Perspective III Results Recalculated

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

07/20/2006 12:44:37 PM · #78

Originally posted by deadlance:

So I am wrong? This isn't a photography contest website? It's a photomanipulation website?

Obviously there's no way to be specific enough to define the line between what a photo is and where it becomes over processed and art instead. That's all based on perspective and opinions. That's why I think the rules are inappropriate and should be fixed.

It is a photography contest website Lance. It just seems that you don't associate photo editing with photography. Just try to think of Photoshop as a digital darkroom and try to consider that before photo editing software was ever thought about, photographers used the darkroom to achieve similar effects that we do today.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

07/20/2006 12:44:40 PM · #79

Originally posted by Elvis_L:

agreed! BTW where can I find that class?

You can start with the Photoshop Basics Workflow Thread right here in DPC.

R.

deadlance

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

07/20/2006 12:49:16 PM · #80

seriously. I don't mean to make people hate me. I just think that on average, people can't be trusted and on average, people don't know everything... so based on that, either you should set extremely strict guidelines as to whats allowed, don't allow ANYTHING, or allow EVERYTHING. That way it's simple and impossible to make an accident. It also becomes more fair for everyone that way.

I completely understand the darkroom portion of photography and that photoshop is that equivalent. I am not saying that every contest should be a no editing contest. I just think it's pretty sad how "Over worked" most of the photos are.

marycciu

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC for Canon

07/20/2006 12:52:05 PM · #81

Originally posted by deadlance:

Perhaps you should start another forum thread to discuss people's entries that have placed well that had little to no processing especially in the advanced editing challenges. If you do that, let me know! I'd be interested too.

Phil

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

07/20/2006 12:58:16 PM · #82

Originally posted by deadlance:

I don't hate you. :D I wouldn't say, "most are overworked" either. Sure, there are several photos that are overly saturated, sharpened, etc at times; but for the most part the higher placed images usually don't look overdone to me. I'm not a big fan of digital art but enhancing photos with software is something I don't consider to be in the same category.

I probably shouldn't say this but take a look at the straight from camera challenge. I found this challenge boring at best but it does go to show you that photo editing is something that many of us should incorporate into our photography. Just look how many good pictures would become awesome pictures with a simple levels and curves adjustment.

Elvis_L

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

07/20/2006 01:06:12 PM · #83

Originally posted by dudephil:

Originally posted by deadlance:
seriously. I don't mean to make people hate me. I just think that on average, people can't be trusted and on average, people don't know everything... so based on that, either you should set extremely strict guidelines as to whats allowed, don't allow ANYTHING, or allow EVERYTHING. That way it's simple and impossible to make an accident. It also becomes more fair for everyone that way.

I completely understand the darkroom portion of photography and that photoshop is that equivalent. I am not saying that every contest should be a no editing contest. I just think it's pretty sad how "Over worked" most of the photos are.

I don't hate you. :D I wouldn't say, "most are overworked" either. Sure, there are several photos that are overly saturated, sharpened, etc at times; but for the most part the higher placed images usually don't look overdone to me. I'm not a big fan of digital art but enhancing photos with software is something I don't consider to be in the same category.

I probably shouldn't say this but take a look at the straight from camera challenge. I found this challenge boring at best but it does go to show you that photo editing is something that many of us should incorporate into our photography. Just look how many good pictures would become awesome pictures with a simple levels and curves adjustment.

I for one Like digital art and really like to work with my photos in photshop. I have a current entry that looks very processed in a basic challenge and it is below 5. I knew it would score low but decided I would start entering what I like without worrying as much about score. my point is that most of the time over processed photos do not do well. no reason to stop that technique in rules. people should be alowed to show what they want as THIER art and let the voters decide if it is too much.

Message edited by author 2006-07-20 13:07:15.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

07/20/2006 02:16:42 PM · #84

Originally posted by Elvis_L:

my point is that most of the time over processed photos do not do well. no reason to stop that technique in rules. people should be alowed to show what they want as THIER art and let the voters decide if it is too much.

I agree. I think people confuse digital photography to mean digital photojournalism. The two are not the same.

dolphnz8

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

07/20/2006 02:37:13 PM · #85

Originally posted by pidge:

Originally posted by deadlance:
who's fault is it that one persons camera isn't as good as someone elses? Go buy a new camera then.

Are you serious?

That has got to be one of the most elitist and classist statements I've heard in a long time.

Anyways, flog that dead horse all you want

[url]

[/url]

For Real!!!

dahkota

07/20/2006 03:00:57 PM · #86

Originally posted by deadlance:

How is it unfair to say "straight from the camera"? who's fault is it that one persons camera isn't as good as someone elses? Go buy a new camera then.

It just seems like photography today has gotten away from what photography REALLY is. Photography isn't snapping a picture and then going to the dark room for 6 hours to "fix" the shot. Photography is simply - get the shot right in the camera... atleast that's what it used to be. It's not a difficult concept really. I can agree with simple fixes like brightening or darkening, but in the interests of simplicity, there really should be a "straight from the camera" ruleset or the basic set should be defined as straight from the camera.

The only file you can get without manipulation from a camera is a RAW file. Many of today's cameras don't even create RAW files.

The idea that in-camera manipulation is okay but photographer manipulation is not still chaffs my @$$. Getting the shot right has NOTHING to do with manipulation after the fact. Photography is still about getting the shot right in camera. To make a broad general statement that it isn't does disservice to all photographers.

Also, to assume that jpegs are unmanipulated straight out of the camera is ridiculous. Look at the images in my port from recently titled with _MG_xxxx. All of those are straight out of the camera. You can't tell me that is what the scene in front of me looked like or that no manipulation was being done.

Sheesh! When will you all get off your high horses with this straight out of the camera crap?

Oh, that's right. All the horses are dead now.

DjFenzl

07/20/2006 03:15:13 PM · #87

where do you draw the line? There is definitely a line, otherwise this place may as well close up shop and we can all go over to worth1000.com

There is a line on this site and it's held in place by the rules of the challenge. Agree with them or not they were in place before and after the challenge. The Site Counsel is the "Supreme Court" of the site - there to give the final word on what is legal and not legal.

With that said the rules are being re-written - but until that time the rules that are currently in place are all we have.

Just because we are capable of doing more to photos doesn't mean we necessarily should be allowed to.

If this site was called B&W Photography Challenge I suppose there would be arguments from time to time that cameras are capable of color so why are they trying to hold their users back. In such a case it would be easy to see the people complaining are on the wrong site.

It's not always as easy to see that this site is similar to that though. Yes there are some restrictions to what is allowed. Many (even most) users may be able to do much more than is allowed and create truly stunning works of art by doing some additional artwork on their photos. That's not what this site is about though. This site is about creating images within the confines of the boundaries given. If you don't like the boundaries here, then perhaps it's not the right site for you. No hard feelings or judgements, just perhaps consider the reason why you are here on this site.

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

07/20/2006 03:37:02 PM · #88

Originally posted by dahkota:

... Getting the shot right has NOTHING to do with manipulation after the fact....

I don't quite agree with this ... getting the shot "right" in the camera includes planning for whatever post-processing is anticipated. The "best" capture for producing a final print will rarely look as good if printed before the post-processing.

I work in an offset print shop, where we deal with something called "dot gain" -- on the press a dot which is 50% black will increase to maybe 55% by the time the ink is transferred-to and absorbed by the paper. So when I made the negatives for those photos, I had to expose them to get that part of the photo to about 46%, so by the time the final process was completed it ended up at the desired 50%.

I don't see digital photography as being any different -- I may have to under- or over-expose a part of the image in order to retain any detail at all in another part, in anticipation of restoring those areas to "normal" tonal values later.

Since the human eye can see a tonal range the equivalent of 7-8 stops (or more), while most cameras can capture a range of only 4-5 stops, the combination of exposure and post-processing is actually used to restore the scene to be closer to what the photographer's eye could see (or mind envision), not just what some chip is capable of capturing.

Message edited by author 2006-07-20 15:37:44.

dahkota

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

07/20/2006 03:46:09 PM · #89

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I don't see digital photography as being any different -- I may have to under- or over-expose a part of the image in order to retain any detail at all in another part, in anticipation of restoring those areas to "normal" tonal values later.

That's still part of getting the shot right, yes? My only point was that I'm tired of certain peoples stating that photographers use photoshop because they can't get the picture right in the first place. That's a load of crap.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

07/20/2006 03:58:36 PM · #90

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Since the human eye can see a tonal range the equivalent of 7-8 stops (or more

Try an incredible 12-13 stops. The human eye is truly amazing. We need to recall that a stop is a doubling of information, so 12 stops over 8 is really 16x the ability to differentiate light...

Rebecca

Nikon D80

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 18-135mm f/3.5- 5.6G ED DX

07/20/2006 04:11:26 PM · #91

Originally posted by dahkota:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I don't see digital photography as being any different -- I may have to under- or over-expose a part of the image in order to retain any detail at all in another part, in anticipation of restoring those areas to "normal" tonal values later.

That's still part of getting the shot right, yes? My only point was that I'm tired of certain peoples stating that photographers use photoshop because they can't get the picture right in the first place. That's a load of crap.

PhotoShop is not the digital equivalent of whiteout. Got it ;)

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

07/20/2006 04:19:29 PM · #92

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by GeneralE:
Since the human eye can see a tonal range the equivalent of 7-8 stops (or more

Try an incredible 12-13 stops. The human eye is truly amazing. We need to recall that a stop is a doubling of information, so 12 stops over 8 is really 16x the ability to differentiate light...

I couldn't remember in stops, but 13 now sounds right -- takes it to 8192x or about the five orders of magnitude I was thinking of. We use a transmission densitometer at work, and I can perceive light through film with a density of greater than 5.2 or less than 1/100,000 of the unfiltered light.

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

07/20/2006 04:21:09 PM · #93

Originally posted by dahkota:

That's still part of getting the shot right, yes?

Yes. I was trying to support your overall premise, while pointing out that those particular words were inconsistent with it.

dahkota

07/20/2006 04:26:31 PM · #94

Sorry. Long day at work. :)

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

07/20/2006 04:27:40 PM · #95

Originally posted by dahkota:

Sorry. Long day at work. :)

You don't need to apologize for asking for clarification : )

hokie

Nikon D2X

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

07/20/2006 04:38:57 PM · #96

A lot of the rules here were generated with two main functions in mind.

1) To retain "Photography" to mean as close to traditional light on receptor (either film or digital) as possible.

2) Maintain a somewhat even playing field between the haves and have nots (referring to skills and technical doodads)

All that being said....we do need to have a challenge section (members only probably) that allows anything that could be accomplished in the traditional darkroom to be allowed. This particularly includes blending multiple exposures (bracketed) to overcome the inherent dynamic range limitations of digital photography.

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

07/20/2006 04:42:21 PM · #97

Originally posted by hokie:

... anything that could be accomplished in the traditional darkroom to be allowed. This particularly includes blending multiple exposures (bracketed) to overcome the inherent dynamic range limitations of digital photography.

If you can "develop" your two bracketed exposures from a single RAW image, you are allowed to do this now for Advanced Editing challenges.

Elvis_L

Canon EOS-5D Mark II