spnosored photo club started at work and our rule on photo editing for our contests is "the finished product must be more about photography and less about editing."
Since the main subject of the photo is the crazy eyes, and that was created in photoshop, I'd have to say this one was more about the editing (unless here eyes are really like that!).
Great image by the way. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:15:54 PM · #13 |
It can easily be done using the liquefy filter in Photoshop! Great photo BTW Jon! I had a feeling however that it was going to be DQ'd (was not me btw).
That filter is amazing to make frowning people smile! :D
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:20:09 PM · #14 |
| Jon, can you please post the original of that? |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:21:43 PM · #15 |
On a slight tangent, a compositional technique I learned recently for doing the classic landscape shots in the style of David Muench, is to shoot wide angle, with a close up foreground subject. Then in photoshop select the foreground object and use the scale/ transform options to make it look bigger, giving the more traditional landscape style.
I'd be curious if that would fly here, given this current DQ.
In vague defence or at least for consideration, the majority of the 'classic' film style versions are achieved using roughly equivalent tricks, with large format cameras and manipulating the film plane angle to the lens to further distort the image.
More and more the 'advanced' editing rules don't feel very advanced.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:24:54 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
That filter is amazing to make frowning people smile! :D |
And for slimming people up also. Great tool. For example
And if you notice that by the icon to the left...MALE. (C:
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:26:11 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by jonpink:
I wonder where the line is drawn sometimes... |
It's not drawn per se, it's more like a somewhat slack rope floating on a pond, slowly meandering back and forth in response to the wind and waves of the moment. |
Thats funny
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:37:24 PM · #18 |
Thanks for kind words :D
I think Gordon sums up the point, in where by the Advanced editing rules seem to now be going backward in what is allowed.
It is edited, although out of the majority of my top rated images, less so than most.
There is nothing there that wasn't there in the first place, an nothing has been removed. Rather the key features have been highlighted (enlarged) to draw attention to them which is an age-old traditional photography technique. As one can see the girl was pulling a very odd face in the first place.
I will create a tutorial on how it was done along with the original. Basics involved the liquefy mask, but there are a few tricks to make it less warped and pixelated (of which that tool is notorious!)
JP
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:49:33 PM · #19 |
I just played with the liquefy filter...cool.
Gordon - your reference to Muench - is that one photo or compbining 2 shots? 2 shots wouuld not be legal
However, if your camera is capable of mutli exposure, you could in theory take several shots in one frame (via black here and light there along with long exposures) and then move elements in that one image (via cloning , which is permitted) and create a whole new image...from one 'legally'.
I prefer the rules at www.fujimugs.com. There as here the end result is a photograph, but there are no rules about editing there. The last winner was 9 shots combined into one (fruit and vegetable) - but you could get the same image in one shot. To me it does not matter, have more 'anything goes' so to speak and see what evolves!
Their rules (other than size, one submission, no posting elsewhere)
Any post-processing you wish to perform is allowed, but you must specify all post-processing (resizing and sharpening are assumed - you do not need to mention resizing and/or sharpening unless you want to include USM details, etc.).
Nobody get's DQd and the pics are better, on average, than here.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 01:56:10 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
To me it does not matter, have more 'anything goes' so to speak and see what evolves! |
Photography is about skill behind a camera in creating an image, not skill on photoshop.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 02:03:49 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
Gordon - your reference to Muench - is that one photo or compbining 2 shots? 2 shots wouuld not be legal
However, if your camera is capable of mutli exposure, you could in theory take several shots in one frame (via black here and light there along with long exposures) and then move elements in that one image (via cloning , which is permitted) and create a whole new image...from one 'legally'. |
It has nothing to do with multiple exposures or multiple images. It is a tool in photoshop that allows you to stretch certain areas of the image, like making the bottom wider than the top. The same sort of tool as rotate - skew, distort, perspective etc. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 02:10:50 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
I prefer the rules at //www.fujimugs.com. There as here the end result is a photograph, but there are no rules about editing there. The last winner was 9 shots combined into one (fruit and vegetable) - but you could get the same image in one shot. To me it does not matter, have more 'anything goes' so to speak and see what evolves!
Their rules (other than size, one submission, no posting elsewhere)
Any post-processing you wish to perform is allowed, but you must specify all post-processing (resizing and sharpening are assumed - you do not need to mention resizing and/or sharpening unless you want to include USM details, etc.).
|
Wish I had a Fuji! :) Sounds like a fun alternative when the creative spirit strikes. :)
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 02:12:00 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Rankles:
Originally posted by bestagents:
To me it does not matter, have more 'anything goes' so to speak and see what evolves! |
Photography is about skill behind a camera in creating an image, not skill on photoshop. |
I use to think that and spent many a long time trying to emulate the photographs I see only to find out that they are manipulated out of the wahoo. The difference is they just look natural. In the 'world' of photography buyers want to buy something that looks good in the end product. |
|
|
|
11/30/2004 02:18:01 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Rankles:
Originally posted by bestagents:
To me it does not matter, have more 'anything goes' so to speak and see what evolves! |
Photography is about skill behind a camera in creating an image, not skill on photoshop. |
Art is in the eye of the beholder. The Vision of the artist is what matters most, not how it is achieved.
While one's ability to use PS may exceed yours (or mine) does not mean they should not be allowed to use it. You may have a better 'eye', or more time, a better camera, lens, etc. To limit your tools is to limit your vision.
It is pre-emptive Art sensorship.
|
|
|
|
11/30/2004 02:49:13 PM · #25 |
moving elements around the photo is not permitted actually.
Originally posted by bestagents:
and then move elements in that one image (via cloning , which is permitted) and create a whole new image...from one 'legally'.
|
Message edited by author 2004-11-30 14:49:38.
|
|
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: 09/13/2025 04:38:43 PM EDT.
