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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Photographic Integrity???
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 82, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/04/2004 04:48:16 PM · #1
this post is in regards to the results of PWL, particularly the "electric laces" entry...



my understanding is that he used nothing but what was allowed by the advanced editting rules....he used a commonly used photoshop filter very creatively... i am a years old photoshop user, i am yet to use that particular filter that effectively...
so a person takes a picture and modifies it along side the rules of editting that is allowed in the challenge and gets hammered down by two respected site councils????
is this "photographic integrity"???
he absolutely created a very interesting picture which fit the subject matter of the challenge.. and used "glowing edges" filter which was allowed in editting rules and got two "1"s from two different site counsils???
is this "photographic integrity"???

is there a writtten definition of "photogprahic integrity" on this site? if so please someone let me know where???

does this "photographic integrity" manifestation states that : hammer people's atwork by some subjective means of judging it?????

does this "photographic integrory say that: vote "1" on entries which you subjectively think was over-photoshopped?????

i mean the challenge rules allow it,,, what is the deal here???

-stealing someone else's artwork is against "photographic integrity"
-painting a blank canvas on photoshop and pose is as "photography" is against "photographic integrity"
-not following editting rules and "subject matter" is against "photographic integrity"
--voting "1" on a person's artwork which he created within the perimeter of rules is against "photographic integrity"

how is thiS "PHOTOGRAPHIC INTEGRITY?" ... someone please expain??

or am i too stupified to understand such "great" and "noble" matters

Message edited by author 2004-02-04 16:57:58.
02/04/2004 04:53:06 PM · #2
for me it means does it look like a photo or does it look like the output of a filter from photoshop.

One would be a photograph, faithful to what comes from a camera

the other would look like the product of digital editing and would be more in line with digital art than a photograph.
02/04/2004 04:57:40 PM · #3
Site Council members are individuals with their own tastes and voting styles, and like every other member can vote however they want on any picture. They are NOT acting as SC members when they vote, but the same way any of you do.

I think it is fair to discuss how people vote with their consent, but I don't think it's fair to initiate a public discussion of the voting patterns of any individuals, and identifying them as SC members serves only to confuse the issues.

I don't think you'd want a Site Council made up of members who agree too much ....
02/04/2004 05:01:12 PM · #4
Originally posted by GeneralE:


I don't think you'd want a Site Council made up of members who agree too much ....


I disagree! oh....
02/04/2004 05:11:05 PM · #5
I voted it a 1. There is not much here that represents a photograph at all to me. The application of the filter, IMO, removed any evidence of painting with light, which was the challenge theme. I do like digital art very much though. However, I don't believe that it belongs in competition with more traditional style photography.

I believe that 'photographic integrity' means that the image i'm viewing looks like a photograph and has no evidence of digital manipulation. This clause is in the rules just for cases like this one. If I see something that violates my idea of photographic integrity, I have the option of voting it as low as I like. I will continue to do this until the rules change to encourage digital art submissions in the photography contests.

02/04/2004 05:12:20 PM · #6
lame
02/04/2004 05:15:30 PM · #7
I totally agree with John, and I will no longer make a comment when I vote a 1.

People always say "You should comment when you give a 1". Well, see what happens now? It just makes people hate you. Fun!
02/04/2004 05:15:47 PM · #8
Just in case anyone missed the other thread on this pic.
02/04/2004 05:17:33 PM · #9
I will continue to leave comments and my score of 1 with it on those types of images. I want to discourage the entry of digital art and this is my only way to do that. This site has never really promoted digital art entries into the contests.
02/04/2004 05:25:05 PM · #10
well alltho im a fan of digital art and i was a fan of the new "advanced editing rules", i now think because of the nature of this site and the people on it its creating seperation and prejiduces against work that "looks photoshopped".

i think crap like this will only ever be solved by going back to the old "basic" editing style.

and IMO, giving a 1 for that pic just cause you think its too photoshopped is really lame. ive never given a 1 to anyone on this site and alltho im sure many do give 1's for photos that have nothing to do w/ the challenge subject and are in bad quality, this image does go along w/ the challenge theme and is in good quality.
02/04/2004 05:29:16 PM · #11
Originally posted by MadMordegon:



and IMO, giving a 1 for that pic just cause you think its too photoshopped is really lame. ive never given a 1 to anyone on this site and alltho im sure many do give 1's for photos that have nothing to do w/ the challenge subject and are in bad quality, this image does go along w/ the challenge theme and is in good quality.


I'm glad you think so. Everyone is entitled to their own views and I never ask anyone to change those views :)

I have asked the site council to help clarify the 'photographic integrity' statement in the advanced editing rules to help clear up our specific intent with that statement.

02/04/2004 05:31:56 PM · #12
I think if the rules are saying we can use functions of photoshop, we can't judge it down because we don't want it in the competition. By saying in the rules that it is ok.... we are saying as a mass that we support it. I think it is fine and exciting to have a site where 'photography' is emphasized and not digital art, but i think then the basic rules should be used.

If it is in the rules, we are saying we accept it and it is the art we are looking for.

I think saying that 'over photoshoped' images are unacceptable is the same as saying, i don't prefer pet pictures, therefore to discourage people taking pet pictures, I'm going to vote them a 1.

I would be very happy to keep this site 'photography based' but then i think the rules should be changed.
02/04/2004 05:32:22 PM · #13
Originally posted by theodor38:

so a person takes a picture and modifies it along side the rules of editting that is allowed in the challenge and gets hammered down by two respected site councils????

The scores given, no matter who they were by, were justified and within the rules.
02/04/2004 05:35:42 PM · #14
Just because the rules say you CAN do something, it doesn't mean people have to like it.
02/04/2004 05:38:25 PM · #15
Originally posted by leaf:

I think if the rules are saying we can use functions of photoshop, we can't judge it down because we don't want it in the competition. By saying in the rules that it is ok.... we are saying as a mass that we support it. I think it is fine and exciting to have a site where 'photography' is emphasized and not digital art, but i think then the basic rules should be used.

If it is in the rules, we are saying we accept it and it is the art we are looking for.


Members are reminded to hold photographic integrity in the highest regard when both submitting and voting.


Is also in the rules (not my bolding). Some people obviously believe that overly photoshopped images are not true to their personal view of what a photograph is, and thus consider that in the highest regard when voting.

The rules state you should give the most importance to if you think it is still a valid photograph - so a 1 is entirely supported by the rules for something you personally think has gone too far away from the spirit of a photograph. In fact, the rules tell you to give it the most importance, not just consider it along with all the other factors...

Message edited by author 2004-02-04 17:39:03.
02/04/2004 05:38:51 PM · #16
Originally posted by Konador:

Just because the rules say you CAN do something, it doesn't mean people have to like it.


no i agree very much with that... and i agree that personal preferance weighs on our decision no matter how much we say it doesn't. However, i think that perhaps personal preferance, or personal interest in the picture is work 1 or 2 points, not 5 or 6.
02/04/2004 05:40:08 PM · #17
Originally posted by leaf:

Originally posted by Konador:

Just because the rules say you CAN do something, it doesn't mean people have to like it.


no i agree very much with that... and i agree that personal preferance weighs on our decision no matter how much we say it doesn't. However, i think that perhaps personal preferance, or personal interest in the picture is work 1 or 2 points, not 5 or 6.


My personal interest dictates differently. If I don't feel that i'm looking at a photography, I don't feel that it belongs in the competition.
02/04/2004 05:40:25 PM · #18
Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by leaf:

I think if the rules are saying we can use functions of photoshop, we can't judge it down because we don't want it in the competition. By saying in the rules that it is ok.... we are saying as a mass that we support it. I think it is fine and exciting to have a site where 'photography' is emphasized and not digital art, but i think then the basic rules should be used.

If it is in the rules, we are saying we accept it and it is the art we are looking for.


allright.. yeah... good point...
i guess it perhaps comes down to defining what is a 'photograph'... in the digital age.. but yeah.. perhaps i could agree with you more now...

Members are reminded to hold photographic integrity in the highest regard when both submitting and voting.


Is also in the rules (not my bolding). Some people obviously believe that overly photoshopped images are not true to their personal view of what a photograph is, and thus consider that in the highest regard when voting.

The rules state you should give the most importance to if you think it is still a valid photograph - so a 1 is entirely supported by the rules for something you personally think has gone too far away from the spirit of a photograph. In fact, the rules tell you to give it the most importance, not just consider it along with all the other factors...

02/04/2004 05:42:19 PM · #19
sorry that last post was a bit of mess... i will try again

yes i see your point,.. and i guess it comes down to what a 'photograph' is, in our digital world... and perhaps i am agreeing with you more now...
02/04/2004 05:48:11 PM · #20
Originally posted by jmsetzler:

...I believe that 'photographic integrity' means that the image i'm viewing looks like a photograph and has no evidence of digital manipulation. This clause is in the rules just for cases like this one. If I see something that violates my idea of photographic integrity, I have the option of voting it as low as I like. I will continue to do this until the rules change to encourage digital art submissions in the photography contests.


While I share your premise, I have opted not to follow your example (above) to the same extreme. I simply feel, that sooner or later, you will make mistakes. There are photos, good ones, too, which appear to have been manipulated but are not.

The comment field, IMO, is a good place for this. I use question marks (instead of votes) at the end of comments articulating my doubts. When it's a picture of a tree or a human hand with a reptilious texture with a metallic glow, however, then... I'm with you.
02/04/2004 05:56:02 PM · #21
The rules as they stand do not prevent you from over--laying a painted layer (Complete 3D art -- maybe in max or maya) over a photo with an overlay and opacity setting so that you can no longer see the photo below and submitting it even though you can no longer see any of the photo...
Are some people really suggesting that they could not tell this apart from photographic integrity once they know? or that it would not disgust them?
Thank god for "digital art" and that it is now allowed...

I didn't vote but had I done so I would have voted a 1 as there is no integrity here in my eyes. But should photos that aren't photo be DQ'ed? As it is no longer a photo -- some clarity from Council would be appreciated by me atleast.
02/04/2004 06:00:20 PM · #22
Originally posted by MadMordegon:

and IMO, giving a 1 for that pic just cause you think its too photoshopped is really lame.

I voted this shot a one for three reasons...
1. I think the level of editing removed photographic integrity
2. I think the effect removed the PWL aspect, therefore the shot did not meet the challenge in my opinion.
3. I don't like the glowing edges effect and therefore the image that was entered.

I therefore stand by my vote, as my vote represented my feelings about the image and after all isn't that why we vote on images?
02/04/2004 06:01:45 PM · #23
my intentions are not to create unnecessary contraversy. i am a fairly new member and i do feel i need to express my feelings about things regarding this site...perhaps, to improve, to contribute..

my knowledge is that advanced editting rules were voted on and accepted by majority vote... so if this site tries to maintain a healthy dose of "photographic integrity. i would assume anything allowed under advanced editting rules has become a part of "photographic integrity" concept... or was the voting for just fun and to create confusion...
there are solid rules lining the edges of editting. and threre is this "photographic integrity" thing that kinda lingers in the air..

i do not see how it can be considered "ethical" to vote down a person who submitted his artwork which obeyed outlined rules...i understand that everyone has thsir own taste, and if a person doesnt like the composition and excecution he can vote the picture down as low as they desire..

but some people say that " the picture was great, but i am voting it down because i feel itis phtoshopped".. this means that some people vote photographs down by disregarding their quality and excecution...
i do feel this should be agaisnt anybody's definition of "photographic integrity..

i do not wish to stir up infertile debates which is going to end up in a direction whre people say :" fine, we are getting rid of advanced editting, because it causes too much headache"....i am already seeing signs leading to that direction..such as "i am not going to leave comments when i vote 1"

but after everything said and done i trully believe thata people should understand there is nothing wrong with using photoshop on the images that are submitted to this site... there many different varieties of special effects that are used in a traditional darkroom which changes the image quite a bit just like photoshop does.. and photoshop use should become a part of "photographic integrity"....

creativity, execution, lighting, focus, and overall appeal of the image should be a consideration for people when they are voting...

it is my personall belief that voting images by "guessing" what photoshop filter was used is a misleading way of doing things... if everybody were to feel that way i dont think "gordon's" wonderfull image could have gotten its most deserved position.. because it does look photoshopped even when it wasnt....

02/04/2004 06:26:38 PM · #24
I think the point is you can vote any photo up or down for any reason which is important to YOU, as can anyone else. No one should have to justify their vote, which is why voting is anonymous, even though comments are not (and are voluntary).
02/04/2004 06:50:21 PM · #25
Originally posted by theodor38:

my intentions are not to create unnecessary contraversy. i am a fairly new member and i do feel i need to express my feelings about things regarding this site...perhaps, to improve, to contribute..

my knowledge is that advanced editting rules were voted on and accepted by majority vote... so if this site tries to maintain a healthy dose of "photographic integrity. i would assume anything allowed under advanced editting rules has become a part of "photographic integrity" concept... or was the voting for just fun and to create confusion...
there are solid rules lining the edges of editting. and threre is this "photographic integrity" thing that kinda lingers in the air..

i do not see how it can be considered "ethical" to vote down a person who submitted his artwork which obeyed outlined rules...i understand that everyone has thsir own taste, and if a person doesnt like the composition and excecution he can vote the picture down as low as they desire..

but some people say that " the picture was great, but i am voting it down because i feel itis phtoshopped".. this means that some people vote photographs down by disregarding their quality and excecution...
i do feel this should be agaisnt anybody's definition of "photographic integrity..

i do not wish to stir up infertile debates which is going to end up in a direction whre people say :" fine, we are getting rid of advanced editting, because it causes too much headache"....i am already seeing signs leading to that direction..such as "i am not going to leave comments when i vote 1"

but after everything said and done i trully believe thata people should understand there is nothing wrong with using photoshop on the images that are submitted to this site... there many different varieties of special effects that are used in a traditional darkroom which changes the image quite a bit just like photoshop does.. and photoshop use should become a part of "photographic integrity"....

creativity, execution, lighting, focus, and overall appeal of the image should be a consideration for people when they are voting...

it is my personall belief that voting images by "guessing" what photoshop filter was used is a misleading way of doing things... if everybody were to feel that way i dont think "gordon's" wonderfull image could have gotten its most deserved position.. because it does look photoshopped even when it wasnt....


well put. i agree completly.
and to say again what someone earlier said, voting a 1 because you dont like/want to discurage "photoshopped" pics is like voting a 1 on all cat picture because you think cat pictures are overused or whatever your reason may be.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 04:28:40 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 04:28:40 AM EDT.