New to Advanced Editing - DPChallenge Forums

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

12/28/2004 02:32:38 PM · #1

I'd like to make use of the exceptional opportunity to use advanced rules in the open challenge 'Mechanical'. I've never worked with that rule set, and I don't know how far the rule about dogding, burning and cloning can be stratched. Let's say you have an over-exposed background, but there still remain some details. Can you just make them disappear by dodging them to pure white, or is this the same as creating new elements? E.g. there's a sky with a cloud: cloning out the cloud is creating new sky, isn't it?
I'm sorry for bringing up this old question again, I've read about it so often, but now I'm not so sure anymore...I want to avoid any possibility of being DQ'ed. Thanks.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

12/28/2004 03:12:52 PM · #2

I'm new here also, but htis seems crystal-clear to me:

Selective Editing: Adjustments can be made selectively to your photo. Cloning, dodging, burning, etc. to improve your photo or remove imperfections or minor distracting elements, etc. is acceptable. However, using any editing tools to duplicate, create, or move major elements of your photograph is not permitted.

In your hypothetical example, removing a single cloud would seem to me well within the rules. Cloning the cloud to make it larger would not be, IMO. The key here is it's ok "to remove imperfections or minor distracting elements." It seems to me the rule's designed to keep you from constructing new elements in the image, primarily.

But then, what do I know except what I read? (grin)

(robt)

Message edited by author 2004-12-28 15:13:25.

graphicfunk

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

12/28/2004 03:42:13 PM · #3

Bear music is correct here. If you have a lot of this to eradicate, you can select what you want to keep and apply a levels adjustment to the remainder. This will reduce the dodging. Then after you finish tweaking you can reselect the same area and apply a little gb to make things look even. However, use caution because selection tools may leave artifacts and fringes. there is the matting command but of you are not familiar, you can blow up your work and examine the edges for stray pixels. These may be cloned out.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/28/2004 04:14:20 PM · #4

Is it legal to 'paint' in the adjustment layers? It would be another way of applying levels, curves or whatever to a limited area. PSP9 lets me manipulate adjusment layers like mask layers. If I paint black inside an adjustment layer, it doesn't apply to the dark areas. I could thus for example push saturation for a specific area, darkening the saturation layer all around that area and leave the rest of the picture untouched without any fringes or noise.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

12/28/2004 04:48:13 PM · #5

Originally posted by gloda:

This sounds like using a mask with an adjustment layer in Photoshop, and should be OK.

What you are "painting" is the mask -- and you are actually just altering the selection, not painting pixels.

As long as you are not painting on the actual image layers you should be fine.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/28/2004 04:51:14 PM · #6

Thanks, that's gonna help me a lot. So I can also use mask layers for USM with a duplicate layer of the original? To sharpen the detailed parts less than those which turned out a bit blurry?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

12/28/2004 05:00:42 PM · #7

Originally posted by gloda:

Thanks, that's gonna help me a lot. So I can also use mask layers for USM with a duplicate layer of the original? To sharpen the detailed parts less than those which turned out a bit blurry?

I think so, although any time you get into moving pixels around you are heading into the gray areas of the rules. Although USM and, actually, all other filters, are explicitly allowed under the Advanced rules, any photo can still be DQ'd if any are used "too much."

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/28/2004 05:11:12 PM · #8

Hmm... I guess I'll prefer some comments about part of the picture being out of focus rather than running any risk of being dq'ed. I'll just apply USM to the whole of the image.
I have to get rid of my Ixus! I need something with a manual control over the aperture...then I don't have to worry about all of this.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

12/28/2004 07:47:18 PM · #9

Originally posted by gloda:

You can apply USM selectively without any worry of DQ, IMO. In order to get DQ'd for something like that you'd have to apply it to an extent that the image was radically changed. If the aim of your application of the USM or other filter is to improve the photograph and not to create a non-photographic artwork, then you are fine.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/28/2004 07:57:57 PM · #10

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by gloda:
Hmm... I guess I'll prefer some comments about part of the picture being out of focus rather than running any risk of being dq'ed. I'll just apply USM to the whole of the image.
I have to get rid of my Ixus! I need something with a manual control over the aperture...then I don't have to worry about all of this.

You can apply USM selectively without any worry of DQ, IMO. In order to get DQ'd for something like that you'd have to apply it to an extent that the image was radically changed. If the aim of your application of the USM or other filter is to improve the photograph and not to create a non-photographic artwork, then you are fine.

Indeed ... I got away with turning

into

under the original rules, which were much more restrictive than the Advanced rules today. Of course, today it could be DQ'd : )