| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/04/2006 09:07:23 AM · #1 |
My crashed plane got DQed in Failure and I don't understand the explanation for the DQ. I thought as long as a layer is used for the whole photo it was alright in basic. I don't understand what they're saying about 'just an adjustment layer' is ok and an 'adjustment layer with pixel data' is not.
I used a layer, darkened it and sharpened it and merged it with the original. Is that what they mean by pixel data?
What is 'just an ajustment layer'??? How does that effect a photo, can anybody explain that to me please?
Well I'm sorry if I did something I shouldn't, but it's obvious I didn't know I was doing something I shouldn't. Still don't know what purpose you use layers for otherwise than to change something.
Hope someone will explain it to me.
I'm not familiar with PS, I use PSP.
Message edited by author 2006-06-04 09:08:28.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 09:10:37 AM · #2 |
This is what got you into trouble:
Originally posted by Titia:
I used a layer, darkened it and sharpened it and merged it with the original. Is that what they mean by pixel data?
. |
You essentially made a copy of your image (new layer), modified that layer, and then merged it with your original photo.
If you had just applied the effect to your original layer without creating a new one, you probably wouldn't have been DQd. Read the rules carefully. Understand what you're doing when you duplicate a layer work on the new layer, and then merge with the old. |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 09:11:28 AM · #3 |
my bad, sorry
Message edited by author 2006-06-04 09:12:22. |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 09:12:20 AM · #4 |
a new adjustment layer is ok, right?
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 09:16:08 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by basic editing rules:
Layers: Only Adjustment Layers (or the non-Photoshop equivalent) may be used. An Adjustment Layer is one that does not contain any pixel data, but rather is a special, non-image layer that lets you experiment with color and tonal adjustments to an image without permanently modifying the pixels. Adjustment Layers must be applied in Normal mode. All other types of layers (including those that contain pixel data or masks) and all other blending methods (modes) are prohibited. Changing the opacity of an Adjustment Layer is permitted.
|
Any layer that does not create new pixels is fine, including adjustment layers (which only "contain" the effect, e.g., levels or curves). She seems to have duplicated a layer (new layer with pixels) edited that layer, and then merged it with her original layer. |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 09:27:37 AM · #6 |
so, I wonder, what's the difference? visually it would be the same?
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 09:30:43 AM · #7 |
Duplicate layer => desaturate => invert => gaussian blur => overlay and adjust opacity to taste is out of order then?
Unlucky, Titia, but is it not better to have loved and lost? (or something) |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 09:58:20 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by raish:
Duplicate layer => desaturate => invert => gaussian blur => overlay and adjust opacity to taste is out of order then?
Unlucky, Titia, but is it not better to have loved and lost? (or something) |
In basic, yes, that isnt allowed.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 10:53:06 AM · #9 |
Hi Titia,
I made the same mistake on this shot.
Read my notes, it might help you understand the layer with pixel data rule. (I hate that rule). I'm Sorry about your DQ.
I find a little humor that your shot is called oops and it is for the failure challenge. On to the next challenge huh? :) |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 11:10:10 AM · #10 |
i was DQed for the failure challenge too. oops! i thought because vignete affectdthe whole image it was ok. guess not...
my failure failed as well...
Message edited by author 2006-06-04 11:11:38.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 11:55:37 AM · #11 |
I got DQ'ed and ALL I did was resize my image twice.
So you can follow the rules as they are written and still get DQ'ed.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 11:58:06 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
So you can follow the rules as they are written and still get DQ'ed. |
It shows you can follow one rule but still break another. |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 12:01:00 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
So you can follow the rules as they are written and still get DQ'ed. |
It shows you can follow one rule but still break another. |
Oh yeah, the rule that says you have to meet SC's idea of what comprises photography.
Whatever that means... |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 12:13:08 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Titia:
I used a layer, darkened it and sharpened it and merged it with the original. Is that what they mean by pixel data?
What is 'just an ajustment layer'??? How does that effect a photo, can anybody explain that to me please?
Well I'm sorry if I did something I shouldn't, but it's obvious I didn't know I was doing something I shouldn't. Still don't know what purpose you use layers for otherwise than to change something.
Hope someone will explain it to me.
I'm not familiar with PS, I use PSP. |
The available adjustment layers in PSP are brightness/contrast, channel mixer, color balance, curves, hue/saturation/lightness, invert, levels, posterize and threshold. They can be found, I believe, under the Layer menu, under Adjustment Layers. Adjustment layers don't contain any pixels - they are basically instructions for how the image layers below it should look, without permanently changing the pixels on those layers. Those are all legal. Duplicating your image is creating a second layer that contains pixels. That's not allowed.
There are also different blend modes for layers. This affects how the layers are applied to the layers below it. In Basic editing, only normal mode is allowed. Some of the other available modes in PSP are darken, lighten, multiply, screen, dissolve, overlay, luminance, etc. None of those are legal in basic.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 12:14:42 PM · #15 |
| The fact you were DQed is a failure. Maybe that makes you a winner.:) |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 12:24:09 PM · #16 |
Practical information: I don't know about PSP, but in PS we have a layers palette, and each new layer shows up as a new row on that palette.
Non-adjustment layers have a single thumbnail image on them, showing what is "contained" on that layer.
Adjustment layers have TWO thumbnails: the first one shows a graphic of some sort that corresponds to the type of adjustment layer it is; double click on that graphic and you get you hue/sat dialogue box for the layer back up, or your levels dialogue box, whatever it is.
If the SECOND thumbnail on an adjustment layer is anything BUT plain white, it's not a legal adjustment layer in basic editing, because it shows there are actual pixels, or a selection, on that layer. For example, if I select the sky and make a hue/sat adjustment layer of that, the foreground will show as black and the sky as white in the thumbnail.
So, in basic editing, your only "legal" layers show two thumbnails, the second of which is always pure white, indicating NO pixels and NO selections.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 12:42:15 PM · #17 |
Does that mean that if I had been a smart Dutchie I should've just said I used sharpening, darkening and contrast and nobody would've known??? LOL
Ok, I have to study about layers a bit more, I still find it confusing when a layer contains pixels or not.
I was very proud of that photo, still am and for me it's still 4th place, my highest score ever, even though it isn't showing in the challenge.
Thank you Robert, I just saw your comment while I was writing mine. Time I learn how to use PS, it's sitting on my pc for ages, but I'm always lacking of time to study properly.
And thanks to all for your support. Now I go sit in a corner and sob, because on top of my DQ, the nice dictionary NE en EN program I had is messing up and my English-Netherlands .exe isn't working anymore and I used that a lot for my poetry writing. A new program will cost me about $200 and that's a lot of money. Damn, wonder what it will be next, because all failures come in three don't they.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 12:46:16 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Titia:
Does that mean that if I had been a smart Dutchie I should've just said I used sharpening, darkening and contrast and nobody would've known??? LOL
|
Yup, you probably would've been fine, as long as you didn't create anything that couldn't have been done legally.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 01:12:32 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by mk:
Adjustment layers don't contain any pixels - they are basically instructions for how the image layers below it should look, without permanently changing the pixels on those layers.
|
Thanks for explaining what these are. I've never seen a good explanation before, and am dissapointed that the rules don't say anything on the subject, leaving non-photoshop users in the dark. |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 01:16:03 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by titia:
...Hope someone will explain it to me. I'm not familiar with PS, I use PSP. |
The available adjustment layers in PSP are brightness/contrast, channel mixer, color balance, curves, hue/saturation/lightness, invert, levels, posterize and threshold. They can be found, I believe, under the Layer menu, under Adjustment Layers. Adjustment layers don't contain any pixels - they are basically instructions for how the image layers below it should look, without permanently changing the pixels on those layers. Those are all legal. Duplicating your image is creating a second layer that contains pixels. That's not allowed.
There are also different blend modes for layers. This affects how the layers are applied to the layers below it. In Basic editing, only normal mode is allowed. Some of the other available modes in PSP are darken, lighten, multiply, screen, dissolve, overlay, luminance, etc. None of those are legal in basic. |
Wow - what a great explanation of how layers work! I didn't realize duplicating the image created a layer with actual pixels to be merged until I read it. Yay MK! I bet a lot of people are glad Titia asked about it.
Edit - fix quotes
Message edited by author 2006-06-04 13:17:41.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 01:27:37 PM · #21 |
Dang Spazmo, that doesn't sound fair that yours got DQ'd......clearly you followed the rules to a T and still got DQ'd.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 01:55:27 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Titia:
Does that mean that if I had been a smart Dutchie I should've just said I used sharpening, darkening and contrast and nobody would've known??? LOL
|
No, if you were a smart Dutchie, you WOULD have just used sharpening, darkening and contrast.
It really bothers me to see people say things like this. Maybe it's cause I spend to much time looking at all these photos, emailing people numerous times when we have issues to try to work them out, extending submitting deadlines, going out of my way to help people and then I see comments like this and it makes me sick. Joking or not, how will I ever know in the future if I should even bother wasting MY time trying so hard to get a photo validated, when I have it in the back of my head that a person would make a joke out of something I personally put a lot of my volunteered time into.
This makes me feel like the next time I see a problem, I should just vote DQ and move on, and not spend 4 days trying to get an original, or editing steps, and extending deadline upon deadline.
Maybe I'm just grumpy today, but this seems like a slap in the face comment to me. |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 02:01:17 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by HBunch:
Maybe I'm just grumpy today, but this seems like a slap in the face comment to me. |
I'm with ya 100% on that. I spend a lot of time, myself, trying to perfect my images "legally" in basic editing, and statements like this make me wonder if I'm being a fool. Is this the new DPC Credo? "If it looks legal, lie about your steps and they can't catch you..."
Maybe I'm just grumpy today too...
R.
BTW, I'm aware that Titia DID tell the truth, so I ain't hanging this on her. But stuff like that makes you wonder how widespread the attitude is...
Message edited by author 2006-06-04 14:02:58.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2006 02:02:18 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by HBunch:
Originally posted by Titia:
Does that mean that if I had been a smart Dutchie I should've just said I used sharpening, darkening and contrast and nobody would've known??? LOL
|
No, if you were a smart Dutchie, you WOULD have just used sharpening, darkening and contrast.
It really bothers me to see people say things like this. Maybe it's cause I spend to much time looking at all these photos, emailing people numerous times when we have issues to try to work them out, extending submitting deadlines, going out of my way to help people and then I see comments like this and it makes me sick. Joking or not, how will I ever know in the future if I should even bother wasting MY time trying so hard to get a photo validated, when I have it in the back of my head that a person would make a joke out of something I personally put a lot of my volunteered time into.
This makes me feel like the next time I see a problem, I should just vote DQ and move on, and not spend 4 days trying to get an original, or editing steps, and extending deadline upon deadline.
Maybe I'm just grumpy today, but this seems like a slap in the face comment to me. |
I totally agree with you. And I'm not grumpy today :) |
|
|
|
06/04/2006 02:09:55 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by HBunch:
No, if you were a smart Dutchie, you WOULD have just used sharpening, darkening and contrast.
It really bothers me to see people say things like this. Maybe it's cause I spend to much time looking at all these photos, emailing people numerous times when we have issues to try to work them out, extending submitting deadlines, going out of my way to help people and then I see comments like this and it makes me sick. Joking or not, how will I ever know in the future if I should even bother wasting MY time trying so hard to get a photo validated, when I have it in the back of my head that a person would make a joke out of something I personally put a lot of my volunteered time into.
This makes me feel like the next time I see a problem, I should just vote DQ and move on, and not spend 4 days trying to get an original, or editing steps, and extending deadline upon deadline.
Maybe I'm just grumpy today, but this seems like a slap in the face comment to me. |
Great attitude...seriously, just the way I know the site wants their site council to act, think, and display their thoughts publicly. Thinking it's one thing, posting it for the entire community (who is supposed to look up to you) to see is just a bit out of line.
|
|
