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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> expert editing....why even require a photograph?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 107, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/26/2006 11:26:27 PM · #1
Expert editing rules need revision. While it was fun to look at many of the entries they are not photographs...they are digital art. Take for instance Gaby_G's "photo" ....do I think it should have placed as high as it did? Yes...it apparently adhered to the rules and it is very well composed and interesting. Nonetheless, it is not a photo. Gaby's entry could have been created in photoshop exclusively (I'm not suggesting it was but it could have been.) If you don't believe me take a look at Bert Monroy's work at //www.bertmonroy.com/fineart/text/fineart1.htm#

In the future, I propose that if DPC retains these editing rules they are renamed "anything goes." Also, ya might as well throw out the need for photo verification as it basically comes down to photoshop skills when this much lattitude is granted so what is the point.

12/26/2006 11:31:17 PM · #2
If you have to provide your own source material, the site does not have to worry about settling disputes about using other people's pictures. Doing so probably falls under the editorial use of copyright, but still, who wants to try to mediate the old "why did you stick my face there?" argument?
12/26/2006 11:35:04 PM · #3
A little tough to create a landscape or portraiture without the aid of a photograph. The thing is... part of the rules are that you must use your own PHOTOGRAPHS so the argument is moot.
12/26/2006 11:35:10 PM · #4
Ya know...I kinda agree. This type of challenge really takes away from true spirit of photography.

Message edited by author 2006-12-26 23:35:40.
12/26/2006 11:37:52 PM · #5
Photography is art.....it is a basis for many different forms. Whether it be straight from the camera, basic editing, advanced editing, expert editing....or free for all...it is all based from photography....this type of art has been in place since before World War 1.

Who are you to stop it now?
12/26/2006 11:40:18 PM · #6
Originally posted by lesgainous:

Ya know...I kinda agree. This type of challenge really takes away from true spirit of photography.


Then don't participate. Expert Editing rules threaten photography the way gay marriage threatens marriage... not at all.
12/26/2006 11:46:18 PM · #7
Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by lesgainous:

Ya know...I kinda agree. This type of challenge really takes away from true spirit of photography.


Then don't participate. Expert Editing rules threaten photography the way gay marriage threatens marriage... not at all.


Hahahaha...I will pay that one. That is soo true...there is no threat....no competition.
12/26/2006 11:53:04 PM · #8
Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by lesgainous:

Ya know...I kinda agree. This type of challenge really takes away from true spirit of photography.


Then don't participate. Expert Editing rules threaten photography the way gay marriage threatens marriage... not at all.

Gay marriage isn't really true marriage...digital art compositions with multiple photos is not pure photography.
12/26/2006 11:54:48 PM · #9
boy the voters sure like it don't they?

that's the first time I've had a chance to look through the results - those scores are amazing!

I think being able to tweak your exposure by looking at the back of your camera is still cheating - occassionally I feel just a bit naughty for being able to do that without paying for developing.

I'm a fan of the way it's being handled here - most of the images look very much like a photo - and did I mention...

look at those scores!

Message edited by author 2006-12-26 23:54:59.
12/26/2006 11:56:46 PM · #10
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by lesgainous:

Ya know...I kinda agree. This type of challenge really takes away from true spirit of photography.


Then don't participate. Expert Editing rules threaten photography the way gay marriage threatens marriage... not at all.

Gay marriage isn't really true marriage...digital art compositions with multiple photos is not pure photography.


How do you spell photography... BIGOTRY
12/26/2006 11:58:18 PM · #11
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Gay marriage isn't really true marriage...digital art compositions with multiple photos is not pure photography.


That's your opinion. But my point still holds. Marriage isn't threatened and photography isn't threatened.
12/27/2006 12:05:31 AM · #12
The moment you press the shutter button, you are already creating a false image. How can you capture a dynamic, three-dimensional object or scene on a static, two-dimensional square? It's already a lie at that point, any further manipulation is just another shovel of dirt on the grave :p
12/27/2006 12:08:59 AM · #13
I didn't say I didn't like the graphics in this past challenge. In fact, there are some super cool graphics submitted.

I'm just saying that this rocks the very foundation of which photography purists are based.

Heck, I may even enter one of these "Expert Editing" (or whatever it may end up being named) challenges. It looks like fun. I'm just saying...

:-)
12/27/2006 12:25:56 AM · #14
There's a LOT that can be done under the "expert rules" that cannot legally be done with the advanced rules yet still remains in the realm of "true" photography; in particular i refer to HDRI processimng, which is "truly photographic" `in nature. And this is even MORE true if you consider the work of acclaimed photographer/artists like Jerry Uelsmann, who did all his stuff long before there was such a thing called "digital editing". I actually don't think Jerry was ever as persecuted by "purist" photographers as those who like to explore fantastical compositions are on this site ;-)

"Philosopher's Desk" by Jerry Uelsmann

"Untitled" by Jerry Uelsmann

ETA: actually, Jerry is still working but he doesn't use digital in his workflow. His prints are hand-created in the darkroom, using as many as 8 enlargers set up with different images and moving the paper from one enlarger to the next.

Edited to text links

Message edited by author 2006-12-27 13:51:06.
12/27/2006 12:28:44 AM · #15
What Bear said.
12/27/2006 12:42:28 AM · #16
It's an arguement without end, really. What is pure? Why do we stick to old traditions and thoughts? Why are we opposed to change? Is anything even changing?

I believe that what we are witnessing here is:
A) People being threatened by what they perceive to be an encroachment on their comfort level
B) A clash of attitude
C) A reaction to the inevitable changes that are made when the 'usual' begins to become boring and/or stale.

What we should try to understand is that any 'threat' is largely artificial. There is no army of digital artists coming to steal your single composition photography, or turn every challenge into a digital free-for-all. There is simply such a growth on the site that it can no longer exist only for the status quo. More people = more ideas, and I don't think it is entirely wrong to foster these ideas.

This, however, brings me to the attitude clash. What I keep seeing are people trying their best to try and convince everyone else (and possibly themselves), that what they perceive photography to be, (or not be), is the *only* way it should or can be. "That's not Photography!" or "You're just a purist!" are both just as inane.

We're a diverse group with many perceptions and ideas, and I think they should all be fostered. What is a photograph? It is the final vision of what a photographer wanted when he saw something and captured it with his/her camera. Whether this vision be realistic, or fantastical, it is never *wrong*.

There will always be challenges for those that wish to keep their photography in the realm of the realistic... but I see nothing wrong with also allowing challenges to nurture the side of fantasy.

But.. on both sides.. don't try and make it seem like one is better than the other.. or more important.. or worth more. Stop feeling threatened, there's enough bandwidth for everyone.

*EDITED* I ran out of buffer room on my Wii, so sorry for those that saw this post at half-way. I had to get to my computer quickly to finish it off.

Message edited by author 2006-12-27 00:49:25.
12/27/2006 12:57:51 AM · #17
I agree with Artyste...

And, it's funny you mention Bert Monroy, today of all days, because I just read an article a few hours ago about him in "Digital PhotoPro," The Sept/Oct edition.

I mean, I really doubt any of us have that much time on our hands...if you go to page 91 in that issue it tells you how long one of those ditial "paintings" takes...

11 months
Image size: 40X120 inches
Flattend file: 1.7 GB
15,000 layers
500 Alpha Channels
250,000 paths....

Yes, the image I'm refering to is probably one of his most detailed and largest files...but still...I don't think anyone's going to be able to put 11 months worth of work in a week time...
12/27/2006 01:00:25 AM · #18
Originally posted by Ware3927:

I agree with Artyste...

And, it's funny you mention Bert Monroy, today of all days, because I just read an article a few hours ago about him in "Digital PhotoPro," The Sept/Oct edition.

I mean, I really doubt any of us have that much time on our hands...if you go to page 91 in that issue it tells you how long one of those ditial "paintings" takes...

11 months
Image size: 40X120 inches
Flattend file: 1.7 GB
15,000 layers
500 Alpha Channels
250,000 paths....

Yes, the image I'm refering to is probably one of his most detailed and largest files...but still...I don't think anyone's going to be able to put 11 months worth of work in a week time...


Yup...that was discussed in another thread. If I remember rightly it was of a train station.
12/27/2006 01:01:33 AM · #19
oops :P sorry for the repetition, didn't read that thread
12/27/2006 01:02:42 AM · #20
Originally posted by Ware3927:

oops :P sorry for the repetition, didn't read that thread


It's ok....that's what forums are for...discussions. And that image is a good one for that. Smile!
12/27/2006 01:03:12 AM · #21
:)!!:)
12/27/2006 01:18:03 AM · #22
First, I think it the whole gay marriage analogy is a poor one and will quickly derail this thread so let's get off of that please...........

Next, I am not against digitat art at all and, Judi, I am not professing to be the arbiter of taste so I am not "one to stop it now." Sorry if I leave out the IMO disclaimers as I think that is implied by my expressing my view.

The problem I have with digital art is not an inherent one, but rather how DA relates to DPC. I'd just hate to see DPC become another photoshop contest -- there are plenty on the web already.

Originally posted by qart:

"A little tough to create a landscape or portraiture without the aid of a photograph. The thing is... part of the rules are that you must use your own PHOTOGRAPHS so the argument is moot."


I guess I see your point but that view dictates that no part of an image can be fabricated....that every element that I can recognize in your entry I must be able to recognize in your source and looking through the entries I am certain there is a bit of "painting" going on. If one can make any modification they want to an image then they can create an entry that is in no way recognizable as the orginal and it is therefore completely unnecessary to submit originals as proof. (other than copyright in personal depictions, etc.)

For example, this is a picture of my dog "Spike." Spike is a handsome dog. The photo was taken during the challenge dates and edited under expert. ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/46046/thumb/443035.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/46046/thumb/443035.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' This photo might not score well but you get my point...........

......or maybe you don't :)

Message edited by author 2006-12-27 01:25:44.
12/27/2006 01:23:10 AM · #23
I propose next week we have a sculpture challenge. My favorite sculpture is of my dog spike :)
12/27/2006 02:09:33 AM · #24
I agree with the idea of changing the name of the "Expert Editing" rules. This is because as this is primarily a photography site then the name implies that the skills required are specifically photographic editing skills. However these rules encompass a broader range of skills than that. You can be an expert at editing/processing/developing your digital photography without necessarily having all the skills to make the most of the expert editing skillset.

I can't think of a new name to put forward now but I do support a review of the name.

BTW. I don't have anything against the ruleset. I think the way the concept has been handled is brilliant. The site now meets the needs and desires of a growing group of people while maintaining its original concept for those that love it.
12/27/2006 02:13:51 AM · #25
What AltCtrl said.

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/28/2021 02:38:53 PM

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: 07/28/2021 02:38:53 PM EDT.