DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> D200 Image overlay..is it legal?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 19 of 19, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/07/2006 06:45:54 PM · #1
Is the use of the D200 "image overlay" (where in the camera it's self you can overlap two images together) option legal or not?
08/07/2006 06:53:57 PM · #2
anyone?
08/07/2006 06:55:59 PM · #3
As long as it's done in camera it's legal.
08/07/2006 06:56:51 PM · #4
Originally posted by alfresco:

As long as it's done in camera it's legal.


^^^^^ points and nods.
08/07/2006 07:03:46 PM · #5
Not in Basic...

Your entry must come from a single photograph, taken during the specified challenge timeframe. You may not combine multiple exposures.

That would be a severe skew in favor of people whose cameras can do that. Most can't.
08/07/2006 07:07:25 PM · #6
Originally posted by chimericvisions:

Not in Basic...

Your entry must come from a single photograph, taken during the specified challenge timeframe. You may not combine multiple exposures.

That would be a severe skew in favor of people whose cameras can do that. Most can't.


Doesn't matter. If it can be done *in camera*.. it is legal.

There are cameras that do multiple exposure, and people have been submitting entries using this method for years. Not all cameras have all functions, and sometimes that's just how it is. Whether it skews in favor or not isn't at issue. Using a Canon 1DsMKII when someone else can only afford an HP Photosmart 315 would be skewing.. no?
08/07/2006 07:12:10 PM · #7
cool. that's all i needed to know guys. thanks alot. i appreciate it.
08/07/2006 07:15:56 PM · #8
Originally posted by Artyste:

Doesn't matter. If it can be done *in camera*.. it is legal.

There are cameras that do multiple exposure, and people have been submitting entries using this method for years. Not all cameras have all functions, and sometimes that's just how it is. Whether it skews in favor or not isn't at issue. Using a Canon 1DsMKII when someone else can only afford an HP Photosmart 315 would be skewing.. no?


Then the rules need to be amended. "You may not combine multiple exposures" is pretty cut and dried and makes no exceptions for in-camera. Yes, the rules state separately that in-camera modifications are allowable, but I don't personally consider the merging of two separate exposures to be just a "modification".

Advanced is also very clear when it says that "You may not post-process your entry from or to include elements of multiple images". It very specifically mentions post-process, which means that in-camera merges are acceptable. Basic does not make that exception.
08/07/2006 07:17:04 PM · #9
Originally posted by chimericvisions:


Then the rules need to be amended. "You may not combine multiple exposures" is pretty cut and dried and makes no exceptions for in-camera.


It's been debated in-depth...
08/07/2006 07:19:49 PM · #10
It should count....as long as you can provide the original with exif info...it should count.
08/07/2006 07:21:16 PM · #11
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by chimericvisions:


Then the rules need to be amended. "You may not combine multiple exposures" is pretty cut and dried and makes no exceptions for in-camera.


It's been debated in-depth...


That's fine - all I'm saying is that if that is allowable in the rules, then the rules need to STATE that. Because right now they don't. They explicitly call it out as illegal.
08/07/2006 07:35:02 PM · #12
Originally posted by chimericvisions:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by chimericvisions:


Then the rules need to be amended. "You may not combine multiple exposures" is pretty cut and dried and makes no exceptions for in-camera.


It's been debated in-depth...


That's fine - all I'm saying is that if that is allowable in the rules, then the rules need to STATE that. Because right now they don't. They explicitly call it out as illegal.


They do state it's illegal, but it also states the following:

Originally posted by DPC Rules:

Any modification done inside the digital camera itself is considered acceptable for challenge submission.


To me, that seems acceptable if you have the exif from the original file that comes straight from the camera. I'm not sure how those exifs look if you overlay images...someone want to post one for everyone to see?
08/07/2006 07:39:19 PM · #13
the current ruleset does indicate a paradox, yes. however, it is legal in both advanced and basic if it's a feature of the camera.
08/07/2006 07:42:12 PM · #14
Originally posted by SamDoe1:


They do state it's illegal, but it also states the following:

Originally posted by DPC Rules:

Any modification done inside the digital camera itself is considered acceptable for challenge submission.


To me, that seems acceptable if you have the exif from the original file that comes straight from the camera. I'm not sure how those exifs look if you overlay images...someone want to post one for everyone to see?


It may be acceptable - I'm not arguing that it isn't. Just that the rules are written wrong/badly.

Stating that something can not be done, followed up by "anything you can do in the camera is ok" is the same as "Anything you can do in the camera is ok, but this can not be done".

The wording makes it illegal. It doesn't say "unless done in-camera" - if it's allowable, then it should.
08/07/2006 07:46:45 PM · #15
i understand your point, but it would be impossible for us to update the rulesets based on every feature of every camera. as this is a new feature not available in many cameras, it's a new issue.

you are more than welcome to suggest this as an amendment to the new rulesets that are under debate, although that is not a guarantee of anything...including the fact that we will ever HAVE new rulesets. ;)
08/07/2006 07:48:27 PM · #16
The rules state that multiple exposures cannot be combined, yes. This is stated in the context of "editing." The rules also state that anyting accomplished in-camera is OK, and this clarifies the separation of "editing" from "shooting," and confirms that techniques deemed illegal in post are still legal if accomplished as-shot. Whether multiple shuter openings are involved, in-camera, is irrelevant, as long as one file is written to memory, with one (valid) set of EXIF data.
08/07/2006 07:49:31 PM · #17
and THAT'S why kirbic is so much cooler than me. :P
08/07/2006 07:58:55 PM · #18
Originally posted by kirbic:

The rules state that multiple exposures cannot be combined, yes. This is stated in the context of "editing." The rules also state that anyting accomplished in-camera is OK, and this clarifies the separation of "editing" from "shooting," and confirms that techniques deemed illegal in post are still legal if accomplished as-shot. Whether multiple shuter openings are involved, in-camera, is irrelevant, as long as one file is written to memory, with one (valid) set of EXIF data.


I just wrote something almost exactly like that, but my internet pooped out on me and didn't post. But yeah, what he said.
08/07/2006 08:04:26 PM · #19
Originally posted by SamDoe1:


I just wrote something almost exactly like that, but my internet pooped out on me and didn't post. But yeah, what he said.


suuuuuure ya did
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/19/2021 12:37:56 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 09/19/2021 12:37:56 AM EDT.