| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/15/2006 03:26:06 PM · #51 |
so you'd vote this one down?
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
OK...
"Photographic" means that it looks like a photograph. It does NOT look like something that started out as a photograph and ended up as something else after a randomly selected group of filters was applied to it. |
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:28:50 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by hopper:
so you'd vote this one down? |
The point is that 20% of the voters did just that, with a vote of 3 or less.
Message edited by author 2006-12-15 15:29:28. |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:30:34 PM · #53 |
so add it into the rules then? even though this image IS "photographic in Nature" as very little post processing was done.
You're trying to discourage this type of shot?
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by hopper:
so you'd vote this one down? |
The point is that 20% of the voters did just that. |
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:35:04 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by hopper:
You're trying to discourage this type of shot? |
Nope- just saying that the voters DO. |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:35:11 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I'm pretty sure that's NOT what I said. |
Feel free to define 'photographic' in easy to grasp terms then. Some feel it is something a 3 year old should understand, evidence to the contrary. If it is so straight foward, why do I enter images straight from a camera that get voted down for being too edited or not photographic ? |
OK...
"Photographic" means that it looks like a photograph. It does NOT look like something that started out as a photograph and ended up as something else after a randomly selected group of filters was applied to it. |
Maybe it's time people started to learn that most of those "crazy photoshop filters" were developed to imitate some traditional photographic technique. To punish an out-of-the camera shot because one doesn't know how it could be made without a Photoshop filter is logical -- because a lot of people don't have that extensive a knowledge of photographic techniques -- but "wrong" or unfair nevertheless. |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:44:45 PM · #56 |
telling people to vote down an image because "they do anyway" is a strange reason to add it to the rules.
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by hopper:
You're trying to discourage this type of shot? |
Nope- just saying that the voters DO. |
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:47:37 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by hopper:
You're trying to discourage this type of shot? |
Nope- just saying that the voters DO. |
Right, but you already said that anyone from a young age can tell the difference between a real photograph and something with too much post processing. So again, I'm confused. Now you appear to be arguing the side that says the voters can't recognise a photo from something too manipulated.
Message edited by author 2006-12-15 15:48:12.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:49:51 PM · #58 |
Just throwing this up for debate. Let's take this as an example of a hypothetical "Sky" entry.
BTW, I won't get offended by either side of the argument. I have my own opinion of what this image is, but not gonna influence discussion.
Message edited by author 2006-12-15 15:51:36.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:50:19 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Maybe it's time people started to learn that most of those "crazy photoshop filters" were developed to imitate some traditional photographic technique. To punish an out-of-the camera shot because one doesn't know how it could be made without a Photoshop filter is logical -- because a lot of people don't have that extensive a knowledge of photographic techniques -- but "wrong" or unfair nevertheless. |
Right. Hence my original statement that seemed to ruffle feathers, that most voters don't appear to have the knowledge to do this effectively, without further information. (such as seeing the comments fields while voting)
if the purpose of the site is educational (says so, right on the tin) then providing the photographers comments during voting would maybe actually start moving towards that purpose.
Message edited by author 2006-12-15 15:51:24.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 03:52:04 PM · #60 |
eeeeeeehhhxcellent point.
Originally posted by hopper:
telling people to vote down an image because "they do anyway" is a strange reason to add it to the rules. |
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:07:16 PM · #61 |
In terms of my original question, this photo brought up a couple of posts ago seems to come closest to my confusion:
It is obviously fantasy, it is no longer a real photograph--but it also still seems "photographic in nature." Still, many folks would not call this a photograph, but "digital art". So as I'm voting on the Sky challenge, I have my own point of view about this that I'm using consistently. However, since it is a "trial" challenge, I would really like to put my finger on what is acceptable. We're talking about not just combining several similar images to create a better image as with HDR, but creating photo art that, while still photographic in nature, could be perceived by some as no longer photographs.
(About filters and processing, this is a totally different matter, in my opinion. Folks did lots of things with film with only wet processing that would never be accepted here because it would appear to be "too much processing." I used high contrast film a lot in the 80s, for instance, that make images look like sketches or block prints--yet it was only the type of film chosen that affected the image.)
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:11:17 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by dsidwell:
It is obviously fantasy, it is no longer a real photograph--but it also still seems "photographic in nature." Still, many folks would not call this a photograph, but "digital art".
So as I'm voting on the Sky challenge, I have my own point of view about this that I'm using consistently. However, since it is a "trial" challenge, I would really like to put my finger on what is acceptable. We're talking about not just combining several similar images to create a better image as with HDR, but creating photo art that, while still photographic in nature, could be perceived by some as no longer photographs.
|
I don't even think the 'digital art' thing needs to be thrown in - it is just montage ,which has been done for a while before photoshop came along. It is based on photography, but I don't consider the end results a photograph.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:24:40 PM · #63 |
For other examples of very nice montage work (all photographic based), I really enjoy Maggie Taylor.
 kiwiness has also done some outstanding work in this area, such as this one:
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:30:38 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
if the purpose of the site is educational (says so, right on the tin) then providing the photographers comments during voting would maybe actually start moving towards that purpose. |
I've often suggested that the info be available as a popup during voting, so only those who want to see it will, but that idea has never been implimented : ( |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:33:03 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by dsidwell:
|
I wonder - would that a be a good or bad winner for an 'Expert' rules challenge ? If it won, would the rules be seen as a success ?
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:36:53 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
|
I wonder - would that a be a good or bad winner for an 'Expert' rules challenge ? If it won, would the rules be seen as a success ? |
Wow! Everyone's opinion is wrong except yours? Get a life! |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:37:29 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by sodoff:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
|
I wonder - would that a be a good or bad winner for an 'Expert' rules challenge ? If it won, would the rules be seen as a success ? |
Wow! Everyone's opinion is wrong except yours? Get a life! |
Which part of what I said even expressed my opinion ?
Message edited by author 2006-12-15 16:39:33.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:38:47 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
|
I wonder - would that a be a good or bad winner for an 'Expert' rules challenge ? If it won, would the rules be seen as a success ? |
I'm sure kiwiness would think it was a success ;-)
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:41:00 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by sodoff:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
|
I wonder - would that a be a good or bad winner for an 'Expert' rules challenge ? If it won, would the rules be seen as a success ? |
Wow! Everyone's opinion is wrong except yours? Get a life! |
Which part of what I said even expressed my opinion ? learn to read. |
What has been said by different people in the past three pages is wrong in your eyes. Everyone has a different opinion on what is a photo, is photographic, no matter what their age, sex, colour creed. What you like, others don't, what others like you don't. Or is it just a case to argue the odds? |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:42:24 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by sodoff:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by sodoff:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
|
I wonder - would that a be a good or bad winner for an 'Expert' rules challenge ? If it won, would the rules be seen as a success ? |
Wow! Everyone's opinion is wrong except yours? Get a life! |
Which part of what I said even expressed my opinion ? learn to read. |
What has been said by different people in the past three pages is wrong in your eyes. Everyone has a different opinion on what is a photo, is photographic, no matter what their age, sex, colour creed. What you like, others don't, what others like you don't. Or is it just a case to argue the odds? |
So answer the question then. Is that photographic or not ? Are you just here to be insulting ?
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:46:31 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by sodoff:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by sodoff:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
|
I wonder - would that a be a good or bad winner for an 'Expert' rules challenge ? If it won, would the rules be seen as a success ? |
Wow! Everyone's opinion is wrong except yours? Get a life! |
Which part of what I said even expressed my opinion ? learn to read. |
What has been said by different people in the past three pages is wrong in your eyes. Everyone has a different opinion on what is a photo, is photographic, no matter what their age, sex, colour creed. What you like, others don't, what others like you don't. Or is it just a case to argue the odds? |
So answer the question then. Is that photographic or not ? Are you just here to be insulting ? |
OH! hit a nerve? Man, I don't come here to be insulting, I come here and pay for membership to learn and chat. I like looking at other people's attempts, and I vote on what I like. I thought that was the purpose of this site? Seems I am wrong cos I don't agree with what you say? |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:47:40 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by sodoff:
OH! hit a nerve? Man, I don't come here to be insulting, I come here and pay for membership to learn and chat. I like looking at other people's attempts, and I vote on what I like. I thought that was the purpose of this site? Seems I am wrong cos I don't agree with what you say? |
Not really, but starting out with 'get a life' seems a bit contrary to what you claim to be here for. And yet again, you seem to be assuming I'm saying something about that picture. and again I haven't. Odd that. So is it photographic ? That's the point of this thread after all.
Message edited by author 2006-12-15 16:48:11.
|
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:48:27 PM · #73 |
OK, lets all talk about the photograph(s) and not each other. Thanks.
And (as Gordon finally demonstrated) you don't really have to requote the entire six levels to respond to someone's point.
Message edited by author 2006-12-15 16:49:18. |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:49:15 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
OK, lets all talk about the photograph(s) and not each other. Thanks.
And you don't really have to requote the entire six levels to respond to someone's point. |
Sorry! |
|
|
|
12/15/2006 04:51:05 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
So is it photographic ? That's the point of this thread after all. |
Technically there is nothing about Kiwiness' image that could not be done in a studio. Although it would take a lot of prop and set design to do, it is achievable.
|
|
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: 08/25/2025 02:55:23 PM EDT.
