| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/29/2006 12:19:27 AM · #1 |
philup guesses correctly!
So legal or not legal?
  |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 12:21:55 AM · #2 |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 12:28:08 AM · #3 |
Hmmm.... I'm not that sure.
I liked this explanation of major element:
Get some people to describe the original photo (after the crop in this case, I guess). Whatever they include in the description is very likely to be a major element.
Perhaps the forklift is ok, but I wonder about the cars in the background. |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 12:49:02 AM · #4 |
| Yeah the cars. Well if that's the case then just a tighter crop to fix that. |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 12:50:08 AM · #5 |
| It'd be interesting to hear some SC weigh in on this... |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 01:29:15 AM · #6 |
Great! I think it'll be legal due to the crop. Wazz cropped his so that only the minimal part of the fork is evident. The cars in the BG doesn't seem to constitute as a major element.
Although it would be nice to hear what SC says ;) |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 02:48:34 AM · #7 |
Not legal.
The shot is not possible without the forklift. How can an element that makes the shot possible (and is in the frame) not be a major element?
Of course, ropes holding up a ladder and strings holding things has been allowed, so who knows how the SC would vote. *shrug*
Cool photo regardless.
David
Message edited by author 2006-04-29 02:48:56.
|
|
|
|
04/29/2006 02:56:05 AM · #8 |
here you go David ;)
 |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 02:58:43 AM · #9 |
I'm not so sure it would be legal. Remember this entry and why it was DQ'ed.
WARNING!
No thumbnails because of adult content.
DQ'ed Entry
Original Shot
|
|
|
|
04/29/2006 03:04:57 AM · #10 |
| Yeah but the Doc cloned out the whole light. I just cropped. |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 03:10:17 AM · #11 |
| yep... a crop is different ;) |
|
|
|
04/29/2006 05:33:56 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Rikki:
here you go David ;)
|
Like I said, they make cool photos -- but as long as the rules are there they need to be defined clearly and enforced. Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I don't see ropes that made the image possible as a 'minor' element -- provided of course the portion of the rope (harness?) visible was identifiable as such.
Just my opinion of course. :P
David
|
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:32:04 PM · #13 |
Bump For an SC to chime in on this pic. It seems some think its legal and others don't.
I think it would pass. What do you think? |
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:35:13 PM · #14 |
| hmmmmm..i dont think it would be legal...just my uneducated,worthless opinion :) |
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:41:18 PM · #15 |
Hey, at least hes wearing a Matisyahu shirt.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:42:22 PM · #16 |
I think it's the difference between being a major element TO the picture and a major element IN the picture. If you'd caught a bit of one of your lights in the corner of your shot where you couldn't crop you'd be able to clone it out. Lighting is a major element TO the picture, but IN the picture it's not.
In the case of the nude (which is fantastic, btw) removal of the light completely changes the composition, balance, etc. of the shot. In the case of the forklift bar it's removal of a minor distraction.
The problem, of course, is defining that fine line between minor and major. Glad I'm not the one who has to do it! :) |
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:48:27 PM · #17 |
I'm SC but don't take my word as gospel. The best way for a definate answer is using the ticket system. Here're my opinions anyway:
The cars: Not a major element, should be fine to get rid of.
The forklift truck: I would definately vote DQ here, since in the original shot I would describe it as a guy sitting on something, and in the second, a guy floating.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:50:59 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Konador:
I'm SC but don't take my word as gospel. The best way for a definate answer is using the ticket system. Here're my opinions anyway:
The cars: Not a major element, should be fine to get rid of.
The forklift truck: I would definately vote DQ here, since in the original shot I would describe it as a guy sitting on something, and in the second, a guy floating. |
Even with the crop huh? Its far from a major element after the crop.
So I can submit an image to the SC even though its not in a challenge. I was hoping to keep this public so we can all learn.
Thanks Konador |
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:52:37 PM · #19 |
Its only my personal opinion, the SC may think otherwise in a majority. I know it's not a large number of pixels in the photo, but I feel that its removal changes the whole concept of the shot.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2006 01:53:52 PM · #20 |
Thats a great PS job.
Very well done, good work.
I dont know...its just the fork...not much there, seems like the car is more of a major element.
Message edited by author 2006-04-30 13:55:57. |
|
|
|
04/30/2006 02:19:11 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Its only my personal opinion, the SC may think otherwise in a majority. I know it's not a large number of pixels in the photo, but I feel that its removal changes the whole concept of the shot. |
I respect your opinion and I thank for it!
But respectfully I would argue that the removal is vital to the shots intended effect.
Erick |
|
|
|
04/30/2006 02:25:28 PM · #22 |
And also, what about when folks suspend stuff in the air with fishing string, then clone out the string.
That certainly changes the concept of the shot, and those are not DQ'd.
I dont think they should be, but not really sure where you draw the line.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2006 02:31:23 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
And also, what about when folks suspend stuff in the air with fishing string, then clone out the string. |
I remain convinced that Erick was actually holding onto very thin, very strong lines and actually cloned the forklift in to the picture. I don't know why he did it, but give me enough time and I'll come up with a semi-convincing conspiracy theory involving SC, Elvis, the CIA and Barney the purple dinosaur.
|
|
|
|
04/30/2006 02:41:15 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
Thats a great PS job.
Very well done, good work.
I dont know...its just the fork...not much there, seems like the car is more of a major element. |
Major element is not defined in how many pixels it is, or how much % of the photo it takes up.
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
But respectfully I would argue that the removal is vital to the shots intended effect. |
It is vital, you're right, but that doesn't make it legal! You may have to find a different way of getting the shots intended effect (for example using a trampaline).
Originally posted by Riggs:
And also, what about when folks suspend stuff in the air with fishing string, then clone out the string. |
At least when using fishing line, it is very thin and designed to be invisible. Using this, the photographer has made a strong attempt to get it looking invisible before post processing. You can't say the same for sitting on a forklift truck!
Anyway, this is just me. Let's wait for some different SC opinion :)
|
|
|
|
04/30/2006 03:16:09 PM · #25 |
Just to narrow things down a bit, let's take a look at a CROP from the original:
Cars are gone, not a problem. Truck is gone, not a problem. All that's left is a little sliver of support for him. I cannot imagine this being DQ'd if he cloned that out in this crop. I'd be more worried about the cars showing through the bush qualifying as clonable distractions, frankly.
I have NEVER seen, anywhere, an official pronouncemnt that part of what makes an element "major" is whether it was essential to the staging of the shot. And with good reson, because it would be silly to require us to eschew the use of fishing line and such to suspend objects. And I'd submit that this little wedge of forklift is just the same thing as the fishing line, or Joey's rope.
Ask yourself this: if he'd PAINTED the forkbar in camouflage so it was LESS obvious, could he THEN clone out the barely-visible bar? I don't see how we could keep anyone from doing that with a straight face, and I don't think any ruleset that requires you to paint something to blend before you can clone it out makes any sense at all.
What if it was a plain yellow background, and he painted the forkbar yellow, and it didn't quite match? See how silly this is? Why do we worry so much about ways to KEEP people from making these extraordinarily creative shots? A great deal of thought and effort went into the making of this image...
R.
|
|
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: 09/18/2025 05:23:22 PM EDT.
