Advance Editing Question - DPChallenge Forums

05/05/2005 05:29:12 PM · #26

Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:

...how much of the original pix has to be included before it is considered a DQ.

I'm not sure I understand the question. I believe if your montage is assembled from multiple photos- even pasting in a single pixel- it's illegal. You can't literally paste in anything from another source. If your image was something like a billboard with real trees and light posts in the foreground, then that's OK, because the foreground elements offer something more than the original art.

Man_Called_Horse

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

05/05/2005 05:46:38 PM · #27

I think I get it, and am playing it safe.

But, if I see that others did what I wanted to do during the critiqe phase, then I quess my pixr will faulter, and the rules should be more clear than they are.

I am a layman, and need laymen terms. IE, Yes you can do this, No you can't do that.
sorry if I am dense.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

05/05/2005 05:53:57 PM · #28

Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:

...the rules should be more clear than they are.

A common complaint that I'm going to try to address soon (though I may not succeed). ;-)

dipaulk

Canon EOS-5D

05/05/2005 06:00:11 PM · #29

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Direct from the rules:

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.

So, if I wanted to clone something in the photo to cover up a walkway, that would not be permitted, correct?

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

05/05/2005 06:11:10 PM · #30

Originally posted by dipaulk:

Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Direct from the rules:

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.

So, if I wanted to clone something in the photo to cover up a walkway, that would not be permitted, correct?

Correct, can't add elements to a photo.

dipaulk

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

05/05/2005 06:17:11 PM · #31

Thank you :)

sofapez

Canon EOS-10D

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC for Canon

05/05/2005 06:30:07 PM · #32

Thanks to everyone for your responses..... If anyone has anything to add it would be greatly appreciated.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

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

05/05/2005 06:33:54 PM · #33

Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:

And the rules should be more clear than they are.

Creating a clear and consistent ruleset is a challenging task.

Specific suggestions for improvement are always welcome.

-Terry

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

05/05/2005 06:37:16 PM · #34

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Originally posted by dipaulk:
So, if I wanted to clone something in the photo to cover up a walkway, that would not be permitted, correct?

Correct, can't add elements to a photo.

Well, not exactly. If the walkway was a minor distraction in the photo (i.e. not a major element), you could clone from the surrounding areas to hide it under Advanced Editing rules. This is not any different than cloning out a telephone wire or intruding twig. You just can't clone from ANOTHER photo.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

05/05/2005 08:33:52 PM · #35

Back to the original, "literal artwork" question, IMO a photograph of a sculpture is always legal. Why? Because it's a 3-dimensional object and the photographer is depicting it in 2 dimensions. Therefore, he is making CHOICES as to how to depict it, completely apart feom any issues of how much additiuonal CONTEXT is placed around the sculpture.

With a painting, on the other hand, it's 2-dimensional to start with, and there has to be something more than the painting there to make it legal. However, I'd think a representation of the Mona Lisa posterized into 60's style psychedelic tones would be legal, to give just one example.

Robt.