| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/22/2022 06:08:44 PM · #1 |
It's worth taking a few minutes to ponder what have always been the 3 Core Principles of Digital Photography Challenge, the site we call home:
1. We are a *Challenge* site: we challenge our members to create images within a specific time frame and on a specific topic/theme.
2. We are a *Digital Photography* site: we are digital-camera based.
3. We enter images that *we* created and that we can objectively *prove* that we created.
There's a certain amount of angst floating around right now about how appropriate (or "legal") it is to use CGI/VR/3D Model-based images in entries into the DPC Extended Editing challenges.
From a historical perspective, bear in mind that when we first started working with Expert/Extended rulesets we began seeing entries that bore no obvious relationship to their "origin" images; that is to say, they had been morphed beyond all recognition in various ways. The most obvious examples are "Flip n' Blend" constructions, but that's just one form of extreme morphing. Now, jump forward to when a certain member named  Gyaban began creating absolutely amazing fantasy images by shooting literally DOZENS of images and painstakingly morphing and whittling them into elaborate scenarios. He wowed us all, and he was just beginning. Somewhere in that evolution, Gyaban entered an image in which he effectively used 3-D modeling/wireframes to create shapes which he then "skinned" with textures etc which were derived from photographs he had shot. At first, we disqualified that image, but there was backlash and he calmly and rationally convinced us that if we are going to allow morphing of photographs at all, it is not consistent to disallow the creation of shapes upon which the images may be molded, since that's a more efficient way of doing it.
So we went along with that, it made sense, and life went on as usual. And in roughly the same time frame as the above evolution was happening (broadly speaking) we adjusted the rules to allow the use of *textures* that came from sources other than the photographer's own images, and to lose the fuzzy differentiation between "major" and "minor" elements, thus allowing the cloning-out, in Standard Editing, of anything you didn't want to see in your final image, the only restriction being that what replaces the cloned-out object should be what one would see if the object were no longer there. So all of these changes, and others too numerous to mention, have been happening for some time.
Now, at the present moment, we have disqualified a member's entry in an extended-editing challenge because it was 100% created in 3D modeling software, and no actual photographs were part of its creation. There are a couple of issues there: for one, we can't actually *validate* the image because there is no EXIF data to show when it, or any of its components, was created, and DPC has always required valid EXIF to validate an image. Additionally, the image in question is not, in fact, a *photograph*: it's a masterwork for sure, but it isn't photography.
The member in question, understandably, is disappointed with our decision and has told us so.
*******************
So here we are. Think about all that. Is it time to allow computer-generated, non-photographic entries in Extended Editing? Should we create a new ruleset specifically for these sorts of images and run challenges using those rules occasionally? Are we becoming irrelevant because we don't allow that currently, or are we an admirable, steadfast bastion against the dilution of photography into something more generic? What does "photography" even mean these days, given that the root of the term is "Light" + "Write", writing with light? Should we embrace OTHER arts than photography, or take the approach that "if it has rules it is not art" and abandon rules entirely?
There are SO many ways to look at this. We're interested in hearing opinions.
This thread is NOT the place to argue against other peoples' opinions, please. We will erase responses that start arguing with other posters over their opinions; we are interested in *hearing* those opinions right now. Discussion will come later, in another thread where we offer up some proposals that seem to have broader support up for debate as we work to achieve consensus.
********************
Thanks in advance for listening and participating! |
|
|
|
07/22/2022 09:52:07 PM · #2 |
| I think creations that are completely computer generated have plenty of other homes on line, such as Deviant Art. But I've been wrong before. Such creations are beyond me, but I do admire the skill that goes into crafting them. |
|
|
|
07/22/2022 09:55:53 PM · #3 |
The digital realm is relatively new and rapidly expanding. In addition to 3D modeling, there's also the introduction of sites like NightCafe generator and StarryAI - which use words you input (ie. black cat on a white sofa in a room with a chandelier) to scour billions of images on the internet to automatically composite what it thinks you mean.
 cgino has started doing this (on FB) with very interesting, and often hilarious results. There is an option to use one's own base photo as a place to start, but it's not necessary.
So would something like that eventually be admissible here? It is, after all, composed of digital photos, it is made by using your own words. The trip-up would be EXIF, which would not be available for any images not your own.
So yes, Bear, the issue is whether what we are known for, and what we currently do, of interest to enough people to make this a viable site? Or do we adapt and grow, with the realization that we might lose some purists, but interest and intrigue some, as well as gain many other members? Remember, one of the other pillars of DPC has been that is is a "learning site". |
|
|
|
07/22/2022 10:13:15 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
... Remember, one of the other pillars of DPC has been that is is a "learning site". |
We are a photography site first.
My opinion ... if you can't prove you took a photo to make whatever creation you present as a challenge entry, then it's not something we should see in a challenge.
Yes, I'm a purist. Surprise, surprise. |
|
|
|
07/22/2022 10:29:38 PM · #5 |
What we're looking at here, IMNSHO, is the limits that the site DP Challenge has.
We are to create images, done with a digital camera, edited within various rulesets.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
it was 100% created in 3D modeling software, and no actual photographs were part of its creation. There are a couple of issues there: for one, we can't actually *validate* the image because there is no EXIF data to show when it, or any of its components, was created, and DPC has always required valid EXIF to validate an image. Additionally, the image in question is not, in fact, a *photograph*: it's a masterwork for sure, but it isn't photography. |
Again, IMNSHO, this is a no-brainer. It's not a photograph, there is no EXIF data to validate, I honestly cannot see how on any level there would be inclination to enter it at all.
Originally posted by tanguera:
The digital realm is relatively new and rapidly expanding. In addition to 3D modeling, there's also the introduction of sites like NightCafe generator and StarryAI - which use words you input (ie. black cat on a white sofa in a room with a chandelier) to scour billions of images on the internet to automatically composite what it thinks you mean.
cgino has started doing this (on FB) with very interesting, and often hilarious results. There is an option to use one's own base photo as a place to start, but it's not necessary.
So would something like that eventually be admissible here? It is, after all, composed of digital photos, it is made by using your own words. The trip-up would be EXIF, which would not be available for any images not your own. |
I'm hoping that this preliminary discussion is just spitballing for sake of covering all the bases.
This one's fatal flaw is as Johanna pointed out, there would be no appropriate EXIF data for the other person's images.
As it is, we cannot enter someone else's image as our own, can we?
As Robert explained, Christophe used this new technique to enhance a composition made solely from his own images.
That seems fair, albeit bordering on ridiculous to even consider for some of us who would never be able to do so in a month of Sundays.
It would be easy to get the same old argument going that Extended editing is digital art more than photography, but that really isn't fair to the people who have taken the time and effort to pursue the craft to the point where they create amazing work.
But IMNSHO, we must start out with a digital camera, and produce a digital image, or images, to create our entry so that the validation playing field is level defined. {Fixed verbiage due to earlier discussion.}
Oh, and just for an index, I have *NO* idea what CGI/VR/3D Model-based images are.
Message edited by author 2022-07-22 22:36:25.
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 02:06:07 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
My opinion ... if you can't prove you took a photo to make whatever creation you present as a challenge entry, then it's not something we should see in a challenge. |
For me, THIS is the dealbreaker. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 02:33:56 AM · #7 |
I am sorry the picture got DJed, but what an amazing discussion ..... I have spent an hour or so on the net "looking" at techniques - oh my word - mind boggling and some videos I watched merged created "images" into actual pictures in PS.
I agree with Bear: This is a photographic site.
I think we should "basically" stick with that (JMHO). However, just like the use of Photoshop (or similar) has become more and more the norm, and DPC has mostly embraced this, with few challenges left as "Minimal Editing" (Which I love as well), maybe its time to expand further. However, keeping the spirit of DPC.
So, and only because I love learning and exploring, why not add a new "category", maybe once a month, which allows "pretty much anything" BUT the "main subject" must be a picture taken by you etc, etc. Yes, one would have to define what the "main subject" is, and I assume there would be a lot of DQs perhaps, but it would allow creating fabulous backgrounds (for those who can do that), or incorporate cool "objects" or "aliens" or whatever. I can imagine that would be fun to explore a bit.
Looking forward what everyone else feels. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 04:09:44 AM · #8 |
Although I'm guilty of entering a few of them myself, I don't really regard "Flip n' Blend" constructions as something that belongs in a photography contest either. They bear no resemblance to reality, not even in a distorted form.
The disqualified entry is actually more photographic even if there are no photographic components in it. However it breaks the first of the common editing rules:
"Your submission must be...
taken with a digital camera that records EXIF data."
I'm not opposed to such images being allowed, but it is my feeling they should fall under a separate rule set. But would such a category attract enough entries on a photography site?
Message edited by author 2022-07-23 04:10:19.
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 08:36:55 AM · #9 |
| I too am a "purist". This is a photography site. What ever the end result...it should start with a photo that the member is able to prove they shot. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 09:08:24 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
My opinion ... if you can't prove you took a photo to make whatever creation you present as a challenge entry, then it's not something we should see in a challenge. |
For me, THIS is the dealbreaker. |
Totally
Would be fab to learn something new, as a side challenge or tutorial or How do they do that. This is a photo site. If Gyban can do it with all his photos and not make computerized pretend stuff up to go with it, then it is possible to do it without faking it. Just requires more time and effort and a lot of hard work. This was basically why Extended exists.
It is interesting and fascinating to learn about it and the results are amazing, but yeah nah |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 01:28:37 PM · #11 |
I am not interested in 3D art renderings on this photography site. (But, Hubby had to convince me that I'd enjoy a digital camera... so there's that about me.)
I am amazed by Margaret's entry and the talent it takes to create that. But, I don't think it should be legalized here on DPC to use someone else's image or photograph other than our own. That's the challenge part of DPChallenge.com
It's a photography site, not a creation site. It has to start with photographs we have taken ourselves, IMHO.
If we open ourselves up to using other people's images, then the "world is our oyster" and it's not DPC... it's "find any images you like anywhere and add them to your photograph".
My two cents worth... if it's even worth that. :D
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 06:25:33 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Lydia:
But, I don't think it should be legalized here on DPC to use someone else's image or photograph other than our own. That's the challenge part of DPChallenge.com
It's a photography site, not a creation site. It has to start with photographs we have taken ourselves, |
+1
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 07:12:19 PM · #13 |
| So far 8 members other than me have weighed in here. We'd love to see some more opinions, we really would. This isn't much of a sample yet. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 07:38:32 PM · #14 |
| I like capturing moments rather than creating them. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 07:46:43 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by tanguera:
... Remember, one of the other pillars of DPC has been that is is a "learning site". |
We are a photography site first.
My opinion ... if you can't prove you took a photo to make whatever creation you present as a challenge entry, then it's not something we should see in a challenge.
|
To me this is a PHOTOGRAPHY SITE. It's not about being old fashion or purists.
I have no problem in some expert editing, every so often (called probably Experiments) where people show their new technical exploits.
I use 3D and it satisfies me somehow as any other new and fascinating discoveries BUT NOT AT THIS SITE. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 07:58:50 PM · #16 |
I think that 3D modelling would be a fascinating avenue of creativity to pursue. But not here.
Message edited by author 2022-07-24 21:55:07. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 08:18:43 PM · #17 |
DPC stands for Digital Photography Challenge so my opinion is that we should remain true to the name and allow only digital photographs, with qualifying exif, to be entered into challenges.
The extended editing rules allow for pretty much anything to be done with said photographs so there is a lot of room for creation in there.
3D and computer generated images that have no identifiable source do not fall within our site's original intention. And I think voting on those type of creations rather than on our own images would not be consistent with what DPC is.
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 08:23:02 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Lydia:
But, I don't think it should be legalized here on DPC to use someone else's image or photograph other than our own. That's the challenge part of DPChallenge.com
It's a photography site, not a creation site. It has to start with photographs we have taken ourselves, |
+1 |
I agree. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 08:29:02 PM · #19 |
I'm not crazy about expert editing, because it doesn't feel like photography. But it's an aspect of photography that probably does belong here.
But I know nothing about this new stuff. Which makes me feel unqualified to make a decision.
If this can be based off of our own photography, then perhaps it is something we should be looking at.
I have no problem creating it's own specific challenge. Perhaps this can be an extra mentor challenge (outside of our normal challenges). Margaret can guide is through something simple and we can explore and learn.
I DO, however, believe this needs to be based off of our own photography, not other people's work. At least the main part of the image.
Why not give it a shot? |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 08:41:35 PM · #20 |
I already expressed my opinion in the other thread, I can only repeat it here, to keep all "votes" in one place
Originally posted by LevT:
This debate seems to be a part of a larger societal paradigm shift as the metaverse is asserting itself more and more broadly and loudly. People are setting up businesses, building theme parks, buying and selling "virtual real estate" for millions of not-so-virtual dollars. So apparently it's time for the "virtual photography" to crop up as well. I don't have a problem with that if that's what people want to do with their time. My only modest desire is that we don't mix our real and virtual lives too much. It would be weird if virtual houses were sold alongside real ones, wouldn't it? Anyhow, I still would love for DPC to remain in the realm of "real photography" where taking photos of a real world with a real camera is involved. Or am I just too old and cranky? |
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 08:43:52 PM · #21 |
I'm not a fan of expert editing in general.
In some instances, the end result could be composed of many images, but I find it falls far outside of the realm of photography.
So my opinion on entries entirely devoid of any photographic images is a hard no.
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 10:19:42 PM · #22 |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 10:31:09 PM · #23 |
poissonly, I am still learning how to use the *** camera. on the other hand, I would not wish to discourage forays into zanyland.
life is short.
|
|
|
|
07/23/2022 10:35:54 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I DO, however, believe this needs to be based off of our own photography, not other people's work. At least the main part of the image.
Why not give it a shot? |
We are already giving it a shot, and have been for some time. As long as it's based on your own verifiable images, using 3D modeling and the rest is allowed in Extended Editing. |
|
|
|
07/23/2022 11:06:54 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by vawendy:
I DO, however, believe this needs to be based off of our own photography, not other people's work. At least the main part of the image.
Why not give it a shot? |
We are already giving it a shot, and have been for some time. As long as it's based on your own verifiable images, using 3D modeling and the rest is allowed in Extended Editing. |
Really? I had no idea. Then, if this is something we can try for free, I vote for a separate, 2 week or maybe even 3 week, challenge -- if Margaret is willing to give us some help on how to get started. But it should be based off our own photos. Let's learn more before having too strong of an opinion. We may be surprised. (which is hard for me to say, because I do photography because I'm better at seeing and photographing art than creating it. That's why my extended entries are extremely rarely "extended".)
Message edited by author 2022-07-23 23:08:01. |
|
