[normhead]

Well, I don’t do competitions but I am subjective…

I’ve noticed that of late that my Facebook stream is full of posts for “photography courses”, illustrated by over-saturated images, which turn out to be courses on post-processing not photography (and designed to sell you pre-sets so you don’t really need any skills).

Personally, I tend to differentiate creating art from taking photographs, so I would guess you need to assess whether the competition is really about art or photography. Personally, I’d try to find competitions interested in photography.

---------- Post added 02-08-22 at 10:16 AM ----------


I think that is spot on!

But I’m talking about my photographic preferences, not winning competitions!

As far a I can tell, all competitions are about art. There are no competitions for "most realistic photograph"... anywhere.. Competitions are won by creativity in portraying a subject. Not for as exact (as possible going from 3d space to 2d space) rendering of the subject.

[Madaboutpix]

Not sure if this has been shared on PF before, but I personally found Zack Arias's advice on contests and why one may struggle to win or even place in them quite instructive. He should know, both from the photographer end and because he has judged quite a few of those contests:

You Tube

You Tube

Strikingly (to me at least), and arguably relevant to this thread, he doesn't make the question of saturation, or heavy vs. light processing, one of his major points. Which could indicate that it is not as central to winning such contests as people think, or just hard to give straightforward one-fits-all advice about.

[JohnMc]

Well, I don’t do competitions but I am subjective…

I’ve noticed that of late that my Facebook stream is full of posts for “photography courses”, illustrated by over-saturated images, which turn out to be courses on post-processing not photography (and designed to sell you pre-sets so you don’t really need any skills).

Personally, I tend to differentiate creating art from taking photographs, so I would guess you need to assess whether the competition is really about art or photography. Personally, I’d try to find competitions interested in photography.

Funny. Two of the three A Adams famous book series are about post-processing.

[swanlefitte]

As far a I can tell, all competitions are about art. There are no competitions for "most realistic photograph"... anywhere.. Competitions are won by creativity in portraying a subject. Not for as exact (as possible going from 3d space to 2d space) rendering of the subject.

I would go even farther. Any photo meant to be looked at, not analyzed, is about art. Landscapes especially. Evoking something in the viewer over what is there. Orange vines over american bittersweet is what important. I photographed american bittersweet yesterday for data. I made sure all the identifying parts were recorded. Then I took 20 photos to get one that was pleasing to look at.

I also photographed 2 coyotes I see on occasion. It was from beyond a football field away but the only time it wasn't a brief moment. I stayed 10 minutes in 4f/-15c weather I pulled my hand out every time they interacted to get a shot that conveys something about them. Sure I would like as much detail as I can but I didn't choose the "Best" photo, I choose the one with the most emotion. I sharpened to distinguish the head from the body, I contrasted to distingish the forms from the snow. I used curves and levels to show the form of the creek in the snow. I also did all of it in a way that optimizes this on my monitor. Looking at it now, it might be too saturated to evoke the "together in isolation" feel I like about the image. I might do it different next time. I might try to evoke a Disney feel and saturate more and sharpen more.

here is the photo I reference so you can decide for yourself what you would want to bring out and what processing would achieve that. I am happy I don't have an evf because I saw what was there in the framing to compare against. My starting point is grounded in reality.

---

Last edited by swanlefitte; 02-08-2022 at 06:48 PM.

[ramseybuckeye]

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder
Art is in the eyes of the beholder

These phrases work for me, I certainly don't like everything I see in a museum, or every song I hear, who does?

[Photos-by-Chas]

Here's a good subjective question ...

Assuming an image is viewed under controlled lighting on a calibrated screen and the image processed to be what is liked/desired, how then should it be altered for competitions?

There, that's open to all sorts of answers, but perhaps we can limit any responses to the level of saturation.

I don't know what it's like outside of the UK but print is nearly always overly saturated here. Publication after publication has, I believe, followed SM's in-your-face processing and now print over-saturated photos. Similarly, on-line, the saturation sliders have been tweaked up.

I don't often enter competitions but I've been looking at recent successful entries and the trend over the last few has been more saturation. So anyone reading this, what do you do to your nice, perfectly processed images? Do you ignore any extra saturation and risk the judges, swamped with super-saturated images, passing your images by, or do you follow the trend? Or maybe you've already been converted to OTT images and see this style as the norm?

Just wondering ...

How exactly are you entering your photographs into the competition? Are you sending the image electronically over the internet or are you printing them yourself or having it commercially printed and entering a physical photograph?

If you are entering them electronically via the internet, then the saturation on your computer may be fine but the computer receiving the image may be different and the resultant image may appear over or under saturated, or there may be other alterations in the appearance. If you are submitting a physical print from yourself or a commercial printer, make the photo look as you want it to look.

As others have said, the images you take and process to your liking are yours and yours alone. If the judges do not like it, do not compromise your personal likes and opinions to be changed by others.

[normhead]

As others have said, the images you take and process to your liking are yours and yours alone. If the judges do not like it, do not compromise your personal likes and opinions to be changed by others.

After all, if you don't win the first one you enter, you might win the next. Judges are not always the same. people. Although I've notice a lot of judges have extensive commercial experience, they know what sells to the point they can make a living from it. There could be worse things to do than pay attention to what they pick as winners. Like listening to internet experts who've never sold an image in their whole lives. Or blow hards with attitudes and opinions, but few to no excellent photos.

[rvandenbrink]

After all, if you don't win the first one you enter, you might win the next. Judges are not always the same. people. Although I've notice a lot of judges have extensive commercial experience, they know what sells to the point they can make a living from it. There could be worse things to do than pay attention to what they pick as winners. Like listening to internet experts who've never sold an image in their whole lives. Or blow hards with attitudes and opinions, but few to no excellent photos.

Well said on that last. I did post, but don’t take commercial photography advice from me, I’m just in this because it’s fun

Read more at: Suitable saturation for competition entries? - Page 4 - PentaxForums.com

My own approach is the extreme minority view, I think, so I don't bother much with contests. I think that if you notice the tweaks applied in post processing in the final print, then it's too much. One is supposed to be thinking about the subject of the work, not how it was made. Besides, you can't make a pig any more attractive by putting lipstick on her.

[JohnMc]

Besides, you can't make a pig any more attractive by putting lipstick on her.

Training her to not eat the truffles she finds for you would make her(or him) look a whole lot more best than what just lipstick is capable of.


“If when someone looks at my photograph, if their first thought is, how did he make this, I feel I’ve failed. I don’t mind that being the second question. I’m used to that. But their first response should be some authentic ‘gee, this is weird,’ or ‘I had a dream like that,’ or ‘boy, that makes me feel lonely or happy.’ You know, it’s an authentic human response."


J Uelsmann from Jerry Uelsmann & Maggie Taylor: This Is Not Photography

...Jerry Uelsmann & Maggie Taylor: This Is Not Photography

Thanks for the cite!

Training her to not eat the truffles she finds for you would make her(or him) look a whole lot more best than what just lipstick is capable of.


“If when someone looks at my photograph, if their first thought is, how did he make this, I feel I’ve failed. I don’t mind that being the second question. I’m used to that. But their first response should be some authentic ‘gee, this is weird,’ or ‘I had a dream like that,’ or ‘boy, that makes me feel lonely or happy.’ You know, it’s an authentic human response."


J Uelsmann from Jerry Uelsmann & Maggie Taylor: This Is Not Photography

Many thanks for that link - I just watched it and it was extremely interesting and inspiring.