| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/03/2004 02:52:36 AM · #1 |
There are some great photographers here but bad Photoshop users .
And most of the winners here are the software GURU's ,where great talents like Mona are not noticed at all! |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 03:34:16 AM · #2 |
my opinion is that a creative digital editting work is just as artistic and painfull process as traditional photography..i dont see the point in making a difference between photoshop and photography.. it is the same idea with more powerfull tools as having physical filters and different lenses...just my 2 cents...
Message edited by author 2004-02-03 03:36:36. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 03:40:09 AM · #3 |
Of course digital darkroom is easier to learn and maybe a little more powerful that traditinal darkroom techniques but it comes down to doing the same things.
Professional phoptographers have been enhancing their photos since forever and I don't think there is anything wrong with doing that in photoshop. I may value more a photo that wasn't edited but a good eiting is also a proof of creativity and technique.
You friend takes good photos and if she is satisfied with them it's all that counts.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 03:43:24 AM · #4 |
I'm not sure if most of the winners here owe their success to Photoshop, but I certainly see a degredation on the emphasis of the pointy and shooty side to photography.
I guess you can't please everyone.... We all voted, editing won by majority, so inevitably some people (myself included) would have preferred the old rules.
At least we still have the open challenges as basic editing - it could be worse!
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 03:46:38 AM · #5 |
I think the winners are also great photographers & know their way around editing.
I would love to see a photo that couldn't be improved by a touch of curves or levels etc - there aren't that many that come out of a digital camera and wouldn't benefit from some basic editing.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 03:48:28 AM · #6 |
I would expect all these threads to come from purists still using film, not digital camera users... ;)
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 04:02:24 AM · #7 |
the whole philosophy of photography, i think, comes down to one objective: interpretation of reality with the use of certain tools..
a photographer tries to create a simulation of a frozen time frame of reality in his work of art with the interpretation of his imagination...
the tools anyone chooses to accomplish this is a subjective matter where personal preference has ruling. but trying to rank one method on top of another is not a appropriate way of approaching this issue..
like i said the final interpretation of reality in the form of photography is what matters even if it went through some powerfull digital editting. i honestly do not see any ethical or creative difference between the two aformentioned ways of doing things....
Message edited by author 2004-02-03 04:04:10. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 04:15:14 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by theodor38:
a photographer tries to create a simulation of a frozen time frame of reality in his work of art with the interpretation of his imagination... |
DPC isn't usually approving of particularly artistic photographs, hence some of us disapprove of what some call 'over-editing'.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 04:29:21 AM · #9 |
From my experience on DPC, I don't think there is such a thing as "over-editing". it's more a case of people not editing very well.
For example, a lot of people saturate their images waaaay to much, and the dreaded neatimage ruins so many shots when used at 100%
The same image can have many more tweeks, but at a lesser degree and turn out much better. But hey, some people like the Neatimage look.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 04:48:31 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Originally posted by theodor38:
a photographer tries to create a simulation of a frozen time frame of reality in his work of art with the interpretation of his imagination... |
DPC isn't usually approving of particularly artistic photographs, hence some of us disapprove of what some call 'over-editing'. |
From the last few of my photos they don't approve of "hardly any editing" either :( |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 05:00:05 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
I would love to see a photo that couldn't be improved by a touch of curves or levels etc - there aren't that many that come out of a digital camera and wouldn't benefit from some basic editing. |
Maybe the closest I'll come?
My Entry
Resized but otherwise unaltered original |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 05:01:36 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
DPC isn't usually approving of particularly artistic photographs, hence some of us disapprove of what some call 'over-editing'. |
From the last few of my photos they don't approve of "hardly any editing" either :( |
I find DPC is a fickle beast.. The trick to a happy life, and happy DPC experience, is to accept it as it is, rather than fathom its workings. ;-)))
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 08:39:52 AM · #13 |
I haven't noticed many winners that have had too much photoshop done to them really. I think it would be interesting to see the 'before' shots for more of the winning entries though - partly to understand how much extra is being done or added and partly to learn what is possible.
Just for an example, here is my 'Fantasia' shot before I took it in to photoshop - for the people who feel that too much editing is winning - did I do too much ?
That shot is the output of the RAW converter, and is unsharpened and has had only very slight contrast adjustments done to it. Mainly in photoshop I removed some of the smaller blemishes and a pencil mark on the background and then set the contrast I wanted and sharpened the final version.
Too much ?
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 08:44:09 AM · #14 |
I'm in this site mostly because of its name "Digital Photography Challenge". This is a whole new era of new hardware (digital cameras) new techniques (digital darkroom) and thus new possibilities. It is true that some good photographs are overlooked or under rated, but in my humble opinion, there's a balance in software and tech expertise and good old photographic expertise, like in these excellent images
Message edited by author 2004-02-03 13:01:43. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 08:47:24 AM · #15 |
It's a great executed shot, Gordon. The results turned out awesome without needing any editing.
(I didn't do hardly anything to my Light on White rose, either. But, I should have.)
Message edited by author 2004-02-03 08:48:55. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 09:32:49 AM · #16 |
Actually, I'm looking at the front page, and I struggle to see any of the 9 current winners that look 'over photoshopped'. Certainly none of them come close to "digital art", which is what I think the legit fear was with the new rules.
They all look like really well-taken pictures that were brought completely to greatness in the darkroom. The digital darkroom, in these cases. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 09:40:35 AM · #17 |
I've worked in PhotoShop for about 5 years. I haven't seen a winning photo yet that went outside the realm of being graphics and not photography. Photoshop is to digital what the darkroom is to film. It's always great to come home with the perfect photo that needs nothing. That happens how often ? It's the end result that matters.
Let me just say this again here : Congrats to you Gordon for a well deserved win. Your photo is amazing !
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes what we think is great isn't so hot to someone else.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 11:01:21 AM · #18 |
I had thought about cloning out a few wee things in this shot, also burning the top right hand corner a little as it was overexposed. In the end I decided to just leave it.
Glad I did, it scored my highest so far, although it wasn't my highest place. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 11:25:03 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by brownt:
I had thought about cloning out a few wee things in this shot, also burning the top right hand corner a little as it was overexposed. In the end I decided to just leave it.
Glad I did, it scored my highest so far, although it wasn't my highest place. |
I really like that shot. A thought occurs to me looking at it though - for me the top left corner really opens up the shot. The bright highlight just drags me up and away from the subject. For either a film or digital version, I'd think about darkening down the corner or cropping the left inch or so. Covering it with my hand makes the attention jump back to the subject and stay in that darker corner.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 11:50:38 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
There are some great photographers here but bad Photoshop users .
And most of the winners here are the software GURU's ,where great talents like Mona are not noticed at all! |
I agree Kosta. I have Mona's "Green Eye" on my favs list.
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
DPC is a fickle beast.. |
Is that why what started out as a poll became a majority vote?
Originally posted by jonpink:
I think the winners are also great photographers & know their way around editing.
I would love to see a photo that couldn't be improved by a touch of curves or levels etc - there aren't that many that come out of a digital camera and wouldn't benefit from some basic editing. |
If you think about it, this sort of sums up the whole argument about the new vs old rules. Under Basic, or the old rules, "great photographers" with the "benefit from some basic editing" won challenges. Under the Advanced, or new rules, that is not enough as now those "great photographers" must also "know their way around editing".
I think the Painting With Light challenge is a poor example to use when discussing the merits of the new rules. Same goes for Macro III and, I expect, for Shallow DOF. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 11:53:59 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
DPC is a fickle beast.. |
Is that why what started out as a poll became a majority vote? |
Sorry coolhar, not sure what you mean there. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 11:58:16 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
I think the Painting With Light challenge is a poor example to use when discussing the merits of the new rules. Same goes for Macro III and, I expect, for Shallow DOF. |
Can you elaborate on why that is ?
|
|
|
|
02/03/2004 11:59:34 AM · #23 |
Sorry if I quoted you out of context. Poll has a connotation of being advisory whereas majority vote implies that it was binding. Hope that makes it clearer.
Message edited by author 2004-02-03 12:00:07. |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 12:03:34 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Sorry if I quoted you out of context. Poll has a connotation of being advisory whereas majority vote implies that it was binding. Hope that makes it clearer. |
Oh got you. I didn't specifically mean it was binding. Just pointing out that the majority was for advanced editing rather than against it, hence it's not completely unreasonable we now have said editing. :-) |
|
|
|
02/03/2004 12:04:41 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
I think the Painting With Light challenge is a poor example to use when discussing the merits of the new rules. Same goes for Macro III and, I expect, for Shallow DOF. |
I think that's hard to say without seeing the original images...My Macro III was 'helped' buy advanced editing.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 06:42:03 AM EDT.
