---XR---;2040267; said:
Incorrect. There are currently over 13,000 threads and 277,000 posts in our amazing photo lounge, I would have to stop eating, sleeping, and working in order for me to go through all of that!
Aug. 08 - POTM Poll * Load Warning *
- Thread starter Gr8KarmaSF
- Start date
- Status
Incorrect. There are currently over 13,000 threads and 277,000 posts in our amazing photo lounge, I would have to stop eating, sleeping, and working in order for me to go through all of that!
Gr8KarmaSF;2040431; said:Incorrect. There are currently over 13,000 threads and 277,000 posts in our amazing photo lounge, I would have to stop eating, sleeping, and working in order for me to go through all of that!
Was this a rule before your revised rule list? i definetly remember seeing that as a rule on a fish forum Photo contest and i'm 90% sure i heard that was a rule here aswell or the forum i'm thinking of was MFK.
never the less- i did go over your current rule setup and i noticed your photo editing rule. And i would like to add- that if a photo has been taken correctly and edited correctly (even massive correction) that even the best of eyes couldn't tell that it was obviously not the original photo or the amount of correction done to the photo.
example- your post on blacking out a backround. It's well known that depending on how you use avalible lighting and flash photography, you can easily make the effect of a blackened backround. This is a natural effect. on the post of Johns he had a very wide tank (easier to have the illusion of a black backround). We later found that he had blackended it out himself.
Therefor if done properly there is no way to know how overdone and how much post processing was used for a photo. So in this case i think your rules a bit sketchy and could use some redefineing. Exactly what and what isn't allowed. Editing of exposure, Noise removal, and the list goes on forever. Or you could keep it the way it is and have the photographers use PS at there own discreation.
Ethier way i'm fine but i just wanted to add this in.
---XR---;2040561; said:
You are correct it is a gray area. Any entry that is in question is always up for review by the entire staff. In the end its to difficult and undefinable to measure what is allowed and not allowed but we do try our best. Like you stated, "the list goes on forever." In fact two entries this month were up for review by the staff and yet were allowed in the contest.
Good day...
So by saying "good day" are you dissmissing my inquiry to if the 1st Rule was defined before the new resivion?
the thought is gonna keep me up all night.
Thank for your reply of my other question though. I've had experience with Mods brushing my questions under the table (Deletion or Lock) or not answering them at all.
the thought is gonna keep me up all night.
Thank for your reply of my other question though. I've had experience with Mods brushing my questions under the table (Deletion or Lock) or not answering them at all.
---XR---;2040561; said:
It's incredibly difficult to pull off a good cleanup without having a very solid base photo to begin with. Regardless of how good you are with Photoshop, the better actual photograph will always be cleaner than something that's heavily edited.
I'd have no problem producing a full resolution unedited copy of my photograph if there were to be deemed any problems with it
japes;2041248; said:It's incredibly difficult to pull off a good cleanup without having a very solid base photo to begin with. Regardless of how good you are with Photoshop, the better actual photograph will always be cleaner than something that's heavily edited.
I'd have no problem producing a full resolution unedited copy of my photograph if there were to be deemed any problems with it
i was not making the accusation that your pic was edited.
And if a photographer had any type of photo editing software, than they most likely also take solid base shots to work with.
I know plenty of people who can take decent shots and make them fantastic through PS. It's not perticularly hard to do and to keep them clean. PS is used by pro's for the reason of photo cleanup,- Cropping, Noise removal, Sharpening, etc. not for complete revamp.
though through certain area's of PS you can completely edit the color of the fish or subject and the true nature of the picture taken and still keep a natural look to the pic.
---XR---;2041345; said:
Yeah I realise you weren't pin-pointing my picture as a problem. I'm just saying that regardless of editing it has to be a good photo underneath to achieve good results. You can't just take a P&S, click randomly, open up Photoshop and expect to be the next Ansel Adams. People very much underate the skill and overate the use of Photoshop when they look at a nice photo and get told it's been edited.
I won't (can't?) disclose which photos mine, but I'm sure yourself and a few others know it (I can usually pick out some others photos, for example I can see shots from Greenterra & VLDesign in there), and all that's done to it is a change in Levels, Brightness/Contrast, and Colour Balance. If the base photo wasn't so clear, and I had to get in there with the blur and burn tools, among other things, the result wouldn't have been as nice in my opinion.
Essentially, my point is that regardless of editing you need to have some skills when it comes to using a camera, composition, etc. to get a shot that people like, whether it's edited or not.
</rant>
- Status
