| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/12/2008 02:03:23 PM · #126 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
..I can here in Phoenix... |
Slight chance you and I could be neighbor in a month or two... working on a deal with a software company right now :/ |
Well alright! Good luck! |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 02:10:53 PM · #127 |
Originally posted by eckoe:
I would think the simplest method would be A flag would be placed on the entry during submission. This flag would be the category flag. It could show up on the voting screen to tell you what ruleset it was submitted under. This flag would then be the key to sorting into the category ribbons. |
That's also good in theory.
The voters don't look at descriptions etc now so how do you expect them to vote a challenge with multiple rulesets? Or will the challenges, once in voting, be listed separately by ruleset so the voters know what they're looking at and when to hit the 'please validate' button? |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 02:18:40 PM · #128 |
Yeah, skipped the voting process in my head, but good question. If it was ME:
I'd keep all of the subsets in the same voting queue, and be sure that what ruleset they're requesting validation on is clear before they click on the submit button, and hopefully, the accuracy isn't so bad that the SC is overwhelmed more than they currently are.
However, I would suppose that the filter could apply to subsets as well, placing a dropdown on the thumbnails page to filter all but one type of submission, allowing people to vote all of each category together.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 02:22:49 PM · #129 |
This discussion brings up another option for voting freestudies: Allow filtering based on subject matter - landscape, portrait, still life, etc. to make voting easier. Then you'd need to vote at least 20% of each category for votes to count to make sure people aren't only voting on portrait for example.
Way off topic so back to the texture/overlay debate.... |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 02:43:04 PM · #130 |
I'm all in for bringing (sexy back... oh wait) Expert Editing back - although I prefer  cloudsme's idea of calling it 'Creative Editing'. I wasn't here when EE was an option, but I would love to have a chance to see and create more creative digital pieces. Preferably once a month.
But I'd also like to keep the three different rule sets simple - I wouldn't mind if Advanced Editing was a no-texture kind of thing.
So all in all, I agree with the below. He said it best:
Originally posted by cloudsme:
I still see this site as a photography site, but it is nice to see and learn new techniques.
1 Basic editing - Love it the way it is. Allowing us to remove sensor dust was a great addition.
2 Advanced editing - I liked it better when we couldn't add or remove major elements, and couldn't do HDR. The new rule with typical viewers description is just too vague. When it comes to editing, I think less is more here.
3 Creative editing - Perfect for multiple exposures, textures, overlays, HDR, and whatever else comes down the road. |
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 02:57:01 PM · #131 |
Originally posted by RKT:
We really wish we could enter this work in some sort of challenge. |
Yes, we do! It would be so fine! |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 04:38:55 PM · #132 |
Originally posted by Wyrdling:
I'm all in for bringing (sexy back... oh wait) Expert Editing back - although I prefer cloudsme's idea of calling it 'Creative Editing'. I wasn't here when EE was an option, but I would love to have a chance to see and create more creative digital pieces. Preferably once a month. |
It would seem to me that using the phase "Creative Editing" would be worse than calling it expert editing. Heck, it is mildly offensive to me to refer to Expert Editing as Creative Editing. All three rulesets demand creativity to get the most out of them so to just call one of them creative doesn't seem quite right. If we do change the name why not just call it something like "Free Form Editing"? In other words, call it something that doesn't automatically assume expertise or creativity but instead on what is being allowed by the ruleset. In this case the freedom to do more photoshop work.
Message edited by author 2008-08-12 16:41:57.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 05:04:56 PM · #133 |
Originally posted by yanko:
If we do change the name why not just call it something like "Free Form Editing"? In other words, call it something that doesn't automatically assume expertise or creativity but instead on what is being allowed by the ruleset. In this case the freedom to do more photoshop work. |
I think that's the name I was trying to remember before that was better than "Expert" not as dumb as "Lawless" and that for the life of me I couldn't remember who'd suggested and also couldn't find in the forum archives despite repeated attempts at using the search functionality which by the way should also be overhauled.
Whew. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 05:23:35 PM · #134 |
| How about "Open Editing" ? |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 05:29:23 PM · #135 |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 05:31:52 PM · #136 |
I don't have time to read through all the responses (company here for a few days). But here is my opinion for what it is worth.
Ban all textures and overlays. Anyone can take a grainy, out of focus, poorly composed photo, add an overlay or texture and create a work of art. This is a photography site, not a digital art site.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 05:35:43 PM · #137 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Anyone can take a grainy, out of focus, poorly composed photo, add an overlay or texture and create a work of art. |
Have to strongly disagree with this. Tantamount to saying that anyone can take a blank canvas and create a work of art. Many can try, but few will actually succeed. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 05:37:08 PM · #138 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Anyone can take a grainy, out of focus, poorly composed photo, add an overlay or texture and create a work of art. |
Have to strongly disagree with this. Tantamount to saying that anyone can take a blank canvas and create a work of art. Many can try, but few will actually succeed. |
OK, replace "anyone" with "many people here".
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 05:46:50 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
I don't have time to read through all the responses (company here for a few days). But here is my opinion for what it is worth.
Ban all textures and overlays. Anyone can take a grainy, out of focus, poorly composed photo, add an overlay or texture and create a work of art. This is a photography site, not a digital art site. |
Frankly Karen...I find this mildly offensive. Many of us who use overlays and textures are good photographers also. I'd hardly say Les Goodman (  goodman ) is trying to cover crap photography with an overlay or texture, or any of the others who enjoy using this layering technique.
ETA: typo
Message edited by author 2008-08-12 18:04:48. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:01:48 PM · #140 |
| Whatever it's worth, try strightening out the issues & problems with the site the way it is now before adding more problems. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:04:29 PM · #141 |
Well it seems that everyone's strong and varied opinions on the matter are probably not going to help the decision-making of site council much, but I do want to throw my hope into the mix.
I think -- I reeeeealllly think -- digital photography combined with digital art is here to stay. I also think that completely banning it from a photography site so limits the excellent photographers who are also excellent artists -- that they will be driven to other sites where they can be free to take inspiring photos and edit them to make them even more dynamic and beautiful. And those are the sites people will turn to to see dramatic, fabulous photography!
I believe that if dpChallenge wants to remain one of the premier photography sites, it better have a place where photographers can regularly (and not just occasionally or once every couple of months, but regularly) be free to create their photographic works of art as they will. Otherwise, you are going to find the really creative photographers going elsewhere, and the quality of the photography on this site is going to tend to be centered around photographers that are not very advanced in working with photos after the capture.
I think voters can always be trusted to reject photos that are too over the top, or that look too edited, or photos that just look unnatural. Allowing overlays will in fact be restricted by the voters themselves who won't readily accept the overdone ones.
Ok, that's my 2-cents to throw in the pot of gold :)
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:10:45 PM · #142 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
I don't have time to read through all the responses (company here for a few days). But here is my opinion for what it is worth.
Ban all textures and overlays. Anyone can take a grainy, out of focus, poorly composed photo, add an overlay or texture and create a work of art. This is a photography site, not a digital art site. |
Who says using an overlay and/or texture results in digital art anyway? You?
Unless you're talking about coprolites, you really can't polish a turd. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:25:32 PM · #143 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
I don't have time to read through all the responses (company here for a few days). But here is my opinion for what it is worth.
Ban all textures and overlays. Anyone can take a grainy, out of focus, poorly composed photo, add an overlay or texture and create a work of art. This is a photography site, not a digital art site. |
A couple of very good points Karen. The texture compilations I've seen do tend to hide/cover the quality of the underlying photo - and - I also think this technique will cross the line more into "digital art", which may be ok a few times a year, but certainly not something that we need to see on a regular basis. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:38:02 PM · #144 |
Originally posted by RKT:
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
I don't have time to read through all the responses (company here for a few days). But here is my opinion for what it is worth.
Ban all textures and overlays. Anyone can take a grainy, out of focus, poorly composed photo, add an overlay or texture and create a work of art. This is a photography site, not a digital art site. |
Frankly Karen...I find this mildly offensive. Many of us who use overlays and textures are good photographers also. I'd hardly say Les Goodman ( goodman ) is trying to cover crap photography with an overlay or texture, or any of the others who enjoy using this layering technique.
|
I knew someone would take this the wrong way. I am not saying that all photos that use overlays are bad photos, I am not suggesting that people who use overlays are bad photographers. I am not even saying that I don't like overlays. In fact, I love a lot of them, many in your profile.
What I am saying is that if you allow overlays and textures, you are stepping away from photography into digital art. Sometimes the photo is unrecognizeable because of the texture/overlay. And yes, sometimes a crappy photo can be turned into something beautiful by using an overlay.
As I said, this is MY opinion, and that is that textures and overlays should be banned and this site should focus on photography, not digital art.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:56:04 PM · #145 |
But it is DIGITAL photography like I mentioned earlier with the definition. I have done an overlay image a day basically since we started the side challenges back in February. Some look more like digital art (yeah, I did add things with brushes, etc) but others are purely a photograph that has been enhanced by the texture/depth, tone, etc of an overlay or two. I often times take a narrow DOF pic of a flower and copy and paste a portion of the background bokeh and stretch it atop the image for more depth of color and texture.
There is even a Digital art category here that has been around a long time. Why not use it more often, if that's the pigeon hole in which you want to put those type of images? Call it Free Style. I think that kind of sums it up nicely. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:59:00 PM · #146 |
| Yeah I like "Free Style" I vote for that! |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 06:59:55 PM · #147 |
The thing is...modern photography and digital art are merging, have been for a long time. Like I mentioned in an earlier post...photography evolves. I did some rather unorthodox things long ago in my actual darkroom and never got the grief people seem to get occasionally for crossing this ever moving line between digital art and photography. Can someone please define digital art? And why are some so offended by it?
I believe there is room for all of us here at DPC. We're not asking that every challenge be an "open" challenge...not at all. Some of us would just like to see this sort of challenge more than a couple times a year is all. Anyone who doesn't like textures/overlays/digital art/ don't have to enter, or vote. I don't see this being the downfall of DPC.
And honestly...if someone can turn a crap image into something lovely by working with layers in Photoshop...who cares and good for them.
Yes this is a photography site, but photography is a many and varied thing anymore...why try to keep it in a cage? |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 07:14:48 PM · #148 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Yeah I like "Free Style" I vote for that! |
That sounds like a great name for it. A challenge once in a while, would be great.
... and once in a while means more than once in a blue moon. ;o)
I think the issue a lot of people are having is that some posters were advocating changing existing challenges to be these free style challenges and doing away with the more straight forward photography challenges.
Both can be present on the site. Maybe run a themed challenge where one runs under advanced and one under free style or even just advanced + textures/overlays. Run them as exclusive so you can only enter one. It would be interesting to see the difference in entries.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2008 07:35:21 PM · #149 |
| I think Jutilda suggested an excellent name and I for one think that it's long overdue. The expert editing challenges seemed to be quite popular and in no small part due to the original concepts and approaches to editing. I know, I know... not 'real' photography. Trouble is I can't understand how some are so sure that they've defined true photography when threads like this demonstrate quite clearly that there is no real definition that is easily agreed upon. Opinions here are based on preference and nothing more. Seems to me that there have been threads in the past blasting the unoriginality here at DPC. Here's a chance to widen the scope a bit... of course while keeping within the rules. If all images start with a photograph, I'm sure even the naysayers should be satisfied. |
|
|
|
08/12/2008 07:50:50 PM · #150 |
Originally posted by Qart:
If all images start with a photograph, I'm sure even the naysayers should be satisfied. |
Somehow, I doubt it, but that's the nature of DPC. |
|
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: 04/17/2024 11:05:58 PM EDT.
