To Photoshop or not? The Poll.

[stevegreen]

I'm no photoshop expert, in fact i know virtually nothing about it, but, having had a bit of a play with it the other night I started to realise just how powerful this software is.

My 'ear' picture that I have submitted this month was transformed with a simple auto balancing of colours etc. (i'll upload it soon and link it here so you can see the difference), so, the burning question is.......

Should image manipulation be allowed in the Photo Competition?

At the moment it's limited to simple red eye reduction and sharpening/blurring. I personally agree with a comment made by Geordie Jester that over manipulation isn't a good idea ( he quoted sticking the Taj Mahal behind a pic ) but, colour correction etc can make a massive difference to the 'quality' of the picture.

I wanted initially to just keep it a simple photo competition without PS savvy entries making it impossible for less savvy people to have a chance at winning (myself included in that by the way), but, my guess is that most entrants will have some idea on digital photo manipulation, so why exclude it.

As I don't know the program very well, i will have to leave it to those more familiar with it to suggest some limitations, without making it complicated

So, what do you think, it's our competition, it's all for a bit of fun, it's all designed to help us learn and get advice, should we relax the rules? Either Yes or No, no mid ground

[Mylo]

My vote is yes, but not excessive amounts of manipulation.

[JayX]

seperating it into a photography competition and a photoshopping competition would probably be for the best. not allowing photoshopping makes you a better photographer, as you have to learn the manual controls rather than doing it at the mouse and keyboard later, but there's no doubt PS allows you to create a far better "image" in the long run.

[stevegreen]

I dont think splitting it into two separate competitions is for the best, my mian concern about allowing image manipulation was that it could detract from the photo and become a Photoshop competition, with some of the more professional users using the program to produce stunning photo works giving less adept users no chance. This could make the competition less popular or more daunting to new entrants. On the other hand it could provide inspiration.

[Mylo]

The ear manipulation is about my limit anyway as I only have PSP. Simple colour balancing helps, adding noise and stuff does not in my completely amateur opinion.

[dolph]

I've voted yes - not really bothered either way to be honest (still haven't got round to this months entry) -

starting to get fed up with the whole thing yet steve....!??!

[stevegreen]

Originally Posted by andrewdolphin

starting to get fed up with the whole thing yet steve....!??!

No way. It took me ages to decide what to take for this months competition. i like that kind of a challenge and it's always interesting to see what other people do too

[Mr.D]

Having backgrounds in traditional photography and being a professional compositor I don't see photoshopping images to be vastly different from what professional photographers can do at the print stage : just a lot less time consuming and more transparent. ( ignoring colourspace issues)

A good image is a good image . Ensure you are not compromising the original image with your tweaking though ( crushing or clipping are bad generally)

Where would you draw the line with technology interfering with the creative process?
Pin-hole cameras? Making your own emulsions?

Its rare to expose a neg and then print it with no modification even if its just cropping into an image. You always make decisions as to the contrast range you print also.

[Gary D]

i clicked no - but i meant yes - D'OH!

maybe if it is allowed then you should have to submit both the before and after pictures so that you can see what has been changed.


gary

[Garrett]

I think it should be more or less be only cropping and even that I have only cropped one for a comp.
The competition is about taking photos not how good are you at photo manipulation.

[Mr.D]

Short of chopping two vastly different images together ( which will likely look pants anyway) I don't see anything wrong with for example bracketing your shots and chopping detail into the shadows from two different exposure ranges : given how clippy most digital cameras are.

Pulling lumakeys and modifying the contrast range in certain areas.

taming some of the unatural colours in isolated areas of the plate.

taming harsh hilights.

Like I said if its a good image its not important how it arrived , even documentary work is modified in this way. (sometimes more extremely than this even)

None of these things is outside the remit of a traditional photographer . At the other end of the scale photo-retouching using airbrush and even just paint has been done for over a century on even some of the most respected fine art photography.

[Adrenochrome]

Jeez it's all for fun just take the pic then enter it no manipulation please.

If we allowed manipulation it would be akin to fondling silicone enhanced boobies

Adrenochrome.

[Mr Cat]

I don't have access to photo manipulation software - and i guess others will be the same....an unfair disadvantage I'd say.....

[Geordie Jester]

I agree with Mr D, even in darkrooms, you can develop the same photograph in a number of ways.

And look at magazine group tests of different developers/shops. They end up with all sorts of differences in tone/colour/contrast.

I personally think that we should allow most photoshopping enhancements.

...or agree on a wider set....

like

LEVELS (contrast/brightness/colour saturation etc)
SHARPENING
SOFTENING
NOISE REMOVAL
CROPPING

Or.... maybe (apart from bandwidth issues) a copy of the original snap. Im sure most people would be happy to own-up to what has been done to the shot too.

[stevegreen]

I didn't understand a word of Keith's post That shows just how much I know!

I don't get your point Tom