If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Exactly how much photoshopping are you allowed to do in a photography contest before the judges disqualify you for 'too much' photoshopping?   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 162
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

24115 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Nov 2012 at 2:49 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



162 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-05 12:10:34 AM  
Stop making sense, subby.
 
2012-11-05 12:14:54 AM  
blogs.photopreneur.com

Can you win posthumously?
 
2012-11-05 02:53:56 AM  
The answer is none. None more photoshopping.
 
2012-11-05 02:59:54 AM  
There is clearly an acceptable level, as even your digital camera is "photoshoping" what it saves to produce a better photo (Unless your using a raw format). Most people would say that adjusting levels/colors across the whole image is also acceptable manipulation. Once you begin using tools to alter specific portions of the image, it becomes totally a matter of opinion on how much is acceptable. Without seeing a before and after picture, you can't really judge whether what was done is acceptable, and the article didn't have one.
 
2012-11-05 03:02:21 AM  
You can't do an "Iran" level of photoshopping.
 
2012-11-05 03:06:50 AM  
I think that adjusting levels might be okay, but any movement of elements of the image would be well into PS territory. I've been told that a big part of the genius of Ansel Adams was the result of tweaks in the development process.

Although we do appreciate the works that show up here.
 
2012-11-05 03:07:22 AM  
If what you did could be duplicated in a dark room then it should be allowed. Anything beyond that should not be allowed.
 
2012-11-05 03:07:28 AM  
No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.
 
2012-11-05 03:08:37 AM  
But it's okay if you use GIMP, right?
 
2012-11-05 03:11:24 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.


Photographers have been shopping their images since film was invented. A darkroom gives you a great deal of control over brightness and contrast, tone, etc. You can crop, and you can even control specific portions of the photograph without affecting other areas. It's seems silly that it's against the rule to do with a computer what film photographers do by waving little paddles around.
 
2012-11-05 03:11:43 AM  
I used MS Paint.

Should I not have done that?
 
2012-11-05 03:12:58 AM  
And no letting colour blind people look at it! They can't appreciate art like we can!!
 
2012-11-05 03:13:03 AM  
 
2012-11-05 03:13:07 AM  
I find it hilarious and sad that the winning photos from the competition were all about broken husks of formerly thriving civilization. Somebody needs a hug.
 
2012-11-05 03:18:37 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.

Photographers have been shopping their images since film was invented. A darkroom gives you a great deal of control over brightness and contrast, tone, etc. You can crop, and you can even control specific portions of the photograph without affecting other areas. It's seems silly that it's against the rule to do with a computer what film photographers do by waving little paddles around.


Pretty much this. I used to add shadows to things in the dark room, and that was in highschool. I even used diffrent filters on the enlarger to adjust the image, dodged and burned specific areas, stitched negitives together, preformed double exposures to produce neat effects, tons of stuff. It was a bit harder then the computer is, But you could accomplish alot with a good enlarger and some time.
 
2012-11-05 03:23:08 AM  
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-11-05 03:24:59 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.

Photographers have been shopping their images since film was invented. A darkroom gives you a great deal of control over brightness and contrast, tone, etc. You can crop, and you can even control specific portions of the photograph without affecting other areas. It's seems silly that it's against the rule to do with a computer what film photographers do by waving little paddles around.


I'm against those things as well.
 
2012-11-05 03:29:26 AM  

bobtheallmighty: I even used diffrent filters on the enlarger to adjust the image, dodged and burned specific areas, stitched negitives together, preformed double exposures to produce neat effects, tons of stuff. It was a bit harder then the computer is, But you could accomplish alot with a good enlarger and some time.


ahhhhh. random ass double exposures. miss those. i also miss cross processing. ps cross processing isn't as random.
 
2012-11-05 03:31:06 AM  
Here's an explanation from somebody with too much time on their hands: Link
 
2012-11-05 03:35:33 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.

Photographers have been shopping their images since film was invented. A darkroom gives you a great deal of control over brightness and contrast, tone, etc. You can crop, and you can even control specific portions of the photograph without affecting other areas. It's seems silly that it's against the rule to do with a computer what film photographers do by waving little paddles around.

I'm against those things as well.


To be fair, I'm only against these things in the milieu of photography contests.

Where one person spends a month of their lives staked out to capture the perfect shot with the sun in the right place in the sky and the weather just so, another will take a mediocre base image and dodge and burn until what he's looking for 'pops'. It's a disservice to those who work hard for their pure shots.
 
2012-11-05 03:40:34 AM  

Krieghund: Stop making sense, subby.


This is not my beautiful photograph.
 
2012-11-05 03:40:55 AM  
Too bad. I love that photo and have been up to Lindisfarne to try and recreate my own version. I won a minor competition using a photo of the castle with a tremendously dramatic sky. I told no-one it was a sky replacement job and I feel slightly guilty, even though the rules say nothing to forbid this.
 
2012-11-05 03:43:21 AM  

Krieghund: Stop making sense, subby.


What you did... I see it.
 
2012-11-05 03:48:10 AM  

wildcardjack: I think that adjusting levels might be okay, but any movement of elements of the image would be well into PS territory. I've been told that a big part of the genius of Ansel Adams was the result of tweaks in the development process.


Exactly. If it's a direct analog of a darkroom process, it's OK to do it in Photoshop. (IMHO)
 
2012-11-05 03:54:08 AM  
Is this a trap?

i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-05 03:54:45 AM  

ras django: ahhhhh. random ass double exposures. miss those. i also miss cross processing. ps cross processing isn't as random.


You can pick up good used 35mm film gear for pennies on the dollar, especially if you're not worried about compatibility with your DSLR system. You can get a good used Medium Format film outfit for less than an entry level DSLR.

I got two Canon Elan 7's for $50 each on EBay. Next purchase is some developing tanks and chemistry.
 
2012-11-05 03:57:36 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Where one person spends a month of their lives staked out to capture the perfect shot with the sun in the right place in the sky and the weather just so, another will take a mediocre base image and dodge and burn until what he's looking for 'pops'. It's a disservice to those who work hard for their pure shots.


i'ld say give a good printer your hard wrought pure image and he/she would make it even better.
 
2012-11-05 03:58:13 AM  
i.telegraph.co.uk

Too much photoshop? Nah, looks the same as it ever was.
 
2012-11-05 03:59:35 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.

Photographers have been shopping their images since film was invented. A darkroom gives you a great deal of control over brightness and contrast, tone, etc. You can crop, and you can even control specific portions of the photograph without affecting other areas. It's seems silly that it's against the rule to do with a computer what film photographers do by waving little paddles around.


Do you mean to say that Photoshop wasn't a totally original idea and name? I always wondered where Photoshop got the inspiration for tools like "Filter" "Lens Flare" and "Magic Wand."
 
2012-11-05 03:59:40 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: I'm against those things as well.


You're also against bathing. What's your point and why should anyone care?
 
2012-11-05 04:00:42 AM  

clyph: wildcardjack: I think that adjusting levels might be okay, but any movement of elements of the image would be well into PS territory. I've been told that a big part of the genius of Ansel Adams was the result of tweaks in the development process.

Exactly. If it's a direct analog of a darkroom process, it's OK to do it in Photoshop. (IMHO)


So New Layer is out?
 
2012-11-05 04:00:58 AM  

clyph: AverageAmericanGuy: I'm against those things as well.

You're also against bathing. What's your point and why should anyone care?


Can't you read his Fark handle?

He's here to represent the average american guy.
 
2012-11-05 04:04:09 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.


Uh...where do you think Photoshop got its name from? It's been done for decades.
 
2012-11-05 04:06:18 AM  
Now, Photoshop or no Photoshop, how did the former winner beat the new one? It's a much better photo in every sense of the word.

Disqualified Photo:

i.telegraph.co.uk

New Winner:

i.telegraph.co.uk
 
2012-11-05 04:07:45 AM  

clyph: AverageAmericanGuy: I'm against those things as well.

You're also against bathing. What's your point and why should anyone care?


Well, that was an unwarranted personal attack.

It's too bad. I thought there was a good conversation to be had here.

rocky_howard: AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.

Uh...where do you think Photoshop got its name from? It's been done for decades.


Yes, and in a photography contest, I think the use of photograph manipulation is out of place.

In your living room or on a museum wall or in your photo albums, by all means, do your worst.
 
2012-11-05 04:08:38 AM  

rocky_howard: Now, Photoshop or no Photoshop, how did the former winner beat the new one? It's a much better photo in every sense of the word.

Disqualified Photo:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x283]

New Winner:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 450x620]


Two words: Onion Titties.
 
2012-11-05 04:08:57 AM  

rocky_howard: Now, Photoshop or no Photoshop, how did the former winner beat the new one? It's a much better photo in every sense of the word.

Disqualified Photo:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x283]

New Winner:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 450x620]


People like moody pictures.
 
2012-11-05 04:09:08 AM  

rocky_howard: Now, Photoshop or no Photoshop, how did the former winner beat the new one? It's a much better photo in every sense of the word.

Disqualified Photo:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x283]

New Winner:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 450x620]


I would tend to disagree.

I think the natural curves in the PSed photo makes me stare harder at it.

And that's what photography is all about, sir.

Staring at stuff until it's perfect.
 
2012-11-05 04:09:37 AM  

Rezurok: Here's an explanation from somebody with too much time on their hands: Link


HOLY....FARK. I thought you were joking when you said too much time, but jesus, that guy is real life Photoshop CSI lol.
 
2012-11-05 04:10:23 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: rocky_howard: Now, Photoshop or no Photoshop, how did the former winner beat the new one? It's a much better photo in every sense of the word.

Disqualified Photo:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x283]

New Winner:

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 450x620]

People like moody pictures.


You just keep your opinions to yourself.

You saw what happened a few posts ago when you started spouting truth.
 
2012-11-05 04:10:59 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Yes, and in a photography contest, I think the use of photograph manipulation is out of place.


What's the solution? Send them to Eckerd? The darkroom processes are manipulation. The whole damned art is manipulation.
 
2012-11-05 04:12:22 AM  

libranoelrose: I would tend to disagree.

I think the natural curves in the PSed photo makes me stare harder at it.

And that's what photography is all about, sir.

Staring at stuff until it's perfect.


Ah, you're a curves guy. I'm a lines guy. Especially diagonals.
 
2012-11-05 04:12:25 AM  
hmmmm.

being that work could have also been done painstakingly in a darkroom before digital ....
this is sad...

i'm not a purist but everyone uses digital darkroom techniques now...

The Byrne photo is just better...

my opinion...

/worked in a darkroom
//smell the stop bath....
/// you want fries with that?
 
2012-11-05 04:14:19 AM  
got my old bronica and a nice eos but i hardly ever use them. and chemistry is so messy. and the smell? ewwww.

clyph: I got two Canon Elan 7's for $50 each on EBay. Next purchase is some developing tanks and chemistry.

 
2012-11-05 04:14:30 AM  

pnkgtr: Krieghund: Stop making sense, subby.

What you did... I see it.


Me, too, but I'll admit it took a little bit to sink in. Delayed effect. Very subtle. +1.
 
2012-11-05 04:15:46 AM  

Zombalupagus: pnkgtr: Krieghund: Stop making sense, subby.

What you did... I see it.

Me, too, but I'll admit it took a little bit to sink in. Delayed effect. Very subtle. +1.


I think I don't get it. Fill me in to see if I do.
 
2012-11-05 04:17:22 AM  

rocky_howard: Now, Photoshop or no Photoshop, how did the former winner beat the new one? It's a much better photo in every sense of the word.



Because it's a portrait. (?)
 
2012-11-05 04:21:10 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: AverageAmericanGuy: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: AverageAmericanGuy: No photoshopping should be acceptable in a photography contest.

Photographers have been shopping their images since film was invented. A darkroom gives you a great deal of control over brightness and contrast, tone, etc. You can crop, and you can even control specific portions of the photograph without affecting other areas. It's seems silly that it's against the rule to do with a computer what film photographers do by waving little paddles around.

I'm against those things as well.

To be fair, I'm only against these things in the milieu of photography contests.

Where one person spends a month of their lives staked out to capture the perfect shot with the sun in the right place in the sky and the weather just so, another will take a mediocre base image and dodge and burn until what he's looking for 'pops'. It's a disservice to those who work hard for their pure shots.


I have to agree with the Dodge/Burn in a contest, but exposure adjustment, levels and such I think are just fine. Basically, anything done in Adobe CameraRAW is fine, since you are basically just digitally choosing your development mixture. Once you've imported the photo into Photoshop, however, add your watermark and you are done. No filters, no layers (other than a watermark).
 
2012-11-05 04:22:50 AM  

Mock26: If what you did could be duplicated in a dark room then it should be allowed. Anything beyond that should not be allowed.


For how long should photographic skills be limited by the possibilities of a chemical process which has already been obsolete for ten years or more? In fifty years time there will be hardly any photographers around who have ever used film or paper.
 
2012-11-05 04:24:50 AM  

rocky_howard: I think I don't get it. Fill me in to see if I do


David Byrne is the photographer of the disqualified photo. David Byrne wore ridiculously over-sized jackets with shoulder pads in the 80's and sang for the talking heads. .
 
Displayed 50 of 162 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report