SO Photography Contest Discussion!!

[Changed]

I think the rule should be: post-processing is allowed if the result is that the photo is faithful to the scene.

I agree.

Obviously, because of what I've already submitted, but also because a photo that is superior in composition should always receive more votes that one that is simply composed of shiny colors. This keeps the competition from simply becoming a photoshop contest between a few people.

I can manipulate a photo to make it stunning, but without proper framing and basic photographic techniques, it isn't going to be worth looking at twice.

I say: change the rules to allow the artists to recreate what was actually seen at the time of the picture making. And, if a photo is submitted that oversteps these boundaries, simply don't vote for it. That way, every person has a chance to win the competition; if somebody doesn't want to post-process their entry because they feel it is a powerful enough image without it, then so be it.

 

[felix]

^ i have to say, i'm gradually coming round to this argument. i'm sure we've all been hugely disappointed with the results of our picture taking because of some auto feature taking over and deciding what's best.

even with 'live view' and reviewing them on the screen at the time, there's still no guarantee that they will turn out OK.

so i would tend to agree that some brightening or contrast fixing should be allowed.

anything more than that - no.

 

[alasdairm]

the colour of the sky in the edited 'land' picture looks extremely unnatural. to me.

alasdair

 

[Changed]

no borders, no filters.

contrast - yes, color correction - yes

saturation... iffy.

 

[Changed]

the colour of the sky in the edited 'land' picture looks extremely unnatural. to me.

alasdair

yeah it does, I had done a few things with the picture previously and it turned out amazing; I tried to emulate it again and it did make the sky a bit comical. Maybe not the best example!

 

[L2R]

regardless of how "faithful" you reckon your touch ups are, they are still touch ups, and most contestants of these comps don't have either the time, skill and/or software to touch theirs up.

as has been previously mentioned, the success of these comps rely on it's easy accessibility for anyone who just likes to point n click.

it is supposed to be fun, and when it comes to fun the K.I.S.S. method rules all.

 

[Changed]

alright fine, I'll discontinue my browsing of Second Opinion in order to avoid further competitions.

 

[alasdairm]

don't forget your ball...



alasdair

 

[mcwally]

how precious are some of you being about minor photo enhancing in PS, lol. Worth losing photographers in the comp because of outdated ideals about not slightly altering shots in pshop? As mentioned before there is a myriad of ways in 35mm film photography to alter images say in the darkroom now this is done in PS or in the digital camera settings at the time.

Never is an image a perfect representation of the actual scene. The camera lens' and camera settings all influence the outcome just like enhancing a shot digitally.

Its never a level playing field, people have different cameras, varying amounts of time and been exposed to different scenes to capture. Enhancing an image on PS is done in all photography nowadays why should this comp be any different. If it is done excessively or if an object is cut and pasted into a different background then that is obviously across the line.

Changed saying his shots were to a small extent enhanced in PS is fine with me and the results should stand imo. Having a different comp for shots that are enhanced in PS is stupidity imo.

 

[pennywise]

alright fine, I'll discontinue my browsing of Second Opinion in order to avoid further competitions.

don't let the door hit you in the....etc, etc.

 

[pennywise]

Furthermore, as to the whole argument over small corrections in colors and contrast and so forth..if you were to do something that is so minor, then how would anyone know it if you did? If it's something that is really obvious and noticeable, then people will notice, and it will be regulated. Otherwise, keep your business to yourself and we'll all get along.

It's really not worth getting all upset about from either side of the fence, imo. I can see both sides. Obviously we want to keep things on a level playing field, but then again that is almost impossible. You may be able to say no digital enhancement, but can you make everyone use the same camera? A person shooting with a cheap 4 MP point-and-shoot is obviously at a disadvantage to someone who has a $500 Nikon SLR. Can you give everyone equal access to subject matter and the amount of time and effort they can put into their shots? Can you limit everyone's experience and education? The answer is obviously no.

Similarly, you can't control who has access and skill with Photoshop et al, but the only difference with digital manipulation is that after a certain point, it becomes less a photography contest than a photoshop contest. Therefore, I believe, it pays to keep the guidelines loose and general. As long as whatever merit the entry has was achieved mostly in the original photo, I wouldn't begrudge some slight tweaking with digital post-processing. Where do you draw that line? It's like the old adage about pornography...it is hard to define when you cross the line from photo to a digitally generated non-photo, but I'm confident that we'll know it when we see it. As such, I would advise people that if it really bothers them that they can't do "color correction" or whatever, that they do what they feel they need to do, while keeping in mind that if it becomes too obvious, we will know.

 

[Johnny1]

Furthermore, as to the whole argument over small corrections in colors and contrast and so forth..if you were to do something that is so minor, then how would anyone know it if you did? If it's something that is really obvious and noticeable, then people will notice, and it will be regulated. Otherwise, keep your business to yourself and we'll all get along.

 

[mcwally]

^nice shot, hang on has that been shopped :D

 

[L2R]

its the fucking honour system. look it up.

if you want to be so petty as to cheat on a photography contest with no reward based on an anonymous drug message board which was made simply in the spirit of good fun, then you really need to be getting yourself a life.

all those whinging about the simple and easy to understand and participating in rules can cry me a fucking river. you want a serious and professional photo contest? this is NOT it.

and it's been repeatedly discussed and agreed upon so why keep asking the same fucking questions? it's precisely this kind of shit that saps all the fun out of the game. and with people like changed submitting what they know to be against the rules completely voids any point in participating.

i don't want to lose changed as a participant in these contests, as long as he (she?) can stick to the rules everyone else does. where's your sense of sport, honour and fun?

 

[Changed]

i don't want to lose changed as a participant in these contests, as long as he (she?) can stick to the rules everyone else does. where's your sense of sport, honour and fun?

You sound like a politician or judge trying to shame a criminal after hes committed a murder. please. After all, this is a drug forum subforum photography contest. My sense of sport, honor, and fun is far removed from this subforum.

I have plenty of other avenues to display my photography for pleasure; you can continue to ostracize artists until eventually, every single person doubts whether they should enter their piece for voting. Enjoy your bland competition in the mean time.

 

[Changed]

If it's something that is really obvious and noticeable, then people will notice, and it will be regulated. Otherwise, keep your business to yourself and we'll all get along.

that's funny, considering nobody said anything about my entries until I outed myself...

A person shooting with a cheap 4 MP point-and-shoot is obviously at a disadvantage to someone who has a $500 Nikon SLR.

each photo I submitted was produced with a crappy point and shoot.

 

[Johnny1]

all those whinging about the simple and easy to understand and participating in rules can cry me a fucking river. you want a serious and professional photo contest? this is NOT it.

It's more like we AMATEURS who are TRYING to have fun are simply making a second, good-hearted attempt to convince people who DO NOT UNDERSTAND that the rule they THINK makes sense actually *HOBBLES* *EVERYONE* *NEEDLESSLY.*

So if that's crying a river, then boo hoo hoo.

But please don't confuse these attempts with trying to ruin the contest by making it serious and professional. We are just trying to make it on the level that every grandpa with a $200 camera, a computer, and the free program Picasa does without even thinking to produce decent photos.

 

[L2R]

After all, this is a drug forum subforum photography contest. My sense of sport, honor, and fun is far removed from this subforum.

Then i'd suggest avoiding thread and contests that rely on such traits.

I have plenty of other avenues to display my photography for pleasure; you can continue to ostracize artists until eventually, every single person doubts whether they should enter their piece for voting.

There's nothing to doubt. The rules are quite clear and simple.

Enjoy your bland competition in the mean time.

Bland? I see more colour and life in untouched amateur works than your unnatural looking preferences. I prefer real tits to silicone.

We are just trying to make it on the level that every grandpa with a $200 camera, a computer, and the free program Picasa does without even thinking to produce decent photos.

bit presumptuous are we? i don't know anyone who touches up their photos, let alone does so without thinking. well except my brother, but he takes his snapping seriously and has spent a fortune on his equipment.

just because my range of associates do not practice touching up their pics does not mean i can presume no one does, just as you can't make your ridiculous and absurd declaration.

 

[L2R]

It's more like we AMATEURS who are TRYING to have fun are simply making a second, good-hearted attempt to convince people who DO NOT UNDERSTAND that the rule they THINK makes sense actually *HOBBLES* *EVERYONE* *NEEDLESSLY.*

what the hell does that even mean?

 

[pennywise]

that's funny, considering nobody said anything about my entries until I outed myself...
each photo I submitted was produced with a crappy point and shoot.

Get over yourself, man. This conversation, let alone the rest of the world, does not revolve around you or your photos. Your photos aren't that good. A lot of people have won the contest, and I can't think of any of them that are as full of themselves as you are. As it is, I think you have a bug up your ass about this because you did do some post-processing in your winning entries, and now feel all butthurt because you think it taints your wins. I've got news for you: no one cares.