| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/14/2005 08:26:33 PM · #1 |
I really like what Matt Taylor did with the Journeyman. From reading his comments on the photo it seems like there was some controversy over his removal of the trees and part of the bridge. However, since he still holds a blue ribbon I would take it that removal is legal under the member challenge rules. ? Your comments please.
 |
|
|
|
10/14/2005 08:29:26 PM · #2 |
Until we see the original, who knows. Was done under the cloak of darkness. We post WHO gets DQd but we can't even get the original for a LEGAL image?
|
|
|
|
10/14/2005 08:31:04 PM · #3 |
I think it was ruled legal because the removal was not complete, and was primarily effected using a non-selected color adjustment and cropping.
It can still be "illegal" to completely remove or replace a background -- I suggest you proceed with caution : ) |
|
|
|
10/14/2005 08:32:17 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Until we see the original, who knows. Was done under the cloak of darkness. We post WHO gets DQd but we can't even get the original for a LEGAL image? |
Only the photographer has the right to post the "original" for public review -- not the SC. |
|
|
|
10/14/2005 08:34:50 PM · #5 |
I agree - I just dont get the secrecy.
|
|
|
|
10/14/2005 08:41:15 PM · #6 |
I use Photoshop Elements and I am still learning. I guess how I see it is that no matter what method you use to get there (as in the black background) the net effect is the same. If I burn that area to blackness or if I use adjustments with contrast and brightness or adjust the levels ΓΆ€“ it all ends up black and a removal of part of the photo. Yes - No?
Message edited by author 2005-10-15 00:42:05. |
|
|
|
10/14/2005 10:29:20 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
I agree - I just dont get the secrecy. |
The more we tell people about how we detect cheating, the more information available to potential cheaters as to how to avoid getting caught. |
|
|
|
10/14/2005 10:30:43 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by kendall6:
If I burn that area to blackness or if I use adjustments with contrast and brightness or adjust the levels ΓΆ€“ it all ends up black and a removal of part of the photo. Yes - No? |
Probably so. |
|
|
|
10/14/2005 10:33:09 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by mavrik:
I agree - I just dont get the secrecy. |
The more we tell people about how we detect cheating, the more information available to potential cheaters as to how to avoid getting caught. |
I get that. I thought this was about him removing a background legally or not? Not about "cheating" just about a legal removal of bkgd? Does 1 have to do with the other?
|
|
|
|
10/14/2005 10:37:16 PM · #10 |
Mav -- no, it's not exactly the same, but I think we just have a standard way of dealing with it.
I think when the photographer uploads the original, it is with the understanding that it is for our use only.
Plus, we'd have to resize it and have a place to post it. For now, it's probably best to PM the photographer and ask that a resized "original" be posted. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/10/2025 07:15:30 PM EDT.
