basic and minimal !!! - DPChallenge Forums

Pentax DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] WR DC

02/23/2013 05:16:39 PM · #26

this site isn't a learning site. its a competition. if you want think of it as a learning site go for it, i come here to win or at least try to and in the process of trying to win you get better. if you want to keep the site dumbed down with baby editing, fine, but don't expect to get any better at making great images.

if you want to keep the minimal rule-set and have a competition with who can make the best unedited image, great, but don't disguise it as some technique for improvement.

if you are intimidated by Photoshop or post processing you may as well give up photography now. its a requirement to make great images just as much as composition, lighting, subject, etc.

Message edited by author 2013-02-23 17:29:05.

tnun

Ricoh GR III

02/23/2013 05:50:39 PM · #27

I couldn't disagree more.

insteps

Ricoh GR III

Fujifilm XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR

02/23/2013 06:06:12 PM · #28

Michael, sorry you haven't learned anything from this site. It's an inspirational place for me more than a competition site. To each his own but I hope you can at least respect the diversity on here.

rooum

02/23/2013 06:07:54 PM · #29

Originally posted by tnun:

I couldn't disagree more.

I agree with the disagreement.

This week i treated myself to two wonderful photo books. The stunning Bruce Davidson retrospective collection 'Outside-Inside' and a recent book by the French photographer, Christophe Agou, The Face of Silence. The Bruce Davidson books are huge so i'm dipping in slowly but the Agou book about French farmers in a remote province has blown my socks off. Absolutely amazing photography and not much dark room work there let alone photoshop.

Message edited by author 2013-02-23 18:11:25.

bvy

Sigma DP1x

02/23/2013 06:13:22 PM · #30

Photoshop is hardly required for great photography. It's a means to an end. If you're saying that it's an end in itself, then you've just made a case for turd polishing.

posthumous

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

02/23/2013 06:18:03 PM · #31

of course the minimal ruleset is a "technique for improvement." of course the minimal ruleset helps you "learn best practices." Anyone who has ever learned or taught anything should be familiar with the notion of breaking a process down into components. To say that it is pointless to focus only on what happens in the camera... well that boggles my mind. It's like an art instructor saying it's pointless to study anatomy, or a music instructor saying it's pointless to perform the scales.

that's the first argument for minimal editing. the second argument has to do with the artistic process. Art thrives on restriction. Some of the most successful art photographers today restrict themselves in the extreme. Some of them use the earliest cameras.

nemesise1977

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro Super for Canon

02/23/2013 06:22:49 PM · #32

Agree its a photography challange not a photoshop challange

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

02/23/2013 06:26:10 PM · #33

Originally posted by mike_311:

if you want to keep the minimal rule-set and have a competition with who can make the best unedited image, great, but don't disguise it as some technique for improvement.

You may not see it, but it is not a disguise. Forcing a photographer to get it right in camera is a good exercise. Most of the time I shoot sloppy in RAW, shooting to allow me to do my standard modifiers, but getting it right in the camera is not just for those who can't work magic in photoshop, quite the opposite. There are plenty of singers who can sound fine with auto-tune to smooth over the flaws in their technique, many fewer who can sing without accompaniment of electronic tricks. Even if your art is dependent on technological artifice, it is a good exercise to practice as bare bones as you can.

Originally posted by mike_311:

if you are intimidated by Photoshop or post processing you may as well give up photography now. its a requirement to make great images just as much as composition, lighting, subject, etc.

Think of massive editing as a butter and cream sauce; Sure it is tasty, but a steady diet of it gets boring, and you can't taste the ingredients. Every so often I like a cream sauce, but nouvelle cuisine or even raw food are better. You may think that anyone who doesn't like a lot of photoshop is intimidated or unable to use the program, but that simply is not true. And no matter what your tastes, a bit of variety is good for any diet.

mrbig65

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

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

02/23/2013 06:33:07 PM · #34

Originally posted by tnun:

I couldn't disagree more.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

02/23/2013 07:11:52 PM · #35

@BrennanOB:
So many logical fallacies I barely know where to start... first, you seem to imply that Minimal is "forcing the photographer to get it right in camera." Not so. It's forcing the photographer to shoot the best thing they can with essentially no post. That's like telling someone who shoots film to shoot, print blindly with no exposure compensation, and hope. It's not a realistic workflow, and no film photographer that ever cared about their printed product would do that.
The statement that " ...if your art is dependent on technological artifice, it is a good exercise to practice as bare bones as you can" is pretty condescending. It presupposes that post-processing of any type is "technological artifice" and that eschewing same makes one somehow superior. I suppose that the significance of the work of Ansel Adams is lessened because he depended on technological artifice? I think not. Post is a part of the photographic process, and artificially lopping it off may be a good way to force a new viewpoint occasionally, but not, IMO, something I'd ever want to do regularly. Note the IMO.
I tend to agree with the premise of your second paragraph; over-the-top processing gets old even when well-done, and variety *is* a good thing. I just don't think that Minimal is a way to learn good technique. Echoing your dietary analogy, mashed potatoes are fine occasionally. As a dietary staple, well, not so much.

brucedgates

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/23/2013 07:28:59 PM · #36

of course the minimal ruleset is a "technique for improvement."
...that's the first argument for minimal editing. the second argument has to do with the artistic process. Art thrives on restriction. Some of the most successful art photographers today restrict themselves in the extreme. Some of them use the earliest cameras.

Exactly! I could not agree more.

This is a challenge site. Basic and minimal are challenging.
If this is a photography site, there should be no complaints about Basic, Minimal or Advanced. Mix it up!
I would expect more complaints about Expert Editing than Basic or Minimal.

tnun

Ricoh GR III

Pentax DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] WR DC

02/23/2013 07:38:56 PM · #37

Logical fallacies...?

Maybe we should break this down. Minimal does not mean that we can't use exposure compensation; minimal does not mean that we get only one shot and have to "guess" - with digital we can shoot and chimp ad infinitum, and in a sense this process mirrors pp in a way; minimal does, however mean that we have to get the crop right - surely we can agree that that is not a problem?

There are more types of film photography than Ansel Adams's. There seems to be a misconception here that pp fine-tooling is an essential ingredient to making pictures.

And there is nothing wrong with clicking the shutter and "hoping." Should photographers divest themselves entirely of joyful anticipation because they have all the possibilities covered in pp?

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

02/23/2013 08:07:32 PM · #38

Originally posted by kirbic:

@BrennanOB:

The statement that " ...if your art is dependent on technological artifice, it is a good exercise to practice as bare bones as you can" is pretty condescending. It presupposes that post-processing of any type is "technological artifice" and that eschewing same makes one somehow superior.

I disagree, photography in and of itself is a technological artifice. There is no insult in admitting that. Digital or chemical, there is nothing that is not an artifice. The question is how much or how little we manipulate past the point of reproducing what was in front of our lens when we took the picture.

For my own work I tend to manipulate the snot out of my images, and I do not make a moral judgment, it is how I work and i like it. However there is a place on this site for basic editing simply because it is different, allows people with different philosophies and skill sets to get on the front page. I have never scored well with minimal editing, but I found it was an interesting excersise, and one I am sorry has been done away with in favor of a steady diet of expert editing.

I admire the work of those expert editors, but I also wish those who prefer to work under the constraint of basic rule would have a chance to shine every so often.

FourPointX

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

02/23/2013 08:37:24 PM · #39

Originally posted by mike_311:

henri disagrees with you as do i

skewsme

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens

02/23/2013 09:47:46 PM · #40

Originally posted by mike_311:

blah blah blah

only reason you say these things is you is askeerd of not having photoshop to save your kerappy peectures. uh. huh.
you are a cheekin. go an get a ribbon in a mini mall challenge then, then you can tell us how it didn't learn ya. pffft.

salmiakki

Sony Alpha a7R III

Sony Sonnar T* 35mm F2.8 ZA

02/24/2013 01:42:06 AM · #41

Originally posted by mike_311:

this site isn't a learning site. its a competition.

Actually, it really was set up as a learning site - the challenges merely one of the ways to promote that learning. Check out the 'about' page.

salmiakki

Sony Alpha a7R III

Sony Sonnar T* 35mm F2.8 ZA

02/24/2013 02:44:23 AM · #42

Originally posted by insteps:

Basic and minimal editing probably wouldn't be popular on here. With participation levels low, now probably isn't the best time to make things more challenging. Advanced has become the norm and expert has gained popularity. Even with film photography images can be manipulated in the dark room. That being said, I'd love to see a few more basic or minimal challenges. I tend to get a little lazy while shooting knowing that I can adjust my composition, tones, contrast, etc. in post processing.

Last spring in another of these expert/minimal type thread discussions, somebody commented that expert challenges were more popular than minimal (I know this discussion is not about expert as such but bear with me). Statistically however, this is not true. Minimal editing challenges are actually creating greater participation. I would suggest with participation dropping almost weekly, surely a good mix of all editing types would be one way to encourage people to take part. Since doing the "analysis" last year (in May) there have only been 4 minimal editing challenges but average participation is 89 per challenge. In the same period there have been 20 expert editing challenges, with an average participation of 46 per challenge.

I know some vocal members only like advanced and expert but if having more of the minimal editing ruleset challenges would increase participation then surely that is something we should be actively encouraging ?

C_Steve_G

Apple iPhone 12

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 35-135mm f/3.5-4.5

02/24/2013 03:28:51 AM · #43

I'll have to speak up for "basic" editing.

The reality is that my cameras do not produce realistic colors or the dynamic range that a minute or two of applying curves will correct. I consider this minute or two the minimum basic edit before I show anyone my work.

As for minimum editing - that is the challenge; the search for subject matter that reproduces faithfully without edit is often daunting.

Sony Sonnar T* 35mm F2.8 ZA

02/24/2013 08:03:16 AM · #44

Like I said if you want to have a contest of who can make the best unedited image, I'm not stopping you. I'm not saying get rid of it, I realize people enjoy it.

I'm just pointing out the reasons you say we need more of it is offbase.

If its to encourage more participation because people are intimidated by advanced editing, then change the names of the rule sets. Minimal, standard, enhanced. Get rid of the stupid monikers that imply competency levels, its deceiving.

If you say its to get right in camera, you should be doing that anyway. You should not need an editing rule set to encourage proper technique.

The rule sets as they are now are more about creating the perception of a level playing field than actually leveling the playing field.

Every time someone suggests more basic or minimal there is the underlying feeling their images can't compete. They want to feel like they have a chance, they want to place a handicap, otherwise why even suggest it? You don't need a minimal challenge to liberate you with this getting it right in camera stuff, you can do that on your own.

salmiakki

Sony Alpha a7R III

02/24/2013 08:19:46 AM · #45

Originally posted by mike_311:

If its to encourage more participation because people are intimidated by advanced editing, then change the names of the rule sets. Minimal, standard, enhanced. Get rid of the stupid monikers that imply competency levels, its deceiving.

I don't disagree with you at all but as it's unlikely we will see any of those things changed any time soon, why not at least try to have more of the rulesets that encourage participation running more frequently? At least if participation increased there maybe a renewed interest in getting some of the changes needed done.

Originally posted by mike_311:

If you say its to get right in camera, you should be doing that anyway. You should not need an editing rule set to encourage proper technique.

The rule sets as they are now are more about creating the perception of a level playing field than actually leveling the playing field.

Every time someone suggests more basic or minimal there is the underlying feeling their images can't compete. They want to feel like they have a chance, they want to place a handicap, otherwise why even suggest it? You don't need a minimal challenge to liberate you with this getting it right in camera stuff, you can do that on your own.

I agree with everything you say here too. The reality is, even with minimal editing challenges, it is usually the skilled photographers who know how to compose and shoot a good image that will win and often those are exactly the same people who win basic, advanced and expert challenges. BUT, it somehow makes people feel like they have a better shot at winning and thus they take part and that has to be a good thing, right?

02/24/2013 08:32:25 AM · #46

its up to Langdon to determine whats best, clearly he doesn't think minimal is the way to go or else he'd have more of them, so its up to him to take the next step and fix the rule names.

RayEthier

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

02/24/2013 12:12:29 PM · #47

Originally posted by mike_311:

its up to Langdon to determine whats best, clearly he doesn't think minimal is the way to go or else he'd have more of them, so its up to him to take the next step and fix the rule names.

Ever hear the old expression ... "the ~~greasy~~ squeaky wheel gets the grease"(edited after being informed or my error by

Focuspoint) and that he might simply be catering to those making the most noise.

I don't know enough about post processing to provide an informed opinion, but I do know that when in my view the terms "Advanced" and "Expert" are such that I am not apt to participate in challenges.

I do on occasion participate, but scores and placements mean nothing to me... which can readily be interpreted as meaning that I am fully aware that I suck as a photographer. :O)

Ray

Message edited by author 2013-02-24 12:34:39.

FourPointX

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

02/24/2013 12:30:12 PM · #48

greasy wheels don't get grease ray. but squeaky ones do :)

and i suck too. we should start a club.

glad2badad

DJI Mavic Air 2

Sears 55mm f/1.4 M42

02/24/2013 12:59:43 PM · #49

Too many "Expert Editing" challenges on this website. I don't even suggest this site to photographers I run into anymore because the unrealistic "fantasy" collage stuff is embarrassing.

There should be a balance ... one "Minimal Editing" for every "Expert Editing" challenge that gets run. Honestly, I liked it better when the only two choices were Basic and Advanced.