COMPETITIONS AND IMAGE EDITING

N

nikonian bob

Suspended / Banned
Messages
66
Name
robert
Edit My Images
Yes
Without the usual sour grapes syndrome I usually get after spending megabucks on forwarding Landscape prints to competitions only to find once again Im foiled, either Iv'e entered inthe wrong competition or Im expecting that some judge will take into account the fact that "off the camera images" with very little editing are still worthwhile. Im a Photoshop fan too but I probably need to be born again to compete with image after image being selected on computer skills result rather than artistic merit from good camera skills on the day. Nothing amiss with a bit of contrast adjustment,crop and sharpen but hell, does every pic have to look like a "Lord of the rings" set now just to get a look in ? Think Ill down another Artonis.
 
nikonian bob said:
Without the usual sour grapes syndrome I usually get after spending megabucks on forwarding Landscape prints to competitions only to find once again Im foiled, either Iv'e entered inthe wrong competition or Im expecting that some judge will take into account the fact that "off the camera images" with very little editing are still worthwhile. Im a Photoshop fan too but I probably need to be born again to compete with image after image being selected on computer skills result rather than artistic merit from good camera skills on the day. Nothing amiss with a bit of contrast adjustment,crop and sharpen but hell, does every pic have to look like a "Lord of the rings" set now just to get a look in ? Think Ill down another Artonis.
Click to expand...

I agree to some point but the problem with any form of visual art is that it is subjective to the viewers own eyes/interpretation.

Do you use filters? If so, isn't that cheating? All subjective.

Post one of your entries and let us be your next judges, you never know, you may win.
 
Thanks Tom, just had a notice here about next comp, NO digital manipulation other than minor adjustment and only digital images accepted so maybe a change is in the wind for a separate classification for fractual's
 
I agree with you for the mostpart, a lot of competitions now prefer heavily manipulated images - it is down to "personal opinion" though so not much you can do but keep entering.

This competition recently run by the Guardian however seems to have chosen "back to basics" images....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/istock-britain-is

Simon
 
My best thought is to create a separate catagory in all sections, we then can have an apples for apples comparison. Its the cost of submitting prints thats the problem. Sad to see now that some submitters are looking at who the judges will be, and their history before deciding to enter at all. Got to be sorted.
 
nikonian bob said:
... Sad to see now that some submitters are looking at who the judges will be, and their history before deciding to enter at all. Got to be sorted.
Click to expand...

That's just common sense, and I'm sure it's always been the case. What with everyone banging on about how subjective photography is. It's like having a look at who your client is before you shoot a job.
 
I think it is like fashion and I am sure it goes in cycles a little bit too. HDR is in right now, but people will get fed up seeing it in a few years and it will go away again. Black and White keeps coming and going in much the same way.

Personally I am looking forward to the upcoming stream of 3D photos heading our way - has anyone bought a LOREO stereoscopic lens yet???

NO? nevermind - I still havent decided whether or not to buy the glasses.
 
Post processing is an integral part of photography. It has been an integral part way before digital manipulation was around. It's a bit like a painter drawing out the scene and then not painting it.

Also how do you know the winning images have been manipulated so much? Some of the best photos i've seen look very manipulated, yet actually are almost the same as what came out of the camera.

Using one of my own examples, how manipulated was this shot?

IMG_0399.jpg


I'd suggest at first glance it would look very manipulated (maybe i'm totally wrong there).

In fact I opened the RAW, adjusted the white balance slightly (auto was to cold for the actual look) and adjusted the curves a little. That was essentially it... I'd class a B&W image as being more manipulated TBH.

Now if images like this were winning I'd agree with you, however I haven't seen any comp winners like that (i'm not commenting on the image specifically, just the type of image and manipulation).

http://fantasyartdesign.com/free-wallpapers/imgs/mid/68landscapes04-m241.jpg

I totally agree with you however regarding prints. Years ago yeah that was the only option but now it's just a pain in the backside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top