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

DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> In-Camera Multiple Exposures to be Disallowed
Pages:  
Showing posts 151 - 175 of 284, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/24/2007 02:51:26 PM · #151
Originally posted by super-dave:

my nikon D200 says that it's one file with 5 shutter clicks. that's how it's taken.


I'm pretty sure Nikon's ME is multiple files stored in cache and combined later. Overlay is multiple files stored on your media card and combined later. To make your direct comparison with film, your camera would have to leave the sensor active and writing to the media card while opening the shutter multiple times. Regardless, just because something could be done with a film camera doesn't mean it has to be legal for DPC contests. :-/
02/24/2007 02:55:10 PM · #152
Heh they could have even tried another poll im sure while alot of us support ME, ime sure plenty of people dont. ANyone remember the Poll on rule #2?
02/24/2007 02:58:46 PM · #153
Originally posted by super-dave:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by super-dave:

...adding sepia to a photo is a digitally edited effect.


That's true, but it's not editing that conflicts with longstanding DPC editing rules! It's only recently that we've seen the ability to combine multiple files or spot clone images in-camera.


perhaps that's the problem "long standing DPC editing rules" ... i imagine this site would have to evolve very quickly due to the rapid changes in technology. and i understand that it's SC's job to keep up with that.

i admire the work you guys do, honestly ... but this is a backward decision. dpc rules should evolve with the technology. i do see that with some things, but editing is a big issue in digital photography.

a digital camera treats multiple exposures as ONE file ... and all 'features' of digital cameras are exactly the same editing process.


I think administration and SC are trying hard to keep the rules up to date with current developments in digital photography. Personally I wish very much that multiple-exposures (not overlays) were allowed. But not allowing either multis or overlays works at this time, and I'm in support of it.

As said before, these are restrictions on challenge entries, not on photography. The challenge rules are never going to be perfect for every situation and for everyone's personal preferences. To me it's wasting my energy if I complain about the rules or try to figure out how to get around them - it is much more efficient to work within the rules, and slowly and carefully work for change.

02/24/2007 02:59:54 PM · #154
Maybe I missed the anwser to Bear's question which was why is ME still allowed under expert editing if the problem about validation still holds true?
02/24/2007 03:01:34 PM · #155
Originally posted by yanko:

Maybe I missed the anwser to Bear's question which was why is ME still allowed under expert editing if the problem about validation still holds true?


I'm pretty sure it's because the image overlay feature would also be legal in the expert editing category?

Aren't outside images allowed to be incorporated in that rule-set?

*EDIT* Oops.. I guess not. I just checked the rules, and they apparently aren't allowed.. I just remembered seeing a few photos in one of the expert challenges that seemed to have stock photography type stuff added to them, but I imagine it was all just photos taken by the submitter during the challenge all put together..

So.. yah, still remains a good question.

Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:04:23.
02/24/2007 03:03:16 PM · #156
Originally posted by super-dave:

... i imagine this site would have to evolve very quickly due to the rapid changes in technology. and i understand that it's SC's job to keep up with that.


The site format and guidelines have proven very popular, and changes are made as time and technology require. In 2002, there wasn't much need for sensor dust removal in Basic, but now there is. In 2002, nobody had to worry about composite images made in-camera, but now we do (and both were subject to months of off-and-on debate). IMO, we can't just make rapid-fire changes to the rules every time a new camera feature appears. It's important to carefully consider how they fit in with the existing rules and the spirit of the contests so that there is some sense of continuity in the game.
02/24/2007 03:05:58 PM · #157
Originally posted by Artyste:

Originally posted by yanko:

Maybe I missed the anwser to Bear's question which was why is ME still allowed under expert editing if the problem about validation still holds true?


I'm pretty sure it's because the image overlay feature would also be legal in the expert editing category?

Aren't outside images allowed to be incorporated in that rule-set?


My understanding of the expert ruleset is you still have to have something validated with a time stamp showing you started this process after the challenge was announced but maybe I'm wrong? I've yet to enter one of these challenges.
02/24/2007 03:06:35 PM · #158
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by super-dave:

... i imagine this site would have to evolve very quickly due to the rapid changes in technology. and i understand that it's SC's job to keep up with that.


The site format and guidelines have proven very popular, and changes are made as time and technology require. In 2002, there wasn't much need for sensor dust removal in Basic, but now there is. In 2002, nobody had to worry about composite images made in-camera, but now we do (and both were subject to months of off-and-on debate). IMO, we can't just make rapid-fire changes to the rules every time a new camera feature appears. It's important to carefully consider how they fit in with the existing rules and the spirit of the contests so that there is some sense of continuity in the game.


Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue. Unless u work for cannon and they denied for years that sensor dust was an actual issue.



Unless howevr yall didnt remove ur lenses until 2003....

Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:07:02.
02/24/2007 03:08:05 PM · #159
Originally posted by hyperfocal:

As several have said multiple exposures have been around since photography was invented. This in camera creative technique is in my opinion less against the spirit of the rules than many allowable techniques such as HDR processing.

And they were mostly done with the techniques which are still legal: covering and uncovering the lens while the shutter remains open, or by firing off multiple flashes during a long exposure in a dark room. "Stacking" negatives in an enlarger is what we're prohibiting, not multiple images per se.

What can or can't be done with any particular set of photographic equipment is really of no consequence -- we will write the rules of this site to be fair and enforceable. We have different rule sets with different degrees of restriction, and this is just another one. It has zero relevance to your photographic experience except as it pertains to a DPC entry.
02/24/2007 03:09:35 PM · #160
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue.


Not here, it wasn't. Very few DPCers had DSLRs in the early days.
02/24/2007 03:10:24 PM · #161
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue.


Not here, it wasn't. Very few DPCers had DSLRs in the early days.


I claim Retarted again... karmat no coments okay lol.
02/24/2007 03:10:39 PM · #162
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by super-dave:

... i imagine this site would have to evolve very quickly due to the rapid changes in technology. and i understand that it's SC's job to keep up with that.


The site format and guidelines have proven very popular, and changes are made as time and technology require. In 2002, there wasn't much need for sensor dust removal in Basic, but now there is. In 2002, nobody had to worry about composite images made in-camera, but now we do (and both were subject to months of off-and-on debate). IMO, we can't just make rapid-fire changes to the rules every time a new camera feature appears. It's important to carefully consider how they fit in with the existing rules and the spirit of the contests so that there is some sense of continuity in the game.


Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue. Unless u work for cannon and they denied for years that sensor dust was an actual issue.



Unless howevr yall didnt remove ur lenses until 2003....


Now you're just jumping at straws. You have to consider this *in the context of DPC*.. and in 2002.. there weren't a lot of people on the site, and active on the site, that had a DSLR, equivalent, or a digital back.
They were extremely expensive, and people were ecstatic to own a $1200 Prosumer type model.

So no.. in 2002, sensor dust was *not* a valid or critical issue.

*EDIT* Dang.. beat by the quick and simple answer yet again.

Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:11:37.
02/24/2007 03:11:34 PM · #163
Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by Artyste:

Originally posted by yanko:

Maybe I missed the anwser to Bear's question which was why is ME still allowed under expert editing if the problem about validation still holds true?


I'm pretty sure it's because the image overlay feature would also be legal in the expert editing category?

Aren't outside images allowed to be incorporated in that rule-set?


My understanding of the expert ruleset is you still have to have something validated with a time stamp showing you started this process after the challenge was announced but maybe I'm wrong? I've yet to enter one of these challenges.


The "expert editing" rules are a trial set of rules (just like the "minimal editing" rules). We haven't decided whether they are here to stay, and we're working on refining them.

Thanks for reminding us to talk about this though!
02/24/2007 03:13:24 PM · #164
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue.


Not here, it wasn't. Very few DPCers had DSLRs in the early days.


I claim Retarted again... karmat no coments okay lol.


Keep spelling it as "retarTed" and we're going to start believing you.
02/24/2007 03:13:38 PM · #165
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:



Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue. Unless u work for cannon and they denied for years that sensor dust was an actual issue.



Unless howevr yall didnt remove ur lenses until 2003....


LOL. Please define issue? I own the Canon 5D, which shows dust perhaps as badly as any current-production DSLR, and I don't find it to be an issue. Cleaning the sensor is easy.
FWIW, your post ignores the point of the earlier post, which was that until about 2 years ago, at DPC the predominant cameras were non-interchangeable-lens designs that were relatively (not completely, BTW) immune to dust.
02/24/2007 03:14:14 PM · #166
maybe they don't want to fuel the fire until it dies down a bit... ;}

Originally posted by yanko:

Maybe I missed the anwser to Bear's question which was why is ME still allowed under expert editing if the problem about validation still holds true?

02/24/2007 03:15:53 PM · #167
Originally posted by soup:

maybe they don't want to fuel the fire until it dies down a bit... ;}

Originally posted by yanko:

Maybe I missed the anwser to Bear's question which was why is ME still allowed under expert editing if the problem about validation still holds true?


Or maybe we're still discussing it...? ;-)
02/24/2007 03:16:24 PM · #168
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:



Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue. Unless u work for cannon and they denied for years that sensor dust was an actual issue.



Unless howevr yall didnt remove ur lenses until 2003....


LOL. Please define issue? I own the Canon 5D, which shows dust perhaps as badly as any current-production DSLR, and I don't find it to be an issue. Cleaning the sensor is easy.
FWIW, your post ignores the point of the earlier post, which was that until about 2 years ago, at DPC the predominant cameras were non-interchangeable-lens designs that were relatively (not completely, BTW) immune to dust.


Kirbic i guess ur unaware that SIGMA has camera's leaving the factory with dust already preattached to the sensor. They use a dust filter way up front but the issue is the day u buy it u have to remove the dust filter and clean the sensor

Blame that on factory conditions.

(BEFORE U SAY ANYTHING... you asked lol :-) )

EDIT TO REPLACE SENSOR WITH FILTER

Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:18:22.
02/24/2007 03:20:14 PM · #169
To the Dust ISSUE, you find it easy.. this guy scratched his sensor

SENSOR: Did I Kill It?
02/24/2007 03:22:35 PM · #170
I am sooooo lost. Please tell me what this has to do with anything we're discussing.

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

To the Dust ISSUE, you find it easy.. this guy scratched his sensor

SENSOR: Did I Kill It?

02/24/2007 03:23:26 PM · #171
Originally posted by dudephil:

I am sooooo lost. Please tell me what this has to do with anything we're discussing.

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

To the Dust ISSUE, you find it easy.. this guy scratched his sensor

SENSOR: Did I Kill It?


Obviously u have not read the last 4 posts on this page... they went into how Dust Removal had to be added to the rules and an SC just asked me to define dust issue.
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by super-dave:

... i imagine this site would have to evolve very quickly due to the rapid changes in technology. and i understand that it's SC's job to keep up with that.


The site format and guidelines have proven very popular, and changes are made as time and technology require. In 2002, there wasn't much need for sensor dust removal in Basic, but now there is. In 2002, nobody had to worry about composite images made in-camera, but now we do (and both were subject to months of off-and-on debate). IMO, we can't just make rapid-fire changes to the rules every time a new camera feature appears. It's important to carefully consider how they fit in with the existing rules and the spirit of the contests so that there is some sense of continuity in the game.


Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:



Sensor dust didnt just become a problem now did it. Since the Kodak in 1995 Kodak DCS460 (6.2 MP) its been an issue. Unless u work for cannon and they denied for years that sensor dust was an actual issue.

Unless howevr yall didnt remove ur lenses until 2003....


LOL. Please define issue? I own the Canon 5D, which shows dust perhaps as badly as any current-production DSLR, and I don't find it to be an issue. Cleaning the sensor is easy.
FWIW, your post ignores the point of the earlier post, which was that until about 2 years ago, at DPC the predominant cameras were non-interchangeable-lens designs that were relatively (not completely, BTW) immune to dust.


Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:25:29.
02/24/2007 03:26:17 PM · #172
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

Kirbic i guess ur unaware that SIGMA has camera's leaving the factory with dust already preattached to the sensor. They use a dust filter way up front but the issue is the day u buy it u have to remove the dust filter and clean the sensor

Blame that on factory conditions.

(BEFORE U SAY ANYTHING... you asked lol :-) )

EDIT TO REPLACE SENSOR WITH FILTER


I've also seen reports of Canon and other cameras with things trapped betwixt filter and sensor, and this is a factory defect. It also can affect P&S cameras, it's not just a DSLR thing. This phenomenon is, however, completely tangential to the current discussion. The original statement was that in 2002, dust removal in Basic was not an issue. To elaborate, the poster was saying that the *users* were not complaining about not being able to remove dust (though hot pixels *were* an issue). Due to the preponderance of DSLRs today, dust is a much larger issue, because it shows up at the worst possible moments, in shots intended for Open Challenges. Naturally, we considered our options, and decided to allow dust removal. That is called "considering and reacting to market and technological changes." And that was the point of Scalvert's original post.

Edit:
We now return you to the regularly scheduled discussion of "legality of in-camera multiple exposure"

Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:28:29.
02/24/2007 03:27:08 PM · #173
Originally posted by RainMotorsports:



Obviously u have not read the last 4 posts on this page... they went into how Dust Removal had to be added to the rules and an SC just asked me to define dust issue.



That post you linked to was made in 2006. How does that show that sensor dust was an issue for photographers here back in 1995, or 2002 for that matter?

Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:27:57.
02/24/2007 03:29:42 PM · #174
Originally posted by dudephil:

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:



Obviously u have not read the last 4 posts on this page... they went into how Dust Removal had to be added to the rules and an SC just asked me to define dust issue.



That post you linked to was made in 2006. How does that show that sensor dust was an issue back in 1995, or 2002 for that matter?


It doesnt were past the 1995 Issue i moved onto

Originally posted by kirbic:



LOL. Please define issue? I own the Canon 5D, which shows dust perhaps as badly as any current-production DSLR, and I don't find it to be an issue. Cleaning the sensor is easy.
FWIW, your post ignores the point of the earlier post, which was that until about 2 years ago, at DPC the predominant cameras were non-interchangeable-lens designs that were relatively (not completely, BTW) immune to dust.


I was talking to him next time ill PM it. He asked me to DEFINE the dust "ISSUE" it was a derailment its over.

Id like to get back to the ME issue now unless ud liek to help derail it more I was actually trying to let it go after i answered someone else question then someone else comes to help me drag it out further with mass requotes.

Message edited by author 2007-02-24 15:30:17.
02/24/2007 03:30:06 PM · #175
Originally posted by dudephil:

I am sooooo lost. Please tell me what this has to do with anything we're discussing.

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

To the Dust ISSUE, you find it easy.. this guy scratched his sensor

SENSOR: Did I Kill It?


absolutely nothing.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 10:48:36 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 © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 10:48:36 AM EDT.