Automotive Photography Competition #212 [Voting]

[pat_ernzen]

The program says "Paint" it comes with MS-Office or XP (I really don't know). I am from the film generation, working with computers is not my favourite job, let alone sorting out all these fancy programmes that serve to mask the deficiencies of a particular shot

Pfffttt...

[henk4]

I think it's fair to argue there was an art in developing film and that is analogous to post processing via computer today.

I have been struggling in a dark room for more than 15 years.....you may want to call it analogous, but it is far more time consuming and difficult even if only dealing with black and white shots.

[henk4]

Pfffttt...

indeed.

[f6fhellcat13]

I have been struggling in a dark room for more than 15 years.....you may want to call it analogous, but it is far more time consuming and difficult even if only dealing with black and white shots.

You could process your pictures using only binary if you feel blood, sweat, and tears are what makes a photo good.
or something

[henk4]

You could process your pictures using only binary if you feel blood, sweat, and tears are what makes a photo good.
or something

I think you have not understood what I said.

[#1 Mustang Fan]

Developing is as you say, a lot more time consuming but photoshop, in my opinion is one of the best softwares for digital photography needs has based all its tools on procedures used in the darkroom. These procedures are not different and even in the dark room they are used to mask deficiencies of a particular shot.

The principles are the same, but just as everything else around us has evolved, photography has evolved into a faster practice. Digital is just all about convenience just as the beginning of chemical photography was compared to painting. Film will always produce a better print on paper than digital but the loses here to digital are worth it because despite people like you henk (ok maybe not you but there are people who are almost computer-phobic or something) the world is constantly becoming more and more digital reliant and more impatient etc.

[henk4]

First, I don't use photoshop, I have no license for that.
Second, I agree that everything you could once do in a dark room, can indeed be done with digital images (and much more effective too) but that concerns only a fraction of all current possibilities. (I never tried colour print development, that at the time was considered too expensive and the developing chemicals only lasted for a very short time, almost making long developing sessions mandatory)
The public domain software for image handling is good enough for me, but I had never thought that simply applying a watermark with one programme would affect the quality of shot processed in another.

[pat_ernzen]

The public domain software for image handling is good enough for me, but I had never thought that simply applying a watermark with one programme would affect the quality of shot processed in another.

Even if you processed it in one program, then reopened it in the same program and added a watermark, you'd likely see a small loss in quality (or a large loss, depending on how you exported it). Using MSPaint is just a bad idea in general, though.

[henk4]

Even if you processed it in one program, then reopened it in the same program and added a watermark, you'd likely see a small loss in quality (or a large loss, depending on how you exported it). Using MSPaint is just a bad idea in general, though.

Rest assured, I managed the watermark technique in Irfanview....

[basman007]

Pat, that's a terrible looking car lol. I hope it makes up for it in driving

[Dary]

henk, u can try this web site Picnik - edit photos the easy way, online in your browser its web based photo editing (resize, crop, contrast, watermark, etc), u don't have to download anything, just upload ur pic and do ur touch then save it (u can choose the quality and the file type at the end), its super easy, and its free.

[henk4]

Thanks for that Dary, I'll have a look, but I think I have solved the problem.

[Kitdy]

I have been struggling in a dark room for more than 15 years.....you may want to call it analogous, but it is far more time consuming and difficult even if only dealing with black and white shots.

So you are discounting digital media as compared to darkroom editing simply because one takes longer?

I'd imagine good processing - tastefully done - in a program like Photoshop involves quite a large amount of skill - and while it may be easier and take less time than a darkroom this doesn't mean it can't be included in our photography competitions.

We have been over this time and time again though.

I think an interesting rule would be to have the raw photo, completely unedited attached as a means of seeing how it looked before processing. Or however unlikely - another competition with no editing other than cropping and watermarking allowed. Not a popular option I'd say, but attaching the raw image I think would be an interesting dynamic just to see exactly what work has gone on. NO one should have anything to fear as this wouldn't be voted on, but I think it would give a greater understanding of the shot.

#1 you run the comps, what do you think about adding a rule to attach a raw shot?

[cmcpokey]

So you are discounting digital media as compared to darkroom editing simply because one takes longer?

I'd imagine good processing - tastefully done - in a program like Photoshop involves quite a large amount of skill - and while it may be easier and take less time than a darkroom this doesn't mean it can't be included in our photography competitions.

We have been over this time and time again though.

I think an interesting rule would be to have the raw photo, completely unedited attached as a means of seeing how it looked before processing. Or however unlikely - another competition with no editing other than cropping and watermarking allowed. Not a popular option I'd say, but attaching the raw image I think would be an interesting dynamic just to see exactly what work has gone on. NO one should have anything to fear as this wouldn't be voted on, but I think it would give a greater understanding of the shot.

#1 you run the comps, what do you think about adding a rule to attach a raw shot?

thats the way the comps used to be. no editing whatsoever was allowed. even watermarks were frowned upon. i liked it because it required a lot from the setup of the shot. it also prevented a crap shot being doctored into being a good shot (which i myself am even sometimes guilty of). but i think it was at the behest of the real photographers that we went away from that. and then once we started getting these professional photographers submitting their shots with high end gear and lots of editing, it became no fun for those of us that arent as skilled or have the best equipment.

but yes, we have re-hashed this too many times.

and i think Zeppelin is still the keeper of the comps, but he has had a lot of issues with his computer if i'm not mistaken, so the #1MF has taken it for the short term.

[henk4]

So you are discounting digital media as compared to darkroom editing simply because one takes longer?

If that is your interpretation, go ahead, I though am convinced that I never said such a thing.