• Life Advice & Visual Arts Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    🌌 Share Your Dreams! 🌌
    📸 15 Years of Photo Contests 📸
  • LAVA Moderator: Shinji Ikari

SO Photography Contest Discussion!!

I just read the first few posts in this thread (will read the rest later), but has anybody thought of changing the rules about image processing?

This may come as a shock to some of you, but every entry I've submitted (3, with 2 winners) has been post-processed to re-create the colors of the image that were actually present when I took the photo. The point-and-shoot that I had available at the time of my photos wasn't able to replicate the colors of the landscape, so I went into CS2 and tweaked them back to normal.

If you want to disqualify my past entries and award the win to the second place finisher, that is fine. But I think post-processing up to the point of "normalizing" the image should be allowed.


For the record, all my future entries will be film, so no processing will be required ;)
 
The contest is on-your-honor, starting with that the photo has to be taken by you. Depending on your gear, you might have to make changes in order for the photo to even turn out. For example, those who shoot RAW and not JPG have no choice but to post-process. From my perspective, if the photo you post is faithful to the scene, that's enough for me. I don't make the rules, but I don't think you should second-guess posting a faithful photo. Only you know what the scene looked like to your eyes.

I have seen many photos posted, one or two of mine included, that were NOT faithful to the scene but were UNprocessed. They were not faithful in that I think they were a bit oversaturated. Colors like that often times don't exist in real life. But I left these the way they were because that's the way they came out of my camera. I could even turn my camera to a "Vivid" JPG mode and have the colors approach acid trip visuals. Yet that wouldn't violate the rules because that's the way they come out of the camera. So it's hard to get one set of rules that work for everyone. But a faithful photo seems to me like it should pass muster.
 
Johnny1 said:
I could even turn my camera to a "Vivid" JPG mode and have the colors approach acid trip visuals. Yet that wouldn't violate the rules because that's the way they come out of the camera.
Click to expand...
eh
thats how this thread started
i couldn't use a pic cuz you where not allowed to use some function on the cam while others functions where ok...

i think that the thread started in regard of the facts that what you could do in photoshop is becoming more and more available inside the camera

so it was a "where do we draw the line" thing at first imo
(i might be wrong)
 
^ Oh, sorry if I misunderstood the rules. So, to save me reading the 10 pages again my Québécois friend with the difficult name and great taste in women, are there rules about in-camera settings? If so, what is the rule with respect thereto? :)

Is it just "no images that are heavily manipulated"? What to do about contrast and saturation settings inside the camera?

Or if you don't know this particular rule, can anyone help me out?
 
^yeah i cant help you
i stopped participating in those
i wasnt into the contest, regulation, rules... part of it
i can already post whatever i want in the pic thread in the lounge, so i stay there
 
Johnny, contrast and saturation settings in the camera do not go against the rules here, IMO. These settings are on pretty much all cameras, so the photographer should not be penalised for what core settings their camera chooses to take the photo with.

The earlier debate was about an eye-candy feature belonging to a specific model camera (perhaps a few others, but certainly not the majority) which had this enhanced feature of applying or enhancing colours. Again, this is not a traditional core feature of a camera (yes, we can get into deeper semantics here), so the prior argument was that this was manipulation.

Personally, I'd love to continue the discussion, in a civil manner, and see if there may be more, varied and different opinions out there. All it takes is one to stand out as something not thought of before. Please feel free to keep adding here.


For the present moment, we will be conducting the contests as usual. Rules, for now, remain simple - please stick to cropping and resizing.

Weren't we working on an Arts forum? ;) Rather than bend the rails under a smooth-running train, why not set up another set of tracks for another train... and another... (I'm talking about starting other photo contest threads, this time each with a very different set of rules. Perhaps have Amateur/Advanced? I'll shut up now, sorry. That was branching off everywhere! LOL

The photo manipulation thing? Core feature on camera - OK. Eye candy feature on camera (add colour, clouds, frame, etc.) - Not OK.
 
What about raw files? You can modify the levels, saturation etc. and output it however you'd like.

I've said this before, but I don't have any problems with photo manipulation. In traditional photography, you can use different lenses, fancy lighting and dodge/burn photos in a darkroom... so what's wrong with digital processing? To me, it's all about artistic vision and the final product. People can choose to vote however they wish. I'm not arguing this, I just like to state my opinion every few pages ;)
 
chrissie said:
... so what's wrong with digital processing? To me, it's all about artistic vision and the final product. People can choose to vote however they wish. I'm not arguing this, I just like to state my opinion every few pages ;)
Click to expand...
Hi Chrissie. Thank you for adding, again, valid points.

Personally, I have nothing against all modes of digital photo processing. The photo contest constantly attracts new participants, some of whom had lurked for weeks and maybe months. The reason this contest attracts a good number of participants, IMHO, is that it is a down to earth "anyone with a camera" can do it.

If we were to introduce the editing talent which we have here to a new set of rules, which would allow post-capture editing, I believe we would see a pronounced polarity develop in the contest. Entries straight from the camera would garner the same popularity, but the show stoppers would most likely constantly be the edited, highlighted, touched up pieces.

This is why I mentioned in my reply to Johnny1 that, IMHO, the way to go forward would be to branch out the contest into either levels or edited/unedited, or whatever else makes the most sense.
 
Well I see nobody is going to directly refer to my photos... :p

I'm done posting digital images, so from here on out it'll be scanned B&W film.
 
Changed said:
Well I see nobody is going to directly refer to my photos... :p

I'm done posting digital images, so from here on out it'll be scanned B&W film.
Click to expand...

Changed, it is a bit of a predicament. To get this thread back to the regular topic, I'm going to take the discussion of your already processed entries to PM. I'll try to have something in your inbox tomorrow. Thanks.
 
the news by changed has saddened me, but then i'm falling for taking this light hearted contest a little too seriously, but nonetheless i am hurt a little. :\
 
I've lurked for months and only just joined in. I don't understand the rules re manipulation, so I left my photos completely unedited.

It seemed obvious to me that Changed had turned up the volume knob on the colour. Regardless, I still voted for his winning entry on landscapes.

But the next week, I just couldn't bring myself to vote for his Swiss alpine roads, even though it was obviously the 'best' picture. I just felt the competition had become about the guy/girl with the best camera and/or best digital manipulation.

I think it needs clearing up but I don't know how. Yeah, maybe two separate competitions (enhanced/non-enhanced). Or people say what they have done to their picture and we as judges use our discretion to vote on whatever basis we feel is right.
 
I feel bad that you guys think I cheated you.


I really don't see what the harm is in correcting the picture to reflect what the actual landscape looked like, and that's all I did.

It may look over the top compared to the other photos, but those of you who have been to the Swiss Alps can attest to it's lushness and beauty.

You can revoke my previous wins and I'll delete my photos, but I am going to enter my B/W film once my new camera arrives.
 
Just for comparison, which do you like better?


land1.jpg


NSFW:
land2edited.jpg
 
Last edited:
Personally I prefer the ones without the NSFW tags - to me they look more "natural" although I really couldn't say which had been adjusted. I know what you mean about needing to alter the colours to return them to "reality". Some of mine come out in all sort of weird colours but I rather like it so leave them.

When I first took up photography I was using B&W film and, of course, you manipulate the image in the darkroom to achieve the desred effect. So really virtually all photography as been altered in some way or another. Tis a bit of a conundrum and I can see both sides.

I think it may be best to go with keeping the rules as they are and maybe having a seperate competition for more processed images. It would be a real shame if new participants were put off from entering because they can't use Photoshop. Perhaps a seperate comp as SA - and undoubtedly others - have suggested would be better. Alterations for dramatic effect but not so completely distorted as to be unrecognisable as photography.

Don't know. Rambled too much to know what I'm typing anymore, but hope some sense can be made :).

PS - My entries have always been straight from the camera - possibly cos I'm just too lazy to manipulate them :D.
 
Changed said:
Just for comparison, which do you like better?
Click to expand...

An interesting question. Because...

I 'prefer' the ones, like Entheo, without the NSFW tags.

BUT.

Almost paradoxically, the ones that 'stand out' more are obviously the enhanced, NSFW ones.
 
Changed, I don't think you should feel bad if what you submitted was faithful to the scene.

Subject matter and composition are so much more important than how good the camera is and what is done to the photo afterward. The playing field is much more level than people realize. A good photographer with a $200 digicam and free Irfanview software will blow away an average photographer with $5000 of gear and Adobe Photoshop CS3.

I think the rule should be: post-processing is allowed if the result is that the photo is faithful to the scene.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top