Member
Photography is about capturing a picture, not capturing a picture to try your hand at making it better through PS. You use your skill at photography to capture the photo to the best of your ability that is what the general photography competition was about.Originally Posted by pat_ernzen
Starting with a photo for everyone is a very good idea for editing competitions, it makes it even for everybody with or without a good camera but skills in PS.
Miscommunication seems to be a direct result of misplaced, text based sarcasm.
Novice
Just to note guys...
Look at the modern world of photography, editing is a crucial part of any photographers process. I mean even when film photography was the main way of dealing with images, the majority of time spent on the image was editing in the darkroom with numerous filters and techniques. I know this as I used to do film photography.
Same should be applied to digital, just that the darkroom is in the form of photoshop... photography is an art, let the artist do whatever he wants to portray his idea. Limiting editing means that you limit the potential of the images you see here. Editing is and always will be part of photography, no matter how extreme. Teach yourself that.
Anyways, ridiculous editing looks stupid, period.
Rookie
Word. Maybe it's just me, but I have a feeling this:
...would fare better than THIS:
I'm not talking about allowing stupid/ridiculous stuff, just the sort of thing that makes a good photo great.
www.Desert-Motors.com - mag.Desert-Motors.com
Member
What point are you trying to make?
What happened to netburner? Why doesn't he want to do the comps anymore?
Miscommunication seems to be a direct result of misplaced, text based sarcasm.
Rookie
My point is editing/post-processing is not the same thing as a bunch of dumb filters and stuff. Post-processing is about enhancing what you already have, not changing it. That first shot was edited from a RAW, then changed a bit more after that, in addition to being cropped and such. Without doing that stuff it'd still be a nice shot, with it, it's a hell of a lot better. Disallowing post-processing, in my opinion, isn't a whole lot different than saying something like "you have to keep your camera on 'Auto' mode".
EDIT: And I don't care how much post-processing you do, a very poor photograph will always be a poor photograph. But then, this has all been covered already.
www.Desert-Motors.com - mag.Desert-Motors.com
Member
Sorry, its just they both look fake.
This thread is generally going nowhere, none of this discussion is getting us anywhere and we need to find out what is happening to the comps.
Miscommunication seems to be a direct result of misplaced, text based sarcasm.
Rookie
The first one looks fake? Wut?
www.Desert-Motors.com - mag.Desert-Motors.com
Supporting Member
I actually think the issue of picture manipulation is a bit overstated. I think nobody would assume that a picture taken with a film camera and processed in a large printing center will not be optimised in any way. The only thing is that digital imaging made that part of the job come much more directly under the control of the "shooter" than previously. (somewhere else I shared some of my own experiences with black and white film processing which I used to do up to 10 years ago, but nobody seemed to have picked that up).
And as far as the competition goes, my main objection to it is the large preference for shots of supercars. Pat Ernzten Murcielago being a point in case. If that car would have been a Civic.....no votes.
So what do we want. A competition where the best photo, in technical terms is being judges, or do we just want a snapshot picture competition, where technical qualities are sort of irrelevant, and the subject determines the winner...
Here is one example....very nice car, but if you look carefully, you can see the shade of my camera in the left bottom corner, which disqualifies this a good photo. Of course I can cut that part off, but that is against the current rules...
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Member
It looks too perfect, how the car is perfectly in focus, the light & reflections look odd too.
Miscommunication seems to be a direct result of misplaced, text based sarcasm.
Supporting Member
the colours look oversaturated...
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Member
And a car on gravel would not be that clean,
Miscommunication seems to be a direct result of misplaced, text based sarcasm.
Supporting Admin
Why would it be so inconceivable that they removed the dust and that the photographer used a polarizer? It would be ridiculous if they hadn't, considering the time spent to get the car to that spot.
If you should see a man walking down a crowded street talking aloud to himself, don't run in the opposite direction, but run towards him, because he's a poet. You have nothing to fear from the poet - but the truth.
(Ted Joans)
Member
Yes good point, personally too lazy to do that. But could you tell me why the whole car isn't in shadow considering there is a big rock behind it that seems to be blocking the light?
Miscommunication seems to be a direct result of misplaced, text based sarcasm.
Supporting Admin
What rock? Secondly, as you might be able to tell by the colour in the air; the sun is setting, so there would be little to no shadows in the first place.
The reason this picture looks so good is that it was properly set up; it was not a snap of a nice car on high street. The things you bring up for it being fake could not possibly have been altered with photoshop. There is no way an out of focus picture can be turned into perfect focus and it is also be impossible to pull a subject out of the shadow.
If you should see a man walking down a crowded street talking aloud to himself, don't run in the opposite direction, but run towards him, because he's a poet. You have nothing to fear from the poet - but the truth.
(Ted Joans)
Member
I really cannot be bothered but there is a rock blocking out sunlight in the reflection of the back window, that again SEEMS to be blocking out the sunlight to this picture. I'm probably wrong, but the picture seems wrong to me.
Miscommunication seems to be a direct result of misplaced, text based sarcasm.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
