| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/23/2018 04:25:39 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by markwiley:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'd be willing to bet that more long term DPCers would tell you that they are most intimidated trying to create a great image within this ruleset than any other. |
For me, I would substitute the word frustrated for intimidated. It is hard for me to look at the image straight out of camera and not think it would be so easy to make this image better with a couple of simple adjustments. Perhaps just a tweak of the white balance and/or exposure. Rather than shoot, attempt to analyze the tiny image on back of the camera, adjust settings, reshoot and reanalyze a couple
iterations to get it "perfect", I'd rather get a good shot in RAW and adjust to "perfect" later. But, maybe that's just me. |
It's not just you. |
|
|
|
10/23/2018 05:07:19 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by JulietNN:
You are so right, and Minium is crazy trying to get a good photo, especially in RAW, gonna try in JPEG next time, but it does seriously make you look really hard at what you are shooting. |
Actually, you must shoot in jpeg for Minimal. A RAW file has been used to validate upon occasion, but for the most part it's shoot in jpeg.
And you have to remember to save the original from the camera and edit a copy from the folder.
A lot of us learned that the hard way...
|
|
|
|
10/23/2018 05:09:59 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'd be willing to bet that more long term DPCers would tell you that they are most intimidated trying to create a great image within this ruleset than any other. |
Originally posted by markwiley:
For me, I would substitute the word frustrated for intimidated. It is hard for me to look at the image straight out of camera and not think it would be so easy to make this image better with a couple of simple adjustments. Perhaps just a tweak of the white balance and/or exposure. Rather than shoot, attempt to analyze the tiny image on back of the camera, adjust settings, reshoot and reanalyze a couple iterations to get it "perfect", I'd rather get a good shot in RAW and adjust to "perfect" later. But, maybe that's just me. |
Tomato, tomato.....
Whatever word you want to use to express the angst that you cannot get exactly what you want without doinking it in PP just a smidge.... LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
10/23/2018 11:27:11 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by jomari:
Originally posted by markwiley:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'd be willing to bet that more long term DPCers would tell you that they are most intimidated trying to create a great image within this ruleset than any other. |
For me, I would substitute the word frustrated for intimidated. It is hard for me to look at the image straight out of camera and not think it would be so easy to make this image better with a couple of simple adjustments. Perhaps just a tweak of the white balance and/or exposure. Rather than shoot, attempt to analyze the tiny image on back of the camera, adjust settings, reshoot and reanalyze a couple
iterations to get it "perfect", I'd rather get a good shot in RAW and adjust to "perfect" later. But, maybe that's just me. |
It's not just you. |
No, it's not just you. I would substitute uninterested for the word intimidated (& I find your choice of the word unfortunate). |
|
|
|
10/24/2018 10:22:02 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by pixelpig:
I would substitute uninterested for the word intimidated (& I find your choice of the word unfortunate). |
Okay.... I feel duly chastised for making such a great leap.
As opposed to the other rulesets, I would venture to say that the Minimal ruleset is the least popular.
That okay?
I find *myself* somewhat intimidated by the task of submitting a wondrous, terrific image within those parameters.
Message edited by author 2018-10-24 10:22:21.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2018 08:15:31 PM · #31 |
| So just what IS the "current frequency"? |
|
|
|
10/24/2018 08:43:23 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by nam:
So just what IS the "current frequency"? |
+1
|
|
|
|
10/24/2018 08:45:30 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by markwiley:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'd be willing to bet that more long term DPCers would tell you that they are most intimidated trying to create a great image within this ruleset than any other. |
For me, I would substitute the word frustrated for intimidated. It is hard for me to look at the image straight out of camera and not think it would be so easy to make this image better with a couple of simple adjustments. Perhaps just a tweak of the white balance and/or exposure. Rather than shoot, attempt to analyze the tiny image on back of the camera, adjust settings, reshoot and reanalyze a couple iterations to get it "perfect", I'd rather get a good shot in RAW and adjust to "perfect" later. But, maybe that's just me. |
+1000
Perhaps we need an intermediate ruleset? Between Minimal and Standard?
Or more Minimal with flags allowing some tweaking?
|
|
|
|
10/24/2018 10:00:04 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by markwiley:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I'd be willing to bet that more long term DPCers would tell you that they are most intimidated trying to create a great image within this ruleset than any other. |
For me, I would substitute the word frustrated for intimidated. It is hard for me to look at the image straight out of camera and not think it would be so easy to make this image better with a couple of simple adjustments. Perhaps just a tweak of the white balance and/or exposure. Rather than shoot, attempt to analyze the tiny image on back of the camera, adjust settings, reshoot and reanalyze a couple iterations to get it "perfect", I'd rather get a good shot in RAW and adjust to "perfect" later. But, maybe that's just me. |
Ah, yes, but the field being equal you're competing (the "Challenge" part of DPChallenge) with other photographers up against the same challenge to "get it right" in camera, or reasonably close. After the competition make those tweaks for yourself from the RAW capture, print it, and enjoy the fine image you captured.
Exposure can be adjusted prior to the shot with aperture / shutter / ISO choices - or even the exp comp +/- button. Sometimes the AEL button gets the job done.
White balance can also be adjusted prior to capture as well.
And yes, I know I'm preaching to the choir here, a very well accomplished choir at that. :-)
All challenges don't have to be easy. Pushing the "know your gear" envelope can be a good thing.
For me, the thing I do like about Minimal editing challenges is that I don't have to sit in front of the computer making adjustments in post. I try to make the best effort with my camera and it's settings. |
|
|
|
10/24/2018 10:42:12 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
... After the competition make those tweaks for yourself from the RAW capture, print it, and enjoy the fine image you captured. |
I suspect I find this argument just as satisfying as you find the argument "You can choose to enter a Minimally edited image in Standard and Extended Editing challenges."
Originally posted by glad2badad:
... For me, the thing I do like about Minimal editing challenges is that I don't have to sit in front of the computer making adjustments in post. |
While I am not a fan of Minimal challenges, I will admit this is an upside of Minimal submission nights. There is also an advantage as an SC member, Minimal validations are quicker and easier. |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 03:19:18 AM · #36 |
Speaking for myself:
Minimal edit = guaranteed to be suboptimal.
Ease of entry (providing you remember to engage jpeg) is assured - I understand that, but as someone who will flick between 1x and DPC, a row of Minimal images doesn’t do DPC any favours at all.
It’s Digital Photography Challenge - one of the main affordances of digital is the ability to manipulate the number values of each pixel.
I for one don’t want to look at, or take, a bunch of sub-optimal images.
Any upping of the frequency of Minimal challenges guarantees a drop in the quality of our collective work. |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 07:26:57 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by Paul:
Any upping of the frequency of Minimal challenges guarantees a drop in the quality of our collective work. |
I cannot even begin to express my astonishment, 1. To see/hear this statement, and 2. From you.
|
|
|
|
10/25/2018 07:33:48 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
... After the competition make those tweaks for yourself from the RAW capture, print it, and enjoy the fine image you captured. |
Originally posted by markwiley:
I suspect I find this argument just as satisfying as you find the argument "You can choose to enter a Minimally edited image in Standard and Extended Editing challenges." |
And even that equation is hardly fair.
That is a legitimate option for said image and has nothing to do with a level playing field. To say that you can enter a Minimally edited image in an Extended challenge borders on offensive. Yeah, a really great shot with a little luck thrown in can render a decent showing in a Standard challenge, but....
At this point I'm really puzzled by the resistance to adding a more equitable balance of Minimal challenges. Though I'm not much good at them, I would like the practice, though the first one of you who suggests that I enter one in a different ruleset, I'm coming to your house and pissing in your garden.
It's not like you have to enter a Minimal challenge if you don't choose to do so.
|
|
|
|
10/25/2018 07:35:22 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
All challenges don't have to be easy. Pushing the "know your gear" envelope can be a good thing. |
That would make it....... a challenge?
|
|
|
|
10/25/2018 08:08:32 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Paul:
Any upping of the frequency of Minimal challenges guarantees a drop in the quality of our collective work. |
I cannot even begin to express my astonishment, 1. To see/hear this statement, and 2. From you. |
Just a logic proposition.
If editing ‘improves’ an image then not editing images means those enhancements will not have been made.
If I thought we would get more Avant Garde images in Minimal challenges, pinholes, zone plates, and the stuff where imperfections and low fidelity adds interest - I’d be up for that.
However, the unedited mediocre shot is - in my opinion - often a truly awful thing.
But, I’d have to admit - i’d love to do some low fidelity, Avant Garde Minimal challenges - Like the Fine Art in Minimal challenge.
But regular challenges, in Minimal? No thanks. |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 09:34:32 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by nam:
So just what IS the "current frequency"? |
In 2018, there have been 5 minimal challenges completed and one in submission, more in 2017
Because I'm a bit geeky and like stats and excel, I have compiled a list of the number of minimal/expert challenges over the years.
The stats suggest that the minimal challenges are in fact more popular than the expert challenges as the average number of entries per challenge are higher for minimal than for extended. I excluded the extended free studies from these stats as there is no comparable challenge for the minimal editing ruleset. However, even including the extended free studies, the average number of entries per challenge is higher for minimal than extended/expert.
Message edited by author 2018-10-25 09:39:42. |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 09:57:19 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by Paul:
Just a logic proposition.
If editing ‘improves’ an image then not editing images means those enhancements will not have been made. |
Your premise is predicated on the if.
Originally posted by Paul:
If I thought we would get more Avant Garde images in Minimal challenges, pinholes, zone plates, and the stuff where imperfections and low fidelity adds interest - I’d be up for that. |
Okay..... So what's to say that this can't be? Why wouldn't one decide to go that route?
Originally posted by Paul:
However, the unedited mediocre shot is - in my opinion - often a truly awful thing. |
And once again, we go back to that age old saw about polishing a turd. I don't want to see, or create a mediocre shot in any challenge. PS cannot fix a bas image.
Originally posted by Paul:
But, I’d have to admit - i’d love to do some low fidelity, Avant Garde Minimal challenges - Like the Fine Art in Minimal challenge. |
So do it! That's a lot less of a reach than suggesting to someone requesting a more equitable distribution of the various rulesets that they can enter a Minimally processed image in an Extended challenge.
Originally posted by Paul:
But regular challenges, in Minimal? No thanks. |
Okay.... We saw Jake hand himself his own hat after a tantrum about the subject material of the last DPL challenge. He was CHALLENGED, and at risk of making people groan, he rose to the challenge and produced one heck of an image. If you want to get right down to it, this ruleset is the most challenging. It's often bandied about that this site was about the friendly competition and to learn and grow. I wous definitely like to see the opportunity at least be given more of a chance, if only for a trial period. Why not try it for 6-12 months? If it's abysmally attended, we can always revert.
I will say one last thing on this subject. I am a much better photog than i was when I got here, and it's because of how this place can push you if you jump on to the available rides. I've gotten to the point where I edit in PS Elements, and if I don't get what I want in three to five minutes, the image sucked and I move on. No matter how many people buy my work in my gallery, how many people gush at my "incredible photography", n matter how often I get published or win this or that award, I *always* come back here to bust my ass, get slapped around in voting, and to wok ar getting better.
And now that I've indulged in this crusade, I'll have to enter every single damn Minimal challenge to not be a hypocrite.
I think I'm bleeding from a hole in my foot...
|
|
|
|
10/25/2018 10:20:08 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by Paul:
If I thought we would get more Avant Garde images in Minimal challenges, pinholes, zone plates, and the stuff where imperfections and low fidelity adds interest - I’d be up for that.
However, the unedited mediocre shot is - in my opinion - often a truly awful thing.
But, I’d have to admit - i’d love to do some low fidelity, Avant Garde Minimal challenges - Like the Fine Art in Minimal challenge.
But regular challenges, in Minimal? No thanks. |
Huzzah! +1 |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 10:21:35 AM · #44 |
Oh for goodness sake Jeb, please desist!
You’re fast making me want to shoot Minimal!!
:-)
Message edited by author 2018-10-25 11:07:34. |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 10:30:51 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
And now that I've indulged in this crusade, I'll have to enter every single damn Minimal challenge to not be a hypocrite. |
with only 6 challenges a year in the minimal ruleset that won't stretch you too much, Jeb ;) |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 12:16:13 PM · #46 |
Based on the polls, once a month, or slightly more, seems fair.
"current frequency" has a slight plurality, but if you sum up everyone who wants once a month or more, it has a solid majority. |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 03:46:54 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
"current frequency" has a slight plurality, but if you sum up everyone who wants once a month or more, it has a solid majority. |
Once a month or *fewer*, actually. "Current Frequency" is 5 minimal challenges so far in 2018, so something like 1.2 a month this year... Anyway, we have 36 votes for weekly or biweekly thus far, and 83 for monthly or no change, so it's a good bet we'll work towards monthly minimal editing challenges going forward. |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 04:03:43 PM · #48 |
5 challenges in 10 months is 0.5/month.
Weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly add up to 75 ...and weekly+bi-weekly = monthly ...
Seems to me about every three weeks is closest to "the middle" ... |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 04:56:36 PM · #49 |
| I don't know what I was thinking, LOL. It FEELS like we're only halfway through the year.... |
|
|
|
10/25/2018 10:26:10 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I think I'm bleeding from a hole in my foot... |
The least I can do is send you a band-aid. Thanks Jeb! Sometimes this place is just awesome. :-) |
|
