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

DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> Some reminders about requesting DQ
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 76, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/17/2004 11:06:35 AM · #1
1. Not meeting the challenge is not grounds for DQ. If you feel a photo doesn't meet the challenge, you may adjust your vote accordinly but please do not recommend the photo for disqualification.

2. If you're going to request a DQ, please help us to understand why you are requesting it. You don't need to copy and paste entire blocks of the rules, but we need something more than "it looks edited" or "something's wrong" in order to check out what you're seeing.

3. You may notice that there's now a new box when requesting an admin note for your own photo. This box is for you to enter the reason you think you need one. If you want a note, we really need for there to be a reason in this box. If you write something like "what the heck goes in this box?" you probably aren't getting a note.

With the increase in challenge entries lately, there is of course an increase in DQ requests. It helps us to process them more quickly if you can make sure you are adhering to these guidelines.

Thanks!
02/08/2005 02:04:06 AM · #2
I received a DQ requesting today, but I don´t know what kind of proof I´ve to send you. I was reading the rules and it says in this case you´ve to send the EXIF file, but my question is how can I send the Exif File. My exif file sizes is about 4 MB and my mail doesn´t permit me to send this quantity of information. I need your help.

Thanks,
02/08/2005 02:15:37 AM · #3
There should be a link for you to upload your original, unaltered image file, just as it came from the camera. The upload is not an email process, so it not subject to the size limitation, although it may take a long time if you have a slow connection. It should look/work a lot like the way you upload the entry in the first place.
02/08/2005 02:18:47 AM · #4
Thanks again... I´m gonna do it
09/09/2005 05:15:19 PM · #5
Is the picture and EXIF information downloaded into Photoshop proof, or would I actually need to go straight from my camera?
09/09/2005 05:21:46 PM · #6
Originally posted by chaimelle:

Is the picture and EXIF information downloaded into Photoshop proof, or would I actually need to go straight from my camera?


the term "straight from the camera" means an un altered, un edited image, as if was JUST transfered to your PC from the camera.

you need to becareful as some programs auto rotate images thus causing that photo to be altered, so now you are stuck with an "edited" original before YOU began to process and edit the photo.

when editing your photos always do a save AS and rename it so you still maintain an original UN edited version, this is your "Negative" for proof

example - original file name is IMG_0023.JPG, edit version - IMG_0023_butterfly.JPG

James

Message edited by author 2005-09-09 17:23:43.
09/09/2005 05:23:32 PM · #7
Originally posted by chaimelle:

Is the picture and EXIF information downloaded into Photoshop proof, or would I actually need to go straight from my camera?

You need the file as it came from the camera. Once the file has been edited, it no longer can be validated (since anything at all may have been done to it). If you shot in RAW, send the RAW file. If you shot in JPEG, send the unedited JPEG file, as it came from the camera.
Note:
You should always keed unedited copies of your originals in a separate folder so that you have them if needed (to submit proof, or in case you want to re-edit). Make a copy of the original, and work on that for JPEG, and for RAW, simply save the converted file in a separate place.
Always remember to back up your originals and processed files too!
09/09/2005 05:29:56 PM · #8
Originally posted by kirbic:

and for RAW, simply save the converted file in a separate place.


Or save the RAW conversion settings in a different file and leave the original as it is, takes up 99% less space.
09/09/2005 07:25:37 PM · #9
Not sure I'm reading your response correctly, but if you shot it in RAW, we'd need the original RAW, not a derivative .jpg from it... so don't ditch the RAW :)

Originally posted by Azrifel:

Or save the RAW conversion settings in a different file and leave the original as it is, takes up 99% less space.


Message edited by author 2005-09-09 19:26:23.
09/09/2005 07:37:53 PM · #10
No, of course, don't ditch the raw. It is like this:
a) Untouched Raw file 6mb
b) Raw settings file 0,01mb

Combine a) + b) to get c) Edited Raw file

Instead of
a) Untouched Raw file 6mb
c) Edited Raw file 6mb

It depends a lot on your workflow of course. The 99% was my mistake. 49% would be about right.

Originally posted by alansfreed:

Not sure I'm reading your response correctly, but if you shot it in RAW, we'd need the original RAW, not a derivative .jpg from it... so don't ditch the RAW :)

Originally posted by Azrifel:

Or save the RAW conversion settings in a different file and leave the original as it is, takes up 99% less space.

01/11/2006 07:34:36 PM · #11
Would the Windows XP rotate feature make an "edited" file?
Right-clicking on an image in explorer and selecting Rotate Clockwise/Counter Clockwise.
02/16/2006 02:00:22 PM · #12
Originally posted by AlptraumZA:

Would the Windows XP rotate feature make an "edited" file?
Right-clicking on an image in explorer and selecting Rotate Clockwise/Counter Clockwise.


I was about to say no, because it doesn't save it, but then I remembered hearing someone mention that it does have some effect. I tried it on an image I have saved, and it came up with this:

Rotation
Because of the dimensions of this picture, rotating it might permanently reduce its quality. Rotating a picture automatically saves it using the original name. To save a backup copy first, see "Copy an image" in Help.

...so I would say it is an actual "change" and I wouldn't do it.

The odd thing is that I've never come across the message. I rotate images all the time in Windows Preview, and it's never given me that message. I hope I'm not screwing up images before I even start messing with them... it's possible I've turned off that warning. (Right now I'm on my mother's fresh-from-the-box version of XP.) That's slightly worrisome.

I guess rotating it in ACDC doesn't change the image? I don't really use Windows Viewer much. I definitely prefer ACDC.

When I do figure out what images I might want to use in the future (ie: Anything that's clear and well-shot), I automatically copy all of them and stick 'em in a seperate folder for editing, and leave the originals totally alone.
02/16/2006 02:03:15 PM · #13
Originally posted by Cyndane:

I guess rotating it in ACDC doesn't change the image? I don't really use Windows Viewer much. I definitely prefer ACDC.


yes, ACDSee does change the image!!!!

when uploading an original, go ahead an upload the TRUE original even if it's sideways. once any application has touched the file (importing using ACDSee, for example), the file is no longer the "original."
02/16/2006 02:11:30 PM · #14
Originally posted by muckpond:

Originally posted by Cyndane:

I guess rotating it in ACDC doesn't change the image? I don't really use Windows Viewer much. I definitely prefer ACDC.


yes, ACDSee does change the image!!!!

when uploading an original, go ahead an upload the TRUE original even if it's sideways. once any application has touched the file (importing using ACDSee, for example), the file is no longer the "original."


So the best thing is to upload it from the camera, and immediately make copies of everything? I upload through whatever program it is Canon uses... that doesn't affect the image does it? I don't import via ACDSee, but I immediately view all of the images through it.

And on a side note (whispered real quiet-like) ... does that mean I don't have true originals for the photos I have submitted here...? I viewed them all in ACDSee before deciding which to use...
02/16/2006 02:17:29 PM · #15
The "best" way is to get a card reader (often less than $10), take the card from the camera and insert it in the reader, and then use the mouse to drag the files into an "originals" folder. This applies to either Mac or Windows systems -- this way you are only copying the files without opening ot "importing" them into anything, and your camera doesn't have to be connected to anything.

You are are shooting a lot (like at a live event) you can be transferring files from one card while you continue to shoot more pictures to a second card.
02/16/2006 03:31:58 PM · #16
Originally posted by Cyndane:

So the best thing is to upload it from the camera, and immediately make copies of everything? I upload through whatever program it is Canon uses... that doesn't affect the image does it? I don't import via ACDSee, but I immediately view all of the images through it.

And on a side note (whispered real quiet-like) ... does that mean I don't have true originals for the photos I have submitted here...? I viewed them all in ACDSee before deciding which to use...

Why use the Canon software to upload from your camera if you're not going to use that program to view your shots? You can do a copy & paste, or drag, like GeneralE is talking about, even if you don't have a card reader. Your camera, when connected directly to your computer with it's USB cable, should be showing up in My Computer.
02/16/2006 04:07:07 PM · #17
I don't think I will ever have to send in a validation because I'm stuck in the mid 5's but I would like to see if the way I save my images are ok. I would hate to get a top 5 and the EXIF be destroyed.

1. I take the CF card out of my camera and put in my reader.
2. If RAW I go to RSE and convert to TIFF keeping the original.
3. I go to PS/CS and use the converted file to work with.
4. When I'm happy with the results of editing I save as .psd or .tiff with no compression.
5. I then resize my image add a little USM and add border and save for web in jpg format @150K or less.

Since RSE converted my original to TIFF and I retain my Original it should hold all EXIF data unedited, correct?

I end up with 3 to 4 files:
1. IMG_5000.CR2
2. IMG_5000E.tif or psd ("E" for editing version)
3. IMG_5000P.jpg ("P" for print version)
4. IMG_5000W.jpg ("W" for web or)

Does it seem like I'm doing the right thing?

Message edited by author 2006-02-16 16:39:28.
02/16/2006 04:10:56 PM · #18
Your .CR2 file (I assume CS was a typo?) would be the original, and should be fine since you're not saving over the file your camera captured.
02/16/2006 04:19:40 PM · #19
Question:

for the raw file, xxx.cr2, if I pick wb, exposure compensation, etc. and proceed to create a jpg in PS, even if I never save the file the next day when I open the same xxx.cr2 in PS, it remembers the settings I used, even the cropping if I used cropping.

That information is stored WITH THE cr2 file, but it is 'on the side', the actual image contents is not modified.

Do you accept such images as proof?
02/16/2006 04:25:35 PM · #20
Yes. The CR2 file itself isn't modified. It's just tagged with user settings.
02/16/2006 04:39:53 PM · #21
Originally posted by scalvert:

Your .CR2 file (I assume CS was a typo?) would be the original, and should be fine since you're not saving over the file your camera captured.

Yes it was a typo, thanks.
02/16/2006 04:42:25 PM · #22
Originally posted by AlptraumZA:

Would the Windows XP rotate feature make an "edited" file?
Right-clicking on an image in explorer and selecting Rotate Clockwise/Counter Clockwise.
Clicking the Rotate icons in xp's Windows Picture and Fax viewer is notorious for deleteing EXIF data so I would say it was chancy at best to rotate with right-click.
02/16/2006 04:43:07 PM · #23
I use Nikon View to download the photos from my card reader to the computer for two reasons:

1. It allows me to batch rename all of the files as they are transfered form the camera (I take a TON of pictures and need a better way to keep things organized other than the cameras numbered names in a bunch of different folders)

2. It also allows me to add all of the shooting data into the IPTC field of the photo. This makes it very easy to copy/paste all of the shooting data when I display an image on the web, etc..

Now, does this mean that I have an illegal original file if ever questioned?

Thanks,

Kevin.
02/16/2006 05:28:54 PM · #24
flyfish: yes.

unfortunately, ANY software that touches the files puts a fingerprint on the EXIF information that means that it's not valid as an original file. the reason being that some software packages (like ACDSee, for one -- don't remember NikonView) have the ability to make rudimentary edits to files.

with modified EXIF information, we have no way of guaranteeing that no edits were done to the file.

02/16/2006 05:59:31 PM · #25
Originally posted by coolhar:

Why use the Canon software to upload from your camera if you're not going to use that program to view your shots? You can do a copy & paste, or drag, like GeneralE is talking about, even if you don't have a card reader. Your camera, when connected directly to your computer with it's USB cable, should be showing up in My Computer.

I've just never tried it any other way. I will now, though. :) Thanks so much for this thread.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/20/2018 07:15:25 PM

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 © 2001-2018 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 04/20/2018 07:15:25 PM EDT.