Reading mode: Light Dark

Challenges -- Photos, Photoshop or Both?

Go to last post
- rce - said:
  • rce -
wrote:

All:

After reading all of the posts to this time, I once again find
myself in the near-middle of the road and see the good and bad
arguments on both sides of this issue. But, ...

I vote for two categories and see no real harm in offering both.

I have never been a fan of comparing apples and oranges.

If and when I offer a photo to the challenge, you can be assured
that it will NOT be PhotoShopped and would prefer to to have my
stuff be judged on its content, not how good my software is.
Click to expand...
your not measuring the software used. your measuring the creativity and inginuity of the artist. this is a digital camera afterall - it's not traditional.

i think anyone who has doubts should try one just once, and see how much work really goes into it.

you have to remember that it doesn't exist anywhere, and where people think that composition and other rules don't come into play, they really do. as you can easily make something look stupid.

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/ http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
 
they did alot more things then just touch up in the darkroom - and given the chance, the people who did those things, would wanted to have been able to do a whole lot more.

---Mike Savad
Daniel B. said:
Don Ellis said:
I'd like to offer a personal opinion...

What began as a photography challenge is now attracting an
increasing number of Photoshop creations -- including 25% of the
Eligible Category of the "Feet" Challenge.

No matter how brilliant -- and some of them are -- for me it's like
finding sand in my sugar.

Although our rules say that any amount of Photoshop is permissible,
I think it's gone a little overboard for a photography challenge
(please spare me the argument that all the Photoshopped elements
are photographed).

If I were making the rules -- and I'm not; it's a consensus -- I
would suggest that Photoshop be used to enhance a "single image" --
contrast, lighting, saturation, sharpening, even inverting colors
-- rather than creating an entirely new image, often out of
multiple pictures.

We're now leaving it up to voters to make the decision, but I would
like offer an alternative suggestion -- create a separate category
for Photoshop creations.

This would have the advantage of leaving two categories for
photography entries and give the Photoshoppers a category where
their artistry can be appreciated and voted for on its own merits.

This strikes me as a little more "apples to apples."

Any thoughts?

Don
Click to expand...
--
Daniel B.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/ http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
 
I seem to be agreeing with both sides?
How confusing!

Since this is a digital camera forum I would expect the challenges to be on digital photography, not photoshop. But with that said, I think it is a very valid art form. Although touch up and digital art are a bit different to say the least.
I personnaly like the straight from the camera approach.
Perhaps it should be called the "digital art" challenge? =)

my thoughs anyway.
mike savad said:
Don Ellis said:
mike savad said:
what would be the point of that? you don't get
anything at all for that area, which is why i
don't bother entering those.
Click to expand...
Unlike the big trophies the winners of the Eligible Categories
receive :-)
mike savad said:
this is a challenge - digital art is even harder
to do then normal stuff. alot harder.
Click to expand...
Is this the "I can enter my cougar in the cat show because it's
harder to raise" argument?

I'll abide by whatever people decide is allowable in the
photography challenges but the discussion is about appropriateness,
not difficulty.

The fact that you refer to it as "digital art" indicates that you
know we're beyond photography with these entries. Perhaps this
should be the "Digital Art Challenge."

Cheers,

Don
Click to expand...
it takes photography to do digital art. and alot more of it at that
too. people never find removing an object from a scene
objectionable. why not adding one?

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
Click to expand...
 
i see it simply as challenge - to fit the theme using a digital camera...

i'm not blessed with a great area to shoot in (as i live in avoid). i don't have pretty feet. and purely by coincidence i didn't have sun for the shadows one.

what it comes down to is, sometimes it's best to setup the display. still life and digital art are the same.

at photosig i ran across this guy: http://www.pbase.com/dannysmythe he does food illustration using a digital camera, all photoshopped. this stuff is found on cakes, salad dressing, etc. all digital art. each thing photographed seperatly and placed in photoshop. without looking you would never know that from looking. and that is what modern photography is. the illusion is shattered as you find out that all this time people have been trying to do it manually. when in fact it's easier and faster when done in photoshop.

if that pbase link doesn't work, i think it was flippy when i tried it - http://www2.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=40383 this is is photosig account.

---Mike Savad
Ginko said:
my thoughs anyway.
mike savad said:
Don Ellis said:
mike savad said:
what would be the point of that? you don't get
anything at all for that area, which is why i
don't bother entering those.
Click to expand...
Unlike the big trophies the winners of the Eligible Categories
receive :-)
Ginko said:
this is a challenge - digital art is even harder
to do then normal stuff. alot harder.
Click to expand...
Is this the "I can enter my cougar in the cat show because it's
harder to raise" argument?

I'll abide by whatever people decide is allowable in the
photography challenges but the discussion is about appropriateness,
not difficulty.

The fact that you refer to it as "digital art" indicates that you
know we're beyond photography with these entries. Perhaps this
should be the "Digital Art Challenge."

Cheers,

Don
Click to expand...
it takes photography to do digital art. and alot more of it at that
too. people never find removing an object from a scene
objectionable. why not adding one?

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/ http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
 
Just remeber these points:

1. We're doing this for fun.

2. When you make rules you increase the need to make more rules.

3. We're doing this for fun.

4. How many pixels can I change in my picture and keep it acceptable for the "Eligible" category and not the "Digital Art" category? or whatever it's called. Who is going to be the "D.A." Police? And no matter where that magical boundry is that separates "Photograph" from "D.A." we can all spend forever arguing that it needs to be adjusted in either direction, see point 2.

5. We're doing this for fun.

6. The rules say "Post-Processing -- Do whatever you like to your photo and the voters will decide if it's too much." The voters have decided every time. I think they've generally been right. I think we should continue to let them decide. The voters are the only logical "D.A." police, see point 4, but they do it after the fact.

7. We're doing this for fun.

8. I don't like boarders and frames on pictures. I generally vote that way too. See point 6 above.

9. We're doing this for fun.

10. If Danny Smith (see a previous post by Mike Savad) had entered http://www.pbase.com/image/3960734 (some serious digital manipulation there) in Challenge 5 - Fruits and Vegetables how would you have voted? It would have gotten one of my three votes.

11. See all the odd number points, Let's keep it that way.

just my $.02

Pops
--
Canon Powershot G2 black http://www.pbase.com/pops
surf the internet -------- hang 0000 1010
 
Pops! said:
Just remeber these points:
Click to expand...
Pops92470 said:
1. We're doing this for fun.
Click to expand...
We're doing this for the challenge. You play baseball for fun (well, some people do) and it has rules. Most sports have rules in order to keep the fun-seekers somewhere in the stadium.
Pops92470 said:
2. When you make rules you increase the need to
make more rules.
Click to expand...
Good sound bite but I don't see the addition of a "Digital Art" category putting us on the slippery slope to bureaucracy.
Pops92470 said:
4. How many pixels can I change in my picture and
keep it acceptable for the "Eligible" category
Click to expand...
As many as you like as long as it's a SINGLE IMAGE.
Pops92470 said:
6. The rules say "Post-Processing -- Do whatever
you like to your photo and the voters will decide
if it's too much." The voters are the only
logical "D.A." police, see point 4, but they do
it after the fact.
Click to expand...
The advantage to a separate category is that the Photoshop entries can be judged against one another and the best will win.

Cheers,

Don
 
CradyHere said:
Don
I realize this is changing the subject,
(slightly),but did Photoshop insert all the neat
technical details that were printed following you
rmost excellent picture of the guy drinking
coffee, or is that a G-2 thing?
Click to expand...
Hi Crady,

There is a very easy way... you carry a little notebook and pen with you and when you take a shot... oh, nevermind, that was the old way.

When you get your G2, do not install ZoomBrowser. Instead, do two things:

1. Download the free Breeze Downloader from http://www.breezesys.com . When it downloads your pictures, either by USB cable or card reader, it creates a separate TXT file that contains all that information, plus a few bits I don't include, such as shot date, firmware version, owner's name, etc.

2. Download and try (and then buy) the US$35 BreezeBrowser. This is a wonderful piece of software that makes working with RAW files as easy as it's going to get. One nice thing about the price -- it includes lifetime upgrades. Having said that, if you never expect to work in RAW mode, you don't need it. But RAW gives you abilities that you may want someday -- for example, if you shoot outdoor white balance under tungsten lighting, you can change this setting during conversion and save your sanity and your pictures.

Hope this helps.

Don

P.S. Like my other comments in this thread, this is a personal opinion :-)
 
mike savad said:
i'm not blessed with a great area to shoot in (as
i live in avoid). i don't have pretty feet. and
purely by coincidence i didn't have sun for the
shadows one.
Click to expand...
I challenge you to put on some shoes and socks. Or take pictures of someone else's feet. Or turn on a light indoors to get a shadow.

:-)

Don
 
You get something for winning in the eligible arena? What did I miss?

--
Eric
Disclaimer: Snapshooter, and proud of it ;-)
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde
mike savad said:
this is a challenge - digital art is even harder to do then normal
stuff. alot harder.

---Mike Savad
Eric Haglund said:
--
Eric
Disclaimer: Snapshooter, and proud of it ;-)
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde
Don Ellis said:
I'd like to offer a personal opinion...

What began as a photography challenge is now attracting an
increasing number of Photoshop creations -- including 25% of the
Eligible Category of the "Feet" Challenge.

No matter how brilliant -- and some of them are -- for me it's like
finding sand in my sugar.

Although our rules say that any amount of Photoshop is permissible,
I think it's gone a little overboard for a photography challenge
(please spare me the argument that all the Photoshopped elements
are photographed).

If I were making the rules -- and I'm not; it's a consensus -- I
would suggest that Photoshop be used to enhance a "single image" --
contrast, lighting, saturation, sharpening, even inverting colors
-- rather than creating an entirely new image, often out of
multiple pictures.

We're now leaving it up to voters to make the decision, but I would
like offer an alternative suggestion -- create a separate category
for Photoshop creations.

This would have the advantage of leaving two categories for
photography entries and give the Photoshoppers a category where
their artistry can be appreciated and voted for on its own merits.

This strikes me as a little more "apples to apples."

Any thoughts?

Don
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
Click to expand...
 
Don Ellis said:
mike savad said:
i'm not blessed with a great area to shoot in (as
i live in avoid). i don't have pretty feet. and
purely by coincidence i didn't have sun for the
shadows one.
Click to expand...
I challenge you to put on some shoes and socks. Or take pictures of
someone else's feet. Or turn on a light indoors to get a shadow.

:-)

Don
Click to expand...
through watching how people vote, they always go to found objects. stills - are ignored every time.

and no i will not take pictures of someone elses feet - people look at me strange enough as it is, i don't need to put that on my list.

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/ http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
 
it's looked upon more then the other one - and at least you can pick a topic.

---Mike Savad
Eric Haglund said:
--
Eric
Disclaimer: Snapshooter, and proud of it ;-)
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde
mike savad said:
this is a challenge - digital art is even harder to do then normal
stuff. alot harder.

---Mike Savad
Eric Haglund said:
--
Eric
Disclaimer: Snapshooter, and proud of it ;-)
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde
Don Ellis said:
I'd like to offer a personal opinion...

What began as a photography challenge is now attracting an
increasing number of Photoshop creations -- including 25% of the
Eligible Category of the "Feet" Challenge.

No matter how brilliant -- and some of them are -- for me it's like
finding sand in my sugar.

Although our rules say that any amount of Photoshop is permissible,
I think it's gone a little overboard for a photography challenge
(please spare me the argument that all the Photoshopped elements
are photographed).

If I were making the rules -- and I'm not; it's a consensus -- I
would suggest that Photoshop be used to enhance a "single image" --
contrast, lighting, saturation, sharpening, even inverting colors
-- rather than creating an entirely new image, often out of
multiple pictures.

We're now leaving it up to voters to make the decision, but I would
like offer an alternative suggestion -- create a separate category
for Photoshop creations.

This would have the advantage of leaving two categories for
photography entries and give the Photoshoppers a category where
their artistry can be appreciated and voted for on its own merits.

This strikes me as a little more "apples to apples."

Any thoughts?

Don
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/ http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
 
Noone really wanted to come up with a way to give more feedback, huh? OK, as far as THIS issue goes. Most photography challenges do have a rule that would not allow for the composite PS images that we are getting. Why would we limit the challenge to Canon users only? Same thing in a way. The participants can decide what limitations to put on the challenge. Maybe we should just take a vote like we did with the anon votes and stop fussing over it.
 
indigo997 said:
Noone really wanted to come up with a way to give
more feedback, huh?
Click to expand...
I started to mention voting but decided it would muddy this thread even more. My original comment was something along the lines of having all the voting for all the categories on one page so that voting pretty much had to happen for all categories.

I don't know what your thoughts are on more feedback but, personally, I find even the short feedback I get on my pictures now to be worth much more than my eventual standing in a challenge.

Any way to increase that commentary or make it easier for people to offer -- and for photographers to read after the fact -- would be welcome.
indigo997 said:
OK, as far as THIS issue goes. Most photography
challenges do have a rule that would not allow
for the composite PS images that we are getting.
Why would we limit the challenge to Canon users
only? Same thing in a way. The participants can
decide what limitations to put on the challenge.
Click to expand...
indigo997 said:
Maybe we should just take a vote like we did with
the anon votes and stop fussing over it.
Click to expand...
I started this thread to offer an opinion and get some feedback before we did a vote. It's arrived at the point where your timing is perfect. I'll ask Jim if he'll send out an email.

Cheers,

Don
 
No doubts here, Mike, I've messed with Photoshop Elements enough to know it's not something you can just toss together unless you really know what you're doing. And that's just the technical portion.

--
Eric
Disclaimer: Snapshooter, and proud of it ;-)
http://www.pbase.com/haglunde
mike savad said:
mike savad said:
  • rce -
wrote:

All:

After reading all of the posts to this time, I once again find
myself in the near-middle of the road and see the good and bad
arguments on both sides of this issue. But, ...

I vote for two categories and see no real harm in offering both.

I have never been a fan of comparing apples and oranges.

If and when I offer a photo to the challenge, you can be assured
that it will NOT be PhotoShopped and would prefer to to have my
stuff be judged on its content, not how good my software is.
Click to expand...
your not measuring the software used. your measuring the creativity
and inginuity of the artist. this is a digital camera afterall -
it's not traditional.

i think anyone who has doubts should try one just once, and see how
much work really goes into it.

you have to remember that it doesn't exist anywhere, and where
people think that composition and other rules don't come into play,
they really do. as you can easily make something look stupid.

---Mike Savad

--
http://www.pbase.com/savad/
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=9050
Click to expand...
 
Don,

I haven't read the whole thread, but have sampled it. I would prefer to keep the "2-category" format. I value having Mike's creations involved in the challenges and competing against more traditional photographs. The sticky point seems to be with the rule stating that elligible entries must be photographed during the contest time-window. Does this mean that all photographic elements of a composite piece must have been taken during the contest window? A first-shot answer might be, "yes". However, really it doesn't really make much difference. I think that a "typical Mike Savad entry" that is appropriate for the elegible gallery should

1) not have been concieved or constructed prior to the contest period
2) have the major photographic element(s) generated during the contest period.

If mike wants to include some pelican earings on a zebra's ear, but he hasn't been to Florida since June...I don't have a problem with his including the June images of the birds in his December challenge entry.

At the end of the day, I don't think anything would be gained by making a 3rd category of entries, and I think that there would be a diution of interest in the contest in general, which would take something away from the challenge. Further, I think that the photoshop entries help challenge us all, and make us think, even if they don't win the popular vote. As such, I strongly endorse keeping the rules as open and inclusive as practicable. I like having the elegible entries generated/created during the challenge period, and think we should leave the details of what that means to the individual contestants. As a guideline, I'd say that means that the
major photographic elements must be taken during the contest period.
Don Ellis said:
I'd like to offer a personal opinion...

What began as a photography challenge is now attracting an
increasing number of Photoshop creations -- including 25% of the
Eligible Category of the "Feet" Challenge.

No matter how brilliant -- and some of them are -- for me it's like
finding sand in my sugar.

Although our rules say that any amount of Photoshop is permissible,
I think it's gone a little overboard for a photography challenge
(please spare me the argument that all the Photoshopped elements
are photographed).

If I were making the rules -- and I'm not; it's a consensus -- I
would suggest that Photoshop be used to enhance a "single image" --
contrast, lighting, saturation, sharpening, even inverting colors
-- rather than creating an entirely new image, often out of
multiple pictures.

We're now leaving it up to voters to make the decision, but I would
like offer an alternative suggestion -- create a separate category
for Photoshop creations.

This would have the advantage of leaving two categories for
photography entries and give the Photoshoppers a category where
their artistry can be appreciated and voted for on its own merits.

This strikes me as a little more "apples to apples."

Any thoughts?

Don
Click to expand...
 
Don Ellis said:
Don Ellis said:
4. How many pixels can I change in my picture and
keep it acceptable for the "Eligible" category
Click to expand...
As many as you like as long as it's a SINGLE IMAGE.
Click to expand...
Well...any cloning/retouching makes it no longer a 'single image'.

If I hide an ugly zit on a model with pink pixels, what's the difference if the pink is from another part of the same image, from the pink airbrush, or from a small crop from the snout of a pink pig? It's all pink pixels that weren't part of the original image. I think that the photographer has to make the call on how to best modify his pictures, and the voters will sort it all out.
 
I support leaving things the way they are, with the proviso from Mango (above) that the major elements must be photographed in the designated time period.
1. this is all in fun and for our enjoyment
2. we tend to learn a lot from each other

3. the voters here generally make good decisions. Let them judge what is acceptable or not.
Don Ellis said:
I can see too many people being upset with a "Digital Art"
category, so I'm suggesting we forego a vote and leave the
challenge as it is.

Don
Click to expand...
--
Jim
 
i'm glad to see that there is STILL LIFE in this group. i guess while the current rules will stand, still we had a remarkably civilized discussion.

i think its good that we didn't pear off digital shots into another competition (i wasn't too nuts about the idea to begin with). participating in these competitions has really been a very fruitful experience for me, and the voters have never let a few bad apples spoil the lot. not only are most people berry happy with the way things are run, but rarely do we see sour grapes.

(i'd like to suggest a rule that all fruit pictured in the next competition must have been purchased during the competition period as well, please - no fuzzy green stuff (like what's at the bottom of my fridge behind all those beer bottles)).
Jim B (MSP) said:
Don Ellis said:
I can see too many people being upset with a "Digital Art"
category, so I'm suggesting we forego a vote and leave the
challenge as it is.

Don
Click to expand...
--
Jim
Click to expand...
--
Tomzinho
http://www.pbase.com/tomzinho
 
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