Rules rewrite status and call for suggestions

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM III

02/12/2006 06:39:03 AM · #26

In this thread we noticed that one and the same effect (duotone) is legal in one program (Photoshop) and illegal in another (Paint Shop Pro).

I suggest that whenever an editing step is legal in one program, it should be legal in any other program as well.

Is that bullet-point compatible?

Structor

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

02/12/2006 07:05:13 AM · #27

Originally posted by JRalston:

The biggest thing I'd love to see is to allow cloning out sensor dust in basic editing. Sensor dust is a problem on dSLR's and even one little speck can give reason for a voter to rate lower.

I agree with that suggestion

Leok

Pentax K10D

Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG for Pentax

02/12/2006 07:06:37 AM · #28

This will cause a flame war but here goes anyway:

DQ for did not meet the challenge

Giorgio

Canon EOS-70D

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Macro EX DG OS for Canon EF

02/12/2006 07:10:59 AM · #29

Originally posted by Leok:

This will cause a flame war but here goes anyway:

DQ for did not meet the challenge

How can you tell it meet's the challenge or not? Maybe you don't share the same vision as the photographer.

IceRock

Canon EOS-20D

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

02/12/2006 07:35:07 AM · #30

I am against this no motion blur and gaussian blur

Originally posted by Falc:

I would like to see the use of motion blur and gaussian blur ALLOWED in advanved editing. I have heard no good reason yet which convinces me that the use of blur etc is wrong.

I'm sure the fundementalists will scream and shout about this, but as long as the tool is available to everyone and the rules are clear where the line is drawn then there is no problem.

CzechMan

Nikon D200

02/12/2006 07:52:13 AM · #31

Originally posted by keegbow:

I think basic editing should remain as is, I can't see any issue with these rules and I feel it is a fundamental of how these challenges have existed. If people don't like the basic rules they can pay the money and become a member.

The real problem comes in for the paid members in the advanced editing; this in my view should have two categories, one to cater for more post processing and the other for limited post processing.

I agree with Tim on both aspects. Basic editing should be just that....basic, otherwise contribute to the website. As far as the advanced editing, I am not an all-star when it comes to properly utilizing photoshop, so it would be nice to break it up into two advanced editing categories. At least I would know what I am getting into if I entered a challenge that catered to those who really know photoshop.

ralph

Nikon Z9

02/12/2006 08:02:54 AM · #32

I would like to see it stated
"that reverting to original raw in Nikon Capture is equivelent to the original image"
i realize this is a tool specific case but i think it is important ;)

i'm in the NO camp as far a any types of blur with selection
don't use it / don't need it
applied equally to the whole image should be allowed though ..

i'm against the use of neat image -- that is the realm of digital art
actually i'm against almost any type of modifications beyond
USM levels curves saturation/chroma

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

02/12/2006 08:06:06 AM · #33

Here are three things I would like to see, as concretely as I can describe them:

*Limit cloning of objects in advanced editing to those that comprise less than 20% of the original image. If what you are cloning out takes up more than 1/5 of the frame, then it's DQ'd. I suck at math and even I can figure that out.

*No use of zoom or motion blur filters AT ALL. None. If they're used, it's a DQ.

*Color shifts are acceptable unless the challenge is color-specific.

IceRock

Canon EOS-20D

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

02/12/2006 08:40:59 AM · #34

no not more than 5% we are taking picture are we ! :)

Originally posted by ralphnev:

fadedbeauty

Nikon D300

02/12/2006 08:57:31 AM · #35

I saw that someone else suggested being able to put some kind of watermark on the images. I think this is a good idea as right now there is nothing to keep someone from stealing a photo. Not that it is a perfect solution since there are ways around it, but at least disable the right click function on the site.

kteach

Nikon D50

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6

02/12/2006 09:06:34 AM · #36

Originally posted by laurielblack:

*Color shifts are acceptable unless the challenge is color-specific.

What about changing different parts of a picture to different colors? I tend to think that it shouldn't be allowed. For me that goes back to the major elements and the rule of thumb that says something like "describe the original picture in words and if the submitted shot has a different description then a major element has been changed". If I have 3 goats in my original shot I would say it's 3 goats. If the submitted shot has a pink goat, a green goat and blue goat that clearly would be part of my description and I would say a major element change.

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

02/12/2006 09:10:01 AM · #37

Originally posted by kteach:

Originally posted by laurielblack:

*Color shifts are acceptable unless the challenge is color-specific.

What about changing different parts of a picture to different colors? I tend to think that it shouldn't be allowed. For me that goes back to the major elements and the rule of thumb that says something like "describe the original picture in words and if the submitted shot has a different description then a major element has been changed". If I have 3 goats in my original shot I would say it's 3 goats. If the submitted shot has a pink goat, a green goat and blue goat that clearly would be part of my description and I would say a major element change.

I personally don't care what color people make their goats, as long as the challenge isn't a color challenge. If you submit a picture of a pink goat to the "Pink" challenge, and most of the free world knows that goats don't come in that color, it is likely a color shift and shouldn't be allowed because the challenge was color-specific. If folks want pink goats in any other kind of challenge, more power to them. ;)

cbeller

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 16-85 f/3.5-5.6G ED VR

02/12/2006 09:10:11 AM · #38

Originally posted by Giorgio:

I really would like to see dodge&burn allowed in basic editing and,maybe, if I don't ask to much, we should be able to use adjustment layers in other blending modes than normal.

Become a member and you can use these tools in the Advanced Editing challenges. We don't need this in Basic challenges.

Message edited by author 2006-02-12 09:12:19.

hyperfocal

Nikon D7000

Nikon MF 105mm f/2.5 AIS

02/12/2006 09:17:20 AM · #39

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

for advanced editing allow the removal of major elements like background items or things that are not relevant to the challenge entry - such as the lighting stand someone was DQ'd for awhile back.

I couldn't disagree more. One of the most important skills to learn in photography is composition. Knowing if one doesn't like an included element it can just be clonned out, creates a crutch. Instead of using proper lens (or focal length with zooms),cropping, or moving to change perspective these skills will never be properly utilized.

If it is just impossible to remove the item (say powerlines in a landscape) then it belongs. In the studio if a light stand is in the image, then JUST CHANGE THE SET UP.

IMO removing any photographic element within the image area is photographic laziness.

Sensor dust, however, is NOT a photographic element and should be allowed to be removed.

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

ps - I appreciate you guys taking the time to do this and hopefully will remove a good portion of ambiguity and subjectivity. Good luck. :)

Ditto

02/12/2006 09:22:23 AM · #40

Originally posted by Judi:

I would like to make one suggestion....but I don't know if it is along the lines of which you are speaking of.

Please....when somebody has a photo in for validation and the image doesn't get validated until after the voting finishes can SC please notify the photographer. I know the photographer gets notified in the case of a DQ....but I know of many photographers who sit on the edge of their chair waiting for that confirmation that their image passed the inspection. I know from experience that validation does sometimes take longer than 48 hours....but even so....4 days after submitting is a long time for someone to be uncertain of the outcome.

I think you will find many members will be in agreeance with this suggestion.

Judi

//dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=344606

~Terry

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

02/12/2006 09:25:29 AM · #41

Originally posted by Giorgio:

I really would like to see dodge&burn allowed in basic editing and,maybe, if I don't ask to much, we should be able to use adjustment layers in other blending modes than normal.

I can say with a fair degree of confidence that this will not happen. The purpose of the Basic Rules is to provide a limited tool set so that new photographers unfamiliar with photo editing software can get their feet wet without being paralyzed by too many options.

There is a strong argument for allowing removal of sendor dust and hot pixels, and that is being considered, but spot-editing beyond that will not be permitted in basic.

~Terry

W.R.Miller

Canon EOS-50D

02/12/2006 09:30:23 AM · #42

Originally posted by fadedbeauty:

Perhaps the DPC site could introduce a digital copyright watermark to the file when it is uploaded to the site server side. Not a watermark that is visible on the image but a watermark that is digitally embedded somehow into the digital data of the file itself. I don't even know if this is possible but thought I would put it out there. They know who you are when you upload the image so they would know what name to put in the digital watermark.

02/12/2006 09:30:43 AM · #43

Originally posted by gloda:

Under the Basic Rules, tools are legal, not [/i]effects[/i]. Where the Advanced rules are result-centric, the Basic Rules are method-centric.

Unfortunately this presents a problem when a particular software package does not have a feature that is permitted under the rules. There is no good way I can think of to address this.

~Terry

02/12/2006 09:34:34 AM · #44

Originally posted by Leok:

This will cause a flame war but here goes anyway:

DQ for did not meet the challenge

This was done at the beginning, but it was removed very earli in the site's history, because it was impossible to enforce. Whenever we DQ'ed an entry under this rule, we would get some 500-word essay from the photographer on how the entry was connected to the challenge.

In the end we decided that this was an issue best left to the voters, and there was no need for such a rule.

~Terry

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

02/12/2006 09:38:21 AM · #45

Originally posted by laurielblack:

*Limit cloning of objects in advanced editing to those that comprise less than 20% of the original image. If what you are cloning out takes up more than 1/5 of the frame, then it's DQ'd. I suck at math and even I can figure that out.

I can't think of an entry where 20% of the entry was cloned out, and it was not considered a major element.

~Terry

Canon EOS-60D

02/12/2006 09:39:43 AM · #46

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Originally posted by laurielblack:
*Limit cloning of objects in advanced editing to those that comprise less than 20% of the original image. If what you are cloning out takes up more than 1/5 of the frame, then it's DQ'd. I suck at math and even I can figure that out.

I can't think of an entry where 20% of the entry was cloned out, and it was not considered a major element.

~Terry

Just trying to put a number on it to make it concrete...you know how people like to split hairs. :)

02/12/2006 09:41:48 AM · #47

Originally posted by ralphnev:

I would like to see it stated
"that reverting to original raw in Nikon Capture is equivelent to the original image"
i realize this is a tool specific case but i think it is important ;)

Forgive what may be astupid question, since I'm not familiar with Nikon Capture. From our side, how can we tell whether the file we are looking at is truly something that was reverted to the original RAW, and not something that was modified in some way?

~Terry

gloda

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/12/2006 09:43:17 AM · #48

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Under the Basic Rules, tools are legal, not [/i]effects[/i].
~Terry

In that case the legality of Duotone in Basic (with Photoshop) seems to be contradicoty, doesn't it?

I assume that the whole filter/effects issue is being revised as well?