One shot Digital challenge

[MWHCVT]

I was thinking, which is always dangerous and this may have already been done.

I often read in threads how the photography game has changed with digital what with the instant review and just delete if it not right era so how about this for a challenge, you only get one chance to take the shot no processing and upload it to share in a challenge thread

Would there be an interest in such a thread?

I should add I am not suggesting there would be a prize other than say bragging rights

Matt
MWHCVT

 

[lexie]

how would you know if someone has only taken one shot of something?

unless everyone was in the same place at the same time it would be impossible to enforce that rule.

there was a thread started last week with people taking shots over the weekend using only jpeg straight out of the camera and no processing except a resize. fair enugh you could have as many cracks at the shot as you wanted, but without the usual computer assistance it's about as close to the 'old' way of working as you're likely to get.

 

[Kaouthia]

you only get one chance to take the shot no processing

Ok, if no processing then I want to be able to put a different type of film in my DSLR. Oh, wait.

 

[SeeFarr]

this challenge would rely heavily on honesty.

 

[Sony_SoFar]

If its a bit of fun people would be honest enough IMO but there would be a very small proportion of people who would get a tad bit serious and just snap away until they got a good'un

 

[R1ch85]

Would it not make more sense to limit yourself to a roll of film? IE 36 shots or however many a film could take. Even a film camera user could take more than one exposure of the same thing unitl they ran out of film.

 

[MWHCVT]

how would you know if someone has only taken one shot of something?

unless everyone was in the same place at the same time it would be impossible to enforce that rule.

there was a thread started last week with people taking shots over the weekend using only jpeg straight out of the camera and no processing except a resize. fair enugh you could have as many cracks at the shot as you wanted, but without the usual computer assistance it's about as close to the 'old' way of working as you're likely to get.

I would expect that because no processing has been done the exif will still be showing and should help to show if any editing has been done I am sure someone with more knowlege that me will be able to confirm if this is possible...

Ok, if no processing then I want to be able to put a different type of film in my DSLR. Oh, wait.

In camera processing is fine, i.e. if you want to shoot in B&W for a given shot set the camera to B&W

this challenge would rely heavily on honesty.

I would hope fore a but of fun honesty would be all thats needed

If its a bit of fun people would be honest enough IMO but there would be a very small proportion of people who would get a tad bit serious and just snap away until they got a good'un

No doubt there would be a few but if they are unable to get the enjoyment out of a bit of fun maybe they need to have a serious think about there reasons for taking part

Would it not make more sense to limit yourself to a roll of film? IE 36 shots or however many a film could take. Even a film camera user could take more than one exposure of the same thing unitl they ran out of film.

I like this idea I had not considered this so yeah to develop the idea further then 36 exposures seems about right, I have never used an SLR so have no idea how many exposures could be had from one roll of film but from my old flim compact days I seem to remember that 36 seemed to be norm...

Matt
MWHCVT

 

[Kaouthia]

In camera processing is fine, i.e. if you want to shoot in B&W for a given shot set the camera to B&W

But if you're shooting RAW, there is no in-camera processing - if you're shooting JPG it's still being post-processed, it's just being done by the camera instead of with much more control and accuracy on a PC later.

One's ability to accurately setup colour profiles, custom curves, and processing settings inside the camera also shouldn't really come into play if all things are to be even. Some cameras can be configured to do quite a lot of post-work in the camera these days, both at the point of capture, as well as various image processing/cropping/etc. tools that are built in for editing later on.

The EXIF data wouldn't really help, because if I load a RAW file into Photoshop, I can tweak the hell out of it, have UFOs flying overhead and explosions in the background and still save it out as a JPG with EXIF info intact.

It can even be made to look as though the UFOs and explosions were captured in-camera (Canon's was also hacked too).

I admire the sentiment, but even if everybody was 100% honest about it, setting up, taking one shot, and submitting that, there are still other variables to consider - unless we all agreed on a standard curve, and picture profile settings that would work across the board (which they couldn't, because Nikon, Canon and others have different ideas about what's "neutral", "vivid", "sharp", etc), and the LCD on the back of the camera isn't often an accurate representation of how it'll look on screen (even a calibrated screen).