Reading mode: Light Dark

Unfair rules in Photo Contests - NO HDR!?

Go to last post
Listen, Reading through this thread I neither agree or disagree but looking at your equipment you have listed and I wonder what PC and software you use? Well it must have cost a few dollars so surely buying a few filters is nothing.

HDR, ND grads? Oh for a photo with a bit of noise and grain Lol.

The other day I went to a UK magazines photo gallery. It was full of nice crisp clean bright perfect focus images. I found them all very good but boring.

cheers Eric
--
http://www.pomgonewalkabout.com
 
Put away that HDR program and achieve your photographic goals without leaning on software to "fix" that which you are unable to do in-camera. That MIGHT mean revisiting, uh, film or filters.

I fully understand the reasons why some contest promoters are forbidding HDR. If done poorly, the images scream "YIKES". When done correctly, they just look HDR'd. There are only a handful of images that have been served well by HDR.

If YOU think you are the lone exception to the HDR stinks rule, trust me, you aren't. If the best of the best in the industry flunk the test, I doubt you'll do any better.

--

 
I agree with you that there's little difference between multiple exposure blending and using a filter--except that the filter shoots the entire composition at the same time whereas the HDR composite images might be fractions of a second apart. Perhaps the contest owner has a philosophy that every element appearing in a photo must have been shot simultaneously.

Anyway, while this rule will limit your bag of tricks, I think if you have good depth of skill, you will be able to make a great photo that isn't of a high dynamic range scene. Plus there must be lots of other contests that either don't care or perhaps even favor HDR composites.

I am left wondering about something--my camera can do multiple exposure blending in the camera and in so doing I can add a few stops of dynamic range to the resultant image. I wonder if that would be allowed?

Another interesting thing, I was leafing through a couple Ansel Adams books yesterday at the library--man oh man, he did TONS of post processing. I wonder if they'd allow that?

Bart
--
http://zumbari.zenfolio.com
 
Who is the more skilled photographer, operative word being photographer, one who can make the image when the shutter button is pressed one one who's image is made the day after the shutter button is pressed and after 2 hours running through photoshop layer manipulation?

My vote is for the photographer who is skilled enough to be able to have and use the right equipment when the photograph is recorded via film or digital.

You read and hear it many, many times: expose it right at the point of capture.

I remember reading an article from George Lepp in Outdoor Photographer magazine that he hears too often students in his workshops saying "oh, I'll just fix it in photoshop".

HDR/layers/combining multiple images should be reserved for "creative digital" or "computer art" categories for competition.
 
ekn said:
Put away that HDR program and achieve your photographic goals without
leaning on software to "fix" that which you are unable to do
in-camera. That MIGHT mean revisiting, uh, film or filters.
Click to expand...
Why don't photographers acheive their photographic goals without leaning on filters? Same difference.
ekn said:
I fully understand the reasons why some contest promoters are
forbidding HDR. If done poorly, the images scream "YIKES". When done
correctly, they just look HDR'd. There are only a handful of images
that have been served well by HDR.
Click to expand...
That is wrong. I have seen thousands of images that look great and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between HDR / using a grad filter unless the person told you they used HDR.
ekn said:
If YOU think you are the lone exception to the HDR stinks rule, trust
me, you aren't. If the best of the best in the industry flunk the
test, I doubt you'll do any better.
Click to expand...
Do any better at what? Making a nice looking HDR image that doesn't look like HDR? That has been done and I believe I have also done that.
ekn said:
--

Click to expand...
--
Canon 10D
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MKII
Sigma 10-20mm EX DC
 
coreyh said:
I know it is the rules of the makers of the contest. National
Geographic is leading the way with allowing this type of photography,
but so many others look at it as negative or wrong.
Click to expand...
Which NG contest? The one they had last year, called their very first one, allowed only minor brightness, contrast, dodging and burning (all minor). It did not even allow cropping; however, it was obvious that the People winner's image was cropped either before or after being entered. It was of two boys in windows of a door and it was a rather long and skinny window that no camera's or film's image format.
 
GaryDeM said:
"What any person has failed to adequately state is WHY hdr/exposure
blending should be dissallowed?"
Click to expand...
Because you are supposed to enter a single photograph. Your so-called HDR is not one photograph, but several. It is not a Photoshop competition, but a photography competition. They are trying to judge the best photograph. If your photograph isn't good enough to win without manipulation, why would you even bother complaining? Go out and take better photos.
 
RedFox88 said:
coreyh said:
I know it is the rules of the makers of the contest. National
Geographic is leading the way with allowing this type of photography,
but so many others look at it as negative or wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
NG has been burnt severely by manipulating an image for its cover and promised never to do it again. Its competitions are no exception. You will find a vast number of media forbid any manipulation of published or submitted images. Only brightness, contrast and cropping are allowed, which is plain photo development that all images go through.
 
LiveM said:
Because you are supposed to enter a single photograph. Your so-called
HDR is not one photograph, but several. It is not a Photoshop
competition, but a photography competition. They are trying to judge
the best photograph. If your photograph isn't good enough to win
without manipulation, why would you even bother complaining? Go out
and take better photos.
Click to expand...
So called HDR? Huh? So are you saying that everyone at Timecatchers.com do not take great photographs and need to improve their photography? All of them use exposure blending in certain circumstances.

I guess they just arn't up to the job and they don't take true photographs.

--
Canon 10D
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MKII
Sigma 10-20mm EX DC
 
I agree you should expose it right at the time of capture, but HDR photographs meet that criterion in my opinion--the photographer was skilled enough to know to shoot two or more shots to capture the scene. And they have to do it without the benefit of seeing the final result in the viewfinder.

It's not like they were lazy in composing the shot and have to fix it by moving elements around in the scene in photoshop.

Bart
--
http://zumbari.zenfolio.com
 
RedFox88 said:
Who is the more skilled photographer, operative word being
photographer, one who can make the image when the shutter button is
pressed one one who's image is made the day after the shutter button
is pressed and after 2 hours running through photoshop layer
manipulation?
Click to expand...
That can be debated. I don't think of myself as any less of a photographer because I use HDR. I can easily throw on a grad ND filter if I had the money for it and get the same results.
RedFox88 said:
My vote is for the photographer who is skilled enough to be able to
have and use the right equipment when the photograph is recorded via
film or digital.

You read and hear it many, many times: expose it right at the point
of capture.
I remember reading an article from George Lepp in Outdoor
Photographer magazine that he hears too often students in his
workshops saying "oh, I'll just fix it in photoshop".
Click to expand...
I'm not "fixing" anything with HDR. The photograph is sound, the dynamic range is limiting. I'm doing the same thing with an hdr as one would do with a filter.
RedFox88 said:
HDR/layers/combining multiple images should be reserved for "creative
digital" or "computer art" categories for competition.
Click to expand...
It's good to see everyone's thoughts on this.

--
Canon 10D
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MKII
Sigma 10-20mm EX DC
 
Bart Hickman said:
I agree you should expose it right at the time of capture, but HDR
photographs meet that criterion in my opinion--the photographer was
skilled enough to know to shoot two or more shots to capture the
scene. And they have to do it without the benefit of seeing the
final result in the viewfinder.

It's not like they were lazy in composing the shot and have to fix it
by moving elements around in the scene in photoshop.

Bart
Click to expand...
Exactly my point as well. Everyone see's HDR as some manipulation of photos. Imo, it is just a different way to get more dynamic range... exactly the same as the use of grad filters.
Bart Hickman said:
--
http://zumbari.zenfolio.com
Click to expand...
--
Canon 10D
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MKII
Sigma 10-20mm EX DC
 
coreyh said:
So called HDR? Huh?
Click to expand...
"High" is a completely relative term. Large format has a high dynamic range, but not infinite.
coreyh said:
So are you saying that everyone at
Timecatchers.com do not take great photographs and need to improve
their photography?
Click to expand...
There is no end to the improvement process. You are confusing photography skill with Photoshop skill.
coreyh said:
All of them use exposure blending in certain
circumstances.
Click to expand...
So? This does not add prestige to a photograph or photographer.
coreyh said:
I guess they just arn't up to the job and they don't take true
photographs.
Click to expand...
Up to what job? They aren't up to winning if they can't take a winning photograph, but they might be up to being an image processing monkey at a processing house. However, I suspect their enthusiasm for low contast images might be their undoing.
 
Martin Caie said:
LiveM said:
coreyh said:
I know it is the rules of the makers of the contest. National
Geographic is leading the way with allowing this type of photography,
but so many others look at it as negative or wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
NG has been burnt severely by manipulating an image for its cover and
promised never to do it again. Its competitions are no exception. You
will find a vast number of media forbid any manipulation of published
or submitted images. Only brightness, contrast and cropping are
allowed, which is plain photo development that all images go through.
Click to expand...
Just found the rules for the "international Photography contest"

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/photo-contest/faq

about half way down it specifies "image manipulation"

--
Canon 10D
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MKII
Sigma 10-20mm EX DC
 
Bart Hickman said:
I agree you should expose it right at the time of capture, but HDR
photographs meet that criterion in my opinion--the photographer was
skilled enough to know to shoot two or more shots to capture the
scene. And they have to do it without the benefit of seeing the
final result in the viewfinder.

It's not like they were lazy in composing the shot and have to fix it
by moving elements around in the scene in photoshop.
Click to expand...
By using hdr/layers/combining exposures you are unable to create your work of art in a single creative process to put it most simply. Yes all photographs, including film, need to have contrast/density balanced after being recorded - but normal minor adjustments.

I liken changing things drastically, such as hdr, to a sculptor deciding after the statue has been carved that he'd like to change it from one type of stone to another after it was completed. That's what hdr and photoshop manipulation is.

Serious computer manipulation will always get beat upon in the art world unless you're in a digital manipulation/digital art category.
 
... That's what I want to say every time I hear someone say something is unfair. Since when is life fair.

If you don't like the rules register a complaint but not on the basis of fairness you'll just sound like a little kid.

If the organizers don't see it your way find another competition.

If you can't find another one then create your own.

BUT don't go around whining that the rule aren't fair. They are the rules and if you don't like it find a legitimate reason to have them changed or don't participate.

--



Rob Kircher
My Stuff: http://www.rrkphotos.com
http://www.pbase.com/rkircher
 
RedFox88 said:
By using hdr/layers/combining exposures you are unable to create your
work of art in a single creative process to put it most simply. Yes
all photographs, including film, need to have contrast/density
balanced after being recorded - but normal minor adjustments.
Click to expand...
You are manipulating the image with filters are you not? The camera cannot by itself shoot that type of image. So why do people make exceptions for that? It is the same thing and it doesn't manipulate the image or the subject.
RedFox88 said:
I liken changing things drastically, such as hdr, to a sculptor
deciding after the statue has been carved that he'd like to change it
from one type of stone to another after it was completed. That's
what hdr and photoshop manipulation is.
Click to expand...
As long as the subject does not change, why should their be a problem?
RedFox88 said:
Serious computer manipulation will always get beat upon in the art
world unless you're in a digital manipulation/digital art category.
Click to expand...
Well, pretty soon cameras will do HDR in-camera and our dicussion will be moot. Why delay the ineveitable. Like a previous poster said, some cameras already do exposure masking which essentially produces a similiar effect.

My thoughts on all of this is that people resist change. HDR is here to stay so why not embrace it instead of frown upon it.

--
Canon 10D
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MKII
Sigma 10-20mm EX DC
 
Rob Kircher said:
... That's what I want to say every time I hear someone say
something is unfair. Since when is life fair.

If you don't like the rules register a complaint but not on the basis
of fairness you'll just sound like a little kid.

If the organizers don't see it your way find another competition.

If you can't find another one then create your own.

BUT don't go around whining that the rule aren't fair. They are the
rules and if you don't like it find a legitimate reason to have them
changed or don't participate.
Click to expand...
You are 100% right. Whining about it not being fair is definitely not the way to go. I chose the wrong words I guess. Life isn't fair. I'm just trying to see why the rules are the way they are. All I see is that people frown upon HDR for reasons I don't understand. Maybe I am just too open to the concept.
Rob Kircher said:
--



Rob Kircher
My Stuff: http://www.rrkphotos.com
http://www.pbase.com/rkircher
Click to expand...
--
Canon 10D
Canon EF 50mm F1.8 MKII
Sigma 10-20mm EX DC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top