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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Concerned
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 30, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/02/2004 05:48:54 PM · #1
I have had two comments on my shot (that for once is doing very well), that the effects I got were from Phtotoshop. For once I got a great shot! Pretty much out of camera and now folks think I did things in post processing. To me this is the saddest part if the rules get changes. Great shots will be suspect. I finally have a shot I am proud of...and photoshop is getting my credit!!
01/02/2004 05:53:29 PM · #2
One more reason I'd like to have the phtographer's comments/photo details visible during the voting.

Console yourself with the thought that they can't recognize a good photo when they see one, and have pity ....
01/02/2004 05:56:49 PM · #3
Originally posted by GeneralE:

One more reason I'd like to have the phtographer's comments/photo details visible during the voting.


Wow, thats an excellent idea! I have to agree.
01/02/2004 06:01:03 PM · #4
lol, thanks gen e, it is a good idea.
01/02/2004 06:01:04 PM · #5
I also agree
01/02/2004 06:03:58 PM · #6
Yeah, but most people (including the admins) have been against it.
01/02/2004 06:04:16 PM · #7
Surely its the end result that matters and not how you got there. it's all your work. Camera - ditital darkroom - final image.

Message edited by author 2004-01-02 18:04:55.
01/02/2004 06:05:00 PM · #8
I have to disagree. Why not let the pictures speak for themselves.
01/02/2004 06:09:49 PM · #9
Originally posted by jgal76:

I have to disagree. Why not let the pictures speak for themselves.


I guess I would have to say, because this is a site you learn on. When voting on a shot you don't understand, seeing the artists comments and the camera settings may explain what you are seeing. Could you read a Dilbert comic strip without the words? Could you laugh?

And don't pull that "If a picture paints a thousand words, then why can't I paint you" ploy either. LOL
01/02/2004 06:10:17 PM · #10
Originally posted by jgal76:

I have to disagree. Why not let the pictures speak for themselves.

Because Lynn could have potentially been scored down because the person didn't know Lynn excelled in her camera skill. To me, this doesn't seem very fair.

As Lynn says - this is a serious down side to the new ruleset.
01/02/2004 06:11:12 PM · #11
ellamay,

people might think that while the votes are being cast, but you always have an opportunity to explain & take credit the fotog's comments section. I know I always read that for shots I really like or the ones that I view.

01/02/2004 06:13:05 PM · #12
thx paul, sniffle sniffle, at my loss and the unfairness of the world we live in, ( I am exaggerating here, but that is why I hope the rules dont change as far as editing.
01/02/2004 06:43:22 PM · #13
It's the reason it may deter me from taking shots like these in the future. Both were minimally edited but I have a suspicion that many may have thought there was more Photoshop than camera.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/166/thumb/50818.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/166/thumb/50818.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/165/thumb/49706.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/165/thumb/49706.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

It may also devalue shots like this:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/157/thumb/47339.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/157/thumb/47339.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
01/02/2004 10:10:07 PM · #14
Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Originally posted by jgal76:

I have to disagree. Why not let the pictures speak for themselves.

Because Lynn could have potentially been scored down because the person didn't know Lynn excelled in her camera skill. To me, this doesn't seem very fair.

As Lynn says - this is a serious down side to the new ruleset.


But isn't it the entire presentation we vote on??? We vote on the choice of subject and how well it meets the challenge and the quality of the shot and/or the feel of the expression over-all. I think the picture should stand on it's own. The entire presentation; borders, titles and anything else you choose to include are a part of the entry.

Camera settings are worthless information at that point.
(but they are helpful to have when giving a critique and coaching someone on how they could have improved certain elements of the shot)

just my thoughts out loud.
01/02/2004 10:15:52 PM · #15
Originally posted by Gringo:

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Originally posted by jgal76:

I have to disagree. Why not let the pictures speak for themselves.

Because Lynn could have potentially been scored down because the person didn't know Lynn excelled in her camera skill. To me, this doesn't seem very fair.

As Lynn says - this is a serious down side to the new ruleset.


But isn't it the entire presentation we vote on??? We vote on the choice of subject and how well it meets the challenge and the quality of the shot and/or the feel of the expression over-all. I think the picture should stand on it's own. The entire presentation; borders, titles and anything else you choose to include are a part of the entry.

Camera settings are worthless information at that point.
(but they are helpful to have when giving a critique and coaching someone on how they could have improved certain elements of the shot)

just my thoughts out loud.


These are my thoughts also. Just because you know how to tweak your exposure settings, adjust hues, colors, etc, that will never make up for bad composition, or less then engaging subject matter. I had said this in a previous thread, the rules are not what makes you a better camera handler.

Too many other factors in building or capturing a good picture. PS wont make up for anyones lack of creativity. The ability to "see" and make a photo, is not dependent on the rules.
01/02/2004 10:20:54 PM · #16
Originally posted by deafwolf:

When voting on a shot you don't understand, seeing the artists comments and the camera settings may explain what you are seeing. Could you read a Dilbert comic strip without the words? Could you laugh?

And don't pull that "If a picture paints a thousand words, then why can't I paint you" ploy either. LOL


If you read the comic but didn't get the joke, would you call the artist and ask him to explain it to you?
01/02/2004 10:22:14 PM · #17
Originally posted by mk:

If you read the comic but didn't get the joke, would you call the artist and ask him to explain it to you?


Well spoken, well said!
01/02/2004 10:28:46 PM · #18
Also, (the flip side)

If I let everyone see I shot this at an f4 and on your camera it would look better as an f2.8 would you mark my score down because in your mind I could have done better if I were you. (Did that make sense?)

Some could loose points regardless of the picture.
01/02/2004 10:30:43 PM · #19
Originally posted by mk:

If you read the comic but didn't get the joke, would you call the artist and ask him to explain it to you?


Using Gary Larson as an example, he was on NPR back in October and talked about all the mail he gets from people asking for him to explain his cartoons. So, apparently, the answer to your question, for many, is yes.
01/02/2004 10:40:00 PM · #20
Originally posted by Gringo:

Also, (the flip side)

If I let everyone see I shot this at an f4 and on your camera it would look better as an f2.8 would you mark my score down because in your mind I could have done better if I were you. (Did that make sense?)

Some could loose points regardless of the picture.


I think the point that ellamay was trying to make in the beginning of the thread was that her shot was being accused of looking too photoshopped. So I don't know that the actual technical settings of the photo would be so important as would the enhancement steps that were taken to get to the photos final appearance, example would be dodging and burning or desaturation or something along those lines. In which case, if we could see the description as what the steps were we would know that she did very little to her photo and that she indeed did capture a wonderul natural setting. :)
01/02/2004 10:40:23 PM · #21

Using Gary Larson as an example, he was on NPR back in October and talked about all the mail he gets from people asking for him to explain his cartoons. So, apparently, the answer to your question, for many, is yes.[/quote]


True, but did he mention all the millions that see his work and do not send him any letters :)

The way I see it, I think it would be nice to know how much postprocessed the shot is, but to get the comment from the photographer would be way to much, you are sopposed just to enjoy the photo, not the making of. So , for my opinion, this should be left, just the way it is.

Go admins !
01/02/2004 10:45:15 PM · #22
Also, to which I agree. The photos should be what they are, how we view them and enjoy them (or not enjoy them). Because the transverse of this is that people could then start to mark down if there was more postprocessing then to their liking. And though the photo may be excellent, they may mark it down because it wasn't "straight out of the camera" natural. Either way, someone won't be happy.

So I think this way, is the best way. No?
01/02/2004 11:50:26 PM · #23
For me, the quality of a photograph comes, in large part, from its ability to communicate to me. After I have had time to study a photo and determine how I feel about it I might be interested in reading about how it was done. I probably won't like the photo any more or less but it can affect my appreciation of it and how I might categorize it. In the case of the photos in these challenges, as long as I am reasonably sure that the photographer did not cheat by combining photos or adding any elements than I will normally stand by my initial reaction to the photo. Whether it is heavily edited or not does not really matter to me as long as I know that it is a legitimate photo. Most people do not watch a movie while hearing the director's comments, they watch the movie first and then they might go back and listen to the director's comments or check out how the movie was made.

T

Message edited by author 2004-01-02 23:51:56.
01/03/2004 12:29:53 AM · #24
Allamay

I would not worry about it.
I would take it as a compliment if the shot is that good!
If you have the original to back it up then there should be no problem :)
Congrats on doing so well.


Originally posted by ellamay:

I have had two comments on my shot (that for once is doing very well), that the effects I got were from Phtotoshop. For once I got a great shot! Pretty much out of camera and now folks think I did things in post processing. To me this is the saddest part if the rules get changes. Great shots will be suspect. I finally have a shot I am proud of...and photoshop is getting my credit!!

01/03/2004 12:44:55 AM · #25
Originally posted by ellamay:

I have had two comments on my shot (that for once is doing very well), that the effects I got were from Phtotoshop. For once I got a great shot! Pretty much out of camera and now folks think I did things in post processing. To me this is the saddest part if the rules get changes. Great shots will be suspect. I finally have a shot I am proud of...and photoshop is getting my credit!!


Just because a shot could be done in PS doesn't mean it is. Give it a higher score and ask for a DQ.

I have to admit that I've asked for at least 1 or more DQ's in a challenge but at the same time , I also give out some higher scores for those shots. If they come back legal the shots would be rewarded with a higher score. Sorry for the extra work SC's.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/06/2021 09:42:33 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: 12/06/2021 09:42:33 AM EST.