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

DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> Advanced Editing Rules Change (Jan 14)
Pages:  
Showing posts 101 - 125 of 147, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/21/2008 12:40:10 PM · #101
Originally posted by levyj413:

Originally posted by scalvert:


That's a great question, and I don't know the answer. I'll have to ask for other opinions.


Any response yet on this? My time lapse entry used the same technique, so I'd like to know. There's still time to shoot using it before the end of January, and for future challenges going forward.

Thanks. :)


I asked it THREE days ago. No answer.
Hopefully they will hear/read you. :-)

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 12:40:46.
01/21/2008 12:43:02 PM · #102
Originally posted by nutzito:

I asked it THREE days ago. No answer.
Hopefully they will hear/read you. :-)


I was hoping to both bump the thread and add a third voice asking for a call on it. :)
01/21/2008 12:43:36 PM · #103
Originally posted by nutzito:

I asked it THREE days ago. No answer.
Hopefully they will hear/read you. :-)

It's not a simple discussion ... especially when we are doing it in writing on all sorts of schedules. It would go faster if we could teleconference, but we can't/don't at this time. Try to be patient; it IS being discussed

Message edited by author 2008-01-21 12:44:18.
01/21/2008 12:59:27 PM · #104
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by nutzito:

I asked it THREE days ago. No answer.
Hopefully they will hear/read you. :-)

It's not a simple discussion ... especially when we are doing it in writing on all sorts of schedules. It would go faster if we could teleconference, but we can't/don't at this time. Try to be patient; it IS being discussed


Thanks, Paul. I can wait. Just wondering what was going on, and now I know. :)
01/21/2008 01:31:49 PM · #105
For what it's worth, IF the SC decide that the purpose of the multiple-captures rule is ONLY what it says IN the rule ("The intent of allowing multiple captures is to enable such techniques as high dynamic range (HDR), noise reduction, increased DOF"), it would be simple enough to add some sort of an elapsed time rider to govern that and exclude "transition shots" such as this bridge image. In other words, your captures have to be made within, say, 1 minute of each other, whatever...

R.
01/21/2008 01:32:32 PM · #106
Thanks, I can wait too as everybody else, but it is always nice to know that you guys have not forgoten this is pending.

In order to figure out a valid conclusion, I searched on SC member's comments and found one saying that new rules address photo quality and not composition (it is quoted in a previous post). If that is correct Falc's image would NOT be legal, since the day/night transition effect is not meant to work on the image quality side. Now, if you say it is still under discussion, it means there is a hope that new rules could also be used for composition effects.

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by nutzito:

I asked it THREE days ago. No answer.
Hopefully they will hear/read you. :-)

It's not a simple discussion ... especially when we are doing it in writing on all sorts of schedules. It would go faster if we could teleconference, but we can't/don't at this time. Try to be patient; it IS being discussed
01/21/2008 02:09:22 PM · #107
Originally posted by nutzito:

Originally posted by scalvert:

The rule addresses photo quality, not composition.

...however, according to what has been said in this post, the answer to Falc's question would have be NOT LEGAL, since the day/night transition effect is on the composition side and it has nothing to do with any "fixing" of the quality of the image nor compensating any limitation of the photo eq. Unfortunately the wording of the rule "create your entry from 1-10 captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose composition/framing does not change). All captures used must be shot within the challenge submission dates." missleads to think it would be legal, since the framing is identical, and the component shots could have been taken during the several days and nights along the challenge submission dates. IMO, the wording of the rule is not clear enough.


That's exactly what we're debating: whether day>night represents a change of scene. Time limits won't work as a restriction since you could spend all night shooting a galaxy with no measurable change. Some photos of this type might have different objects visible (stars, street lights, etc.), but you could also consider those minor and say it's mostly a change of lighting, color or exposure... and how would you deal with the rapidly changing colors of a sunset? Limiting multiple captures to matters of photo quality might be a solution, but is it too restrictive? Obviously, this isn't a simple question.
01/22/2008 01:43:48 PM · #108
I don't envy you guys in your trying to nail down this particularly undulating piece of jello. I just wonder if there will ever be a category of Editing Rules called "GO FOR IT!" or "ANYTHING GOES" or "BLOW US AWAY" or any other name that gives the impression that you can take a photo and do whatever you want to it and let the members here decide if it is good or bad from their votes.

I REALLY would like to see such an artistic category ... (Not often but once in a while to let people play with their photoshop fantasies. You could even make it exclusive and have another with not such open rules so people can't say that they had nothing to do because they did not have the knowledge or software or artistic talent to compete.

Just my two cents.
01/22/2008 02:15:08 PM · #109
I'm going to have to chime in and say that I don't envy the SC's decision to implement a new and somewhat confusing ruleset. I was just handed my first DQ because of some confusion (on my part) over the new rules. I was dealing with a particularly long time exposure and felt that I met the criteria for a "legal" image. Unfortunately I was wrong and now have a pink banner under my belt as a result. I can also understand some of routerguys frustrations even though I don't necessarily agree with the way he went about venting those frustrations (RIP RG... nothing but love brotha).

My biggest concern at this point is whether or not there will be any leniency on some of the other rules that are in place. For example, if there is understandable confusion over a new ruleset and the photographer submitted in good faith and ends up with multiple DQ's over a short period of time, will he/she be penalized from submitting to additional challenges?

Specifically this rule

Originally posted by da the rules page:


1st DQ in last 25 submissions: No penalty
2nd DQ in last 25 submissions: 1 week suspension of submission privileges
3rd DQ in last 25 submissions: 2 week suspension of submission privileges
4th DQ in last 25 submissions: 4 week suspension of submission privileges and 3 months of required “pre-submission” of proof file.
01/22/2008 03:04:31 PM · #110
Again..

"I am confused why Expert Editing is/was not used for Challenges such as Landscape, Time Lapse, etc. That would have sufficed for challenges where HDR, or deliberate styles of multiple images were required or desired. Why the Advanced Rules had to be modified to accommodate editing that was already allowed under Expert Editing is unclear, especially with all the resulting issues. At least that was not open to (mis)interpretations. The 'freedom' in Expert Editing doesn't have to be used to create 'digital art', it could be used for specific themed Challenges, with or without 'Extra Rules'. "

Isn't this a simple solution that is 'already there'?
01/22/2008 03:13:09 PM · #111
Originally posted by macrothing:

Again..

"I am confused why Expert Editing is/was not used for Challenges such as Landscape, Time Lapse, etc. That would have sufficed for challenges where HDR, or deliberate styles of multiple images were required or desired. Why the Advanced Rules had to be modified to accommodate editing that was already allowed under Expert Editing is unclear, especially with all the resulting issues. At least that was not open to (mis)interpretations. The 'freedom' in Expert Editing doesn't have to be used to create 'digital art', it could be used for specific themed Challenges, with or without 'Extra Rules'. "

Isn't this a simple solution that is 'already there'?


The problem is that the site wants to allow "true" HDRI imaging and "true" astrophotography imaging into its mainstream challenges, and both require multiple exposures of the same scene for processing purposes. They're trying to find where they can draw the line so that "regular" advanced challenges don't begin to resemble anything-goes expert challenges, with very imaginative composites competing against straight photography.

Before the new ruleset, those of us (and there are a LOT of us) who are getting more and more into expanded dynamic range imaging, definitely the wave of the future (or one of them anyway) were forced to use kludgy attempts to emulate HDRI working from single exposures. This, IMO, is why "HDRI" was getting such a bad reputation amongst the voters and commenters; these images didn't look right. There's a whole, "hidden" subset of HDRI imaging that does NOT look obviously artificial and produces stunning images that deserve to be judged on their own merits, not side-by-side against off-the-wall photo-composite images of separate scenes artfully cobbled together. And as long as HDRI was limited to expert editing, that was going to keep happening.

R.
01/22/2008 10:09:36 PM · #112
Touche Robert! (of course I am more than a bit biased towards HDR experimentation)
01/22/2008 10:20:07 PM · #113
Originally posted by macrothing:

Again..

"I am confused why Expert Editing is/was not used for Challenges such as Landscape, Time Lapse, etc. That would have sufficed for challenges where HDR, or deliberate styles of multiple images were required or desired. Why the Advanced Rules had to be modified to accommodate editing that was already allowed under Expert Editing is unclear, especially with all the resulting issues. At least that was not open to (mis)interpretations. The 'freedom' in Expert Editing doesn't have to be used to create 'digital art', it could be used for specific themed Challenges, with or without 'Extra Rules'. "

Isn't this a simple solution that is 'already there'?

<<<<< Well, since we're repeating ourselves from earlier postings in this thread, let me respond "again" with my opinion on this. :-) >>>>>

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by macrothing:

I am confused why Expert Editing is/was not used for Challenges such as Landscape, Time Lapse, etc. That would have sufficed for challenges where HDR, or deliberate styles of multiple images were required or desired.

HDR is not the same as wide-open Expert Editing digitial art/collage imagery and IMO should not be limited to Expert Editing events. I'm glad the Advanced Rules were modified to allow the use of HDR. However, that said, I think the 10 image maximum is a little high...perhaps 3 would be more controlled.

Originally posted by macrothing:

The 'freedom' in Expert Editing doesn't have to be used to create 'digital art', it could be used for specific themed Challenges, with or without 'Extra Rules'.

That 'freedom' is expected to be used in most cases with an Expert Editing ruleset. Most non-digital art type work will get lost in the fantasy world.

I'm glad the Expert Editing ruleset is fading away (for now)...
01/22/2008 10:50:43 PM · #114
Originally posted by macrothing:

Again..

"I am confused why Expert Editing is/was not used for Challenges such as Landscape, Time Lapse, etc. That would have sufficed for challenges where HDR, or deliberate styles of multiple images were required or desired. Why the Advanced Rules had to be modified to accommodate editing that was already allowed under Expert Editing is unclear, especially with all the resulting issues. At least that was not open to (mis)interpretations. The 'freedom' in Expert Editing doesn't have to be used to create 'digital art', it could be used for specific themed Challenges, with or without 'Extra Rules'. "

Isn't this a simple solution that is 'already there'?


Langdon's announcement of the December 31 revision probably explains it best:

Originally posted by langdon (modified to strike out the scrapped time-lapse part):

We weren't completely happy with how Expert panned out, and have spent some time taking the things we do like from Expert and adding them to Advanced. Mainly, combining multiple captures to allow for things like true HDR, noise reduction, and time-lapse photography. We have plans to revise Expert (and likely rename it) at a later date, so until then there won't be any Expert challenges. Hopefully though, with these changes to Advanced Editing, which also include entries sized at 720x720 @ 200kb, everyone will be quite busy for a bit.


~Terry
01/22/2008 11:13:21 PM · #115
For hdr why didn't you just use the term bracketing?
01/22/2008 11:18:21 PM · #116
Originally posted by Falc:

with the reworded (newer new) rules would an image similar to my 'From the Darkside' be legal?


The majority feels that the current rules are not worded to support this sort of combination of imagery. Some feel the problem lines within the preamble, while others feel it lies within the generic terminology we use.

We are discussing whether or not we want to make a move to include this type of imagery within Advanced, but there is no clear majority at this time. If you have an opinion as to whether or not you'd like to see this type of imagery in Advanced or not, let us know.

01/22/2008 11:22:56 PM · #117
Originally posted by jaysonmc:

For hdr why didn't you just use the term bracketing?


Bracketing is the act of taking multiple photos of an identical scene while varying a setting, which has always been legal. It's the act of combining those multiple images to produce a single end-product for submission that the rules seek to regulate. Increasing dynamic range is one legal use of bracketing, and is listen in the preamble as an example. The term HDR does not appear anywhere in the actual body of the rules.

~Terry
01/22/2008 11:24:05 PM · #118
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by macrothing:

Again..

"I am confused why Expert Editing is/was not used for Challenges such as Landscape, Time Lapse, etc. That would have sufficed for challenges where HDR, or deliberate styles of multiple images were required or desired. Why the Advanced Rules had to be modified to accommodate editing that was already allowed under Expert Editing is unclear, especially with all the resulting issues. At least that was not open to (mis)interpretations. The 'freedom' in Expert Editing doesn't have to be used to create 'digital art', it could be used for specific themed Challenges, with or without 'Extra Rules'. "

Isn't this a simple solution that is 'already there'?


The problem is that the site wants to allow "true" HDRI imaging and "true" astrophotography imaging into its mainstream challenges, and both require multiple exposures of the same scene for processing purposes. They're trying to find where they can draw the line so that "regular" advanced challenges don't begin to resemble anything-goes expert challenges, with very imaginative composites competing against straight photography.

Before the new ruleset, those of us (and there are a LOT of us) who are getting more and more into expanded dynamic range imaging, definitely the wave of the future (or one of them anyway) were forced to use kludgy attempts to emulate HDRI working from single exposures. This, IMO, is why "HDRI" was getting such a bad reputation amongst the voters and commenters; these images didn't look right. There's a whole, "hidden" subset of HDRI imaging that does NOT look obviously artificial and produces stunning images that deserve to be judged on their own merits, not side-by-side against off-the-wall photo-composite images of separate scenes artfully cobbled together. And as long as HDRI was limited to expert editing, that was going to keep happening.

R.


I don't know how you know what the "site" wants. I think a vocal segment of the photographers here want to do HDR imaging. I think it may be a minority. I think many here think that HDR should not be competing with single frame images, but should be in some form of a more advanced level of editing. The only way to know what the "site" wants is to take a vote. If we voted to have HDR imaging in advanced editing, I would accept that. I'm not sure it would turn out that way.

The second thing I would like take exception to is your assertion that you need HDR imaging for landscape photography. I've seen many beautiful ribbon winning landscapes on this site that are from single frame. Your last ribbon winning landscape was a very flat image. It didn't need any more dynamic range than a single frame. You did HDR imaging anyway, giving yourself 3 times the megapixels to compete with. Not fair in my book. (By the way, it is a beautiful image, and congratulations on the ribbon). I would love to use the liquify filter for glamour portrait work. I think many portrait artist use it quite a bit. I would say I need it for portraits.

I think advanced editing should be limited to a single image. I'm all for some form of expert editing that allows HDR imaging, and would even be okay with having selected challenges (like an astronomy challenge or a landscape challenge). The problem has always been with expert editing. That should be fixed. It doesn't make sense to so radically alter the previously well understood and fairly balanced advanced rules set.

Does anyone else want a vote on this?
01/22/2008 11:56:34 PM · #119
Originally posted by cloudsme:

Your last ribbon winning landscape was a very flat image. It didn't need any more dynamic range than a single frame. You did HDR imaging anyway, giving yourself 3 times the megapixels to compete with. Not fair in my book.


This seems a little contradictory to me. If the image was flat (ie. small dynamic range), then adding two more frames would do little to add more dynamic range. So either it wasn't flat or he didn't help himself by adding two more exposures.

Anyway, I got no beef with HDR. I use it when I feel it's necessary and I leave it alone when I don't.
01/23/2008 12:31:16 AM · #120
Originally posted by cloudsme:

I don't know how you know what the "site" wants. I think a vocal segment of the photographers here want to do HDR imaging. I think it may be a minority. I think many here think that HDR should not be competing with single frame images, but should be in some form of a more advanced level of editing. The only way to know what the "site" wants is to take a vote. If we voted to have HDR imaging in advanced editing, I would accept that. I'm not sure it would turn out that way.


By "the site" I meant Langdon and the other powers that be.

Originally posted by cloudsme:

The second thing I would like take exception to is your assertion that you need HDR imaging for landscape photography. I've seen many beautiful ribbon winning landscapes on this site that are from single frame. Your last ribbon winning landscape was a very flat image. It didn't need any more dynamic range than a single frame. You did HDR imaging anyway, giving yourself 3 times the megapixels to compete with. Not fair in my book. (By the way, it is a beautiful image, and congratulations on the ribbon).


I have said several times that this particular image could have been duplicated working from a single frame, yes. What's your point? HDRI multiple-image merging did not confer any advantage in this case.

R.
01/23/2008 11:21:06 AM · #121
Langdon, I guess I'd vote not to allow the kind of image that Falc and I submitted to the time lapse challenge.

The technique can create stunning images, but I'm having a hard time drawing a line. An image that showed a clear sky turning into a violent storm, for instance, might as well be a normal composite because it's definitely not a single scene. And I can't think of how to rule that out while ruling my image in.
01/23/2008 06:57:13 PM · #122
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by cloudsme:

I don't know how you know what the "site" wants. I think a vocal segment of the photographers here want to do HDR imaging. I think it may be a minority. I think many here think that HDR should not be competing with single frame images, but should be in some form of a more advanced level of editing. The only way to know what the "site" wants is to take a vote. If we voted to have HDR imaging in advanced editing, I would accept that. I'm not sure it would turn out that way.


By "the site" I meant Langdon and the other powers that be.

Originally posted by cloudsme:

The second thing I would like take exception to is your assertion that you need HDR imaging for landscape photography. I've seen many beautiful ribbon winning landscapes on this site that are from single frame. Your last ribbon winning landscape was a very flat image. It didn't need any more dynamic range than a single frame. You did HDR imaging anyway, giving yourself 3 times the megapixels to compete with. Not fair in my book. (By the way, it is a beautiful image, and congratulations on the ribbon).


I have said several times that this particular image could have been duplicated working from a single frame, yes. What's your point? HDRI multiple-image merging did not confer any advantage in this case.

R.


Okay, my point is you did use HDR on a flat image. We know it was a flat image and didn't need HDR for dynamic range purpose. I think you used it to give yourself more megapixels to work with. To smooth out curves, etc. But I guess you can answer better than I can. If you needed only one image, why did you use three? Was there really no advantage.

PS I hope you don't take this as a personal attack, I love your work. I just want to have a discussion about the fairness of using multiple images in a challenge.

Mike
01/23/2008 07:11:33 PM · #123
Originally posted by langdon:

As with any rule set, this one is subject to change. If there's an obvious flaw, we'll attempt to fix it right away, but otherwise we'll let these run for a few weeks and see how they work out.


Considering that we have yet to see the results of even one challenge with these new rules, how are some people so sure of their problems?

Why not just allow these rules to run for a couple weeks, per Langdon's suggestion, so we can all make an informed decision about their effect, instead of just screaming that the tonemapped sky is falling?

~Terry
01/28/2008 10:35:53 AM · #124
But what about people who aren't experts in Photoshop? I don't even know what tonemapping is, let alone how to use it - and for what it's worth I feel that there should be a single-capture category, as it's obvious these new Advanced rules are going to give the upper hand to those already highly conversant in PS.
01/28/2008 10:39:51 AM · #125
Originally posted by snaffles:

But what about people who aren't experts in Photoshop? I don't even know what tonemapping is, let alone how to use it - and for what it's worth I feel that there should be a single-capture category, as it's obvious these new Advanced rules are going to give the upper hand to those already highly conversant in PS.


That's why we have Basic editing challenges too.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:18:17 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 05:18:17 AM EDT.