| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/13/2015 04:10:15 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by Kroburg:
Originally posted by jagar:
Expert should just become unlimited, we don't need a lighter version of expert. |
Don't agree, I think all challenges should be completely photographic in nature. No modelling or what so ever. So bring back Expert Editing back to what is. |
Well expert to me has always seemed none photographic in nature so why not just let it go completely cartoony, overall though I'm not that bothered because I never look anyway. People who do like that sort of thing should have the chance to go all the way me thinks. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 04:28:25 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by kasaba:
Originally posted by Kroburg:
Originally posted by jagar:
Expert should just become unlimited, we don't need a lighter version of expert. |
Don't agree, I think all challenges should be completely photographic in nature. No modelling or what so ever. So bring back Expert Editing back to what is. |
well, just to mention, what about the use of brushes? You get amazing brushes that look like real things (spider webs, leaves, splatter, birds, trees, clouds, hair, ... endless other stuff). Nothing photographic about them (unless you happen to have made them yourself which mostly is not the case). As far as I know they are allowed in Expert ... just saying :-) |
Considered like clip art and not allowed unless you created them yourself, to my knowledge. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 08:05:54 AM · #53 |
get rid of the rules, we obviously aren't photographers, so lets stop pretending to be.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2015 08:28:26 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by Mike:
get rid of the rules, we obviously aren't photographers, so lets stop pretending to be. |
Macbeth:
I go, and it is done; the bell invites me.
Hear it not, Duncan, for it is a knell
That summons thee to heaven or to hell.
Macbeth (II, i, 62-64) |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 08:37:17 AM · #55 |
what's with all the metaphor around here lately?
|
|
|
|
08/13/2015 08:52:55 AM · #56 |
"Minimal", "Standard", "Expanded", "Unlimited" are four possible categories. "Minimal" would be the current "Minimal", possibly with the addition of incremental rotation and cropping. "Standard" would be the current "Advanced" and would include panoramas. "Expanded" would be just that: like the current "Advanced" ruleset but allowing for multi-image compositing, double exposures, more radical removal and substitution of elements. You'd be able to add clouds to empty skies, substitute elements from different burst exposures, etc. "Unlimited" would be the current "Expert" loosened up even more; it would allow all this stuff that's under debate right now basically, 3D modelling, and drawing etc.
Above is something we are considering. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 09:05:05 AM · #57 |
i can't say I'd disagree with any of what you are proposing. only that i think that they should be applied equally, not just a majority of standard, to appeal to everyone. maybe less of unlimited and a longer time frame like Cory suggested.
Message edited by author 2015-08-13 09:13:56. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 09:10:22 AM · #58 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by Kroburg:
Originally posted by jagar:
Expert should just become unlimited, we don't need a lighter version of expert. |
Don't agree, I think all challenges should be completely photographic in nature. No modelling or what so ever. So bring back Expert Editing back to what is. |
Well expert to me has always seemed none photographic in nature so why not just let it go completely cartoony, overall though I'm not that bothered because I never look anyway. People who do like that sort of thing should have the chance to go all the way me thinks. |
We agree? Weird. ;-) |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 09:18:40 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by Kroburg:
Originally posted by jagar:
Expert should just become unlimited, we don't need a lighter version of expert. |
Don't agree, I think all challenges should be completely photographic in nature. No modelling or what so ever. So bring back Expert Editing back to what is. |
+1 |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 09:21:49 AM · #60 |
| Egotistically speaking of course, I wouldn't like to see implemented what SC is considering, there would be two challenge categories that I'd be zapping completely. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 09:50:43 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by Kroburg:
Originally posted by jagar:
Expert should just become unlimited, we don't need a lighter version of expert. |
Don't agree, I think all challenges should be completely photographic in nature. No modelling or what so ever. So bring back Expert Editing back to what is. |
+1 |
what does photographic in nature actually mean?
|
|
|
|
08/13/2015 09:53:09 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Egotistically speaking of course, I wouldn't like to see implemented what SC is considering, there would be two challenge categories that I'd be zapping completely. |
I'd like to i see it implemented simply because it would appeal to everyone equally and not cater to a specific editing category |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 10:07:15 AM · #63 |
Sounds good.
But hurry the people are in stile like positions and are restless.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2015 11:04:46 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by Mike:
what does photographic in nature actually mean? |
It's a phrase favored by fundamentalist photographers. Nobody knows what it means. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 11:08:00 AM · #65 |
| & FWIW I favor no rules re what you do with the photograph after you take it. Simple. No DQ. No misunderstandings. No hurt feelings. Less work for SC. Let the voters sort it out. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 11:17:04 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by jagar:
there would be two challenge categories that I'd be zapping completely. |
I'm in favor of people not participating in categories they oppose. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 11:20:32 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
FWIW I favor no rules re what you do with the photograph after you take it. Simple. |
Wait, up to and including drawing a different image on top of it? Pasting an image from Google Images over it? But if the google image is imported as a brush, that makes it ok, right? Or rendered from a 3D model?
This is a photography site. "Photographic in nature" means the primary elements of the composition derive from photographs, taken by you, during the challenge dates. Period. I can look elsewhere on the 'net for 3D art, illustrations, or cartoons.
There will always be questions of what does "primary elements" mean, and "how far is too far" - and that's why we have SC to make rulings.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2015 11:22:39 AM · #68 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by jagar:
there would be two challenge categories that I'd be zapping completely. |
I'm in favor of people not participating in categories they oppose. |
Sounds good in theory. Until you consider that an image receives only ~80 votes per challenge as it is. How much can you afford to split the population?
Message edited by author 2015-08-13 11:23:01. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 11:29:20 AM · #69 |
| id rather receive 20 votes from someone who wants to look at my image than 80, where 60 are negatively predisposed because of how it might have been created. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 11:43:15 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Originally posted by pixelpig:
FWIW I favor no rules re what you do with the photograph after you take it. Simple. |
Wait, up to and including drawing a different image on top of it? Pasting an image from Google Images over it? But if the google image is imported as a brush, that makes it ok, right? Or rendered from a 3D model?
This is a photography site. "Photographic in nature" means the primary elements of the composition derive from photographs, taken by you, during the challenge dates. Period. I can look elsewhere on the 'net for 3D art, illustrations, or cartoons.
There will always be questions of what does "primary elements" mean, and "how far is too far" - and that's why we have SC to make rulings. |
fwiw, i agree with your threshold.
i dont think we should be creating computer models for anything in the image. the source file has to be taken with a camera, even if it was pulled off the net (if that is allowed)
if you have an image where very few things were photographed, its not really photography and longer (even in a loose definition of it). brushes should limited to enhancement only.
Message edited by author 2015-08-13 11:44:09. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 12:13:51 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by smurfguy:
Originally posted by pixelpig:
FWIW I favor no rules re what you do with the photograph after you take it. Simple. |
Wait, up to and including drawing a different image on top of it? Pasting an image from Google Images over it? But if the google image is imported as a brush, that makes it ok, right? Or rendered from a 3D model?
This is a photography site. "Photographic in nature" means the primary elements of the composition derive from photographs, taken by you, during the challenge dates. Period. I can look elsewhere on the 'net for 3D art, illustrations, or cartoons.
There will always be questions of what does "primary elements" mean, and "how far is too far" - and that's why we have SC to make rulings. |
fwiw, i agree with your threshold.
i dont think we should be creating computer models for anything in the image. the source file has to be taken with a camera, even if it was pulled off the net (if that is allowed)
if you have an image where very few things were photographed, its not really photography and longer (even in a loose definition of it). brushes should limited to enhancement only. |
I agree also, what I have alway liked with good expert editing shots was the detail in shooting the elements, anyone can combine photos but it takes real talent to create proper lighting and effects prior to images being combined. To me thats what takes it back to photography. There are plenty of sites out there catering to digital drawing, hopefully we keep more photo focused. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 01:13:16 PM · #72 |
When I created the "Aliens are real" picture I drew on paper all the elements needed to create an alien from my son's body parts. I used my naked LED panels for the backlight and posed my son in the positions I planned. Later I assembled all those parts in photoshop. I had to shoot all the pictures at the same moment because a slight difference in light would have taken me a lot of more time to adjust it in post processing.
I was more like Dr Frankenstein creating the beast. The head and hands were only modified by the liquify tool in photoshop. The eyes in my alien is only a picture of my trackball. All the elements can be created from a computer or from "a real camera". Keep it only from digital cameras, please.
Total time spent before the pictures taken: 4-5 hours. Shooting 30 minutes and photoshop after about 3 hours to create all.
I still make a difference between computer rendered art and photography. They are both visual art. Hopefully we still need a camera for the unlimited and expert category.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2015 01:48:49 PM · #73 |
| A major issue we have is one of "provenance": that is to say, do we have unfalsifiable information that the component parts were created BY the artist and WITHIN the timeframe of the challenge? With these PNG files, we do not. We don't doubt that Gyaban and Kasaba created their PNGs, and in a timely manner, but if we leave this loophole open it is ripe for abuse :-( Even if we DO want create this "Unlimited" editing category and allow from-scratch rendering of elements without restriction, then we have to find a way to deal with verification of authorship, or we'll find ourselves in a position of wondering how much of a given submission is actually cribbed from the internet and modified to suit... |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 02:46:08 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
A major issue we have is one of "provenance": that is to say, do we photography is a matter of teoalferoasterea matter of taste. But as a competition site we must level the playing field unfalsifiable information that the component parts were created BY the artist and WITHIN the timeframe of the challenge? With these PNG files, we do not. We don't doubt that Gyaban and Kasaba created their PNGs, and in a timely manner, but if we leave this loophole open it is ripe for abuse :-( Even if we DO want create this "Unlimited" editing category and allow from-scratch rendering of elements without restriction, then we have to find a way to deal with verification of authorship, or we'll find ourselves in a position of wondering how much of a given submission is actually cribbed from the internet and modified to suit... |
THIS is the crux of the issue. And pretty much nothing else. Questions of is it art or photography is a matter of taste. But as a competition site we have to level the playing field. And our way of doing that is to be able to verify that an image or composted elements were created within the challenge dates. |
|
|
|
08/13/2015 03:07:53 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
... Questions of is it art or photography is a matter of taste. ... |
Well, if a camera wasn't involved in the making of this "art" then it certainly isn't photography anymore. I'd certainly hope we could at least agree on that. |
|
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: 04/25/2024 03:43:10 PM EDT.
