| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/01/2007 10:58:39 AM · #51 |
I thought expert editing already allowed for multiple images. It seems like entrants of past have done this. Is this true?
|
|
|
|
08/01/2007 11:13:03 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by Rooster:
I thought expert editing already allowed for multiple images. It seems like entrants of past have done this. Is this true? |
Expert, yes. But they're talking about adding it to advanced for one specific purpose only. |
|
|
|
08/01/2007 11:23:08 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
That's easy to validate. The exif will show the images as consecutive. That's really the point of taking different exposures of the same scene is to do them in relatively quick succession, not come back tomorrow. |
Ah, but some people knowing "the point" isn't good enough. Consecutive isn't good enough, either. I can well imagine leaving the tripod in the same spot over a period of a few hours and clicking a shot every 30 minutes to show the progression across the sky.
I like Lanndon's suggestion:
Originally posted by LanndonKane:
Basically, if the two shots are identical, but with different exposures, than it should be fine. By identical, I don't mean all the leaves on the tree have to be in the exact same position, or the water has to stay still while you're setting up the next shot. But if a new feature comes into view, like a bird or boat, than it can effectively be used beyond the means of enhancing the dynamic range of the image, and would be disqualified. |
Good point, Lanndon. As with other judgement calls, I'd be comfortable leaving it to the SC to determine how much change is allowed. I know that sets some people's teeth on edge, but I think it's needed.
|
|
|
|
08/01/2007 11:31:34 AM · #54 |
flowing water (white water) would appear silky smooth in an HDR composite ... which is "beyond the means of enhancing the dynamic range".
so would long grass in the wind
Originally posted by LanndonKane:
Basically, if the two shots are identical, but with different exposures, than it should be fine. By identical, I don't mean all the leaves on the tree have to be in the exact same position, or the water has to stay still while you're setting up the next shot. But if a new feature comes into view, like a bird or boat, than it can effectively be used beyond the means of enhancing the dynamic range of the image, and would be disqualified. |
|
|
|
|
08/01/2007 11:32:52 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
As with other judgement calls, I'd be comfortable leaving it to the SC to determine how much change is allowed. I know that sets some people's teeth on edge ... |
Especially mine. SC should be arbiters of rules, not esthetics ... I think judgements on whether something otherwise legal is "too much" should be left to the voters. |
|
|
|
08/01/2007 11:38:01 AM · #56 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
After a lot of thinking about the expert editing rules and a possible proliferation of 'digital art' that would result from them, I think there may be a better solution to help establish the line between "photographic in nature" and digital art.
1. I think DPC definitely has room for digital art challenges on a regular basis, where anything goes with absolutely no restrictions on editing.
2. I think that the advanced editing rules could quickly become 'expert' rules by adding the following statement to those rules:
"You may use multiple photos of the same composition for the purpose of enhanced dynamic range. You may not use multiple different photos for your final image."
This would maintain the same type of images we get now with a little more robust set of opportunities to finish them. The advanced editing rules seem to give us most of the opportunities we want to properly finish a photograph in whatever way we see fit. The addition of tools to allow for HDR would make those even more complete without turning the results into photo collages.
Just some food for thought... |
The key to this thought IMO is the area that I've bolded in John's quote.
Extrapolating further...modify the Advanced Editing rules slightly to allow HDR multiple images. Let the Expert Editing run amuck on it's own.
My biggest complaint/concern - keep the "Marquee" challenges as Photography challenges. "Marquee" to me is the monthly "Free Study" and the year-end "Best Of" challenges. If a "Marquee" challenge is needed for Expert Editing then run them at the same time. Don't take one away for the other. Mixing of these two types of art forms (Photography vs Digital Collages) doesn't seem fair to either group when it comes to unbiased voting. |
|
|
|
08/01/2007 12:23:41 PM · #57 |
Okay, it seems that many people are comfortable with the idea of HDR in advanced editing. That is:
- a number of shots taken immediately after each other, varying only in exposure
- every pixel is exactly the same other than exposure
Some people might modify the second one to "nothing changes enough from frame to frame to change the look," but others think that's problematic.
I think you'd have to add both of those to eliminate:
- grass, water, and other moving objects from becoming smooth in the long exposures
- other objects moving into and out of the frame (including the sun or moon if they're long enough)
- time lapse photos
|
|
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: 04/27/2024 05:40:10 PM EDT.
