| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/25/2007 09:25:46 AM · #376 |
Originally posted by flavioalima:
I think minimal editing is great. It offers people who do not know/want/like to use Photoshop a more balanced competition. It's also great to bring us back to the time when we must do it all with the camera. Anyway, those who don't like the rules may always enter in another challenge... |
Yes, any who don't like the rules *may* enter another challenge....including those who *don't* know/want/like to use Photoshop.
In general, I have found the biggest detractors of it have the highest level of ignorance about it.
Learn how to use it.....it's fun, helpful, amazing in its ability to help you get what you want from a pic.
And the best part?
If you get a piucture that is in elemental purity?
You do NOT have to use it!
It will not kidnap your picture and put red lipstick where there isn't supposed to be any!
It just sits there waiting to help you like an amazing concierge.
The people who are *really* good at it will use it and you will *NOT* be able to tell. So much for the purity aspect.
I didn't even *have* Photoshop before I got here last July and the camera I have is my first digital.
Before that it was 30 years with film and no clue.
Not only have I learned how to Photoshop the sh*t out of anything I want since joining DPC, but I'm a better PHOTOGRAPHER, because one of the PS/Photography junkies here not only took the time to teach me how to hammer a picture right off the charts, but he got me to understand the relationship of aperture, shutter speed, what that little scale was in my viewfinder (Exposure Meter), and how they all work together along with all kinds of little things you cannot learn in a class but that you develop over time with the help of someone.
And I understand it well enough that now I go for the shot for the effect, the story it tells, and from what perspective I seek, and I don't worry so much about how it will turn out 'cause I understand how to set my camera to make it come out the way I want.
I learned how to use a *camera* here!
Yeah, I use photoshop, but as an aide, not as a medium.....it allows me to get that image that was in my mind's eye if it didn't download as I remember it.
I never had a camera off full automatic in my whole life......now I don't shoot anything but full manual and RAW.
I *do* let the autofocus do its thing though 'cause it's FAST!!!!8>)
And shooting in RAW is another opportunity to *finish* the picture after I get home with my shots. PS is a wonderful *tool* if you let your preconceived notions get out of the way. It'll let you clean that sensor dust off a pic if you didn't realize it was there when you left the house.....there's no rules in photography for your own pleasure, just in certain challenges, so why not be able to save an other wise irreparably damaged pic?
|
|
|
|
01/25/2007 12:19:28 PM · #377 |
Now that there's another thread asking about multiple exposures in-camera, can we PLEASE get a clear statement as to whether it will be allowed in minimal editing?
It was discussed in a very confused way earlier in this thread, but either it wasn't resolved or I missed it.
It it allowed or not? if not, how do you reconcile the exact same wording meaning different things in different rule sets?
|
|
|
|
01/25/2007 12:21:07 PM · #378 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Now that there's another thread asking about multiple exposures in-camera, can we PLEASE get a clear statement as to whether it will be allowed in minimal editing? |
the short answer is that right now it is allowed, but we are discussing changes to ALL of the rulesets that, if implemented, will be announced with definite starting dates.
edited to add: (go colts!) for  _eug
Message edited by author 2007-01-25 12:21:42. |
|
|
|
01/25/2007 03:09:12 PM · #379 |
| I have to admit, that I never tought this would be a set of rules that I would enjoy, but I am! I am learning sooo much! before this rule set, I just took crappy pictures thinking that later I could fix them in ps (they still look crappy) but now, I have to know how to get the effect I want from the camera, and how to make a good composition from the visor... (and... my pictures are still crappy, but now I just don`t have to waist time editing them! :P) |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:23:17 PM · #380 |
| Wondering if the border restriction could be reconsidered as the rules are tweaked. It has no effect on the editing of the photo and is merely an element of presentation. |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:27:28 PM · #381 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Wondering if the border restriction could be reconsidered as the rules are tweaked. It has no effect on the editing of the photo and is merely an element of presentation. |
no way. presentation is all that a photo is or does.
ok, I'd better stop now. me arguing against you will probably only further your cause.
|
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:28:38 PM · #382 |
If I were to tweak these rules (which I don't think are bad), I would allow cropping. It seems a bit overly restrictive to not allow such a basic tool. Not having cropping also precludes any aspect ratio outside your sensor. No square, no 1.25:1, no anything.
Just my opinion. |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:30:03 PM · #383 |
considering that every inch they give becomes an argument for two inches, I think they should stand fast.
|
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:32:28 PM · #384 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If I were to tweak these rules (which I don't think are bad), I would allow cropping. It seems a bit overly restrictive to not allow such a basic tool. Not having cropping also precludes any aspect ratio outside your sensor. No square, no 1.25:1, no anything.
Just my opinion. |
I would agree with this but it must be in a normal format.
BTW is it ok to ,when resizing my entry for web, make it a square format. so i go to the resize screen and uncheck the box to constrain and make it 640x640? |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:33:38 PM · #385 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If I were to tweak these rules (which I don't think are bad), I would allow cropping. It seems a bit overly restrictive to not allow such a basic tool. Not having cropping also precludes any aspect ratio outside your sensor. No square, no 1.25:1, no anything.
Just my opinion. |
This is one of the better aspects of the minimal editing rules. |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:34:11 PM · #386 |
Originally posted by Elvis_L:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If I were to tweak these rules (which I don't think are bad), I would allow cropping. It seems a bit overly restrictive to not allow such a basic tool. Not having cropping also precludes any aspect ratio outside your sensor. No square, no 1.25:1, no anything.
Just my opinion. |
I would agree with this but it must be in a normal format.
BTW is it ok to ,when resizing my entry for web, make it a square format. so i go to the resize screen and uncheck the box to constrain and make it 640x640? |
Wouldn't that horrendously distort your photo? Either way, right now I highly doubt that's legal. |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:34:58 PM · #387 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
In general, I have found the biggest detractors of it have the highest level of ignorance about it.
(...)
The people who are *really* good at it will use it and you will *NOT* be able to tell. So much for the purity aspect.
|
Don't get me wrong. I'm not a detractor of Photoshop, nor a purist. I do edit my pictures, with the Gimp (well, I'm learning...). I just think it's good to have a rule set under which we can compete with less editing.
Don't get angry :-) |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 05:57:40 PM · #388 |
Originally posted by flavioalima:
I just think it's good to have a rule set under which we can compete with less editing. |
I consider myself to be an above average PSer (pretty darn good at it really) but I do like the min editing rule set myself.
The reason I like it the most is that it helps to teach good camera skills. PS goes a long way, but it's always helpful to start out with the best image possible. The Minimum Editing rule set is one of the most valuable rules sets this site has, IMO.
PS is a valuable tool. But a good photo always starts in the camera.
Just to make an example. This would fall under Expert editing rules, but had I not had the ability to understand consistency in exposure, PSing this together would have been much harder (if not impossible).
|
|
|
|
02/17/2007 06:43:45 PM · #389 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Wondering if the border restriction could be reconsidered as the rules are tweaked. It has no effect on the editing of the photo and is merely an element of presentation. |
no way. presentation is all that a photo is or does.
ok, I'd better stop now. me arguing against you will probably only further your cause. |
That's about the lamest argument I've ever heard, but I'm all for the second half of it. |
|
|
|
02/17/2007 07:15:44 PM · #390 |
| I support this one hundred percent, I like photoshop, but using it when it is not necessary defiles the image and encourages photographers to take bad photographs. |
|
|
|
02/18/2007 12:45:52 PM · #391 |
I think this is a great addition. IMO if you have expert editing you should have the opposite minimal editing too. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:06:01 AM · #392 |
| During editing, how many times can a person hit the sharpen button? |
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:09:03 AM · #393 |
Originally posted by undieyatch:
During editing, how many times can a person hit the sharpen button? |
if you mean CS2's built in sharpening tool ... as many as you want i guess.
if it's a programed unsharpen mask or high pass sharpen, then you can't use it at all.
i submitted my tree photo straight out of the box ... zero edit ... damn it was hard. i soooooo wanted to edit it! :)
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:11:44 AM · #394 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by levyj413:
could someone from the SC please clarify whether you can sharpen more than once? Scalvert said something indicating no, but the rules don't say anything about it. |
Good point. That was in the behind-the-scenes discussions, but it doesn't look like it made it into the rules, so more than once should be fine. |
Thanks super dave...... I also found this within the thread |
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:23:29 AM · #395 |
going from memory here, but I think it was sharpening twice that got scalvert dq'ed the last time.
will look when I get a bit of time later, if no one else has clarified it. |
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:28:32 AM · #396 |
I recall that it was resizing twice that got him DQ'd.
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:36:24 AM · #397 |
Originally posted by karmat:
going from memory here, but I think it was sharpening twice that got scalvert dq'ed the last time.
will look when I get a bit of time later, if no one else has clarified it. |
It was resizing twice that got Shannon DQd - sharpening multiple times is allowable, but you can only resize one. I remember the funny stuff! ;)
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:37:54 AM · #398 |
Originally posted by idnic:
I remember the funny stuff! ;) |
Well, we did tease him about it for 3 days straight... you should remember :-P
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:38:34 AM · #399 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by idnic:
I remember the funny stuff! ;) |
Well, we did tease him about it for 3 days straight... you should remember :-P |
Ahhhhh, good times, good times!
|
|
|
|
02/20/2007 11:48:58 AM · #400 |
More questions concerning minimal editing software usage.......
Open or Convert to Profile
Since convert to gray scale is allowed, and I am assuming that one could in photoshop access this legal function via: Edit>Convert to Profile>Destination Space....... Is this allowed? yes or no?
Some cameras which may allow one to shoot jpeg in various cc is obviously is allowed. Various software open in various cc or have options to choose a cc. Is it allowed to open or use a working colour profile other than sRGB IEC61966-2.1? yes or no?
Photoshop in Convert to Profile>Conversion Options has default settings including Engine and Intent, which manipulate output in various ways. What if any are the rules concerning these settings?
|
|
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 04:58:51 PM EDT.
