tools of the trade - DPChallenge Forums

08/04/2005 04:59:43 PM · #52

To comment on the subject of editing, I don't see why it is that people become so upset about how much a picture is 'altered' from the original.

First of all, it has been brought up before but from what I understand the eye is quite a bit more sensitive than a camera and lens. The original image therefor is not an exact representation of what the photographer saw. Rather it takes editing to get it to a more accurate representation of contrast and color. Excessive neat-image is another topic entirely, but I still feel that if it represents what the photographer saw when he took the image, then it is perfectly acceptable.

Secondly, editing is hardly limited to digital photography. If you have ever printed your own photos in a dark room you know that it takes quite a bit of work to come up with the right exposure. Time for exposure, filters for contrast, and cutouts for dodging and burning at the very least. Then once the print is made, spot editing to take out any scratches/dust. An example (probably cliche) is Ansel Adams who was a master in the darkroom at getting his prints to look exactly the way HE envisioned them, rather than exactly the way the came out on the film.

Although 'how much is too much' editing is subjective, I feel that the voters to a good job of determining this and there are certainly good examples of when something is over sharpened/saturated.

But, as always, art is subjective and this is only my 2 cents.

08/04/2005 06:07:40 PM · #53

hey 'kpriest' nice computer skills....lets focus on your photographs too ok...............

Gil P

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

08/04/2005 06:22:01 PM · #54

funny how all flames wind-up as personal attacks... having been victim of this on DPCfanatics...I can say that it's very hard to take. I think someone should lock this thread down before it becomes any more "violent".

Olympus 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 ED Zuiko Digital Zoom

08/04/2005 08:07:26 PM · #55

Gee I hope it does not come to that. Maybe I shouldn't slame the ribbon getter s but hey if you compete you are open to this. Am I right maybe and maybe not....I did not slame anyone else.....it seems they are happy to ridicule me and my pictures and that is fine but nothing changes. My concern as always, is that winners seem to all look the same. Sorr,y but I kinda like a little variety. I'd like to see a powerful composition or something that is thought provoking. I do not need instant recognition. I like to be 'challenged' I hope there are other here who also look for more. I quess the name 'challenge' could be changed?

LadeeM

Olympus E-410

08/04/2005 08:44:56 PM · #56

rofl ... people just crack me up ... Just not happy unless they're complaining about something ...

I'm still trying to get my 6.0. The only way to do is to keep trying, keep taking photos, keep doing what I love ... Some people need to quit taking themselves so seriously ... Just enjoy life, take pleasure in the things that GIVE you pleasure ... Does that make sense?

OK ... my 2 cents :)

08/04/2005 08:50:11 PM · #57

Originally posted by azoychka:

I'm not offended by your opinion, and do not feel slammed whatsoever. I'm curious to know what your concept of "thought provoking" looks like, though. Could you post a picture that depicts what you perceive SHOULD be a ribbon winning, thought-provoking piece?

I'm not trying to be a smartass, by the way. I'm actually curious to see what your vision of "thought provoking" is. While I never imagined my photo would win any ribbons, I felt it to be plenty thought-provoking.

I would like to comment on one of your previous statements, though: that winning entries use too much NeatImage and that it should be "recalled". I did use NeatImage on my B&W to clean some of the noise in the clouds, but I scaled it back to about 25% strength. It's very minimal. I've taken the liberty to post the color and B&W side-by-side for your critical inspection:

Notice the difference in clarity between the two? Good on you if you're able to pick it out. Image #1 used NeatImage, Image #2 used none. In fact, Image #2 is barely post-processed at all. It's virtually straight out of the camera.

I am not trying to defend my image, here. If you don't like it, so be it. You're probably not the only one. But your accusations that DPC'ers have no imagination and your insinuation that they rely on post-processing to obtain a passable image seems rather careless and insubstantiated.

ed: grammar

Message edited by author 2005-08-04 21:20:43.

08/04/2005 09:16:08 PM · #58

Wait wait wait! aboutimage might, but I'm not letting you off the hook that easy. Please review your original post:

Originally posted by azoychka:

It seems that the blue ribbon for this challenge should be taken down. It borders on offensive to associate a ceremonial dress of a native north american with tools of the trade.

You stated it "should be taken down" because you thought it "borders on offensive" Then you start changing your position to something about images not being "thought provoking" and "My concern as always, is that winners seem to all look the same" - your posts are hypocritical and schizophrenic.

How would this NOT be offensive to people of faith?

08/04/2005 09:23:13 PM · #59

Originally posted by kpriest:

How would this NOT be offensive to people of faith?

LOL! I was waiting for someone to notice that! I am a believer, and found the concept to be a bit offensive, yet I still voted the image a 6 based on what I felt to be above-average composition and image quality.

Message edited by author 2005-08-04 22:16:28.

08/04/2005 09:23:33 PM · #60

Hi 'aboutimage' I do not think dpers have no imagination but goodness can you imagine a closeup of an eagle wins 'independence'! Now come on!! Can you honestly tell me this is thought provoking? Sheesh! I actually like your picture but there is a strangeness to it I can't put my finger on. If it is not neatimage then what is it? The camera or lens? Just curious. It is almost surreal.....

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/04/2005 09:25:37 PM · #61

We've gone from "should be taken down" to "not thought provoking" to "I actually like it" azoychka, please report to the pharmacy for your MEDICATION.

JayWalk

Canon EOS-6D

08/04/2005 09:26:30 PM · #62

Originally posted by azoychka:

I actually like your picture but there is a strangeness to it I can't put my finger on. If it is not neatimage then what is it? The camera or lens? Just curious. It is almost surreal.....

.... the photographer perhaps???

It's a great capture.. that's all there is to it.

Message edited by author 2005-08-04 21:27:10.

08/04/2005 09:26:50 PM · #63

Originally posted by azoychka:

Like I stated, I DID use NeatImage in the B&W, and scaled it back to about 25%. I only needed enough to clean the clouds up a bit, as you notice noise more easily in B&W. To be quite honest, it's a 3-step process. One of the simplest and least destructive to the original.

What you ARE probably noticing is the unusual contrast in the B&W. This is caused by the red filter. Try it yourself sometime. Go out and shoot B&W with a red filter and you will come home discovering fascinating contrasts you never noticed before.

Message edited by author 2005-08-04 21:28:54.

08/04/2005 09:26:59 PM · #64

hey kpriest how are you....nice to hear from you again. Actually if you think about it you might wonder if I was questioning whether it is obsolete...you know question mark and all!

08/04/2005 09:28:46 PM · #65

Jaywalk he captured the picture? No thought just click click click?

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/04/2005 09:30:04 PM · #66

thanks aboutimage.....I wondered what it was.

JayWalk

Canon EOS-6D

08/04/2005 09:38:27 PM · #67

Originally posted by azoychka:

No thought just click click click?

That's actually the exact opposite of what I meant.

LadeeM

Olympus E-410

Olympus 40-150mm f/4.0-5.6 ED Zuiko Digital Zoom

08/04/2005 09:39:36 PM · #68

fyi ... azoychka's sig means ...

when love is not madness, it is not love

It's all starting to come together now ...

08/04/2005 09:40:37 PM · #69

I am unclear what you meant Jaywalk..........how do you capture something other than by just shooting alot?

08/04/2005 09:48:51 PM · #70

Originally posted by LadeeM:

fyi ... azoychka's sig means ...

when love is not madness, it is not love

It's all starting to come together now ...

LOL - well, he is most obviously "in love" then. :)

bucket

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/04/2005 09:55:06 PM · #71

Originally posted by kpriest:

Wait wait wait! aboutimage might, but I'm not letting you off the hook that easy. Please review your original post:
Originally posted by azoychka:
It seems that the blue ribbon for this challenge should be taken down. It borders on offensive to associate a ceremonial dress of a native north american with tools of the trade.

You stated it "should be taken down" because you thought it "borders on offensive" Then you start changing your position to something about images not being "thought provoking" and "My concern as always, is that winners seem to all look the same" - your posts are hypocritical and schizophrenic.

How would this NOT be offensive to people of faith?

text

I think a good lesson for everyone is think before you write..it seems that we are so busy pointing fingers in anger further harm is done. kpriest I hope you realize the innappropriateness of using the term "schizophrenic" in such a manner..and no I am not being overly sensitive. I know you were angry, and please don't take my comment as a personal judgement.

I certainly don't agree with everything azoychka has said...but really I can't understand the anger. People constantly post their comments on what they like or don't like...do we want this to stop. One person thought the shot should be pulled..certainly this is not cause for panic. My response is "I don't agree".
Personally I think there is a healthy discussion opportunity being lost here. Can the winners be criticized without the critic being attacked? Yes clearly.. aboutimage has earned my respect for sure.

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

08/04/2005 10:04:46 PM · #72

Originally posted by bucket:

kpriest I hope you realize the innappropriateness of using the term "schizophrenic" in such a manner..and no I am not being overly sensitive. I know you were angry, and please don't take my comment as a personal judgement.

I suppose you're right. I'm sorry. ...Me too. ;-)

Ok just kidding. Your points are well taken. Disengaging...

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

08/04/2005 10:09:41 PM · #73

Originally posted by kpriest:

How would this NOT be offensive to people of faith?

People of faith should not be offended by the ravings of non-believers; that would imply that the statement contains an element of truth, and thus cast doubt where none is allowed to exist. Rather, they should feel only pity for the obviously unenlightened infidels, and pray for the redemption of their souls despite their blasphemous ways.

08/04/2005 10:22:56 PM · #74

Originally posted by azoychka:

I am unclear what you meant Jaywalk..........how do you capture something other than by just shooting alot?

I've been waiting to see if anyone commented on this.

azoychka, I think you should read up on "composition". The more you study it, you more you will probably come to realize that you really DON'T need to take a lot of photos to get a good capture.

I might suggest you pick up a copy of something like "How to do Everything with your Digital Camera, Second Edition" and read the section on composition. Then read it again.

I try to read a little bit every day about photography, and I typically find myself referring to "Composition", over and over again. Why? Because I think most other skills pale in comparison to Composition and Exposure. My composition skills need constant honing, and reading up on it seems to remind me of the basics, again and again.

Message edited by author 2005-08-04 22:27:26.