| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/15/2008 03:27:36 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
If you can get a viewable image off your sensor without processing it, I'll send you my 5D. Why don't you spend time learning how to best process your images rather than ask everyone else to operate at your level. |
A viewable image, off my sensor, no processing? Oh pack up that 5D now, PM me for the address. Gawd I love contests with no rules afterall...
I don't even have to use my printer for this one... |
Really? Whatever method you use to convert electrical signals into a visual media is processing. Looking forward to seeing the results. |
What conversion of electrical signals? Oh, you are thinking so inside the box. You need to quit relying on software and computers. |
Alright, Mr Wizard. I stand ready to be schooled. |
Gee, there's a computer in my camera so I have to stop relying on it. I guess a challenge with the traditional pinhole is in order. |
Heh...all that is still for 'acquisition' and the associated on-body processing. The talk is about not allowing any software 'post processing' once the image is off the camera body for occasional challenges.
Ok lets make it simple. Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing.
Message edited by author 2008-10-15 15:29:24. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 03:34:53 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Prash:
...
Ok I understand you said that as an opinion. I am only trying to emphasize the fact that the classic definition of photography be (re)lived sometimes. And another thing is: I may never score better.. no matter what the rules. But just the idea of a RAW buffer dumped out of the body with no touch at all fascinates me. Again, just a suggestion. Not a request, not a demand. Just an honest suggestion.
(( runs off to get the shield :-)) |
Do you know how much processing and editing is involved in "the classic definition of photography..."? Do you realize that Ansel Adams processed his shots to death in the darkroom? ;)
|
|
|
|
10/15/2008 03:35:14 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
If you can get a viewable image off your sensor without processing it, I'll send you my 5D. Why don't you spend time learning how to best process your images rather than ask everyone else to operate at your level. |
A viewable image, off my sensor, no processing? Oh pack up that 5D now, PM me for the address. Gawd I love contests with no rules afterall...
I don't even have to use my printer for this one... |
Really? Whatever method you use to convert electrical signals into a visual media is processing. Looking forward to seeing the results. |
What conversion of electrical signals? Oh, you are thinking so inside the box. You need to quit relying on software and computers. |
Alright, Mr Wizard. I stand ready to be schooled. |
Gee, there's a computer in my camera so I have to stop relying on it. I guess a challenge with the traditional pinhole is in order. |
Heh...all that is still for 'acquisition' and the associated on-body processing. The talk is about not allowing any software 'post processing' once the image is off the camera body for occasional challenges.
Ok lets make it simple. Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing. |
JPEG is lossy, not lossless and if saved at 100% it's a whole lot bigger than what's allowed for submissions.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2008 03:45:55 PM · #29 |
Back to  Prash: I too would like more minimal processing challenges, but I don't think they will help me explore what I need to explore right now which IS processing. We've certainly discussed this in the past, but it is not so much a matter of argument as it is of praxis: even the slightest tweaking in pp shows you something about your data, whether it is raw or jpeg. The more you "play" the more you see. Digital imaging is a Pandora's box that has already been opened.
(Damn, that  JulietNN is quick. Didn't really want that 5D anyway). |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 03:50:07 PM · #30 |
Don't for a minute think that just because you can't post process your image will make it score above a 5.0.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2008 04:53:26 PM · #31 |
| Hmmh... so you're telling me that I should actually be proud of the 5 out of 7 entries scoring more than 5... (even though I know 3 of them are horrible!).. as I dont know anything about PP...? |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 04:55:53 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
If you can get a viewable image off your sensor without processing it, I'll send you my 5D. Why don't you spend time learning how to best process your images rather than ask everyone else to operate at your level. |
A viewable image, off my sensor, no processing? Oh pack up that 5D now, PM me for the address. Gawd I love contests with no rules afterall...
I don't even have to use my printer for this one... |
Really? Whatever method you use to convert electrical signals into a visual media is processing. Looking forward to seeing the results. |
What conversion of electrical signals? Oh, you are thinking so inside the box. You need to quit relying on software and computers. |
Alright, Mr Wizard. I stand ready to be schooled. |
Gee, there's a computer in my camera so I have to stop relying on it. I guess a challenge with the traditional pinhole is in order. |
Heh...all that is still for 'acquisition' and the associated on-body processing. The talk is about not allowing any software 'post processing' once the image is off the camera body for occasional challenges.
Ok lets make it simple. Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing. |
JPEG is lossy, not lossless and if saved at 100% it's a whole lot bigger than what's allowed for submissions. |
I work in image analysis industry. Trust me... there is a thing called lossless JPEG compression. You are missing the main point and just countering with details.
Message edited by author 2008-10-15 16:56:33. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:16:18 PM · #33 |
Jeez.. what is it with people running to get negative facts when something 'different' is proposed or re-explored? Not much has changed I guess in terms of being open to different ways of looking at the same thing.
I have made all the points I had to make in support of a suggestion for a zero editing challenge. And if you still have reservations about what this was all about,have a look here, and think about it over a coffee.
Dear SC: Can you please lock this thread before it goes out of hands?
|
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:19:34 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
If you can get a viewable image off your sensor without processing it, I'll send you my 5D. Why don't you spend time learning how to best process your images rather than ask everyone else to operate at your level. |
A viewable image, off my sensor, no processing? Oh pack up that 5D now, PM me for the address. Gawd I love contests with no rules afterall...
I don't even have to use my printer for this one... |
Really? Whatever method you use to convert electrical signals into a visual media is processing. Looking forward to seeing the results. |
What conversion of electrical signals? Oh, you are thinking so inside the box. You need to quit relying on software and computers. |
Alright, Mr Wizard. I stand ready to be schooled. |
Gee, there's a computer in my camera so I have to stop relying on it. I guess a challenge with the traditional pinhole is in order. |
Heh...all that is still for 'acquisition' and the associated on-body processing. The talk is about not allowing any software 'post processing' once the image is off the camera body for occasional challenges.
Ok lets make it simple. Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing. |
JPEG is lossy, not lossless and if saved at 100% it's a whole lot bigger than what's allowed for submissions. |
I work in image analysis industry. Trust me... there is a thing called lossless JPEG compression. You are missing the main point and just countering with details. |
Sorry, but the details matter in this context.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:20:45 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Jeez.. what is it with people running to get negative facts when something 'different' is proposed or re-explored? Not much has changed I guess in terms of being open to different ways of looking at the same thing.
I have made all the points I had to make in support of a suggestion for a zero editing challenge. And if you still have reservations about what this was all about,have a look here, and think about it over a coffee.
Dear SC: Can you please lock this thread before it goes out of hands? |
Man those images are so heavily edited. They were just edited in the camera using the camera's various settings. Read the notes on the first place image if you don't understand what I'm talking about. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:21:35 PM · #36 |
Ignoring the bickering I just want to defend my kid and avoid the dreaded straight from camera again...
 vs 
sorry but she really did have a cold at the time... |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:43:50 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by Prash:
Jeez.. what is it with people running to get negative facts when something 'different' is proposed or re-explored? Not much has changed I guess in terms of being open to different ways of looking at the same thing.
I have made all the points I had to make in support of a suggestion for a zero editing challenge. And if you still have reservations about what this was all about,have a look here, and think about it over a coffee.
Dear SC: Can you please lock this thread before it goes out of hands? |
Man those images are so heavily edited. They were just edited in the camera using the camera's various settings. Read the notes on the first place image if you don't understand what I'm talking about. |
Right. I did see what you are talking about.. and thats why I said before:
"Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing."
If your camera allows it, you are allowed to do it. That is 'in-body' processing.. not software based post processing. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:45:45 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
If you can get a viewable image off your sensor without processing it, I'll send you my 5D. Why don't you spend time learning how to best process your images rather than ask everyone else to operate at your level. |
A viewable image, off my sensor, no processing? Oh pack up that 5D now, PM me for the address. Gawd I love contests with no rules afterall...
I don't even have to use my printer for this one... |
Really? Whatever method you use to convert electrical signals into a visual media is processing. Looking forward to seeing the results. |
What conversion of electrical signals? Oh, you are thinking so inside the box. You need to quit relying on software and computers. |
Alright, Mr Wizard. I stand ready to be schooled. |
Gee, there's a computer in my camera so I have to stop relying on it. I guess a challenge with the traditional pinhole is in order. |
Heh...all that is still for 'acquisition' and the associated on-body processing. The talk is about not allowing any software 'post processing' once the image is off the camera body for occasional challenges.
Ok lets make it simple. Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing. |
JPEG is lossy, not lossless and if saved at 100% it's a whole lot bigger than what's allowed for submissions. |
I work in image analysis industry. Trust me... there is a thing called lossless JPEG compression. You are missing the main point and just countering with details. |
Sorry, but the details matter in this context. |
I am sorry too, but what details???
Detail#1: Werent aware of the fact that lossless JPG compression is possible. But you are not admitting that.
Detail#2: Ignored the fact that resize and crop both are valid methods to reduce an image's size.
What other details? |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:53:19 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by Prash:
Jeez.. what is it with people running to get negative facts when something 'different' is proposed or re-explored? Not much has changed I guess in terms of being open to different ways of looking at the same thing.
I have made all the points I had to make in support of a suggestion for a zero editing challenge. And if you still have reservations about what this was all about,have a look here, and think about it over a coffee.
Dear SC: Can you please lock this thread before it goes out of hands? |
Man those images are so heavily edited. They were just edited in the camera using the camera's various settings. Read the notes on the first place image if you don't understand what I'm talking about. |
Right. I did see what you are talking about.. and thats why I said before:
"Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing."
If your camera allows it, you are allowed to do it. That is 'in-body' processing.. not software based post processing. |
Ok. The raw file captured by those cameras that can capture in raw, contains nothing but 'raw' image data. The in-body processing being performed by the camera, which are many of the same tools available in external editing applications, spit the resulting file out as a jpeg. You can't use your in-camera options and dump a raw file for later conversion to jpeg. It simply does not work that way. If you want to be able to sharpen, use saturation boosts, contrast boosts, etc - the camera is going to give you a jpeg.
So in the camera or out of the camera, you took a picture of something and a computer processed it exactly as you told it to and you submitted it to dpc. The only difference between in-camera editing and editing in photoshop is you are letting the camera move the sliders for you. That's it. It's not in anyway a more 'genuine' form of photography. It's an option for those who can't/won't/don't care to learn to use an external editing application, and (if forced upon them via rules) a restriction on the creative options normally available to those who would rather do the editing themselves and leave the camera out of it.
Starbucks calls...
Message edited by author 2008-10-15 17:55:09. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:55:22 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Right. I did see what you are talking about.. and thats why I said before:
"Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing."
If your camera allows it, you are allowed to do it. That is 'in-body' processing.. not software based post processing. |
In camera processing still uses software, no?
Anyway, what's the difference between what you're suggesting and the minimal editing ruleset? Sharpening? |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 05:58:16 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by Prash:
Jeez.. what is it with people running to get negative facts when something 'different' is proposed or re-explored? Not much has changed I guess in terms of being open to different ways of looking at the same thing.
I have made all the points I had to make in support of a suggestion for a zero editing challenge. And if you still have reservations about what this was all about,have a look here, and think about it over a coffee.
Dear SC: Can you please lock this thread before it goes out of hands? |
Man those images are so heavily edited. They were just edited in the camera using the camera's various settings. Read the notes on the first place image if you don't understand what I'm talking about. |
Right. I did see what you are talking about.. and thats why I said before:
"Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing."
If your camera allows it, you are allowed to do it. That is 'in-body' processing.. not software based post processing. |
Ok. The raw file captured by those cameras that can capture in raw, contains nothing but 'raw' image data. So if you want people to submit a dump of the raw file you've already got a problem because web browsers won't display raw files. The in-body processing being performed by the camera, which are many of the same tools available in external editing applications, spit the resulting file out as a jpeg. You can't use your in-camera options and dump a raw file for later conversion to jpeg. It simply does not work that way.
So in the camera or out of the camera, you took a picture of something and a computer processed it exactly as you told it to and you submitted it to dpc. The only difference between in-camera editing and editing in photoshop is you are letting the camera move the sliders for you. That's it. It's not in anyway a more 'genuine' form of photography. It's an option for those who can't/won't/don't care to learn to use an external editing application, and (if forced upon them via rules) a restriction on the creative options normally available to those who would rather do the editing themselves and leave the camera out of it.
Starbucks calls... |
Man I salute your perseverence and the way you morph details. ((...Bowing...))
[1] Are you suggesting in camera editing is at par with Adobe PhotoShop or the likes of advanced image processing software?
[2] If it wasnt clear, I wrote: save as a lossless JPEG.. not RAW. Not RAW, not RAW?
Coffee break for me too here :-) |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:01:43 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by rinac:
Originally posted by Prash:
Right. I did see what you are talking about.. and thats why I said before:
"Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing."
If your camera allows it, you are allowed to do it. That is 'in-body' processing.. not software based post processing. |
In camera processing still uses software, no?
Anyway, what's the difference between what you're suggesting and the minimal editing ruleset? Sharpening? |
Generally speaking, all the programs on camera body are 'firmware' not software... although loosely speaking, you can call it software in this context. The difference being no processing on a personal computer outside of the camera allowed.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:15:39 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by rinac:
Originally posted by Prash:
Right. I did see what you are talking about.. and thats why I said before:
"Use whatever feature is in your camera body (there can be variations in feature set).. but dump the RAW file. Once dumped, only a crop/resize allowed, then save as a lossless JPEG (no compression allowed when saving: 100% quality setting). No use of any additional software based post processing."
If your camera allows it, you are allowed to do it. That is 'in-body' processing.. not software based post processing. |
In camera processing still uses software, no?
Anyway, what's the difference between what you're suggesting and the minimal editing ruleset? Sharpening? |
Generally speaking, all the programs on camera body are 'firmware' not software... although loosely speaking, you can call it software in this context. The difference being no processing on a personal computer outside of the camera allowed. |
Ok, how are meant to "crop/resize"? Sorry if you've already explained, I think I must have missed it if you did. Besides, if we were to "crop" anything, that would kinda defeat the purpose/challenge of composing in-camera |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:21:24 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by ambaker:
Originally posted by violinist123:
If you can get a viewable image off your sensor without processing it, I'll send you my 5D. Why don't you spend time learning how to best process your images rather than ask everyone else to operate at your level. |
A viewable image, off my sensor, no processing? Oh pack up that 5D now, PM me for the address. Gawd I love contests with no rules afterall...
I don't even have to use my printer for this one... |
Really? Whatever method you use to convert electrical signals into a visual media is processing. Looking forward to seeing the results. |
What conversion of electrical signals? Oh, you are thinking so inside the box. You need to quit relying on software and computers. |
Alright, Mr Wizard. I stand ready to be schooled. |
Gee, there's a computer in my camera so I have to stop relying on it. I guess a challenge with the traditional pinhole is in order. |
East, easy Colette... I'm not the one arguing that there should be no processing. Actually nobody is. Prash is interested in a no processing challenge, not changing the whole site.
Violinist123 made the statement that if one could "get a viewable image off their sensor" without processing, that he would mail them his 5D.
I merely claimed that I could get a viewable image off my sensor without processing. Further, I can do it without computer, without software, without a printer. He has now either tried to honor me by calling me "Mr, Wizard", or tried to engage in personal insult for whatever reason. (I suppose because I called him on his overly broad offer.) But I will accept it as an accolade.
Being a person of good faith, and honest intent, I would be more than happy to "school" (his words not mine), Mr 123 (I suppose Violinist is his first name and 123 may be his last.) However, education does have a price.
I propose that he mail you his 5D. Then I propose that I will create an image on paper, from the sensor of my camera, without the aid of computer, or software of any kind. I will film the making of the image and mail you the image for verification. If indeed I have created an image on the paper, from the sensor, without the use of computer of software of any kind, then you will then mail me the 5D, and you can mail him the image and the video of how it was created. He will be educated, I will be one 5D richer, and everybody should be happy. (Note: I will cover the shipping from you to me.)
If I fail to create an image on paper, from the sensor of my camera, then I will pay the shipping from you back to Mr. 123, and reimburse him twice the cost of the shipping from him to you, for his trouble. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:26:37 PM · #45 |
| People who think avoidance of post-processing=emphasis on good photography are the same people who think you get better pictures with a more expensive camera. bwa-hahahahahah! |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:41:32 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by ambaker:
I propose that he mail you his 5D. Then I propose that I will create an image on paper, from the sensor of my camera, without the aid of computer, or software of any kind. I will film the making of the image and mail you the image for verification. If indeed I have created an image on the paper, from the sensor, without the use of computer of software of any kind, then you will then mail me the 5D, and you can mail him the image and the video of how it was created. He will be educated, I will be one 5D richer, and everybody should be happy. (Note: I will cover the shipping from you to me.)
If I fail to create an image on paper, from the sensor of my camera, then I will pay the shipping from you back to Mr. 123, and reimburse him twice the cost of the shipping from him to you, for his trouble. |
Well I was hoping to be foiled by some stunning twist of logic but that's not even clever. I said 'get an image off your sensor' not make an image using your sensor. Come on man.
edit: the Mr Wizard reference was due to me thinking perhaps you were going to do something using magnetism or in some way capturing the electrical field of the charged sensor, etc. Again, very disappointed! Not that I would have parted with my camera, but still :p
Message edited by author 2008-10-15 18:42:55. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:43:27 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by violinist123:
I wish there were no editing rules at all. Don't see the point in watching a marathon where everyone agrees to have their ankles broken beforehand. |
Worth1000.com |
//www.straightoutofthecamera.com
|
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:45:10 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by violinist123:
I wish there were no editing rules at all. Don't see the point in watching a marathon where everyone agrees to have their ankles broken beforehand. |
Worth1000.com |
//www.straightoutofthecamera.com |
lmfao |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:48:42 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Did we ever have zero (absolutely no) editing challenges where all that was allowed was a crop and resize? |
I'm all for another minimal editing challenge. Hopefully will have time to shoot when the next one comes around the corner.
The first one I can remember was...
Straight from the Camera (48hours speed challenge)
//www.dpchallenge.com/challenge_results.php?CHALLENGE_ID=519
The first official one to run under the trial minimal ruleset...
Minimalism II (Jan 07') . Not even a crop allowed.
//www.dpchallenge.com/challenge_results.php?CHALLENGE_ID=623
Trees (Feb 07')
//www.dpchallenge.com/challenge_results.php?CHALLENGE_ID=638
Insects II (April 07')
//www.dpchallenge.com/challenge_results.php?CHALLENGE_ID=667
Photojournalism III (Oct 07')
//www.dpchallenge.com/challenge_results.php?CHALLENGE_ID=761
Long Exposure IV (Sep 08')
//www.dpchallenge.com/challenge_results.php?CHALLENGE_ID=921
Message edited by author 2008-10-15 18:50:08. |
|
|
|
10/15/2008 06:53:50 PM · #50 |
I'd like to see that one run again soon.
|
|
