It's That Time of Year Again! (Please answer in this thread!)

[WDWFigment]

Then aren't you arguing to change something using an "evidence" that doesn't necessarily exist?

If all we are doing here is using hypothetical scenarios, then each one of us can come up with our own scenarios to counter each other. What makes one scenario more valid than the others?

Zz.

Just because an argument is hypothetical doesn't mean it's invalid, conversely, it doesn't make it valid either. If your accompanying rationale isn't plausible, it's fairly easy to see. Few arguments have such bright line divisions that they can be argued without theory. What makes some more valid than others is their consistency and how sensible they are to others. I'm only presenting my theories regarding size change to convince others to vote in favor of an increase (although with this now on the second page it's probably unlikely that many will read it before voting...in which case this is all for naught).

 

[cjb-nc]

I've been a lurker at best for the last year and a half, but I'll chime in anyway...

Picture size... I'm not so concerned about archaic monitors, rather archaic computers and net connections. Larger pictures take more memory in the computer and slow them way down when you reach the limit. They also take longer to download for those folks still using modems.

As for detail in small pictures... if the detail is what is important in the photo, it should be cropped to show that detail. Otherwise you have a good shot lost in a sea of blah surroundings. That's a composition decision on the part of the photographer. That said, allowing us to link back to larger formats off the board seems reasonable.

To photoshop or not to photoshop... My camera can correct whitebalance, I can do better. My camera can guess at dynamic range, I can do better. My camera can swap colors, fix red-eye, oversaturate on demand, etc etc... all things done better with more control in post processing. You can't give $2000 DSLRs to all the $150 point-and-shoot owners, any more than you can make sure everyone has Photoshop CS3 vs the free trial copy of Elements that came with the camera.

I think these would be reasonable to allow:
- cropping, including rotation correction
- whole-picture exposure correction
- white-balance correction
- sharpening (for those of us who don't let our camera sharpen before the other corrections)
- RAW conversion

Not allowed, perhaps, since this is still a photo taking not editing group:
- local exposure corrections like dodge/burn, tone mapping, and such
- feature editing (can't remove wires, people in the way, etc)
- HDR, panoramic stitching and other multi-shot assembly techniques

Hope this helps stir up some discussion. This is a great board and I enjoy participating under whatever rules are used.

Charles

 

[WDWFigment]

I've been a lurker at best for the last year and a half, but I'll chime in anyway...

Picture size... I'm not so concerned about archaic monitors, rather archaic computers and net connections. Larger pictures take more memory in the computer and slow them way down when you reach the limit. They also take longer to download for those folks still using modems.

As for detail in small pictures... if the detail is what is important in the photo, it should be cropped to show that detail. Otherwise you have a good shot lost in a sea of blah surroundings. That's a composition decision on the part of the photographer. That said, allowing us to link back to larger formats off the board seems reasonable.

I'm not convinced here; as I've stated before, the contest should not stagnate for the sake of people stuck in the past. This may seem inconsiderate to that very small minority who don't have new machines, but I don't think a few people should be allowed to stand in the way of what's better for the contest, and in this case, does not preclude those stuck in the past to participate.

I don't think cropping should have to be the answer to this. What if my photo is already brilliantly composed and has fine details? That I should crop simply to appease those with archaic technology is ludicrous, especially when the whole point of the contest is the pictures. If there were a logical reason not to increase the size of the photos to 800 x 600 that pertained to the photos themselves, and not users, I might concede this point.

To photoshop or not to photoshop... My camera can correct whitebalance, I can do better. My camera can guess at dynamic range, I can do better. My camera can swap colors, fix red-eye, oversaturate on demand, etc etc... all things done better with more control in post processing. You can't give $2000 DSLRs to all the $150 point-and-shoot owners, any more than you can make sure everyone has Photoshop CS3 vs the free trial copy of Elements that came with the camera. [emphasis added].

I think these would be reasonable to allow:
- cropping, including rotation correction
- whole-picture exposure correction
- white-balance correction
- sharpening (for those of us who don't let our camera sharpen before the other corrections)
- RAW conversion

Not allowed, perhaps, since this is still a photo taking not editing group:
- local exposure corrections like dodge/burn, tone mapping, and such
- feature editing (can't remove wires, people in the way, etc)
- HDR, panoramic stitching and other multi-shot assembly techniques

Hope this helps stir up some discussion. This is a great board and I enjoy participating under whatever rules are used.

Charles

Great point. I have to say that I now take back my statements about 'no photo editing'. My only concern is that those with $2,000 DSLRs may also be the ones with Photoshop CS3, so that would increase the gap between the $2,000 camera folks and the $150 folks even more. But as a matter of principle, it's hard to justify prohibiting things from being done on the computer that could just as easily be done on (some) cameras.

 

[PhotoDave219]

There's a calendar

I disagree with MKT (sorry ) - photos submitted should be as taken - no photoshop or other programs to enhance. If this is a photography competition then it should be about the photographers skill, not there ability to use a computer

There's nothing wrong (IE unethical) with basic cropping and toning of a photo.

 

[PhotoDave219]

To photoshop or not to photoshop... My camera can correct whitebalance, I can do better. My camera can guess at dynamic range, I can do better. My camera can swap colors, fix red-eye, oversaturate on demand, etc etc... all things done better with more control in post processing. You can't give $2000 DSLRs to all the $150 point-and-shoot owners, any more than you can make sure everyone has Photoshop CS3 vs the free trial copy of Elements that came with the camera.

.... And i can do better with a kodak $10 disposable camera. Your point being what?

Generally if you shoot it right the first time, you wont have to spend any time in front of a computer.

 

[CAPTAIN HOOK]

There's nothing wrong (IE unethical) with basic cropping and toning of a photo.

No, there's not - but its not as the photo was taken, which is the point I'm trying to make. A photography competition SHOULD be about the photo (as taken) and not after its been through countless stages of enhancement, blending and goodness knows what else.

 

[joanna71985]

Nibbs, thanks for having these great photo contests. Keep up the great work.

 

[PhotoDave219]

No, there's not - but its not as the photo was taken, which is the point I'm trying to make. A photography competition SHOULD be about the photo (as taken) and not after its been through countless stages of enhancement, blending and goodness knows what else.

I understand the point you're trying to make, but if i underexpose something by 1/3rd of a stop, I'm going to fix it. If there are dust marks, i'm going to fix those. If i'm over exposed a tad, i'm going to fix it. If i see a photo that has any technical error in it that could have been fixed by 30 seconds in photoshop, i'm going to think that the photographer is pretty lazy and discount their photo.

(Do i have any idea how to use 3/4s of those features in photoshop mentioned earlier by some other poster? Heck no.)

But i abide by a code of ethics in my profession and that gives you a little lattitude when it comes to fixing things in post. Its expected. Personally, I hate working up images in front of the computer. (I also hate the vinetteing that seems to be happening on the Canon 5d to give some weird falling off, but thats another story)

As for these contests, there are people around who police them who understand what's been delibretly altered and what's been simply corrected as to the way it ought to be. Its usually pretty blatent and obvious, and thankfully happens rarely.

As for what was mentioned by a previous poster, cropping, exposure, white balance and some small sharpning are all acceptable in my book. Those are minor corrections and aren't blatent alterations of what your original intention was.

 

[PhotoDave219]

How many people actually look at the pictures that closely?

Youre not suggesting that these are popularity contests, are you?

 

[DDuckFan130]

Youre not suggesting that these are popularity contests, are you?

:lookaroun

No, but if the picture is "good" (and that is mostly in the eye of the beholder), then we don't need to see a little detail to know it's "good."

I try to stay away from voting for the obviously good ones, mostly because there are other really good ones that get ignored.

These contests are for fun, so I don't see the big deal.

 

[mkt]

:I try to stay away from voting for the obviously good ones, mostly because there are other really good ones that get ignored.

Please tell me you only aim for that in these contests and not during elections that actually matter? Given the current status of the US that was a result of actions like that in 2000, your post has left an extremely bad taste in my mouth.

 

[nibblesandbits]

Hey guys...you all know I"m taking all this in...however, there's still something that I am looking for...and that's for new idea topics for next year's contest. I have a few, but I really would like some more to choose from, so we can continue to keep the contests fresh.

(You can, of course, still debate everything else that's being debated. :lol: )

 

[Laura]

As for what was mentioned by a previous poster, cropping, exposure, white balance and some small sharpning are all acceptable in my book. Those are minor corrections and aren't blatent alterations of what your original intention was.

I completely agree. I think photography contests should be about capturing a moment, conveying an emotion, and doing it creatively with a nicely composed shot. Whether or not you need to adjust the white balance or exposure a bit before you post it is not the least bit relevant to the meaning of your picture.

Haven't these contests always been more about the emotional value of the pictures and not the technicalities? So why should photo corrections matter?

Honestly, you'd have to be a pretty well established and trained photographer to nail your exposures in every shot, especially while on vacation just trying to catch things quickly. Not being able to adjust the photos afterwards makes the contests a little unfair to the people who get great shots, but can't use them because they need a little brightening or something.

I think as long as the essence of the photo remains the same there shouldn't be a problem with correcting it. Things like background removal, blurring, and adding filters and such shouldn't be allowed, but basic corrections don't change the meaning of the photo.

I honestly almost never participate in these contests anymore because I have no idea which of my pictures I've done levels adjustments or white balance adjustments to after they've come off the camera. I don't save my originals and fix all of my photos as soon as they're on the computer.

 

[joanna71985]

I have an idea for a contest. It could be a special events one (combine mnsshp, mvmcp, P&P, ect).

 

[mpoppins76]

I have an idea for a contest. It could be a special events one (combine mnsshp, mvmcp, P&P, ect).

Great idea! :sohappy:

 

[joanna71985]

Great idea! :sohappy:

Thanks Steph.

 

[DDuckFan130]

Please tell me you only aim for that in these contests and not during elections that actually matter? Given the current status of the US that was a result of actions like that in 2000, your post has left an extremely bad taste in my mouth.

Um...ok.

What that has to do with these contests I would love to know. But I don't think your rude reply merits a response so I'll leave it at that.

 

[mkt]

Um...ok.

What that has to do with these contests I would love to know. But I don't think your rude reply merits a response so I'll leave it at that.

I personally took offense to your voting style as described in your post, and I likened to it a very real situation. If you're going to waste your vote and not help out the person whose work you think is best, then I feel you're wasting it.

 

[DDuckFan130]

As far as the CONTESTS are concerned, I'd like to see us step away from focusing on individual lands like Adventureland or something.

Or, just to look at this objectively nibbs, you can see which contests fared better (i.e. who participated more) and figure out what should stay and what should go that way.

 

[DDuckFan130]

I personally took offense to your voting style as described in your post, and I likened to it a very real situation.

Like omg like yeah I like totally just vote for like what's cool or pretty.