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

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Motion Blur II
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 87, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/22/2006 09:35:22 PM · #26
Reminder: Motion blur should NOT be added in post processing

Advanced ediing rules.

After photo taken, is tilting or sharpening or cropping allowed in this challenge?
 06/22/2006 09:36:26 PM · #27
if you mean tilt as in rotate, then yes. however if you modify the pixels then that would be a DQ. the rest are legal as well.
 06/22/2006 09:39:39 PM · #28
Originally posted by Rikki:
if you mean tilt as in rotate, then yes. however if you modify the pixels then that would be a DQ. the rest are legal as well.


Yes, about 2 degree rotate needed... I cropped after rotated... Now, is this still ok? I don't understand the pixel modifiying...
 06/22/2006 10:19:22 PM · #29
Originally posted by focuspoint:
Originally posted by Rikki:
if you mean tilt as in rotate, then yes. however if you modify the pixels then that would be a DQ. the rest are legal as well.


Yes, about 2 degree rotate needed... I cropped after rotated... Now, is this still ok? I don't understand the pixel modifiying...


yes rotating and cropping is legal
 06/22/2006 10:34:17 PM · #30
Originally posted by focuspoint:
Reminder: Motion blur should NOT be added in post processing

Advanced ediing rules.

After photo taken, is tilting or sharpening or cropping allowed in this challenge?


The extra rule is probably a reference to the photoshop plugin called "motion blur"

I did this to one of my challenge entries for fun - but not allowed in this challenge
 06/22/2006 10:49:50 PM · #31
done 4 or 5 differnt shots /
not sure if i like anyofthem ,,
still havea few days ,
 06/22/2006 10:58:34 PM · #32
Curious, not that I would do this but what if you created the motion blur in photoshop and then printed it out and used as a backdrop to a setup shot. Would that be grounds for DQ since that effect is coming straight out of the camera? Would the printout be considered a "work of art" and so long as you didn't shoot it as a literal representation would it all be legal? The thought of this actually came when I was thinking about bokeh shots and how easily you could create a great looking bokeh background this way. Let me be clear I didn't do that with my entry.

Message edited by author 2006-06-22 22:59:35.
 06/23/2006 09:00:43 PM · #33
Can the blur be enhanced in post processing?
 06/23/2006 09:17:21 PM · #34
Originally posted by ggbudge:
Can the blur be enhanced in post processing?


NO.
 06/23/2006 09:23:51 PM · #35
Just wondering...

Do you think the amount of blur in a shot will matter to the voter? Like if you have a crisp picture except for one object that is blurred do to motion, with the vast majority of voters in mind, would it meet the challenge?
 06/24/2006 02:26:42 PM · #36
Unlike the 30 sec challenge, it DOES NOT say using a filter is grounds for a DQ. It says you should not use it. Which I agree with, because it is more of a technical challenge. However, according to the challenge, you will not be DQ'd. You may be ridiculed and scolded. So to answer ggbudge, I would say enhancing is within the spirit of the challenge. As long as it is there to begin with. Just don't go overboard.
 06/24/2006 02:36:02 PM · #37
Originally posted by yanko:
Curious, not that I would do this but what if you created the motion blur in photoshop and then printed it out and used as a backdrop to a setup shot. Would that be grounds for DQ since that effect is coming straight out of the camera? Would the printout be considered a "work of art" and so long as you didn't shoot it as a literal representation would it all be legal? The thought of this actually came when I was thinking about bokeh shots and how easily you could create a great looking bokeh background this way. Let me be clear I didn't do that with my entry.


Might be a SC judgement call but I think you'd be okay. If I caught on to the technique, however, I would vote it lower than a real motion blur photo.

Message edited by author 2006-06-24 16:24:22.
 06/24/2006 02:38:27 PM · #38
Originally posted by AlphaTrooper:
Just wondering...

Do you think the amount of blur in a shot will matter to the voter? Like if you have a crisp picture except for one object that is blurred do to motion, with the vast majority of voters in mind, would it meet the challenge?


For me, I will be looking for something to be in focus as well as something blurred. If the entire photo is (motion) blurred, there is no place for my eye to rest. Just consider this my personal preference, not a rule or anything.
 06/24/2006 02:44:28 PM · #39


would this work?
 06/24/2006 03:29:21 PM · #40
Originally posted by Rikki:


would this work?


would get you about 6 ;)
 06/24/2006 03:55:48 PM · #41
Originally posted by Cutter:
Unlike the 30 sec challenge, it DOES NOT say using a filter is grounds for a DQ. It says you should not use it. Which I agree with, because it is more of a technical challenge. However, according to the challenge, you will not be DQ'd.


It is an extra rule, so it is grounds for dq.

06/24/2006 04:02:25 PM · #42
It says "Motion Blur" should not be used. It doesn't mention gausian, smart, radial, etc.

06/24/2006 04:13:06 PM · #43
Originally posted by Nobody:
It says "Motion Blur" should not be used. It doesn't mention gausian, smart, radial, etc.


It doesn't say Motion Blur filter.

quote:

Extra Rules: Reminder: Motion blur should NOT be added in post processing.

That applies to all post processing, I thought it was an easy description.
So even a radial blur is a no no.

Message edited by author 2006-06-24 16:15:12.
 06/24/2006 04:15:58 PM · #44
Originally posted by yanko:
Curious, not that I would do this but what if you created the motion blur in photoshop and then printed it out and used as a backdrop to a setup shot. Would that be grounds for DQ since that effect is coming straight out of the camera? Would the printout be considered a "work of art" and so long as you didn't shoot it as a literal representation would it all be legal? The thought of this actually came when I was thinking about bokeh shots and how easily you could create a great looking bokeh background this way. Let me be clear I didn't do that with my entry.


Awwwww, MAN! lol. That would be lowwwwwwwwwww to do that! :)
 06/24/2006 04:28:36 PM · #45
Originally posted by Azrifel:


It is an extra rule, so it is grounds for dq.


wrong. It is plain as day. Look at the exact wording in 30 secs vs. Motion blur. Look at it. There is a reason for difference. There has to be. It doesn't say DQ. They are stressing no use of motion blur filters for the explicit reason to encourage creative use of shutter speed. Unless they change the wording, that is what I am sticking to.
 06/24/2006 04:30:42 PM · #46
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Originally posted by Nobody:
It says "Motion Blur" should not be used. It doesn't mention gausian, smart, radial, etc.


It doesn't say Motion Blur filter.

quote:

Extra Rules: Reminder: Motion blur should NOT be added in post processing.

That applies to all post processing, I thought it was an easy description.
So even a radial blur is a no no.


I think we shall need to agree to dissagree on this one. I haven't used blurring on my entry, but I wouldn't have a problem with someone using anything other than Motion.
 06/24/2006 04:34:35 PM · #47
Originally posted by Cutter:
Originally posted by Azrifel:


It is an extra rule, so it is grounds for dq.


wrong. It is plain as day. Look at the exact wording in 30 secs vs. Motion blur. Look at it. There is a reason for difference. There has to be. It doesn't say DQ. They are stressing no use of motion blur filters for the explicit reason to encourage creative use of shutter speed. Unless they change the wording, that is what I am sticking to.


Me thinks there's a photo with added motion blur that will have Cutter's name on it. Else he's signaling a voting approach. You be the judge.
 06/24/2006 05:23:00 PM · #48
Originally posted by Cutter:
Originally posted by Azrifel:


It is an extra rule, so it is grounds for dq.


wrong. It is plain as day. Look at the exact wording in 30 secs vs. Motion blur. Look at it. There is a reason for difference. There has to be. It doesn't say DQ. They are stressing no use of motion blur filters for the explicit reason to encourage creative use of shutter speed. Unless they change the wording, that is what I am sticking to.


It says DQ in the 30s challenge because all hell broke loose after failing to create an extra rule for the 2s challenge and people winning with a non 2s shot.

The 2s challenge had no extra rule.
The 30s challenge has and we are reminded that less than 30s will be dq'ed.
The Motion Blur II challenge also has a very clear extra rule. It is not encouragement, it is a rule. Clear and simple as that. Not sticking to rules is ground for dq, that includes extra rules.
The extra rule also does not talk about filters, it clearly says that motion blur should not be added/created with post processing and post processing defines any tool or filter you can think of.

06/24/2006 07:13:23 PM · #49
Originally posted by maestro:
Originally posted by yanko:
Curious, not that I would do this but what if you created the motion blur in photoshop and then printed it out and used as a backdrop to a setup shot. Would that be grounds for DQ since that effect is coming straight out of the camera? Would the printout be considered a "work of art" and so long as you didn't shoot it as a literal representation would it all be legal? The thought of this actually came when I was thinking about bokeh shots and how easily you could create a great looking bokeh background this way. Let me be clear I didn't do that with my entry.


Awwwww, MAN! lol. That would be lowwwwwwwwwww to do that! :)

One person's lowwwwwwwwwww is another's creativity. Similar things have been done to great success in photography in general and at DPC in particular numerous times before. This type of thing has been a fundamental part of photography forever.
 06/24/2006 07:36:55 PM · #50
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by maestro:
Originally posted by yanko:
Curious, not that I would do this but what if you created the motion blur in photoshop and then printed it out and used as a backdrop to a setup shot. Would that be grounds for DQ since that effect is coming straight out of the camera? Would the printout be considered a "work of art" and so long as you didn't shoot it as a literal representation would it all be legal? The thought of this actually came when I was thinking about bokeh shots and how easily you could create a great looking bokeh background this way. Let me be clear I didn't do that with my entry.


Awwwww, MAN! lol. That would be lowwwwwwwwwww to do that! :)

One person's lowwwwwwwwwww is another's creativity. Similar things have been done to great success in photography in general and at DPC in particular numerous times before. This type of thing has been a fundamental part of photography forever.


I do believe that would be cheating if I understand it correctly. Nothing really moves in second shot... Creativity comes with "skills" in photography I believe. If you only use your creativity, why take pictures at first place. Sit on your computer and gather some stuff, claim your work, art... whatever.

Anyway, I believe in Karma... There is always a "feeling" in a real photo and a fake one. Here is one more thing, even if you succeed something with that kind of "creativity", you only fooling yourself... think about it ;)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 03:05:28 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: 08/02/2025 03:05:28 PM EDT.