Welcome to the poll for our August "Dramatic Sky" photo contest! Select the photo you think is the best from among our finalists below:

#1.


#2.


#3.


#4.


#5.


#6.


#7.


#8.


#9.


#10.


#11.


#12.


#13.


#14.


#15.

[tcarter]

Very creative group! Hard to choose.

[wpteedphotography]

wow - photos have always been manipulated. Ansel Adams is a culprit if manipulation is a big bad. The reality is to make it look real, something that people can relate to. Just a late night thought

[UncleVanya]

I voted. But I’m not saying for which one because - etiquette! I will say that many looked great and on more careful looks they didn’t hold up as well as the image I picked. Composition and technique both play a role in what I select each month to vote for.

[grey goat]

wow - photos have always been manipulated. Ansel Adams is a culprit if manipulation is a big bad. The reality is to make it look real, something that people can relate to. Just a late night thought

You're absolutely right. Not just Adams, either, but just about every photographer whose name we know who shot black & white in the 20th C.

And anyone who took color film to the shop on the corner or the big-box or pharmacy to have developed and printed . . . take a look at the back of those prints, at least the last decades of the 20th C. The photofinisher didn't crop the image, but they did make adjustments to the color based on the kind of film you used and what paper and chemicals they were using.

So I guess that's another late night thought. :-)

Back to editing concert photos. . . .

[Ski Jumper]

Well I voted #1, looks less photoshopped to me from the others. I wish there were rules(which would be hard to enforce) as to limited amount of software editing. I realize some is needed but not to where the pictures look unrealistic. I am old school on editing, I think the photographer should know his cameras well enough to take less needed edited pictures. Just my opinion. Thanks

Same feeling here. 13 looks pretty natural too.

[XLXW]

I voted for #2.

[mroeder75]

Since I pick 3, 6, 9, and 14, and I cannot vote against the others, I abstain, and hope better eyes prevail.

[Rick in PA]

Well I voted #1, looks less photoshopped to me from the others. I wish there were rules(which would be hard to enforce) as to limited amount of software editing. I realize some is needed but not to where the pictures look unrealistic. I am old school on editing, I think the photographer should know his cameras well enough to take less needed edited pictures. Just my opinion. Thanks

I totally support the comments made by MWM, there needs to some sort of restriction on the photo editing other wise we are going to ultimately be voting on the best proceeded image which I believe defeats the object.

[Yaki]

Amazing collection of sky photos! I choose my favorite but five more cold be easily on its place.

[MrB1]

Image editing should be considered to be one of the essential skills of the digital photographer but, in my opinion, the image produced should remain a recognisable representation of the scene (or part of it if cropped) that was captured by the photographer. I would suggest that each of these images fulfills that criterion admirably.

[Yaki]

I totally support the comments made by MWM, there needs to some sort of restriction on the photo editing other wise we are going to ultimately be voting on the best proceeded image which I believe defeats the object.

Well, I don't support it in the part of not postprocessing and support it in the part of knowing the camera abilities. Because you can get much much mor in post processing from a nearly perfect composed and measured image. And wat to emphasize or hide from such an image by postprocessing is artists choice the same way as it is what and how to shoot it.
When I look on a great painting I don't care what kind of brushes, paints and other instruments the artist used to create it.
In the end of the day the result is what matters - at least for me

[Wellshot]

Photography is an art. It's all about manipulation. From start to finish. It has no obligation to reality, or to even look "realistic". It's about taste and style. If the beholder doesn't like a photo, then he doesn't have to vote for it. It's that simple.

I haven't checked on PF, but maybe there is a contest or challenge suited to those who prefer minimal or even no editing/PP? If such a contest doesn't exist, perhaps those interested could set one up?

[krmitchell1055]

I vote for #3

[Fdooch]

I do not belong to the Orthodox who believe that post-processing is evil and has nothing to do with photography. It's stupid not to take the opportunity to correct imperfections a little or correct your own mistakes. But I will not vote, because in my opinion, the submitted authors have changed their sense of proportion. The dramatic sky itself is epic enough to add a wow effect, especially since it is so crude and redundant. Such processing only reduces the cost of decent pictures.

[tncowdaddy]

The beauty of the monthly contest is you get to "Pick the photo you think should win the contest"! If you think a "well processed" image should win, pick it! If you think a "natural" looking one should win, pick it! We all get a vote. Personally, I simply pick the one I like to look the most. Sometimes it's processed, sometimes it's natural, sometimes it's purely my emotional reaction, but it's always the one I think should win. I wish more forum users would submit pictures and vote. I think it's fun to submit and see what others have to say. Sometimes I think there's no way I'd ever win, but then some months a surprise winner emerges and I have renewed hope. If I submit 100 times and never win, I'll still enjoy it! The monthly contest is one of my favorite things about the forum.