Stroke. Legal? Adv. editing Q ...

12/19/2005 05:55:32 PM · #1

Seriously ...
'Stroke' (no laughs please). Legal?

Used:

Wanted to use:

The text didn't pop enough for me (stop snickering), I wanted to set it off a more. I magic wand selected the text, created new layer, filled selection with white, stroked, changed blending mode to soft (no laughs please) light, lowered opacity of layer.

My feeling: this isn't different than creating a new layer with soft light blending, then drawing black and white to dodge/burn - this method is just (much) more exact.

So. legal? not legal? There's a better way to accomplish?

12/19/2005 06:01:47 PM · #2

I don't really know if there's a better way to accomplish this, but i think if you wanna do this, the 'stroke' could be a little bigger IMO.
if i had to choose between the one you've entered and the other one, I'd still pick the first one. the 'stroke' is a little careless edited (I know, you did take care of it, but I think it could be better..)

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

12/19/2005 06:06:31 PM · #3

Well, easier would be use Magic Wand to select letters, and apply a 'stroke' to the selection.

A possibly more legal way would be to apply really heavy-duty sharpening.

I think you'd get some votes for both legal and illegal, and I'm not even sure what mine would be right now ...

frisca

Nikon D70

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

12/19/2005 06:07:16 PM · #4

i don't see a problem with such usage in an advanced editing challenge. Its not a major element and it is not that much different than a little bit of cloning or burning as far as "pixel manipulation"

Edited to add: this is merely my personal opinion and should not be taken as the final ruling on this photo or any photo using this technique.

Message edited by author 2005-12-19 18:08:15.

12/19/2005 06:07:55 PM · #5

@ GeneralIE: why would this NOT be legal?

12/19/2005 06:09:20 PM · #6

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Well, easier would be use Magic Wand to select letters, and apply a 'stroke' to the selection.

I didn't try that because it seems like that wouldn't be legal. I created the new layer, changed blending, etc to get it to be more of a dodge/burn effect than a straight out of the box 'stroke' (which seems to me to be drawing).

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

12/19/2005 06:10:54 PM · #7

Originally posted by biteme:

@ GeneralIE: why would this NOT be legal?

Well, because I think some would construe it as "adding an element" -- a design created/added on the computer -- and not just an "enhancement" of something already there. For example, what if it was a bright pink 'stroke' ...

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

12/19/2005 06:12:45 PM · #8

ok, that sounds fair to me.

if you see it that way, I don't think it would be legal.

frisca

Nikon D70

12/19/2005 06:12:48 PM · #9

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by biteme:
@ GeneralIE: why would this NOT be legal?

Well, because I think some would construe it as "adding an element" -- a design created/added on the computer -- and not just an "enhancement" of something already there. For example, what if it was a bright pink 'stroke' ...

But are we talking about 'stroke' in general or 'stroke' as used in this photo? I think we can only really restrict ourselves to the example given. As it is show on the condom box photos, its an added element, for sure, but we don't DQ for added elements, only for changes that amount to "major elements" . Just my thoughts on your thoughts, GenE.

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

12/19/2005 06:13:56 PM · #10

OK -- you could select, use the "Border" command at about 3 pixels, optionally feather the selection, then use that as a mask for an Adjustment layer (Curves, Levels) to create the contrasting edge.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

12/19/2005 06:15:45 PM · #11

What constitutes a major element? Is it easily quantified like percent total pixels? Or is it more subjective?

frisca

Nikon D70

12/19/2005 06:17:46 PM · #12

Originally posted by alfresco:

What constitutes a major element? Is it easily quantified like percent total pixels? Or is it more subjective?

Sadly, its much more subjective, but we can categorize some things in the "percentage of pixels altered" sort of way. However, most can't. But I think in any method of deciphering what is meant by "major elements", this just ain't making it, in my books. I would say it was legal unless some of other, more insightful members of the SC can persuade me otherwise.

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

12/19/2005 06:17:59 PM · #13

Originally posted by frisca:

... but we don't DQ for added elements ...

We don't? I think the "major element" guideline refers to removal or relocation of elements, but I think we're pretty strict on disallowing the creating of and new elements other than as a "border" -- and even I don't think this qualifies as that.

I'm not saying (yet, anyway) that I myself would be against it, but that it's my guess that some people would be.

12/19/2005 06:22:51 PM · #14

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I think the "major element" guideline refers to removal or relocation of elements,...

Ok, now I'm gonna be really honest.
(sorry for spoiling your topic JP..)
In my last entry (holiday catalog) I erased part of the reflection of the christmas-ball. This is a removal of elements. Would that be a reason to get a DQ?

Message edited by author 2005-12-19 18:23:15.

12/19/2005 06:23:24 PM · #15

Originally posted by GeneralE:

That's why I changed blending modes, to make the "addition" to be more of a burn around the edges, dodge on the text.

12/19/2005 06:24:21 PM · #16

Originally posted by biteme:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think the "major element" guideline refers to removal or relocation of elements,...

Ok, now I'm gonna be really honest.
(sorry for spoiling your topic JP..)
In my last entry (holiday catalog) I erased part of the reflection of the christmas-ball. This is a removal of elements. Would that be a reason to get a DQ?

NP Hanneke - good question. My opinion: removal of minor elements is okey dokey.

Edit: okey dokey for advanced editing only.

Message edited by author 2005-12-19 18:26:28.

12/19/2005 06:25:41 PM · #17

ok, but when is it a minor or a major element? with the whole reflection of the ball, my own reflection wouldn't have the impact like it had now!

Message edited by author 2005-12-19 18:26:03.

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

12/19/2005 06:37:24 PM · #18

Originally posted by biteme:

ok, but when is it a minor or a major element? with the whole reflection of the ball, my own reflection wouldn't have the impact like it had now!

There is no one answer, especially without seeing the entry and the original side-by-side for comparison. It sounds unlikely the vote would be unanimous ...

wewillexplore

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

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

12/19/2005 06:38:58 PM · #19

nm.

Message edited by author 2005-12-19 18:39:17.

12/19/2005 06:42:46 PM · #20

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by biteme:
ok, but when is it a minor or a major element? with the whole reflection of the ball, my own reflection wouldn't have the impact like it had now!

There is no one answer, especially without seeing the entry and the original side-by-side for comparison. It sounds unlikely the vote would be unanimous ...

allright, thanx for your respond. I can go to sleep now in a relaxed way ;)

have a nice evening!

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

12/19/2005 08:45:33 PM · #21

Anyone else care to comment? Anyone? Anyone?? Beuller? Beuller?

idnic

Canon EOS-60D

12/19/2005 08:51:03 PM · #22

Originally posted by alfresco:

Anyone else care to comment? Anyone? Anyone?? Beuller? Beuller?

From the best movie ever made.....

I think people should be able to 'stroke' if they want to.

ShutterPug

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/19/2005 08:51:04 PM · #23

I think all this chatter about strokes and magic wands in relation to your Trojans is bit much for me right now....too tired to not laugh.

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/19/2005 09:05:50 PM · #24

I noticed nobody mentioned a Yak. Good.

Beyond that important comment, I feel what alfresco described is adding an element. But it's a gray area, slippery slope, pandoras box, red herring, kinard, ...can't think of any more...