SO Photography Contest Discussion!!

[felix]

wow.

calm the fuck down please people. this really isn't serious business.

 

[Changed]

I've got news for you: no one cares.

Then why are you (and a whole slew of other moderators) pissing and moaning about a few minor touch-ups? 8)

 

[fizzle]

^Because technically that was cheating on your part, as impacto said, the rules are quite clear. However, it was you who sort of brought this onto yourself, as pennywise said, you didnt have to say anything about your photos being touched up and no one would have known.

The rest of the discussion is not about you and your photos, its about the contest rules in general.

 

[pennywise]

Then why are you (and a whole slew of other moderators) pissing and moaning about a few minor touch-ups? 8)

I'm not. If you had the slightest idea what was going on, you would have realized that.

 

[pennywise]

^Because technically that was cheating on your part, as impacto said, the rules are quite clear. However, it was you who sort of brought this onto yourself, as pennywise said, you didnt have to say anything about your photos being touched up and no one would have known.

The rest of the discussion is not about you and your photos, its about the contest rules in general.

see, she knows whats going on.

 

[Johnny1]

what the hell does that even mean?

Oh, sorry, I will try to be much more clear. Here it is, explained by the numbers:

1. Some of us want the contest rules to be changed to allow the fixing of photos.

2. The fixing of photos is not to make the photo something it's not, it's to make it resemble the scene that was shot.

3. Those of us who have lobbied for the rule change are not professionals, but amateurs.

4. Amateurs, just like you.

5. But we are not like you because we don't fear fixing a photo to make it come out right, something even a grandpa can do (even if you and your friends can't).

6. We are not trying to make the contest serious, we are trying to make it fun.

7. By keeping the rules the way they are, they curtail the ability of everyone to post photos that look right.

Please let me know if you require further clarification.

 

[BA]

Oh, sorry, I will try to be much more clear. Here it is, explained by the numbers:

1. Some of us want the contest rules to be changed to allow the fixing of photos.

2. The fixing of photos is not to make the photo something it's not, it's to make it resemble the scene that was shot.

3. Those of us who have lobbied for the rule change are not professionals, but amateurs.

4. Amateurs, just like you.

5. But we are not like you because we don't fear fixing a photo to make it come out right, something even a grandpa can do (even if you and your friends can't).

6. We are not trying to make the contest serious, we are trying to make it fun.

7. By keeping the rules the way they are, they curtail the ability of everyone to post photos that look right.

Please let me know if you require further clarification.

1. When I started this whole photo contest, yes, I, it was never intended to be a "digital photography manipulation contest" but rather a basic photo contest where users could enter simple shots. This way people like chrissie (for example, because I know she's good with Adobe) wouldn't have an unfair advantgage over the occasional picture taker. This puts everyone on an even playing field, or as even as possible.

2. Resemble the scene that was shot? You don't need photoshop to do that, you need to know the basics of exposure. Again, even basic P&S cameras can handle this without having to master a software manipulation package.

7. Too bad. If you don't like the rules, you're free to start a "digitally photoshop altered photography contest" which DOES allow any kind of "touching up". Because let me tell you, mastering a software package like Lightroom or Adobe are a different skill set than photography skills. Let's be clear on that. I see plenty of average photographers who are above-average photoshoppers who pump out great images on flickr daily.

It's really too bad that a simple fun contest like this can turn so nasty and people feel they need to cheat just to compete. That means your photography skills (not your photo manipulation skills) are shit. These kinds of people probably don't know an f-stop from their grandmother's bush. They couldn't tell you what a flash sync speed is, or the correlation between an increase in ISO and shutter speed. They'd rather cheat, just to be able to hang with those who DO know good photography skills.

 

[alasdairm]

i tend to agree with ba among others.

the competition is not about the photograph which best represents the scene which was actually shot. apart from anything else, that's entirely subjective. i also believe it's mostly irrelevant in this context.

it is - for most i believe - about the photo which best finds the voice of the theme.

alasdair

 

[SA]

Shoot > resize/crop > post. It really is a simple proposition, folks.

As for changing the rules, it has been suggested several times already that parallel contests, which allow for image manipulation, are welcome. We welcome volunteers who wish to start, manage and upkeep these new contests, following the current template.

Some of the lobbying energy seen expended here over the months would have been so much more productive, IMHO, if spent on creating new streams (read: threads/contests/themes) to further our dream of an Arts sub-forum. For now, it remains just that - a dream.

"Do, or do not. There is no try." - Yoda

 

[pennywise]

Some of the lobbying energy seen expended here over the months would have been so much more productive, IMHO, if spent on creating new streams (read: threads/contests/themes) to further our dream of an Arts sub-forum. For now, it remains just that - a dream

Really...it seems like arguments and discussion of arts content are far more popular threads than the actual arts threads...

 

[Changed]

It's really too bad that a simple fun contest like this can turn so nasty and people feel they need to cheat just to compete. That means your photography skills (not your photo manipulation skills) are shit. These kinds of people probably don't know an f-stop from their grandmother's bush. They couldn't tell you what a flash sync speed is, or the correlation between an increase in ISO and shutter speed. They'd rather cheat, just to be able to hang with those who DO know good photography skills.

What's funny about this is, it isn't true- anybody who knows anything about basic photographic techniques (f-stops, DOF, ISO, etc...) are 99% more likely to be well versed in post-processing.

 

[Johnny1]

I'm still willing to participate under the current rules. But this being the Photography Contest Discussion thread, when the matter came up I brought up this suggestion a second time. I won't bring it up again.

If people are still living in 1995 and don't understand why it doesn't matter whether you post process a photo, or how difficult or easy it is to post-process a photo, or that a photo is a photo is a photo, far be it from me to teach them, because they're not willing to learn.

I will make sure to use my view camera with a cape and take a single plate of film at a time and not post-process, just like Ansel Adams--wait, he post-processed every photo, sorry. I will just do as you say. Perhaps I will buy a disposable camera just for these contests, then I can't even adjust the focus. Just to be on the safe side.

 

[Johnny1]

1. When I started this whole photo contest, yes, I, it was never intended to be a "digital photography manipulation contest"

I didn't know you owned the contest. Perhaps you should charge an entry fee, or at least a fee to make suggestions about the contest rules.

It's really too bad that a simple fun contest like this can turn so nasty and people feel they need to cheat just to compete.

Give me a break, BA. You of all people should understand that making minor adjustments to a photo does not give someone an unfair advantage. (And I have not, I just suggested that it be allowed.) Don't you have thousands of dollars worth of new gear? Don't you have lenses that most of us don't have that allow you to get shots others can't? Does that give you an unfair advantage? No? It's the same thing! Perhaps the rule should be that the camera and lens together can't cost more than $300 USD! 8)

What makes a photo is subject, lighting, and composition. If anyone thinks that post-processing makes a photo, they need to take more photos until they realize what makes a good one. And for most of us amateurs, what makes a great photo is often luck!

 

[SA]

I'm still willing to participate under the current rules. But this being the Photography Contest Discussion thread, when the matter came up I brought up this suggestion a second time. I won't bring it up again.

If people are still living in 1995 and don't understand why it doesn't matter whether you post process a photo, or how difficult or easy it is to post-process a photo, or that a photo is a photo is a photo, far be it from me to teach them, because they're not willing to learn.

I will make sure to use my view camera with a cape and take a single plate of film at a time and not post-process, just like Ansel Adams--wait, he post-processed every photo, sorry. I will just do as you say. Perhaps I will buy a disposable camera just for these contests, then I can't even adjust the focus. Just to be on the safe side.

Thank you for insulting every single photo I've entered in this contest, Johnny.

This set of rules is simple. It makes a relatively level playing field for everyone, without having to get into a further debate of "how much is too much" (post processing). But a sarcastic response is oh so much more productive than saying, "Hey, everyone, I'm going to get a parallel contest going where we can touch up our shots to make them look more original".

 

[Johnny1]

SA, I can't imagine how I insulted you with my post but I apologize if I did so in any way.

It's true that I was sarcastic. All my posts in this thread before these last two days have been absolutely polite. This past day or two I was responding to harsh, angry posts and to what I believe was unfair criticism of others. I felt bad about making sarcastic posts in response, especially in response to BLers who I otherwise respect, but I got caught up in the moment. If I offended anyone, I'm sorry.

I am completely against a parallel contest for two reasons:

(1) as I've said, I don't believe that touching up a photo makes them better (or even more original), just that it's a basic and necessary part of the technical process that starts with focusing and ends with posting. To me, it's no different than any other technical part of photography, and with the free and easy-to-use software available, can be done by anyone. I would never think of taking a mediocre photo of mine and using Photoshop to improve it, because it can't be done. It can never be anything other than a mediocre photo. And a great photo typically doesn't need much work, just to make sure the color is right. Or to make it B&W. A bit of sharpening. Eliminate red eye. Etc. But it was great to start with.

(2) I think it would ruin the contest. I have no desire to participate in a high-level contest, or a lower-level contest, this is about fun for me just like it is for everyone. The best photo I ever took, which won the People contest and is the photo I'm most proud of, was taken with a $30 point-and-shoot film camera and scanned and posted. The fun of this for me is that everyone participates. There are nearly always surprises and great pictures.

 

[SA]

No worries, Johnny, thanks. I see where you're coming from. That first was tongue in cheek.

The biggest problem, which we've butted up against during the previous debates over the rules, is "how much is too much". Once you open the door to editing, all bets are off. I doubt we'd get past one round without multiple challenges of "got enough paint on that photo?". Some, like yourself, would wisely use the tools to perform those slight necessary edits. Others, as has been seen already, would get carried away in their artistic moment. Who is to judge?

 

[Changed]

Some, like yourself, would wisely use the tools to perform those slight necessary edits. Others, as has been seen already, would get carried away in their artistic moment. Who is to judge?

I'm really not sure what you are referring to here, but I'm sure it isn't my photos. Like I said before, the processing I performed was to recreate the landscape as it was when I saw it with my own two eyes.

If that is "getting carried away in an artistic moment," I'd hate to see the results from somebody going truly wild.

 

[alasdairm]

if the difference is really so subtle, at this level of comparison, why even bother?

as i said previously, the competition is not about the photograph which best represents the scene which was actually shot. apart from anything else, that's entirely subjective. i also believe it's mostly irrelevant in this context.

alasdair

 

[ninjadanslarbretabar]

awww, thats part of why i love competition so much

 

[Rogue Robot]

seems more like a debate, ninjadan.