| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/06/2003 04:21:58 PM · #26 |
Simple and to the point... I personally think it's ashame that we can't post a finished work to a challenge. No matter how good you are with your camera, there are usually minor improvements that can be applied to an image that make it better. It's very rare that I get something out of my camera that can't be made better. I think it has only happened twice for me.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:28:36 PM · #27 |
| A lot of people have no idea how to use software like photoshop, they're just photographers, won't they be at a disadvantage. After all they are coming to present their photography skills not there computer skills. |
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:30:31 PM · #28 |
I'm never quite sure how I feel about this - from a competative point of view, I'd love to have unrestricted post-processing (not digital montage/ art type stuff) but unlimited touch up, dodge/ burn/ spot artwork and so on.
But I also notice that I've been doing less and less editing to save a bad picture as I start getting a little bit better at taking pictures. I pay more attention to the frame, to the composition and to the elements other than the main subject and so don't spend as much time having to fix mistakes later. I'd rather spend the time getting things right before I press the shutter, rather than fixing it in photoshop later. I've found that trying to work with the goal of getting things right in camera has made me a better photographer, even though I can use all the photoshop tricks I like later - I just find I don't have to very much any more and when I do use them it is really minimal. |
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:32:00 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by kiwiness:
A lot of people have no idea how to use software like photoshop, they're just photographers, won't they be at a disadvantage. After all they are coming to present their photography skills not there computer skills. |
They are coming to present their digital photography skills.
Is the digital darkroom part of digital photography ?
Is the normal darkroom part of film photography ?
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:35:30 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by kiwiness:
A lot of people have no idea how to use software like photoshop, they're just photographers, won't they be at a disadvantage. After all they are coming to present their photography skills not there computer skills. |
They are coming to present their digital photography skills.
Is the digital darkroom part of digital photography ?
Is the normal darkroom part of film photography ? |
The normal darkroom is an essential part of film photography, the digital dark room isn't necessarily. |
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:36:35 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by kiwiness:
A lot of people have no idea how to use software like photoshop, they're just photographers, won't they be at a disadvantage. After all they are coming to present their photography skills not there computer skills. |
They are coming to present their digital photography skills.
Is the digital darkroom part of digital photography ?
Is the normal darkroom part of film photography ? |
The normal darkroom is an essential part of film photography, the digital dark room isn't necessarily. |
I would love to hear elaboration on that... I think it's just as much a part of digital photography as the darkroom is in film photography...
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:50:38 PM · #32 |
John, I would also like to see the poll re-run, but what did you mean by "only photographers" should vote in it? Did you mean only those that submit photographs, whether they are members or not?
That poll is flawed. I think the poll should be re run and only photographers get to vote in it.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:51:45 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by goodtempo:
John, I would also like to see the poll re-run, but what did you mean by "only photographers" should vote in it? Did you mean only those that submit photographs, whether they are members or not?
That poll is flawed. I think the poll should be re run and only photographers get to vote in it.
|
something like that... people who come here to vote that don't submit photos or never have submitted photos or don't own cameras should not be included in the poll.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:52:25 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by kiwiness:
A lot of people have no idea how to use software like photoshop, they're just photographers, won't they be at a disadvantage. After all they are coming to present their photography skills not there computer skills. |
They are coming to present their digital photography skills.
Is the digital darkroom part of digital photography ?
Is the normal darkroom part of film photography ? |
The normal darkroom is an essential part of film photography, the digital dark room isn't necessarily. |
I would love to hear elaboration on that... I think it's just as much a part of digital photography as the darkroom is in film photography... |
To a certain extent it is I agree. But if you allow any post processing here you'll end up with all kinds of montages which resemble very little of the original photo. |
|
|
|
03/06/2003 04:59:24 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by kiwiness:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by kiwiness:
A lot of people have no idea how to use software like photoshop, they're just photographers, won't they be at a disadvantage. After all they are coming to present their photography skills not there computer skills. |
They are coming to present their digital photography skills.
Is the digital darkroom part of digital photography ?
Is the normal darkroom part of film photography ? |
The normal darkroom is an essential part of film photography, the digital dark room isn't necessarily. |
I would love to hear elaboration on that... I think it's just as much a part of digital photography as the darkroom is in film photography... |
To a certain extent it is I agree. But if you allow any post processing here you'll end up with all kinds of montages which resemble very little of the original photo. |
I disagree. We had an open edit challenge in the members challenge (Windows & Doors) and there were very few montage photo's, and less full blown PS manipulated ones then I thought. The winning shot had spot editing done, but nothing other then cloning out some rough areas on the wall.
We need to be free to be able to fix little things that make a nice picture a great picture.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 05:59:04 PM · #36 |
I can't believe I'm about to write this...
I believe that even the best image out of the camera can be made better with some editing. Dodging and burning (or selectively screening or multiplying) can be used to subtly highlight certain portions of an image. You can get rid of an annoying spot on a wall, clone out a scratch on a road, or move objects around in a scene to make it "perfect."
I heavily "photoshop" the photos I'm currently putting together for a portfolio to show a gallery here in Salt Lake. I've done all the things I've said and more. These days, I'm even creating digital paintings from some of my photos and intend to include them in the portfolio.
And yet...
I think I fall on the side of NO editing. In fact, I personally think there's too much editing already allowed on the site (like screwing around with individual color channels or adding borders). Can these edits make better photos? Most definitely. But why not leave it a site that focuses completely on the camera side of things and not on the post-processing. There are loads of sites out there that will accept anything, but there aren't very many that limit what you can do.
Right now, you get a 2K icon if you win and the kudos of your peers for a week. Hopefully, more importantly, you learn a heck of a lot about photography. If/when they start offering prizes, I think they'll almost HAVE to allow unlimited editing just to avoid the people cheating in the first place. (I guarantee I could HEAVILY edit a photo in ways such that you'd have to be an FBI digital image forensics expert in order to catch me.)
Yes, unlimited editing would help those with lower-end cameras even the playing field. But the very act of allowing editing creates two other uneven fields: those with high end-imaging software vs. those without, and those who know how to use high-end (or low-end, for that matter) imaging software vs. those who don't.
But y'all can take it or leave it -- after all, I've not actually submitted to a challenge in months. :-)
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 06:11:39 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
That poll is flawed. I think the poll should be re run and only photographers get to vote in it. |
Is there ANY evidence whatsoever that the poll is flawed other than the fact it came out the way you did not want it to, John? Serious evidence? I doubt it, but I am willing to see anything you produce. If you can produce nothing (as I strongly suspect) then you should immediately apologise for your immodest claims to those of us who voted in what I consider a fair and balanced poll.
The call for only photographers to vote is, of course, elitist in the highest extreme. Photographers are NOT the only users of this site. I would strongly suggest that the VAST majority of users of this site are not photographers, merely those who like to watch and enjoy. They count too, you know.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 06:40:41 PM · #38 |
i wouldn't mind seeing another poll where only the photographers voted--just to see if the numbers are any different! and granted, i think it is great that the vast majority of folks are here to watch and learn--as an amature photographer, i definitely appreciate the feedback. it does, however, worry me a little, that non-photographers can vote on the fate of the photographers.
anyway, who cares! i just see this as a debate, no use getting riled up about it! dpc is awesome, i have learned an immense amount about photography in the past year--with the limitations--so i am fine with whatever. i dont have a problem with minor spot editing, but i also dont have a problem with it the way it is either. definitely nothing to get upset about! :)
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 06:48:55 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Jak:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
That poll is flawed. I think the poll should be re run and only photographers get to vote in it. |
Is there ANY evidence whatsoever that the poll is flawed other than the fact it came out the way you did not want it to, John? Serious evidence? I doubt it, but I am willing to see anything you produce. If you can produce nothing (as I strongly suspect) then you should immediately apologise for your immodest claims to those of us who voted in what I consider a fair and balanced poll.
The call for only photographers to vote is, of course, elitist in the highest extreme. Photographers are NOT the only users of this site. I would strongly suggest that the VAST majority of users of this site are not photographers, merely those who like to watch and enjoy. They count too, you know. |
Jak, it's not elitist at all. Why should people who don't participate in the photography side of the challenge be allowed to participate in making the rules that guide a challenge?
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 06:56:07 PM · #40 |
| The vast majority of VOTERS are photographers. |
|
|
|
03/06/2003 07:17:33 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Digipixer:
The vast majority of VOTERS are photographers. |
Currently I believe that is probably the case. During the week of that particular poll, i don't believe it was the case.
It doesn't really matter. I do not believe that there are enough that would support the concept. I do think that the ranks of the site members could possibly support it at a higher level, but I'm not sure of that either.
There are a lot of 'fears' associated with unlimited editing capabilities. I think the major fear is that the site would turn into a digital art/collage contest. I think this is avoidable if the rule is written correctly.
My only desire for full editing capabilities is to be able to fix a spot here and there that is NOT fixable with the camera. I would also like to occasionally remove some element that is not supposed to be in the frame, but unavoidable for a correct composition.
These elements are what make digital photography more appealing to me than film photography.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2003 07:28:46 PM · #42 |
I have a concern that certain pictures that I've entered in the past that used more creative approaches to making pictures (zooming, panning, frame within a frame composition) would get less credit in a contest that allowed more lax editing rules - people would assume the effect was done digitally and decide they don't like digital effects, rather than bothering to look at the result and decide if they like it - no matter how it was done, or rate it higher because of the technical difficultly of achieving it well - its much easier to get a good pan shot with the motion blur tool and careful selection than it is to stand there swivelling around on a street corner.
That said - there is an interesting compromise position - we could make the member challenges 'no holds barred' with some sort of restriction that drives towards editing to preserve the realism of the original photograph while allowing more creative expression and final production of the entry and keep the open challenge to the existing rules. Would make for an interesting experiement and also keep a 'control' challenge running. This could be done permanently, or on a once per month basis or similar.
Note that this is very different to the no editing restrictions rules that were in place for the windows and doors challenge - where nothing was mentioned about preserving the original photographic intent and montages and digital composites were entered.
Message edited by author 2003-03-06 19:30:14. |
|
|
|
03/06/2003 07:45:21 PM · #43 |
I think this is not really a digital editing or photoshop question, but really one of intent. People want see realistic photographs in a DPchallenge contest - that seems to be the underlying message. How that is achieved is a secondary concern.
Take these two pictures that I shot in the last month.
Nightmare #1205
Almost zero post processing on this nightmare shot. Each picture is exactly as taken. No cutting, no pasting, no spot editing or masking. The shots were carefully taken to have the correct elements in the right places with non-conflicting background elements. These were then layered in photoshop with appropriate blending styles, resized, sharpened and that is it.
Now consider
Amanda
This second shot is probably one of my more processed shots for a few months. I used multiple layers, different blending modes, clone brushes, healing brushes, spot editing, gradient masks, gaussian blur filters (but not to get the background blurry - that's camera/ lens work) colour adjustments, contrast changes and many other non-dpc legal editing techniques.
Which one is the most realistic ? What does the amount of editing have to do with the final result ? The issue is with the intent - are you trying to produce a realistic image ,or not ? |
|
|
|
03/06/2003 07:59:14 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
we could make the member challenges 'no holds barred' with some sort of restriction that drives towards editing to preserve the realism of the original photograph while allowing more creative expression and final production of the entry and keep the open challenge to the existing rules. |
This would be a great idea. myself I like it how it is. It allows me to correct things with the photo after the challenge. For instance, an entry of mine this week was mentioned looking better b&w...didn't even think about it at the time, and it does look much better!.
The main thing that the way things are right now...it makes me TRY to get the photo, as I want it, when I take it. I stop and look at things closer, look at different angles, checking the lighting, where is the sun, etc. It is helping me become a better photographer. And if I get a regular ol SLR (not bloody likely!!), I will know what I am doing.
I think anyone that has good knowledge of PS, could take any snapshot and turn it into a decent photo with post processing...maybe even incredible, with adding whatever they want, etc.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2003 07:39:41 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
From the poll 9/6/02:
Poll Results: "What kind of restrictions would you prefer for challenge submission?"
No restrictions on editing 50
Unlimited use of filters, no spot editing 34
Limited use of filters only, spot editing allowed 56
Limited use of filters, no spot editing (like current rules) 213
More restrictive editing rules 37
390 users participated. |
Not to rock the boat but my poll "What kind of restrictions would you prefer for challenge submission?" at Poll 5
gives very different results and I checked on two different browsers on two different OSes to make sure it wasn't my error.
No restrictions on editing: 50
Unlimited use of filters, no spot editing: 56
Limited use of filters only, spot editing allowed: 213
Limited use of filters, no spot editing (like current rules): 37
More restrictive editing rules: 34
Sorted...
Limited use of filters only, spot editing allowed: 213
Unlimited use of filters, no spot editing: 56
No restrictions on editing: 50
Limited use of filters, no spot editing (like current rules): 37
More restrictive editing rules: 34
Looks like the majority is in favor of more editing freedom.
-tog
|
|
|
|
03/12/2003 08:28:56 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
This is just further support for no restrictions on editing :) |
I have to agree. Spot editing does a lot for the photos. When I was voting I noticed a photo in the bridge challenge that actually moved me, I would have given it a 10 if it weren't for the "sunspot" in the middle of the image. I had looked and looked at this very image and the spot could have been cropped, but the effect of the entire image would have been gone. A simple spot editing of a very small area on this photo would have made it a 10. |
|
|
|
03/12/2003 08:34:51 AM · #47 |
This is a display error -- there have been some changes to the poll code and it is apparently causing the poll results to display in the wrong order. I remember when this poll was run and can verify that the results were as GeneralE posted.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
03/12/2003 10:13:15 AM · #48 |
|
|
|
03/13/2003 12:19:30 AM · #49 |
Here is the list of editing rules from www.digitalphotocontest.com, and I think they would be totally appropriate here (but I'd throw out the no borders rule :))
Image Modifications
Cropping and Rotation: Images may be cropped and rotated as long as a rectangular format is maintained.
Resizing: Images may be resized as long as aspect ratio is maintained.
Borders and Frames: No borders or frames shall be added to images prior to submission. Borders are added by DPC to all entries upon submission.
Watermarks, Signatures, or Copyright Notices: These marks may be added to the photos to protect the photographer's copyright. Keep in mind, however, that excessively large, distracting watermarks may weaken your photo and thus hinder its chances of being selected as a winner.
Spot Editing, including Red-eye Removal: Spot editing refers to the application of a change or effect to a selected portion of a photo. Spot editing and red-eye removal are permitted for the purpose of improving the appearance of a photograph and to give it a more natural look.
Adding or Replacing Elements: Elements or objects that do not exist in the original photo shall not be added to an image. For example, you can not improve a sky by replacing it with a sky from another photograph.
Examples of Permitted Modifications - These modifications may be applied selectively or globally to all categories unless stated otherwise.
One-step enhancement (known in various software packages as Auto Levels, Enhance, Intellihance, Quick Fix, etc.)
Use of filters such as sharpen, unsharp mask, soften, blur, despeckle, JPG cleanup, and remove noise. These filters should not be used to the extent that they create a non-realistic or artistic effect.
Use of corrective functions such as levels, contrast, brightness, curves, gamma, intensity, tone, hue, saturation, desaturation, lightness, value (in HSV model), RGB color channel adjustment, color balance, and tint.
Use of the cloning or rubber stamp tool to remove minor blemishes and small, unwanted items such as power lines and debris that may spoil your composition.
Barrel distortion and pin-cushioning correction.
Message edited by author 2003-03-13 00:49:30. |
|
|
|
03/13/2003 12:34:31 AM · #50 |
| We should consider allowing people to use the Digi-Marc filter. The idea is for it to be invisible. |
|
