p.4 #1 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
jvarszegi wrote:
It's really very simple. If you copy and paste pixels, you no longer have a photograph but rather a collage or other form.
What if I use a contrast mask while making a print in the darkroom? In the digital darkroom I'd need to copy and paste the image into a new layer and apply a blur. Is the film version a photograph but the digital version not?
What if I don't copy and paste, but have the patience and skill to draw in something that looks real, pixel by pixel? What if I shoot film and double expose? What if i shoot film, single expose, but use strobes to create the effect of multiple exposures? What if I shoot film and stack two negatives? What if I shoot film and have a sharp knife and glue?
p.4 #2 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
My personal take on this discussion is that it is being totaly blown out of proportion, I think that what they are saying like most rules for large competition state that a digital photograph must not render anything or take away anything that you saw through the view finder when you pressed the trigger.
The original image must not be manipulated to add or remove clouds, branches, twigs, catchlites, leaves, etc etc etc.
I think what they are saying is that a little saturation, contrast and curves adjustments noise and sharpening are fine, Just don'y add or subtract anything from the original shot as stated above, that's how I read it, Just my .02 cents worth.
p.4 #3 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
Roby said, To browncam, do you know some competition that asks only for the RAW for verifies? Me no, the most restrictive rules also allow the JPEG, whose metadata of they very easily alter.
No I don't. I have not researched it at all. It was just an observation.
p.4 #4 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
I believe that it it is necessary once more to specify the purpose of the petition, here he is not discussing if is correct or no to elaborate the images before delivering her to a jury of a photographic contest, but if we direct to give the means to the juries to verify how much the images are been manipulated. I agree that is a lot of difficulty to establish some precise rules but the philosophy of the Shell wildlife photographer of the year it suits me in everything except that for the delivery of the original file JPG, a file too easily manipolabile and whose reliability is difficult to verify. At the state of the art, technical motivations that prevent the delivery of the RAW don't exist, rather with a lot of of the last cameras in commerce best results are gotten with the file RAW in comparison to the JPEG and buffer allows 20 or 30 consecutive photos.
I believe, reading this forum, that many don't see the problem of the digital manipulations as a true problem. Yes photograpy is an art.. but in the images of wildlife must be represents the reality, any other type of image belongs to other categories.
In Italy the problem is very felt and we have organized a round table on the theme that April 25th 2008 will be held to Comacchio (FE) to which photographers and magazine editors will intervene for find a "file rouge", a line by to apply to the photographic contests of nature.
p.4 #5 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
Humm Interesting, I don’t think I would sign this petition even though I feel the need for my digital photos to be as close to what the camera saw. Having been doing photography (mostly wildlife) for 58 years I still can remember making many changes to a slide or a negative in my darkroom by dialing a little more filter into the next try or dodging or burning with a stick and a piece of cardboard on the end of it. The camera was all manual but this was a simple operation compared to the digital cameras they make today. I myself applaud the people that can use software like Photoshop and understand these new cameras so well. No matter what type of system you use wildlife photography is never easy be it film or digital because you have no control over the weather or light changes. I think some needs will be necessary in either the computer or the dark room.
And as far as I can see the big difference is you can do it cheaper with digital but on the other side I or (I don’t think anyone else) can say digital raws will produce prints like Kodak Chrome slide over the period of time they were used as I have many that are over 50 years old and still scan a beautiful photo.
I say a wildlife photo need not be perfect depending on what the needs for it are; it just has to do what you want it to. Let them judge studio work and leave wildlife out of it. Unless of cause you were Marlin Perkins with a full crew.
Lou
PS Didn’t I read somewhere that the digital camera RAW would need sharpening due to the protective thing in front of the sensor If so not to fair for the RAW file.
p.4 #6 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
I understand what the judges are trying to control, but digital takes photography to a whole new level. There is NO going back.
This sounds like an extension of the... we have to be fair... politically correct crap that is infecting the world today.
Not every thing, not every body, not every photo has to be equal... the world just doesn't work like that. To me, it is a survival of the fitest issue. With PS I'm more fit to survive than I would be without it.
p.4 #7 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
Have to agree with Terry, as the way I see it if the judge likes it so be it and if not so be it. I just submitted two 8X10 for a jury to look at to allow me a space in an upcoming show so I gave them one wildlife (eagle) and one landscape of an old building. I did both because I am not sure what the jury people like for themselves. I don’t know any of these judges and one or two may love a sharp and enhanced photo while another might not. So like Terry says digital is here to stay and if the wildlife judges want to judge photos for what the camera took than let those people enter it that agree. Why a petition
Lou
p.4 #8 · Digital manipulation in wildlife photography
Casmerodius wrote:
Images should be submitted at their native resolution with no interpolation applied. Scans or prints are not permitted. Save images as JPEGs at the highest possible quality setting (eg 12 in Photoshop).
Do not use subfolders when saving images onto CD/DVD. The original capture as it was recorded by the camera with no manipulation applied (eg *.DNG, *.jpg, *.NEF, *.CR2, *.CRW) will be requested if your image reaches the final stages of the competition and must be supplied to us in early May 2008. We will contact you to request these.
This is an extract of the Shell Wildlife photographer of the year 2008, the contradiction is evident since is possible to also deliver the file jpeg, whose attached metadata are very easily modifiable, those of the RAW no!
I completely disagree with you on the entry of a jpg. Most people in these contests would be shooting raw, though a manipulated jpg would be obvious to the judges. At 8 bits, all you have to do is look at the histogram to see that if the original has been seriously altered. Which they would certainly do......................
If so not to fair for the RAW file.