| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/01/2006 08:58:48 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by bvoi:
What do you think about using the black and white settings on your camera? I'm worried voters would deduct because it looks like post processing. |
I'm thinking of trying that out, too, so I say go for it! This sounds like a great challenge to try out all sorts of different "settings" on the camera... Now if I only knew what those settings were... |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 09:27:28 AM · #52 |
| I hope to be back from Chicago to enter this one.....hehe |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 09:37:19 AM · #53 |
Wow only a member for 5 days and now I have 3 Challenges that I can enter. System overload. Not sure where to point my camera first...
I guess I just go shoot flowers for starters, Could end up with a Stationary shot in the process or perhaps one for the straight out of the cam. Then Ill still need a flower shot see overload ,Argh!
|
|
|
|
07/01/2006 10:19:23 AM · #54 |
| So besides saturation, contrast, & sharpness tweaks, I wonder if the color space should be changed from AdobeRGB back to sRGB? |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 10:23:30 AM · #55 |
Hmmm..i should have an advantage with a 30D - allthose lovely picture styles and then the ability to tweak them in-camera...
gotta go b&w i think - and my camera has filter options for that as well.
So i can't complain it's a camera issue....should i start to blame the trolls now? LOL
Fireworks in black and white! OK, maybe not.
|
|
|
|
07/01/2006 10:24:56 AM · #56 |
Originally posted by hyperfocal:
So besides saturation, contrast, & sharpness tweaks, I wonder if the color space should be changed from AdobeRGB back to sRGB? |
I am alwyas in sRGB. My output is 100% web or my local lab - both are sRGB spaces so it's pointless to shootin one and convert every pic. If you print via inkjet then AdobeRGB makes sense.
|
|
|
|
07/01/2006 11:35:45 AM · #57 |
I'm wondering what all of the questions are about?
It clearly states you cannot use RAW. You cannot rotate or manipulate the original in "any" way. You can only resize and save for web. This does not mean you can use bicubic or any other way to resize other than a natural form of resizing, IMO. If you use bicubic, then you are manipulating the image by sharpening it and that can be reason for DQ.
So it is best to shoot something that is completely able to be used as is, and then do a natural resize and save. Simple as that. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 11:43:32 AM · #58 |
If there are any SC members monitoring, it would be good to get a ruling as to whether rotating an image shot "portrait" so it is viewed straight is allowed. By the letter of the description, it would appear that it isn't, but I'm guesing that the intention was to prevent straightening the horizon.
I can rotate the image in-camera, so I'm not impacted for my entry, but it would be nice to have clarification before DNMC sets in.
The question about the sharpening options for resizing being allowed / dissallowed would also be nice to have clarified.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 11:59:22 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by maestro:
You can only resize and save for web. This does not mean you can use bicubic or any other way to resize other than a natural form of resizing, IMO. |
It does not _not_ mean that either. You do have a good point though.
Ultimately though, resampling on resizing down to 640 px merely maintains sharpness (or at least tries to), not adding it.
IMO resampling is no big deal.
Edit to add: And there is no easy way anyone can tell if an image was or was not resampled so it's a moot point.
Message edited by author 2006-07-01 12:05:14. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 12:15:22 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by maestro:
I'm wondering what all of the questions are about?
It clearly states you cannot use RAW. You cannot rotate or manipulate the original in "any" way. You can only resize and save for web. This does not mean you can use bicubic or any other way to resize other than a natural form of resizing, IMO. If you use bicubic, then you are manipulating the image by sharpening it and that can be reason for DQ.
So it is best to shoot something that is completely able to be used as is, and then do a natural resize and save. Simple as that. |
What is a "natural" resize? In photoshop I just can't for the life of me find an option to naturally resize a photo. .....just having fun with ya. Surprised there isn't complaints that most dslr's still have an advantage. So easy to set parameters to completely control various levels of contrast, brightness, sharpness, even add various filter effects and B&W, sepia ect ect. Then it's easier to attach lens filters of every description to a dslr.
It's not fair to the dslr shooters ... although they can shoot JPG I've forgotten how to do anything unless it starts as a RAW ... not fair ... not fair ... point and shoots have an unfair advantage .... sob..sob .. cry... cry.
ONLY HAVIBG FUN .... NO FLAMES PLEASE ;)
|
|
|
|
07/01/2006 12:58:19 PM · #61 |
What I mean by natural resizing is using "smartsize". I use PSP8 so anything else, at least to me and what I find, effects the pixels in the photo. Then again it really can't be known if you use is so that is true.
I don't seem to have functions on my camera which allows me to make it b/w or sepia in a photo though. I guess anything you do in camera is accepted but I have a feeling that SC is going to have there work cut out for them this time around. :) Lot's of validations and lots of complaints about DQ's. I can just smell it in the air! :) |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 12:59:22 PM · #62 |
Im going to go out on a limb and say most dslr cameras have a rotate function in camera. not to mention that you can turn off the auto-rotate function.
also. any kind of resizing changes the pixel data of an image. down sizing is the removal of pixels. using a sharpening sampler to downsize all it does is 'attempt' to preserve the original 'sharpness' of an image. now if you were upsizing an image there might be an issue, since you would be adding pixels. tisk tisk. this is a non issue.
im suprised there are no border lovers complaining yet. ;) |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:02:34 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by veocon:
im suprised there are no border lovers complaining yet. ;) |
No problem, I can use a photo-frame :P
|
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:05:38 PM · #64 |
Hey, I've taken a shot for this challenge. It is still in my camera so I haven't uploaded it yet. It looks like it's very postprocessed, I think. The monitor on my camera isn't the best one so I don't have an idea how it looks on a computer monitor. I hope I won't be voted down for not meeting the challenge because of the look of my photo.
I hope we will get some good photos. It is really hard to make a good photo without postprocessing, but it's possible. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:08:16 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by biteme:
Originally posted by veocon:
im suprised there are no border lovers complaining yet. ;) |
No problem, I can use a photo-frame :P |
cheater :P |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:09:31 PM · #66 |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:19:43 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by Djabordjabor:
...It is really hard to make a good photo without postprocessing, but it's possible. |
bah-hum-bug. what a nay-sayer. i dont believe that at all. ;)
its kinda like saying everything you see with your eye should be edited before it is beautiful. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:30:09 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by veocon:
Originally posted by Djabordjabor:
...It is really hard to make a good photo without postprocessing, but it's possible. |
bah-hum-bug. what a nay-sayer. i dont believe that at all. ;)
its kinda like saying everything you see with your eye should be edited before it is beautiful. |
Your brain does edit it. That's why you don't notice how yellow indoor lighting is until you see a picture of it. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:45:28 PM · #69 |
kind of stupid that you can't even sharpen the photo...even when sharpening is all the way up, I get soft images when i resize them to 640 pixels...definately skipping this one.
|
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:48:39 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by veocon:
Originally posted by Djabordjabor:
...It is really hard to make a good photo without postprocessing, but it's possible. |
bah-hum-bug. what a nay-sayer. i dont believe that at all. ;)
its kinda like saying everything you see with your eye should be edited before it is beautiful. |
Your brain does edit it. That's why you don't notice how yellow indoor lighting is until you see a picture of it. |
good point. lol... i always forget white balance. :D |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:53:03 PM · #71 |
| I guess 'save for web' is out since sharpening is part of that process. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 01:57:35 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
I guess 'save for web' is out since sharpening is part of that process. |
I think it would be fine since "Absolutely NO post-processing is allowed except resizing and compression for the web." And, that is compression for web. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 02:16:53 PM · #73 |
Sharp is not going to bother me. I'll miss the cropping for sure! Crop is my crutch.
KS
Originally posted by deapee:
kind of stupid that you can't even sharpen the photo...even when sharpening is all the way up, I get soft images when i resize them to 640 pixels...definately skipping this one. |
|
|
|
|
07/01/2006 02:23:49 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by dahkota:
Originally posted by veocon:
Originally posted by Djabordjabor:
...It is really hard to make a good photo without postprocessing, but it's possible. |
bah-hum-bug. what a nay-sayer. i dont believe that at all. ;)
its kinda like saying everything you see with your eye should be edited before it is beautiful. |
Your brain does edit it. That's why you don't notice how yellow indoor lighting is until you see a picture of it. |
Ok, I think it is hard, maybe you can. My photos always look like a grey mud before I edit them. |
|
|
|
07/01/2006 02:37:16 PM · #75 |
Personally I love this challenge. I really like to see real pictures that comes out from the machine which tells me how much you know about the machine, and its adjustments like ISO, aperture and shutter speed... etc.
It is very possible to take excellent photos without editing, editing should be the "touch" instead of "heavy adjustments" on a photo.
... I already hear grounding sounds, but this is my opinion.
Good luck to challengers :) |
|
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: 04/18/2024 05:05:48 PM EDT.
