DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> Rules rewrite status and call for suggestions
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 451, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/12/2006 09:46:45 AM · #51
Whatever you guys come up with is fine with me - I just want to be able to understand the rules.

I would LOVE to see, as an addendum or separate "help" section, concrete examples of what will and what will not constitute a DQ in advance editing in the new set of rules.
 02/12/2006 09:47:48 AM · #52
Originally posted by gloda:
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?


Duotone is a tool in Photoshop -- it's right in the menus.

In regard to your second question, again, I can think of no good way to address that in the form of an understandable and relatively bulletproof rule. Any suggestions?

~Terry
 02/12/2006 10:05:28 AM · #53
Before we go setting fixed rules we have a more fundemental question to ask ourselves. There is a huge range of opinions about where the DPC line should lie with regard to use of digital manipulation.

At one extreme you have the digital artist, probably better served by DeviantArt or some other community. At the other extreme are the photo-fundementalists who want nothing to do with manipulation.

My own stance is as you can guess not aligned with the 'prohibit manipulation' and more towards the 'moderate manipulation' position.

Once we have decided where the line is drawn we can get to defining the rules which would be used to enforce that line.
 02/12/2006 10:11:54 AM · #54
Originally posted by gloda:
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?


I think this is where there is a confusion. Don't use "photoshop" equivalent actions or filters as examples. Stay away from using any computer program as a standard. Use plain 'ol photographic terms as what is allowed and what is not. Far too many different programs and everyone does not know what the equivalent is in photoshop. Yes I use PS CS2 but have no idea what sililar things are in older versions or other programs.
 02/12/2006 10:14:39 AM · #55
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by fadedbeauty:
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.


How would we do this and still have anonymous entries?

~Terry


There could be a universal DPC watermark used to preserve anonymity - but the watermark would have such a detrimental effect on viewing photos that I for one would not really like to see it implemented. I understand that there are those that have a valid concern about image theft though.
 02/12/2006 10:16:37 AM · #56
1. basic should be "as the eye" sees it. colorshifts, filters, etc that enhance sunsets to purple or orange or water reflections to glass when it's not realistic should be discouraged. If the sky, water, etc are not natural it should not be basic.

2. Not allow computer screen shots or other background picture or painting be used in basic. Taking a pic of the moon for example and putting it on a screen to use it as an artifical background is really the same as using two different photos. A single photo should be just that a single photo. If it is used as a "major" element then it should not be allowed in any competition.
02/12/2006 10:26:28 AM · #57
Originally posted by Falc:
Before we go setting fixed rules we have a more fundemental question to ask ourselves. There is a huge range of opinions about where the DPC line should lie with regard to use of digital manipulation.

At one extreme you have the digital artist, probably better served by DeviantArt or some other community. At the other extreme are the photo-fundementalists who want nothing to do with manipulation.

My own stance is as you can guess not aligned with the 'prohibit manipulation' and more towards the 'moderate manipulation' position.

Once we have decided where the line is drawn we can get to defining the rules which would be used to enforce that line.


...and that's why this thread exists. Inherent in people's suggestions is there idea of both where that line should be and of where it's practical to draw it.

~Terry
 02/12/2006 10:28:29 AM · #58
I dont agree with allowing spot editing in basic to remove sensor dust. I'd like to see filter use CLEARLY defined as allowable or not allowable. Basic editing is basically as nearly as clear as it can get now. But the advanced needs to be more black and white clear, rather then some having a grey area and it being up to the SC to have to determine wether its more of one then the other. Say no to sensor dust removal in basic editing.

MattO
 02/12/2006 10:30:15 AM · #59
Originally posted by PhantomEWO:
Originally posted by gloda:
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?


I think this is where there is a confusion. Don't use "photoshop" equivalent actions or filters as examples. Stay away from using any computer program as a standard. Use plain 'ol photographic terms as what is allowed and what is not. Far too many different programs and everyone does not know what the equivalent is in photoshop. Yes I use PS CS2 but have no idea what sililar things are in older versions or other programs.


I agree with Phantom. Using the GIMP is great, but not always equivalent to PS (and others), so I'm often left wondering just what is being talked about. Yeah, I could go out and get PS, but honestly, I can't afford it. And trying to translate PS-speak to GIMP-speak is frustrating at best.
 02/12/2006 10:32:42 AM · #60
Originally posted by brin61:
[quote=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 strongly agree with that too.
 02/12/2006 10:33:05 AM · #61
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.


Not a problem in Olympus DSLRs... :)
 02/12/2006 10:34:18 AM · #62
Originally posted by saracat:
Originally posted by PhantomEWO:
Originally posted by gloda:
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?


I think this is where there is a confusion. Don't use "photoshop" equivalent actions or filters as examples. Stay away from using any computer program as a standard. Use plain 'ol photographic terms as what is allowed and what is not. Far too many different programs and everyone does not know what the equivalent is in photoshop. Yes I use PS CS2 but have no idea what sililar things are in older versions or other programs.


I agree with Phantom. Using the GIMP is great, but not always equivalent to PS (and others), so I'm often left wondering just what is being talked about. Yeah, I could go out and get PS, but honestly, I can't afford it. And trying to translate PS-speak to GIMP-speak is frustrating at best.


Suggestions for wording?

~Terry
 02/12/2006 10:37:28 AM · #63
Sensor dust removal in basic - yeah, might be a good idea, but how hard would this be for the SC to regulate?

Filters - let folks use their motion, gaussian blur if they wish in Advanced, but know that in my humble opinion it does not add to a picture at all. In most of the cases I've seen so far, it significantly detracts, but that's a matter of taste.

Best of luck SC - you're doing good work here!
 02/12/2006 10:39:38 AM · #64
i agree with the sensor dust for basic :)...maybe for a couple of these suggestions we could have polls?
 02/12/2006 10:40:37 AM · #65
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by gloda:
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?


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


Perhaps wording for this might list programs where use is acceptable and ones where it is not due to the method used by each program (for specific effects)?
Unfortunately I've not got the experience with or exposure to any of the editing programs other than the GIMP to be able to give a more concrete wording for this.
Sorry! :)
 02/12/2006 10:42:13 AM · #66
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by saracat:

I agree with Phantom. Using the GIMP is great, but not always equivalent to PS (and others), so I'm often left wondering just what is being talked about. Yeah, I could go out and get PS, but honestly, I can't afford it. And trying to translate PS-speak to GIMP-speak is frustrating at best.


Suggestions for wording?

~Terry


Maybe a table that lists equivalent tools and actions between programs that can be placed in the help menu and referred to/updated as needed?
 02/12/2006 10:50:12 AM · #67
Originally posted by Ombra_foto:
I think most of the basic rules are quite clear.
The advanced ,of course, need some rewording and clarifying.

I would still like to see a Masters challenge, a more free version of editing.
Not Digital Art, just photo editing to the best of our ability. A place for all the skills to be used.
Many people don't want it, they don't have to participate. They have the other challenges.
From what I've seen, this might be a way to keep the interest of some of the people who have advanced beyond the limitations of the challenges.

I am NOT talking about Godzilla burning shoes here, just making the best of the tools we have to make the best possible picture.
My turn to get flamed


I'd vote for that. Maybe a Once-a-Month Master's challenge (not that I'd have the guts to enter!), but if nothing else it would be an "educational" experience, and something for which to strive.

And yes, no one would be "forced" to enter!

And while I'm at it, I'd like to see basic editing allow cloning out dead pixels.
 02/12/2006 10:53:17 AM · #68
Originally posted by RolandB:
Originally posted by Ombra_foto:
I think most of the basic rules are quite clear.
The advanced ,of course, need some rewording and clarifying.

I would still like to see a Masters challenge, a more free version of editing.
Not Digital Art, just photo editing to the best of our ability. A place for all the skills to be used.
Many people don't want it, they don't have to participate. They have the other challenges.
From what I've seen, this might be a way to keep the interest of some of the people who have advanced beyond the limitations of the challenges.

I am NOT talking about Godzilla burning shoes here, just making the best of the tools we have to make the best possible picture.
My turn to get flamed


I'd vote for that. Maybe a Once-a-Month Master's challenge (not that I'd have the guts to enter!), but if nothing else it would be an "educational" experience, and something for which to strive.

And yes, no one would be "forced" to enter!

And while I'm at it, I'd like to see basic editing allow cloning out dead pixels.


Good suggestions, but we're probably getting a bit off-topic here.

We are discussing a possible super-advanced rule set, as well as a sub-basic one, but those may not come at the same time as the basic/advanced rewrites.

~Terry

Message edited by author 2006-02-12 10:53:50.
 02/12/2006 10:55:39 AM · #69
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Good suggestions, but we're probably getting a bit off-topic here.

We are discussing a possible super-advanced rule set, as well as a sub-basic one, but those may not come at the same time as the basic/advanced rewrites.

~Terry


Cool. I'm a patient guy! :)
02/12/2006 10:59:55 AM · #70
*If a photo is being reviewed for dq, the sc should have a 65% majority vote to dq it.
*Just as the photographer has 48 hours to submit their original photo, the sc should be held to 48 hours to decide.
*Create a benchmark folder to show the membership which photos were dq'd and approved for certain filter effects. Keep this seperate from the individual challenge the photo was taken for so it can be easily reviewed by everyone.
I know you guys are all volunteers and you have a life, but the thing is you have willing volunteered to do this. Your position on the sc isn't something that someone is forcing you to do.
 02/12/2006 11:04:57 AM · #71
Originally posted by pcody:
*If a photo is being reviewed for dq, the sc should have a 65% majority vote to dq it.
*Just as the photographer has 48 hours to submit their original photo, the sc should be held to 48 hours to decide.
*Create a benchmark folder to show the membership which photos were dq'd and approved for certain filter effects. Keep this seperate from the individual challenge the photo was taken for so it can be easily reviewed by everyone.
I know you guys are all volunteers and you have a life, but the thing is you have willing volunteered to do this. Your position on the sc isn't something that someone is forcing you to do.


Pat, I appreciate the suggestions but none of these really relate to the Challenge Rules. It would probably be most appropriate to discuss them in a new Website Suggestions thread.

~Terry
 02/12/2006 11:07:27 AM · #72
Here is my proposal - very very simple for the SC to rule on, which is where the current problem is most evident.

Your entry MUST follow the following advanced manipulation rules:

1. Originate from a single exposure, taken during the challenge period.
2. The original single exposure MUST only be converted from RAW once. It may not be processed multiple times using different parameters and combined at a later stage of post processing.
3. NOT be manipulated to clone multiple elements of the original image.
4. May NOT include clip-art, elements from other images, computer rendered images or similar.
5. Images from the original exposure may only be entered in one challenge only.
6. An image may be post-processed in a digital manipulation suite of your choice.
7. No text except an approved DPC watermark may be added to any image.
7. Advanced manipulation is limited only by the imagination of the author,but it should be noted that the voting of your peers will be affected by the amount of 'perceived' manipulation. It is the responsibility of the author to judge the current 'level of acceptability' within the community. This may change over time.

My objective here is simply to ease the burden on SC and the DQ process. Voters will tell us what is acceptable and what is not in terms of manipulation. This is exactly how it works in the real world, a judge in a photo contest will have his own opinion of when something is over-processed. Its the author's skill in estimating the judges opinion which counts just as much as the more orthodox photographic skills.

Additionally it will help beginners learn how to use modern software (PS/PSP/GIMP) which is an essential part of the photographers toolkit.

Message edited by author 2006-02-12 11:31:57.
 02/12/2006 11:29:47 AM · #73
I would recommend the more black and white the rules (whatever they be), the better. This is mainly true for filter use. The SC should decide which filters are ALLOWED and which filters are DISALLOWED. Filter use for allowed filters should be at the discretion of the user.

I would recommend the following filters be allowed:
Gaussian Blur
All sharpen filters
All Noise filters (including Neat Image (or comparable))

Basic would require a nonselected application. Advanced would allow selective or layered application.
 02/12/2006 11:33:16 AM · #74
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I would recommend the more black and white the rules (whatever they be), the better. This is mainly true for filter use. The SC should decide which filters are ALLOWED and which filters are DISALLOWED. Filter use for allowed filters should be at the discretion of the user.


The rules will then have to be changed EVERY time there is a new release of software - thats just plain impractical
 02/12/2006 11:37:16 AM · #75
I just wanted to throw my support out there for allowing removal of dust in basic editing, since it was said that it was being discussed.

As was mentioned, the removal of sensor dust (or dead pixels) is something that is preserving photographic integrity...it's not something that should be there...not to mention, you *can* tell who's photo is who's if they submit a non-cropped photo and you know where their dust specks are (yeah, it's a stretch), so in that sense, it helps with the anonymity of challenge entries.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 06/24/2025 07:20:31 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 06/24/2025 07:20:31 PM EDT.