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

DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> Site Updates and Advanced Editing
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 541, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/31/2007 01:05:39 AM · #76
I think it's going to be very important to keep repeating the part about "natural subject motion" in this rule:

Originally posted by advanced rules (new):


You may ...
create your entry from 1-10 captures of a single scene (defined as a composition whose framing does not change, with the exception of natural subject motion). All captures used must be shot within the challenge submission dates.

12/31/2007 01:07:40 AM · #77
Can I suggest that ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/1.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/1.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Langdon makes a link in the Challenge about, so entrants are directed to the new rules...especially the statement on NATURAL MOTION over placed bodies!!!
12/31/2007 01:09:43 AM · #78
Originally posted by levyj413:

I could set up my tripod, take a shot, download it to my computer, leave the tripod in the same spot, go shoot a bunch of other stuff, come back, put it back on the tripod, rinse and repeat up to 10 times within the challenge dates?

Yes, that would be true of a sequence that occurs over a long time frame, but for a quick motion (a single water drop, for example) I would expect the files to be pretty close to sequential. If there's a gap of 26 frames between the last drop and the splash (or they're out of order), I would personally conclude that the photographer didn't shoot a time-lapse of a natural motion, but stitched together several different motions. I expect validations to be, um... interesting in that regard (see earlier Pandora's Box comment). ;-)
12/31/2007 01:10:16 AM · #79
Originally posted by levyj413:

I think it's going to be very important to keep repeating the part about "natural subject motion" in this rule:


Yeah I think I get it now. Cool! A pole vaulter running and vaulting image OK. Me sitting in every chair at a poker table, not Ok.
12/31/2007 01:12:56 AM · #80
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by levyj413:

I could set up my tripod, take a shot, download it to my computer, leave the tripod in the same spot, go shoot a bunch of other stuff, come back, put it back on the tripod, rinse and repeat up to 10 times within the challenge dates?

Yes, that would be true of a sequence that occurs over a long time frame, but for a quick motion (a single water drop, for example) I would expect the files to be pretty close to sequential. If there's a gap of 26 frames between the last drop and the splash (or they're out of order), I would personally conclude that the photographer didn't shoot a time-lapse of a natural motion, but stitched together several different motions. I expect validations to be, um... interesting in that regard (see earlier Pandora's Box comment). ;-)


That makes sense, Shannon. Thanks! I'm thinking of things like a bud growing on a lengthening stem, where you'd see the bud and flower appearing in different spots over a series of several days. Or a storm moving across a sky over several hours from left to right. And I've always been comfortable with having the SC handle close calls. :)

I also appreciate the clearer statements about how you really can't paint in new shapes using desaturation!
12/31/2007 01:19:18 AM · #81
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

A pole vaulter running and vaulting image OK. Me sitting in every chair at a poker table, not Ok.

You diving under the poker table to escape a bullet as the guy you just cheated shoots at you, OK. :D
12/31/2007 01:20:03 AM · #82
Wait so are shots that have multiple images of the same person in one photography illegal even if you do it using a flash in a dark room?

Personally, I have read the new rules and this entire thread and I just do not get it. How can you show a time lapse without erasing so that you can see the differences? Oh man....the rules need to just have a huge one page explanation as to how they are different and how they are the same instead of having a bunch of random questions answered sporadically in a thread. It just makes me more confused! :(
12/31/2007 01:23:15 AM · #83
Originally posted by levyj413:


You diving under the poker table to escape a bullet as the guy you just cheated shoots at you, OK. :D


Shhhhh you just gave away my LoD entry. :-P
12/31/2007 01:29:27 AM · #84
Originally posted by lovethelight:

How can you show a time lapse without erasing so that you can see the differences?

You CAN erase to show the parts that changed.
12/31/2007 01:31:16 AM · #85
Originally posted by lovethelight:

Wait so are shots that have multiple images of the same person in one photography illegal even if you do it using a flash in a dark room?


No, that's always been legal and it still is. What they are saying is, you can't use this new multiple-image compositing feature to create "fantasy images", basically. The kind where you take a dozen shots of the same scene with yourself in a dozen different places, then layer them all up and erase as needed to create a unified image. There's gonna be a huge gray area with regards to what is and what isn't legal, but they'll get it worked out.

You really don't need to worry about it if it confuses you. Just steer clear of that approach for a few weeks and see what shakes out interpretation-wise.

R.
12/31/2007 01:31:27 AM · #86
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by FocusPoint:

[thumb]627563[/thumb]

I did this with few shots and editing in PS...

Yes, that's HOW you would do it, but that particular shot would be illegal since it's not a natural movement, but a subject arranged in different frames.


so to clarify for my sake, this HDR, using more than one image stuff, the subject can not move or change for the shot to be legal.??
12/31/2007 01:31:31 AM · #87
Originally posted by lovethelight:

Wait so are shots that have multiple images of the same person in one photography illegal even if you do it using a flash in a dark room?



If it's done with one long exposure and the subject painted by the flash gun, it would be legal even in Basic.

Edit: Too slow again!

Message edited by author 2007-12-31 01:32:08.
12/31/2007 01:33:59 AM · #88
This is a wonderful end-of-year gift, BTW :-) Finally, true HDRI comes into its own, and all landscape and architectural photographers rejoice.

**********

Query to SC: any chance of a moratorium on DQs counting towards penalty-box time while the interpretations are worked out? This might encourage more rapid experimentation and make it easier to see where the rule needs clarification.

R.
12/31/2007 01:35:58 AM · #89
Originally posted by aerogurl:

so to clarify for my sake, this HDR, using more than one image stuff, the subject can not move or change for the shot to be legal.??

Those are two different things. HDR is typically used for landscapes- combining different exposures of the same scene to deal with high-contrast light conditions. Time-lapse is supposed to record a moving subject. Either would be legal.
12/31/2007 01:36:42 AM · #90
Originally posted by aerogurl:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by FocusPoint:

[thumb]627563[/thumb]

I did this with few shots and editing in PS...

Yes, that's HOW you would do it, but that particular shot would be illegal since it's not a natural movement, but a subject arranged in different frames.


so to clarify for my sake, this HDR, using more than one image stuff, the subject can not move or change for the shot to be legal.??


Well, that's definitely legal, a static subject. No problem. But there IS a gray area because they are allowing time-lapse photography, and they are saying it is only allowed if the movement represents a natural, sequential progression. So this shot's no good, because you arbitrarily posed the kid in several places. But if he'd been, say, sliding down a slide and you froze him in several places with a burst exposure, then combined them all, that's acceptable apparently.

R.
12/31/2007 01:39:55 AM · #91
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

any chance of a moratorium on DQs counting towards penalty-box time while the interpretations are worked out.

We frequently waive the penalty on DQ's that arise from understandable confusion in the rules.
12/31/2007 01:41:09 AM · #92
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by aerogurl:

so to clarify for my sake, this HDR, using more than one image stuff, the subject can not move or change for the shot to be legal.??

Those are two different things. HDR is typically used for landscapes- combining different exposures of the same scene to deal with high-contrast light conditions. Time-lapse is supposed to record a moving subject. Either would be legal.


Thanks scalvert... I know what HDR is.. so is time lapse only one photo with a long shutter? I've never understood what the "cloning" I call it, same person in the shot multiple times, truly is called or how it is done.

btw, I am so excited to try out HDR. I read up on it after reading the new rules and am excited to try it!
12/31/2007 01:42:07 AM · #93
Originally posted by Bear_Music:


Well, that's definitely legal, a static subject. No problem. But there IS a gray area because they are allowing time-lapse photography, and they are saying it is only allowed if the movement represents a natural, sequential progression. So this shot's no good, because you arbitrarily posed the kid in several places. But if he'd been, say, sliding down a slide and you froze him in several places with a burst exposure, then combined them all, that's acceptable apparently.

R.


That totally explains it! Thank you :)
12/31/2007 02:00:16 AM · #94
So if I wanted to do light graffiti as an example and shot 4 frames with different light patterns, I'm guessing that's not legal? Here's an example of what I mean.

Message edited by author 2007-12-31 02:01:41.
12/31/2007 02:01:14 AM · #95
Originally posted by langdon:

Probably of greater interest, there's a new preference (for Members Only, set to On by default) that will email you any new comments received on challenge images that aren't in voting, and on all portfolio images.

Happy New Year!


Thankyou sir, and a Happy New Year to you too, personally, I would prefer a notification on the site when I have a new comment rather than an email. But it's certainly better than the current system, self monitoring.
12/31/2007 04:22:42 AM · #96
720 x720 is enough for me.. thank you & Happy New Year!
12/31/2007 04:51:50 AM · #97
Thankyou and a Happy New Year to all!
12/31/2007 05:00:54 AM · #98
A couple more questions...
Lets say you are doing HDR and there are birds flying through the scene. In photomatix you can select a little box that says remove moving objects. And it gets rid of the birds in some scenes but not others(I don't know if it really works that well) Or what if you clone out the blurry ones from long exposure and keep the sharp ones from the fast exposure? Is this alright?

Back to the person in a long exposure scene... You take the long exposure with the person in the shot but they move a bit. Take a faster exposure, with the person in the same spot so that they are sharp. Can the photographer choose which version of the person they want to use? If you can erase/overlay for time lapse can you selectively mask out for clarity and sharpness like this scenario?

When shooting a time lapse sequence, lets say you don't have a tripod and just shoot some scene in burst mode getting natural action but all the images don't line up exactly. Saying all images are exposed the same, is it up to the photographers discretion to choose one image and then apply the overlay to that image making adjustments via free transform of each subject in different positions to realign naturally? Or must you try and line up all the images first? This could be problematic with even slight movements at super wide angle.
What if your camera is not in manual mode or the exposure is not locked, but you capture a time lapse and the the meter changes the exposure for a few shots. Can you then pick the best exposure for overlay, or pick parts (say one accidently exposes for the sky and one the foreground) can you combine the best of both exposures, then overlay the motion on top of this new base exposure?

Recently there was a big hoopla over cloning, editing out background in the Car advertisement challenge, the reason for the dq was that it changed the composition. Now if I wanted, could I simply take two shots of a scene, and completely over or underexpose one of them so that I could combine them to obliterate the unwanted details and make them black or white or seem like they are floating in studio land? How would you DQ that if one of the images of the scene has no detail? Is the photographer forced make the most of the pixels and include what they can, or does it fall under the change the description of the regular viewer clause?

I may think of more :P

I will enjoy seeing the true HDR images, but honestly I am not too interested in having the time lapse images part of the weekly ruleset. Somewhere in my head, HDR is part of capturing a single scene with as much detail as possible, but to me it seems that capturing moving action and overlayed over eachother goes against capturing that single decisive momeny. Maybe because HDR is generally done in a static scene it feels like a single moment. but I wish time lapse wasn't included, even though I know there will be some creative results.
Joe
12/31/2007 05:31:39 AM · #99
Time laps usually results in a gif or flash animation, emulating a movie type effect, for example a flower bud opening.
Otherwise the objects in a time lapse single image need to be distinct with regard to placement in the frame in order to remain uncluttered. I think the DPC definition of time lapse is a misnoma and should be changed to more accurately reflect the intention.
12/31/2007 05:33:24 AM · #100
Originally posted by Falc:

Time laps usually results in a gif or flash animation, emulating a movie type effect, for example a flower bud opening.
Otherwise the objects in a time lapse single image need to be distinct with regard to placement in the frame in order to remain uncluttered. I think the DPC definition of time lapse is a misnoma and should be changed to more accurately reflect the intention.


Exactly what I was thinking Falc, should be a fun H2H this week if neither of us fully understand whats required?
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 01/20/2021 02:14:03 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: 01/20/2021 02:14:03 PM EST.