| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/06/2005 10:09:24 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by gi_joe05:
I think as long as someone would post a tutorial about how to do it that would level the playing feild a bit and thus making it less controversial |
You've just hit the nail on the head!!! That's EXACTLY the issue.
The problem isn't that these techniques (color shift, D&B, etc) are cheating/unethical/too artsy/etc. I strongly believe the problem is that most people don't know how to do them well, and simply don't like being at a disadvantage.
Message edited by author 2005-04-06 22:09:50.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 10:12:08 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by sfboatright:
Originally posted by gi_joe05:
I think as long as someone would post a tutorial about how to do it that would level the playing feild a bit and thus making it less controversial |
You've just hit the nail on the head!!! That's EXACTLY the issue.
The problem isn't that these techniques (color shift, D&B, etc) are cheating/unethical/too artsy/etc. I strongly believe the problem is that most people don't know how to do them well, and simply don't like being at a disadvantage. |
And of course the funny thing is it's so EASY to do it's almost pathetic... Fortunately a bunch of DPCers spend time showing how to do such things on various htreads...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 10:25:15 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by sfboatright:
Originally posted by gi_joe05:
I think as long as someone would post a tutorial about how to do it that would level the playing feild a bit and thus making it less controversial |
You've just hit the nail on the head!!! That's EXACTLY the issue.
The problem isn't that these techniques (color shift, D&B, etc) are cheating/unethical/too artsy/etc. I strongly believe the problem is that most people don't know how to do them well, and simply don't like being at a disadvantage. |
So the logic goes "user doesn't know how technique is done, user sees shot using technique, user votes it down because (s)he feels disadvantaged?
Really, I don't think so. That line of thought is the same as the assumption that voters vote down good shots simply out of jealousy. Unsupportable, and judging by comments and score distributions, I strongly doubt this happens more than rarely.
Besides which, the technique has bee ncovered in a number of duscussions, and is, as Robert pointed out, insanely easy to do.
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 10:36:26 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by sfalice:
|
It may be true that someone can get their effect through PS, but I think we had more 'fun' getting ours. :) |
You bet.
Alice
|
|
|
|
04/06/2005 10:41:57 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by kpriest:
And not only will they not be DQ'd, they will not be voted down because of these types of edits and could win ribbons even if they don't meet the challenge rules - literally or in spirit. |
I would disagree with this. I think they will get voted down when they are detected. Mine scored fairly well because it was not detectable and the photo was clean. |
Beg to differ... (2nd place) and as the person who first posted this here said: "does it get any more obvious than this?" or something to that effect. :)
 |
|
|
|
04/06/2005 10:42:45 PM · #56 |
Every once in a while I see a post suggesting that the use of a particular technique gives an unfair advantage to those who use it. If it's legal, then why can't you use the same technique? If it's because you don't agree with what's allowed in the rules, then go someplace else. You agreed to those rules when you entered.
Those who live in scenic areas have an unfair advantage
Those with beautiful girl/boyfriends have an unfair advantage
Those with DSLRs have an unfair advantage
Those with studio lights or $1000+ lenses have an unfair advantage
Those with decades of film experience have an unfair advantage
Those who've mastered Photoshop have an unfair advantage
The list goes on...
Unless we restrict everybody to the same camera, software, location, etc. there will always be inequalities. I'm pretty sure that Kiwiness or JJBeguin would still clobber me in a Free Study even if they were restricted to a 3 megapixel point and shoot camera and an empty room. Oh well. I'm not going to just throw my hands up and surrender on a portrait challenge because I don't live in Thailand. Use your imagination and determination to make the best of whatever you have.
Message edited by author 2005-04-06 22:45:09. |
|
|
|
04/06/2005 11:09:12 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Every once in a while I see a post suggesting that the use of a particular technique gives an unfair advantage to those who use it. If it's legal, then why can't you use the same technique? If it's because you don't agree with what's allowed in the rules, then go someplace else. You agreed to those rules when you entered.
Those who live in scenic areas have an unfair advantage
Those with beautiful girl/boyfriends have an unfair advantage
Those with DSLRs have an unfair advantage
Those with studio lights or $1000+ lenses have an unfair advantage
Those with decades of film experience have an unfair advantage
Those who've mastered Photoshop have an unfair advantage
The list goes on...
Use your imagination and determination to make the best of whatever you have. |
Use your imagination and determination to make the best of whatever you have.
This is the key and a very well said statement!
I for one only have one of the above advantages listed above, but it doesn't make me a better photographer. Living in Southern CA has it's advantages, but I still have real-world interferences like time. I still make use of my ebay camera that is now over 5 years old, lens adaptors, and essentially everything I own can fit in my camera bag (small one). No fancy nuthin!
Because I happen to be driven to do better each and every time I click the shutter to that last adjustment in PS, I have looked, and read, and tried (and failed), but have learned. It takes time and passion.
I used to (and once in a while still do) feel something is unfair, but only because I don't know how, and by golly I will figure out how to learn it or get around it!
Being away from photography for over 10 years, then jumping right back in the fire has been a learning curve. Self-taught everything. Many of the masters on this site have forgotten more than I have ever known, but it didn't stop me, but rather made me dig deeper.
No reason anyone else on this site can't do what I have done in less than a year. I do admit that having better equipment will be a major help IF the basics are still used. Better equipment means more creativity and freedom from limitations of lesser cameras, BUT it isn't a cure-all for not being able to take a good shot to begin with.
Am I tooting my own horn? You betcha!
No reason any of you can't be making this statement instead of me. |
|
|
|
04/06/2005 11:43:00 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by BradP:
Am I tooting my own horn? You betcha! |
You should be. You're the poster child for making the most of whatever's available. |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:12:04 AM · #59 |
Off topic, but...
Anyone else "see" the paul-revere profile on the clouds in the left-hand side of the thumbnail? |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 12:26:43 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by Telehubbie:
There was one in the Pink challenge with the same concept of a pink bulldozer, and it scored 62 out of 268.
 |
Well, since this one is mine I should say a few words.
Most people seemed to know that the hue had been shifted on this, there were some who did not catch on that the hue had been shifted which was nice in a way since I tried to make it look believable.
For this photo I was trying to have some fun, and from the comments I think I succeeded at least some.
But I can understand some people feeling somewhat cheated, I think some people got a kick out of thinking there really was a backhoe painted that color. This is getting to be a central question, how much should a photo be changed before it becomes more digital art and less a photograph?
There are many things that have been cheapened due to the easy manipulation of photographs. When I used to look at a photo of a sunset I would marvel at the colors, now I wonder if they have been as much painted as photographed. Dramatic skies, blue oceans, lush green grass, all of these have lost some of their impact in photos simply because we can not be sure they are what was really seen. There are those who will argue that if the photo looks good then what does it matter if it got that way with a bit of help. I have very mixed feeling about this, part of the joy of looking at photos is the wonderment of other places part of this wonderment is lost when the photo has been heavily edited.
The problem is that this is all a matter of degree, who would fault someone for making the sky just a bit bluer, to make it look like what it seemed like at the time? But if making it look a bit bluer is ok what about pasting in a whole new sky for one that is gray?
I think it would be interesting to have people show the before photos, just resized, so that people can tell what the starting photo looked like.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 01:04:50 AM · #61 |
Fooled me and to be honest, I was crushed when I read that you shifted the hue. I really wanted to believe in it. |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 05:03:45 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by robgo:
Off topic, but...
Anyone else "see" the paul-revere profile on the clouds in the left-hand side of the thumbnail? |
Oooooo... I'm thinking you might just have a tinsy winsy bit to much time on your hands there, buddy. :)
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 05:08:23 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Every once in a while I see a post suggesting that the use of a particular technique gives an unfair advantage to those who use it. If it's legal, then why can't you use the same technique? If it's because you don't agree with what's allowed in the rules, then go someplace else. You agreed to those rules when you entered.
Those who live in scenic areas have an unfair advantage
Those with beautiful girl/boyfriends have an unfair advantage
Those with DSLRs have an unfair advantage
Those with studio lights or $1000+ lenses have an unfair advantage
Those with decades of film experience have an unfair advantage
Those who've mastered Photoshop have an unfair advantage
The list goes on...
Unless we restrict everybody to the same camera, software, location, etc. there will always be inequalities. I'm pretty sure that Kiwiness or JJBeguin would still clobber me in a Free Study even if they were restricted to a 3 megapixel point and shoot camera and an empty room. Oh well. I'm not going to just throw my hands up and surrender on a portrait challenge because I don't live in Thailand. Use your imagination and determination to make the best of whatever you have. |
Unrelated to the original purpose of this forum discussion, but VERY well stated!
Message edited by author 2005-04-07 05:09:10.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 05:12:56 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by BradP:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Every once in a while I see a post suggesting that the use of a particular technique gives an unfair advantage to those who use it. If it's legal, then why can't you use the same technique? If it's because you don't agree with what's allowed in the rules, then go someplace else. You agreed to those rules when you entered.
Those who live in scenic areas have an unfair advantage
Those with beautiful girl/boyfriends have an unfair advantage
Those with DSLRs have an unfair advantage
Those with studio lights or $1000+ lenses have an unfair advantage
Those with decades of film experience have an unfair advantage
Those who've mastered Photoshop have an unfair advantage
The list goes on...
Use your imagination and determination to make the best of whatever you have. |
Use your imagination and determination to make the best of whatever you have.
This is the key and a very well said statement!
I for one only have one of the above advantages listed above, but it doesn't make me a better photographer. Living in Southern CA has it's advantages, but I still have real-world interferences like time. I still make use of my ebay camera that is now over 5 years old, lens adaptors, and essentially everything I own can fit in my camera bag (small one). No fancy nuthin!
Because I happen to be driven to do better each and every time I click the shutter to that last adjustment in PS, I have looked, and read, and tried (and failed), but have learned. It takes time and passion.
I used to (and once in a while still do) feel something is unfair, but only because I don't know how, and by golly I will figure out how to learn it or get around it!
Being away from photography for over 10 years, then jumping right back in the fire has been a learning curve. Self-taught everything. Many of the masters on this site have forgotten more than I have ever known, but it didn't stop me, but rather made me dig deeper.
No reason anyone else on this site can't do what I have done in less than a year. I do admit that having better equipment will be a major help IF the basics are still used. Better equipment means more creativity and freedom from limitations of lesser cameras, BUT it isn't a cure-all for not being able to take a good shot to begin with.
Am I tooting my own horn? You betcha!
No reason any of you can't be making this statement instead of me. |
If you got a horn to toot there ain't nothin' wrong with tootin' it! And if you don't have one yet there ain't nothin' stopping you from getting one, except possibly yourself.
|
|
|
|
04/07/2005 08:58:35 AM · #65 |
Scott, I think your photo is really funny and creative, that's why I remembered it from the Pink challenge. When I first saw it during voting, it took me a while to realize that it was just a color shift, and not a real pink bulldozer. I just brought it into this thread because it was so similar.
I personally don't think that shifting a color is grounds for dq. How many sunset shots in here are obviously shifted to where it's unrealistic, but we love them even more with the extra bit of color. |
|
|
|
04/07/2005 09:27:21 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by scottwilson:
Originally posted by Telehubbie:
There was one in the Pink challenge with the same concept of a pink bulldozer, and it scored 62 out of 268.
|
Well, since this one is mine I should say a few words.
Most people seemed to know that the hue had been shifted on this, there were some who did not catch on that the hue had been shifted which was nice in a way since I tried to make it look believable.
For this photo I was trying to have some fun...
But I can understand some people feeling somewhat cheated...
This is getting to be a central question, how much should a photo be changed before it becomes more digital art and less a photograph?
There are many things that have been cheapened due to the easy manipulation of photographs...
I have very mixed feeling about this, part of the joy of looking at photos is the wonderment of other places part of this wonderment is lost when the photo has been heavily edited.
The problem is that this is all a matter of degree, who would fault someone for making the sky just a bit bluer, to make it look like what it seemed like at the time? But if making it look a bit bluer is ok what about pasting in a whole new sky for one that is gray?... |
Scott... Hope you were not offended by my example being very similar to yours from the pink challenge. I certainly did not mean to single yours out. Truth is that a different image in another challenge is what got me to thinking about this issue.
You've touched on the issue of how much editing is to much. That is a significant issue for DPC because of it's photo education 'focus', but not for a lot of other places or the 'real' world either.
I find my camera, and I suspect most cameras, are reasonable poor devices for capturing reality compared to the human eye. Mine does not capture color or contrast as I really saw it so I necessarily must resort to editing tools to recapture what I remember seeing. I might use those tools to add some texture and color to the image to make it more esthetically pleasing as well.
Doing things in post processing to bring out greater detail is an obligation if it better portrays the scene as the photographer saw it.
|
|
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: 08/07/2025 03:33:55 PM EDT.
