| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/14/2003 12:16:54 PM · #176 |
What if for every no editing restrictions challenge there was also a straight from the camera only challenge?
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 12:26:51 PM · #177 |
Originally posted by amsmyth:
What if for every no editing restrictions challenge there was also a straight from the camera only challenge? |
We tried that once with the past challenge. Not only was it extremely frustrating as a photographer (although somewhat of a challenge), especially not being allowed to even crop an image, but I also think it was somewhat difficult for the voters too.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 12:27:44 PM · #178 |
Originally posted by amsmyth:
What if for every no editing restrictions challenge there was also a straight from the camera only challenge? |
Then the photography quality will drop even more with "straight from the camera images". Just the resizing alone to the 640 requirements here at DPC, will usually require some form of sharpening, its just the nature of digital photography.
People have to understand, that digital photography is dependent on software to make it tangible. Even if you take your media card from your camera right after taking a picture to have it printed, at a local lab, the software used will take care of sharpening the image down to the size you print it.
Digital photography requires the use of software. Every digital camera you buy comes with some form of editing program.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 12:33:17 PM · #179 |
was the overall technical merit that much worse in the no editing challenge we had? editing to add name of challenge--The Past
Message edited by author 2003-11-14 12:35:18.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 12:37:44 PM · #180 |
|
|
|
11/14/2003 12:40:00 PM · #181 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Why not just shoot film? |
Exactly, but then people would whine about my medium format entries compared to their 35mm. ;D |
|
|
|
11/14/2003 12:52:21 PM · #182 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Why not just shoot film? |
Good point John. There seems to be a large group of people here that believe digital photography is closly related to point and shoot-drop your film off at the drug store- style photography. I think alot of people here also believe the restricted editing rules here give them hope of winning also.
Ribbon winning on this site has nothing to do with the editing methods. There are way too many other important factors that carry more weight like. ie: photographers experience, camera equipment ( to some extent ), some luck, etc.
Rules or no rules, you still need to know how to use your camera, understand exposure, have the ability to make a pleasing composition, etc....these are far more important to you to win, than the restrictive editing rules.
These rules here did not make me a better photographer....learning how to use my digital camera and the software did. The challenge format has made me shoot things I may never have, but these rules, didnt force me to learn my cameras capabilities....Wanting to be a better photographer did that!
Dont use the crutch of the rules being your reason to become better at using your camera. The current rules allow you to create crap too. Take advantage of the people here wanting to help, and learn all there is to learn.
Message edited by author 2003-11-14 12:52:45.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:02:15 PM · #183 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Why not just shoot film? |
I have been. And you know what, for the ones that I'm printing large to sell - I'm spot editing the negative, getting the printer to dodge and burn it, doing selective colour edits and so on.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:05:26 PM · #184 |
how do you spot edit a negative?
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Why not just shoot film? |
I have been. And you know what, for the ones that I'm printing large to sell - I'm spot editing the negative, getting the printer to dodge and burn it, doing selective colour edits and so on. |
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:11:14 PM · #185 |
"There seems to be a large group of people here that believe digital photography is closly related to point and shoot-drop your film off at the drug store- style photography."
Do you think learning about DOF is related to P and S photography?
Do you think learning to select the right lens for an interchangeable lens camera is P and S?
Look at what people are asking about in the forums.
Look at what people are marking as helpful among comments.
Message edited by author 2003-11-14 13:12:18. |
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:14:43 PM · #186 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
"There seems to be a large group of people here that believe digital photography is closly related to point and shoot-drop your film off at the drug store- style photography."
Do you think learning about DOF is related to P and S photography?
Do you think learning to select the right lens for an interchangeable lens camera is P and S?
Look at what people are asking about in the forums.
Look at what people are marking as helpful among comments. |
My above statement is true... it says a large group of people here, and I have come to that understanding from the many of posts I have read here and by looking and voting on 100 percent of the images in challenges that I have entered.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:23:05 PM · #187 |
Originally posted by goodtempo:
how do you spot edit a negative?
|
You use brushes and dyes to paint the negative, to build up density.
I've been working with printers who will do the negative retouching and print artwork for the final image. Basically I describe what I want done and they do it - this is all pretty standard for film techniques.
It can also be done by scanning the image and working it in photoshop, but most of the work I've been involved with has not used digital processes at all, but still does a huge amount more than is done within the rules here - with the purpose of producing a natural final image.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:29:50 PM · #188 |
| It's true that it is your opinion, but does not make it the truth. |
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:34:06 PM · #189 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
It's true that it is your opinion, but does not make it the truth. |
Many of them vocally express the opinion in the forums. You'll see that in the repeated claims that the current editing rules are too open and that people should enter straight from the camera for example.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:34:40 PM · #190 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by goodtempo:
how do you spot edit a negative?
|
You use brushes and dyes to paint the negative, to build up density.
I've been working with printers who will do the negative retouching and print artwork for the final image. Basically I describe what I want done and they do it - this is all pretty standard for film techniques.
It can also be done by scanning the image and working it in photoshop, but most of the work I've been involved with has not used digital processes at all, but still does a huge amount more than is done within the rules here - with the purpose of producing a natural final image. |
Another method I have seen used to edit a film image (especially with tranparency film to avoid the increase in contrast associated with printing Ilfochromes or other direct positive prints) is to dupe an image onto a larger format color negative, then retouch that internegative and then print using color negative print materials.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:38:54 PM · #191 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Another method I have seen used to edit a film image (especially with tranparency film to avoid the increase in contrast associated with printing Ilfochromes or other direct positive prints) is to dupe an image onto a larger format color negative, then retouch that internegative and then print using color negative print materials. |
Sounds good - I'm really ignorant about most of the processes used, both for digital and film though I can certainly see the possibilties from the final product that I've witnessed.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:55:14 PM · #192 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Another method I have seen used to edit a film image (especially with tranparency film to avoid the increase in contrast associated with printing Ilfochromes or other direct positive prints) is to dupe an image onto a larger format color negative, then retouch that internegative and then print using color negative print materials. |
Sounds good - I'm really ignorant about most of the processes used, both for digital and film though I can certainly see the possibilties from the final product that I've witnessed. |
I was always deathly afraid to try retouching film myself when I worked at a photo lab. I didn't mind using spot-tone on B&W prints, but that was as far as I ever went. The people who did this kind of work and got paid for it are VERY VERY good at it.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 01:59:39 PM · #193 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I was always deathly afraid to try retouching film myself when I worked at a photo lab. I didn't mind using spot-tone on B&W prints, but that was as far as I ever went. The people who did this kind of work and got paid for it are VERY VERY good at it. |
Yup, I've seen prints roughly 11x14 that cost $5000.00 mainly due to the additional retouching work that's been done to them - they are just amazingly great pictures - from fantastic original captures.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 02:16:07 PM · #194 |
| I've done color and B&W printing. I also have done print retouching with a brush. Some of it was major like removing a pole. I use to make 4x5 internegs from my 35mm slides all the time. I'm glad we now have digital! So the arguement about retouching digital photographs and how it's not part of "taking" the photograph crackes me up. You truelly don't have full control unless you master all steps from capture to the final product. That's photography. |
|
|
|
11/14/2003 02:39:20 PM · #195 |
"Many of them vocally express the opinion in the forums. You'll see that in the repeated claims that the current editing rules are too open and that people should enter straight from the camera for example."
I don't see that opinion expressed in the forums nearly as much as the one that we should loosen the rules. Those who want them changed sometimes give me the impression that they think they can get them changed merely by keeping up the steady drumbeat. In almost every forum thread someone finds a way to bring in the idea that loosening the rules would make this a better site. But there very persistence is evidence in itself that this method won't work.
I really wish this topic would stop coming up again and again in the forums. Until the admins/site council decide to take some action, this really is a dead horse. And by "take some action" I don't mean further discussion, debating, voting, surveying or polling. The lack of action indicates that the rules will not change soon. I'm getting used to it.
Message edited by author 2003-11-14 14:59:39. |
|
|
|
11/14/2003 02:54:21 PM · #196 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
But there very persistence is evidence in itelf that this method won't work.
|
I don't quite understand that logic, but
Originally posted by coolhar:
The lack of action indicates that the rules will not change soon. I'm getting used to it. |
My understanding is that this is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 03:01:56 PM · #197 |
Not too keep repeating myself, but Ill say it again:
What matters the most if you are a beginning photographer or seasoned pro, happens before you press the shutter button.
The restrictive rules here do not make you have just as much of a chance of winning a ribbon then the guy next to you.
Learning how to use your camera has nothing to do with the rules here.
Saying you are happy with the way things are, will stunt your growth as a photographer. There is no end to learning photography. It is a life long adventure.
Enough said.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 03:37:08 PM · #198 |
Originally posted by scab-lab:
What matters the most if you are a beginning photographer or seasoned pro, happens before you press the shutter button. |
Then no need for any editing, eh? :)
I've been beaten down through attrition - I don't care one way or the other. However, I an finding it hard to keep track of who's on which side of the fence. Might I suggest an addition to the info under our names at the left: "Position on free-editing restricts: For/Against/Ambivalent". |
|
|
|
11/14/2003 03:58:32 PM · #199 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Originally posted by scab-lab:
What matters the most if you are a beginning photographer or seasoned pro, happens before you press the shutter button. |
Then no need for any editing, eh? :)
I've been beaten down through attrition - I don't care one way or the other. However, I an finding it hard to keep track of who's on which side of the fence. Might I suggest an addition to the info under our names at the left: "Position on free-editing restricts: For/Against/Ambivalent". |
Yes, it matters the most before you press the shutter. But Scott, you know, post processing is a part of digital photography. I dont think anyone here will argue that point.
Message edited by author 2003-11-14 15:59:06.
|
|
|
|
11/14/2003 05:45:31 PM · #200 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Originally posted by scab-lab:
What matters the most if you are a beginning photographer or seasoned pro, happens before you press the shutter button. |
Then no need for any editing, eh? :)
I've been beaten down through attrition - I don't care one way or the other. However, I an finding it hard to keep track of who's on which side of the fence. Might I suggest an addition to the info under our names at the left: "Position on free-editing restricts: For/Against/Ambivalent". |
.../Other for me.
|
|
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: 03/12/2025 04:59:43 PM EDT.
