First monthly Anandtech Photography contest! June 2007

[blurredvision]

I'm not against Photoshop completely, I just think that by allowing use of the advanced tools of today's programs bastardizes the idea of a "photography" contest. It should be about who can take the best photograph, not who can apply the best filters. It's not against the rules to adjust curves, sharpness, exposure, etc. What else exactly are you wanting to do with Photoshop?

MY EDIT FOR YOUR EDIT:

Originally posted by: episodic
For instance - a guy named orton just to photograph in slides. He'd photograph one overexposed, on sharp and exposed, and one blurred. When they are stacked they create a wonderful effect. Now you can do the effect with photoshop. . .

Was it photography when it was done on slides? What makes it less a photo now?

Not trying to argue - just thought this would be a cool discussion

When you put it that way, I still stand on my side of the fence, it just becomes harder to explain my thoughts.

I guess it's like this with me. I want this contest to make people better "picture takers", not better Photoshop users. It's about composition and subject matter first and foremost, something even Photoshop can't fix.

 

[episodic]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
I'm not against Photoshop completely, I just think that by allowing use of the advanced tools of today's programs bastardizes the idea of a "photography" contest. It should be about who can take the best photograph, not who can apply the best filters. It's not against the rules to adjust curves, sharpness, exposure, etc. What else exactly are you wanting to do with Photoshop?

I often like to dodge and burn - especially in black and whites.

I like to play with the channels and swap channels occasionally, especially in b&w again.


Whats the harm of the channel mixer in a black and white pic?

If something was in the shot I don't like - especially if it were candid, and I could not set it up - what is the harm of cloning it out - if you are so good noone can tell, and if you are not a news reporter with a promise of 'truth' in photos. . ., again whats the harm?

Also - while many hate it, this contest totally ignores the reality of the popularity of HDR photography. I'm not talking about the crappy HDR's that are posted all over the internet with ugly halos. I'm talking about wonderful ones like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I..._City_at_night_HDR.jpg



Now I can understand the contest not wanting people swapping whole backgrounds, etc. .

 

[episodic]

I also think you'll find many of the masters of photography back in the film days - especially the artistic ones - were masters of manipulating photos in a darkroom. You could dodge, burn, tint, soft focus, etc . . . all in the dark room, all selectively, etc. . .

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: episodic
Whats the harm of the channel mixer in a black and white pic?

If something was in the shot I don't like - especially if it were candid, and I could not set it up - what is the harm of cloning it out - if you are so good noone can tell, and if you are not a news reporter with a promise of 'truth' in photos. . ., again whats the harm?

I really don't have any more arguements for you . I'm still viewing this as a photography contest, not a photoshop contest. Don't get me wrong, though, I understand the validity of the arguements of the things that can be done in a darkroom, but those were (are?) different times, not to mention a unique skill. I've used those arguements before against the old fogies in other photography forums who lambast any sort of PP on the computer whatsoever.

But, I don't feel that I'm the sole rule-maker of this thing. What does everyone else think? Open the contest to any and all PP? I guess as long as nobody goes all Andy Warhol on us, it won't be too bad.

Yes, episodic, you've swayed me a bit.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: episodic
Whats the harm of the channel mixer in a black and white pic?

If something was in the shot I don't like - especially if it were candid, and I could not set it up - what is the harm of cloning it out - if you are so good noone can tell, and if you are not a news reporter with a promise of 'truth' in photos. . ., again whats the harm?

I really don't have any more arguements for you . I'm still viewing this as a photography contest, not a photoshop contest. Don't get me wrong, though, I understand the validity of the arguements of the things that can be done in a darkroom, but those were (are?) different times, not to mention a unique skill. I've used those arguements before against the old fogies in other photography forums who lambast any sort of PP on the computer whatsoever.

But, I don't feel that I'm the sole rule-maker of this thing. What does everyone else think? Open the contest to any and all PP? I guess as long as nobody goes all Andy Warhol on us, it won't be too bad.

Yes, episodic, you've swayed me a bit.

If you're going to allow full blown photoshoping, at least make it separate category. I don't have access to PS and I don't really have that much of a desire (at the moment) to play with the photos I take with various PS filters.

 

[ProviaFan]

I find most "anti-post processing" arguments to be rather silly, since a photo can not be seen until it has been post processed, either with a developer and an enlarger, or with a computer. Since dodging and burning were simple and routine operations on the enlarger, I find it difficult to support the idea that a photo which has not seen dodging or burning is better than one which has - regardless of whether this was done on an enlarger or in Photoshop. We're not in any sort of new photographic "millenium," "dispensation," or whatever else one might call it, and what was acceptable ten years ago should be acceptable now. Please explain better why the use of a different technology warrants a different set of rules. I don't really follow how PS skill is any different from darkroom skill - if you have one but not the other, that doesn't make the other "unique."

With that said, you're free to set up an arbitrary set of regulations, since you're running the contest. What bothers me is the desire to separate from photography that which occurs after the shutter is pressed. Darkroom work, whether in a chemical bath or in PS, is to me an integral part of photography. I think we can all agree that it is easy to reach a level of manipulation where a photo becomes "graphic art," but I won't go along with semi-purists who draw invisible lines at such arbitrary points as local brightness/contrast adjustment.

 

[blurredvision]

I'm not ultimately familiar with darkroom techniques, I only imagine that it is a skill that is learned, not automated tasks like most of what Photoshop presents. And Provia, you've said the term that I've been trying to think of all this time, but could never put my finger on. "Graphic art" is exactly what I'd like to stay away from, the main reason in trying to keep the more advanced functions of Photoshop out of the PP workflow for the contest.

Then again, Brainonska511 brings up another point. Although, in this instance, you don't need Photoshop to submit a good picture, so I never used the arguement of access to the program . But is it fair to allow the use of expensive and advanced tools that are not available to just everyone? Or does the existence of The Gimp make it a level playing field? (I've never used The Gimp, so I'm not sure how it compares.)

I have no problems with the arguements that episodic and Provia bring up. And to Provia, I don't feel that just because I started the thread that I should make all the rules. You guys tell me what you want, and we'll do it that way. Anybody else think banning advanced Photoshop functions should stay or go?

 

[episodic]

If it is just the expensive tools you have:

Paintshop (cheap)
Ulead's Graphic Suite (I use it alot - can find it for 20 something)
Paint.net - free
Gimp - free (used to use this - it is powerful)
Adobe's Photoshop Elements (you can get version 3 or 4 for a song)




How about post processing is allowed as long as it isn't garish or andy warholish


Then just don't vote for anyone that submits garbage?

 

[montanafan]

I can see both sides of the full PhotoShop or not debate. Yes, post-processing is an integral part of photography whether it's film or digital. I had to learn chemical processing with film and I'm learning PhotoShop with digital, but I agree with the limitations blurredvision has set for this particular contest for the following reasons:

1) Most of the people who'd like to participate probably do not have something like CS2 or are even extremely skilled with any post-processing and would be discouraged by the comparison of their photos to ones that are finely tuned. Let's give everyone the feeling that they have a fair shot at this and get as many as possible involved.

2) No limitations on post-processing would make it an entirely different kind of contest than what I think the original intent was. I think the idea of this was to see whose photo comes across as the best with the proper exposure, focus, composition, etc. at the time of capture; instead of who can do the best job of fixing any flaws or making it more impressive after the capture. Perhaps there could be a different category for unlimited post-processing skills or a different contest for that later.

3) Though I understand the importance of post-processing to photography, I feel that it sometimes is taken to the point that it takes away from the purity or honesty of photos. Cloning, dodging, burning, using layers, etc. all have their uses in photography and make for compelling photos, but the results are an artist's rendering of what you see, not the reality of it.

Just my .02.

 

[episodic]

I can see both sides - but if the argument is about price of software - what about price of camera? Software is cheap. You don't have to have photoshop to retouch effectively. You can adjust levels, curves, etc even with the free software that comes with cameras. Gimp is quality software if you bother to learn it. . . Photoshop Elements is excellent. Ulead is excellent. . .

Also you guys were going to allow what is in Adobe Camera raw? I can turn a mediocre sunset into a gorgeous spectacle just in Adobe Camera Raw. . . How is that any more or less honest?

If someone's post processing skills are not good, and they get 'discouraged' - I hope that they would want to improve? I don't understand that really. How can someone know if they are not good or not without testing their skill. Of course you are going to fail alot before you get it right. . .

Provia has the best argument above. Why do we have to go 'back' in time just because there is a new medium? This was all accepted and prized just 20 years ago. . ., now it is shunned?

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: episodic
I can see both sides - but if the argument is about price of software - what about price of camera? Software is cheap.

That's not the arguement at all. I just mentioned in response to someone else.

Originally posted by: episodic
Also you guys were going to allow what is in Adobe Camera raw? I can turn a mediocre sunset into a gorgeous spectacle just in Adobe Camera Raw. . . How is that any more or less honest?

It seems as if what is in ACR can typically be done in-camera these days. My reasoning is that if it can basically be done on the camera itself before taking photos, then it should be allowed during PP.

Originally posted by: episodic
Provia has the best argument above. Why do we have to go 'back' in time just because there is a new medium? This was all accepted and prized just 20 years ago. . ., now it is shunned

Shunned is a harsh word, let's call it strongly discouraged . I feel that if we were having this contest 20 or 30 years ago, then darkroom skills would be sought after since not everyone was particularly skilled at it. Maybe I have the wrong impression, but to me, using a darkroom to PP pictures to a level that can be seen today with Photoshop takes considerable skill. So those skills were sought after. In today's world, everyone has access to powerful programs that can basically do a lot of the work for them. Click a couple of buttons, and ta-da, they have a picture that is very different from they took. Even novices can figure it out, it's not that hard.

Is that a good thing? Ya, but my thinking is that we should probably take a step back this time and focus more on the skill taking the picture rather than the skill of PP. Of course, I've been wrong before . But like I said before, I typically use Photoshop to do effects with my pictures, and I'm not against using the program at all for PP in general. I just questioned the appropriateness of allowing it's full use in a photography contest.

 

[dug777]

I don't have PS, want PS, and to me the main joy of photography is getting out there and enjoying it

Last thing i want to do is then spend hours and hours of my free time fiddling on PS, after a week at work in front of the computer...

 

[fierydemise]

Blurred I think you are making PP seem a lot more simple then it is, sure you can just hit a couple buttons and have PS fix the photo but that will only get you so far, without really knowing what you're doing you aren't going to get very far. Tools like curves are incredibly powerful but they are also very difficult to use correctly, just because PS has auto features that any monkey could use doesn't mean that all PP is is hitting a couple buttons. That said I think the restrictions you have in place are just fine, I don't really see the need to use anything other then the listed tools and similar in a photography contest.

 

[blurredvision]

Alright guys, I've decided to allow any and all PP. I have listed a couple of discouragements, but we shouldn't really have any problems in the long run.

 

[tfinch2]

Glad to see the contest getting started. Hopefully I will have some time to snap a few by the deadline.

 

[ZOXXO]

Just checked this thread to refresh my memory on the guidelines and must say I was surprised by the size requirements. Quite the opposite of most Photog forum contests which generally require a photo to be websized(400-600px on the long side). I think higher resolution submissions will better enable judging the quality of a shot.:thumbsup:

Of course this aspect of the rules may need to be revisited if we get inline image posting.

ENJOY

 

[magomago]

here is one last suggestion:


have different contests - have one be a "shutter" content, have one allow various degrees (defined by you guys) of post processing, and then allow one full blown one that really lets people play around with everything that programs these days offer~ Seems like the best method

 

[blurredvision]

Alright guys, I've started the gallery. The earlier you submit, the better chance your picture will be towards the front. I'll add them in the order I get them.

 

[BornStar]

The first picture looks good.

Since the submissions are anonymous, is it possible to get people to include information that wouldn't be in the exif data? I'm looking for lens choice information specifically since we can see basically everything else.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: BornStar
The first picture looks good.

Since the submissions are anonymous, is it possible to get people to include information that wouldn't be in the exif data? I'm looking for lens choice information specifically since we can see basically everything else.

I may consider turning on editable comments, so anyone and everyone can edit the comments anonymously. If a person would like to comment on their lens choice, then so be it.

Let me look into this, and I'll see about implementing it in the next couple of days.

 

[montanafan]

Just thought I'd bump this to the top to remind people that the deadline is nearing, and to thank blurredvision for taking it on.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: montanafan
Just thought I'd bump this to the top to remind people that the deadline is nearing, and to thank blurredvision for taking it on.

:thumbsup: Not a problem.

I've updated the gallery page a bit. I've changed the theme of the page to better suit the theme of our contest. I've also changed the layout so people can view just one picture at a time with the EXIF info immediately viewable. Be sure to check out detailed EXIF also! I've also taken out my name from my URL, and also taken out any links going to my personal gallery, so it's more our own little space now.

 

[tenthumbs]

I only see two pics. Are there more?

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: tenthumbs
I only see two pics. Are there more?

There have only been two submitted thus far. Submisison dealine is at the end of this week, so hopefully we just have a bunch of procrastinators instead of people not wanting to participate .

 

[aphex]

i'll have to jump in next month, too busy as of late