| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/12/2002 06:20:47 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by bobgaither:
Why not leave it the way it is? I have a moderate price camera and photo editing but what about the people that have less or more? Maybe once a month or so have it open to any editing and filters to see what we come up with. As with most of us luck is the key in having excellent image. Yes there is skill and experimentation to come up with the perfect shot but to have everyone creative on the same level there needs to be handicaps on the better equipment and software used.
Other than the camera issues, the photo editing things people are asking for are not expensive. They are all available in free or shareware packages. (Paint Shop Pro, The Gimp under linux etc)
Why stop people who can get better results from getting them with freely available techniques ? It actually allows people with cheaper
cameras (which are really bad at colour shifts etc) to compete on a
more level playing field.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2002 06:28:04 PM · #52 |
They are all available in free or shareware packages. (Paint Shop Pro, The Gimp under linux etc)
Just to clarify - Paint Shop Pro is not free or shareware - it's $109.
* This message has been edited by the author on 4/12/2002 10:29:23 PM. |
|
|
|
04/12/2002 06:40:27 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by Amphian:
[i]They are all available in free or shareware packages. (Paint Shop Pro, The Gimp under linux etc)
Just to clarify - Paint Shop Pro is not free or shareware - it's $109.
[/i]
Urm, it is shareware. Shareware doesn't mean free. It usually means you can download it and use it for a trial period, then pay for it. For paintshop Pro, the fee these days is $99 for the full download version. With care you can pick it up for about $50, with rebates. It certainly used to be shareware. You can also get the trial version for 30 days, with full functionality.
The point being there are plenty of good, free or cheap image processing tools available.
here are some more
* This message has been edited by the author on 4/12/2002 10:42:01 PM.
|
|
|
|
04/12/2002 07:14:52 PM · #54 |
Shareware doesn't mean free.
I know - I'm a programmer. :-)
The point being there are plenty of good, free or cheap image processing tools available.
Yep - most image editors have a trial version now.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2002 02:36:04 AM · #55 |
Originally posted by Amphian:
[i]Shareware doesn't mean free.
I know - I'm a programmer. :-)
The point being there are plenty of good, free or cheap image processing tools available.
Yep - most image editors have a trial version now.
[/i]
BUT if you look on the covers of magazines, you may be able to find something like Paint Shop Pro v.4 for free on cover discs. They tend to give away older versions of the programs so you can use them, and then be tempted to pay full price for the newest version. Sure, the older ones aren't as good, but they're better than some of the cheap crappy ones available on the market. |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 04:32:03 AM · #56 |
i've been following this discussion for some time now without commenting. I guess I'll summarize my opinion now, fwiw.
I am a photoshop maven. I use it at work, and at home. Been using it since version 2.5! I love the program. Post-processing an image is second nature to me.
However, I've really liked the 'purity' if you will of these contests - placing the burden of the quality of the image squarely on the shoulders of one's ability to frame, compose, light, focus, and expose. It really got you to work your camera because you knew the pic had to be solid right then and there, instead of relying on the computer to 'salvage' the result for you. I'm afraid that professional pshoppers are going to have a major advantage straight out of the gate now. Yes, that might favor me, but I don't think that's fair ..
I think level changes are ok, as is sharpening. Saturation is OK, but I don't think [direct] Hue manipulation should be allowed. Hue is one of those attributes that's most fundamental to the perception of the image, and I don't think it's right be able to take your pic of an orchid and turn it into a psychedelic flourescent green orchid or whatever.
I'm a little sad that we're opening up the allowable alterations. As some others have expressed, I think it would be cool to allow that on maybe one challenge a month. Let's keep placing the main emphasis on working and learning camera skills; we can have photo editor contests as the exception, not the rule.
just me three shekels
|
|
|
|
04/13/2002 04:50:04 AM · #57 |
I couldn't agree more, magnetic9999 . I'm new to photography but I have been doing graphics for a long time. I think alterations would only sway things to a new advantage for some. I want to learn how to use my camera to the best of my ability and get great results. A once a month thing is cool. I love this place as it's got some great guidelines and rules set up to push you to think and use not only your mind but to grow and learn.
I'm a mod at a PhotoShop board that may help some of you. There's a great print section and scripting section. also. Feel free to check it out:)
//www.ozoneasylum.com/
|
|
|
|
04/13/2002 05:53:12 AM · #58 |
I would like to say I have enjoyed this site the way it has been. The pictures I submit come straight off the camera. I was even taking them at 640x480 until this last challenge because I did not want to resize them.... I have been coming up with some neat stuff (thanks to the challenges) so now I will take them at high resolution and only resize. I try to do all the work while taking my images so I don't have to touch them. This has been the challenge for me.
I have used Ulead Photo Impact, Photo Shop and PSP for a few years now, but I would rather stick to the old rules. Just my opinion :-) |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 05:58:04 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
i've been following this discussion for some time now without commenting. I guess I'll summarize my opinion now, fwiw.
I am a photoshop maven. I use it at work, and at home. Been using it since version 2.5! I love the program. Post-processing an image is second nature to me.
However, I've really liked the 'purity' if you will of these contests - placing the burden of the quality of the image squarely on the shoulders of one's ability to frame, compose, light, focus, and expose. It really got you to work your camera because you knew the pic had to be solid right then and there, instead of relying on the computer to 'salvage' the result for you. I'm afraid that professional pshoppers are going to have a major advantage straight out of the gate now. Yes, that might favor me, but I don't think that's fair ..
I think level changes are ok, as is sharpening. Saturation is OK, but I don't think [direct] Hue manipulation should be allowed. Hue is one of those attributes that's most fundamental to the perception of the image, and I don't think it's right be able to take your pic of an orchid and turn it into a psychedelic flourescent green orchid or whatever.
I'm a little sad that we're opening up the allowable alterations. As some others have expressed, I think it would be cool to allow that on maybe one challenge a month. Let's keep placing the main emphasis on working and learning camera skills; we can have photo editor contests as the exception, not the rule.
just me three shekels
I think this goes full circle to the discussion over
here
The crux of the question is what you think digital photography is.
Does it last until you press the shutter, or does it start somewhere before that and end with the final print/ image etc.
It sounds like you think the photograph is taken once you press the shutter, rather than that just being a step on the way to creating the thing you visualised before you raised the camera in the first place.
It just comes down to different opinions, neither is 'right'
* This message has been edited by the author on 4/13/2002 10:41:46 AM. |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 06:51:01 AM · #60 |
I certainly think the overwhelming (90%+) majority of photography should be until the shutter is pressed. Langdon and I have discussed this many times before...
But part of the reason we started this thread was because people are complaining. They have non-Photoshop editors, and their commands aren't the same as those we're listing. Other people think that the commands we currently don't allow can be done with the ones we do (an argument I don't agree with) and that they should therefore be allowed.
Langdon and I have both never wanted hue adjustments to be made for exactly the reason stated by magnetic. But we've gotten to a point where we'll never please everyone, from our selections down to our wording.
If we do end up using these rules and I see an image that's obviously had its hue adjusted entirely beyond its original color, I'm going to penalize it in my vote.
Drew |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 07:05:27 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by drewmedia:
I certainly think the overwhelming (90%+) majority of photography should be until the shutter is pressed. Langdon and I have discussed this many times before...
But part of the reason we started this thread was because people are complaining. They have non-Photoshop editors, and their commands aren't the same as those we're listing. Other people think that the commands we currently don't allow can be done with the ones we do (an argument I don't agree with) and that they should therefore be allowed.
Langdon and I have both never wanted hue adjustments to be made for exactly the reason stated by magnetic. But we've gotten to a point where we'll never please everyone, from our selections down to our wording.
If we do end up using these rules and I see an image that's obviously had its hue adjusted entirely beyond its original color, I'm going to penalize it in my vote.
Drew
I think that is probably the best way to go - you let the votes decide what is a good image or not. I've had enough experience of other types of games/ competitions to learn that as soon as you really try to legislate for things like that, and really try to pin down rules, that it becomes a nightmare of misunderstanding and twisting.
It's better to have a general guideline and let people make up their
own minds. If there isn't a hard line to push against most folk err on the side of caution :)
I guess on the 'what is photography' thing I've been influenced by reading Ansel Adam's books like 'the print' and 'the negative' where
he describes the portion of his work after the shutter is pressed as the
main creative portion, rather than just finding the right view to snap.
It's all good.
* This message has been edited by the author on 4/13/2002 11:07:05 AM. |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 07:59:06 AM · #62 |
I am definitely a "new kid on the block", but have no problem with the way it is. As a newcomer to photography, I feel that I must focus mainly on the part up to "pressing the shutter". Anything I can do with it after that is a bonus.
|
|
|
|
04/13/2002 08:06:09 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by drewmedia:
If we do end up using these rules and I see an image that's obviously had its hue adjusted entirely beyond its original color, I'm going to penalize it in my vote.
Drew
This idea stands for itsself. You could allow unlimited editing and let the voter decide. I could live with this. You could also keep the rules exactly as they are. I believe that when a photo is modified well beyond it's original image, we are dealing with digital art rather than the traditional digital photograph.
After all, this is a "Digital Photography Contest" site. Defining a difference between digital photos and digital art could be an interesting thread...
|
|
|
|
04/13/2002 08:18:35 AM · #64 |
Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
The crux of the question is what you think digital photography is.
Does it last until you press the shutter, or does it start somewhere before that and end with the final print/ image etc. It sounds like you think the photograph is taken once you press the shutter, rather than that just being a step on the way to creating the thing you visualised before you raised the camera in the first place.
not exactly. i just think that they are 2 completely different skillsets, and then I would ask which skillset do we want more focus upon? i, me, subjective, saw this site as focusing on the skillsets relating to 'capturing'. i suppose that was because initially drew and langdon had placed the limitations they had, so as humans are apt to do, we adapted. It turned out that it was pleasurable to work within those relatively minimalist contexts.
anyway, i would of course enjoy anything goes, seeing i'm a designer by trade and manipulating images is something i enjoy doing, and i think the best compromise is to have some challenges explicitly with the old rules and some with more 'latitude' granted.
also, no one has pointed out that, unlike our 19th century film using counterparts, we can set up the shot, review it, change attributes, and do that again and again in realtime until we get the perfect picture right there out of our cameras. it takes alot of people time to adapt to the fact that they really can shoot dozens of the same subject and nothing bad is going to happen to them! :)
|
|
|
|
04/13/2002 08:26:34 AM · #65 |
Once again, the advantages go to those who are proficient with the software... We already have those who are and aren't proficient with the cameras. Adding the element of unlimited digital manipulation adds another learning curve for some...
|
|
|
|
04/13/2002 01:36:39 PM · #66 |
We should have a challenge that is a "Photo Altatering" challenge. Where anything is excepted, those who do not have access to a photoshop or paint shop pro can sit on their hands until the next week. Most everyone here, i'm sure, has access to some sort of program, if not then they can submit any photo in this challenge (whether it is altered or not)...becuase the challege will not have any restrictions.
My $0.02
Daniel |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 02:59:43 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Once again, the advantages go to those who are proficient with the software... We already have those who are and aren't proficient with the cameras. Adding the element of unlimited digital manipulation adds another learning curve for some...
I thought the 'new rules' (if and when they get finalised) still are fairly restrictive. There is a whole lot of digital manipulation that is excluded, which would be more into the realm of digital art (e.g., 3d modeling, masking, layering, filtering etc)
I'm quite happy having a contest that is about digital photography - that is, that the single image comes out of a camera, rather than being computer generated or compositied - I just like having the tools to make that picture look as good as it possibly can, rather than limit myself to the typical compremises forced on camera makers, based on limited processing power within embedded cameras. I'd rather use the full variety of postprocessing transforms available in good software tools. |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 03:09:16 PM · #68 |
| The wole idea behind digital photography is having the ability to manipulate and transmit images faster. I belive the idea behind DPC is to get people off their butts and behind their camera. The better their image the more inclined they will be to want to soot more. Limiting the use of softwear in "DIGITAL" photography is just plain silly. If you can make your image better and you don't it is wasting a big opportunity. If someone wants an unaltered image let me know I will send them some slides, because all mediums change when they go to print or screen. |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 07:08:04 PM · #69 |
| hmm... I don't believe anyone has mentioned blur, or gaussian blur. In a lot of cases you get some one who has a really bad digital cam and they have to overlay (or soft light) a blurred layer ontop of the original so that the color is corrected and you don't get all those bad hot pixels. So, what happens with those people? To me that would seem a tad unfair if they weren't allowed to do that. I mean, it IS done to the image as a whole, not just a small portion of the image. |
|
|
|
04/13/2002 09:29:37 PM · #70 |
Most of the aterations listed are easy to find in reasonably inexpensive software, and are a natural part of the digital photography process. Digital cameras have real image quality limitations inherent in the technology used, but many can be corrected for using these alterations. I can't think of a better place for people to learn about the things that 'professionals' do to tune images to look their best than right here. Instead of fretting that some photographers might be at a disadvantage because they don't have any expertise in using a program like Paint Shop or Photoshop, why don't we as a community (stay with me) try our best to communicate the simple steps that 'professional' photographers go through on almost any image to make them reflect their experience of the original subject and not the camera's technology-filtered interpretation.
This said, anybody who blurs something, or takes a red tomato and turns it green, or otherwise violates the reality behind their photos is going to get a miserable score from me. As hard as it is to comprohensively define what those violations might be, I'll know one when I see one. :) I think this challenge should remain focused on a more immediate, less processed representation of the subject as seen by the photographer at the time the photograph is taken. I will be sad if we lose this purity.
I still don't have a stopped motion shot. *eek!* |
|
|
|
04/14/2002 04:45:22 AM · #71 |
Originally posted by Mousie:
Most of the aterations listed are easy to find in reasonably inexpensive software, and are a natural part of the digital photography process. Digital cameras have real image quality limitations inherent in the technology used, but many can be corrected for using these alterations. I can't think of a better place for people to learn about the things that 'professionals' do to tune images to look their best than right here. Instead of fretting that some photographers might be at a disadvantage because they don't have any expertise in using a program like Paint Shop or Photoshop, why don't we as a community (stay with me) try our best to communicate the simple steps that 'professional' photographers go through on almost any image to make them reflect their experience of the original subject and not the camera's technology-filtered interpretation.
This said, anybody who blurs something, or takes a red tomato and turns it green, or otherwise violates the [i]reality behind their photos is going to get a miserable score from me. As hard as it is to comprohensively define what those violations might be, I'll know one when I see one. :) I think this challenge should remain focused on a more immediate, less processed representation of the subject as seen by the photographer at the time the photograph is taken. I will be sad if we lose this purity.
I still don't have a stopped motion shot. *eek!*[/i]
When you submit an entry, maybe people should detail the postprocessing steps that have been done. ALso, maybe these submission comments should be visible for voters. |
|
|
|
04/14/2002 05:27:47 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
However, I've really liked the 'purity' if you will of these contests - placing the burden of the quality of the image squarely on the shoulders of one's ability to frame, compose, light, focus, and expose. It really got you to work your camera because you knew the pic had to be solid right then and there, instead of relying on the computer to 'salvage' the result for you.
I agree with magnetic9999 on this one. In my opinion we are fixing something that is not broke. There is no doubt that there is more to digital photography than the initial exposure, however getting the initial exposure close is a challenge in itself. My guess is that for most photographers (myself included) there is plenty to learn just in the areas of photography that exclude post processing. I have seen many comments regarding how much the photographs have improved in the challenges already, with the limited set of alterations currently allowed. I would consider this a success in and of itself. I also do not detect any widespread boredom with the challenges, but on the contrary, the spirit and excitement around the challenges seems to rise daily.
My attraction to the site was a desire to be "pushed" to expose better photos with limited digital darkroom work. In my view, having the desired exposure and composition is the first step, and I think the most important step, in getting the desired output. This does not mean that I don't like Photoshop work, but consider it an entirely different skill in the toolbox.
If we do open up the rules to a wider set of alterations I hope there is the possibility to have dual challenges where one would be for photographs with minimal alterations and the other could be for "anything goes" if that is what a large group of people want. It would not bother me if most people choose to compete in the "maximum alterations challenges" as long as the "straight photo" challenge remains available for those who enjoy it because it fits there desires or needs for photographic growth. Considering the diverse audience participating in the site, it probably should not surprise us that some may consider that they have already "mastered" the basics and are looking to hone their skills in the post processing arena. I'm not sure that all can make this claim however.
These are obviously all just my opinions. I commend the administrators on an excellent site. I hope they have the strength and wisdom to make a good decision that allows the site to grow and flourish. Resolving issues like these are true tests of leadership. I recognize that whether the outcome suits my personal needs and desires or not is "small potatoes" in the big picture.
Good luck,
Dave |
|
|
|
04/14/2002 06:01:07 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
When you submit an entry, maybe people should detail the postprocessing steps that have been done. ALso, maybe these submission comments should be visible for voters.
I love this idea! Not only does it let me know the purity of the picture, but it also tells me how I can go about getting the result I see (almost more important to me.) |
|
|
|
04/14/2002 06:45:31 AM · #74 |
I re-read this entire thread again today...
I would like to vote that all modifications be permissable except spot editing with tools like the paintbrush, blur, eraser, etc.
I personally don't do a lot of level editing in my photos but there are some who do. If it doesn't work out, the rules may always be changed.
|
|
|
|
04/14/2002 06:58:13 AM · #75 |
| I think this has been said before, but IMO the allowed alterations listed at the head of this thread really are "minimal". Global edits are available to just about everyone at little or no cost (in cash or time), and actually levels the playing field for those whose cameras aren't configureable in every detail. Adjusting color balance (do you do a custom WB for *every* lighting situation?), contrast (some cameras let you adjust this before exposure, but think of all the shots you'd miss), gamma, color depth, etc. are not rocket science. It takes me about three minutes to do my usual routine on an image on my circa 1879 P166. I understand the reservations some folks have about people going overboard in post-processing - it usually happens when someone is new and excited about the possibilities. Still, if we're going to improve and learn, let's not stop just short of finishing off our images. Otherwise, we might as well not allow any processing at all. |
|
