Photo contests

Gary · 07-29-2010, 06:46 AM

I've been looking at some of the entries in the photo contest section and they are fantastic. I've noticed that many of them have some kind of post processing. Wouldn't it be fun to see a contest that doesn't allow any post processing? In other words the photographer would have to rely on his or her skills as a photographer without the use of software. Just the photographer and the camera. Just a thought.

Adam · 07-29-2010, 07:50 AM

Yes, that would be fun! I can run one in the near future

Rupert · 07-29-2010, 07:51 AM

Although I occasionally get a shot right out of the camera that is near perfect, I consider processing a part of the skill of using a DSLR and have no problem when it is applied. Compact cameras are already "cooked" to process what you get, and actually require less processing that those of a DSLR, which relies on you to do the work to get the desired result, in particular if you are a RAW shooter.

My thoughts are that it would be like asking a film shooter to just exhibit the negative......
Regards!

SpecialK · 07-29-2010, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Wouldn't it be fun to see a contest that doesn't allow any post processing? In other words the photographer would have to rely on his or her skills as a photographer without the use of software.

There is no such thing as an unprocessed image. The camera uses basic settings to process the image.

Getting it perfect in the camera with only basic settings is a lofty goal, but with so many variables to review on a 3" screen, it is difficult to be perfect on a regular basis.

With the ease of use of processing software, it is sort of silly not to use it.

And Rupert made an excellent point about the negative. Even Ansel Adams' shots look like guano before he had his printer dodge and burn the heck out of them.

landscaped1 · 07-29-2010, 08:38 AM

I personally think it would be an interesting challenge. I do however agree with the above comments, but it would be interesting to see what we could get our cameras to process. I know there are lots of filters and effects in camera that I personally have not experimented with and this could be a good opportunity.

So maybe stretch the challenge to in camera only processing!

reeftool · 07-29-2010, 09:46 AM

Way back in the "good ole days" of film, we had to get it pretty much the way we wanted it with the camera. While it was possible to dodge and burn and have custom printing done, it was expensive and time consuming. Having your own darkroom wasn't possible for many folk, even if they wanted to. We carried a bag of filters and a few rolls of film and at the end of the day, dropped the film off to be developed and hoped for the best. If I had something I thought was really special, then I might have a custom print made. There wasn't much room for error. I have salvaged digital shots that would have ended up in the garbage with film. It will make an interesting contest, just using the camera settings and various lens filters without any PP.

Gary · 07-29-2010, 10:03 AM

I'm not disputing whether someone should use processing or not, I'm saying that it would be fun to try shooting without the use of external processing to the camera. Like I said, just the camera and the photographer. Even a film camera has to be adjusted to take a good image.

Gary · 07-29-2010, 10:14 AM

I agree with you, reeftool. I'm also one of those guys from the "good ole days." That's what I was thinking about when I suggested this contest. Getting back to basics and making every shot count. Seeing what we can actually get out of the camera with our own understanding and skill of composition, color, texture, line, shape, value, etc. I think it would be fun as well as challenging and perhaps educational too.

CWyatt · 07-29-2010, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK:

There is no such thing as an unprocessed image. The camera uses basic settings to process the image.

What SpecialK said. This is opening a can of worms really, I shoot RAW because I want to (and have the time to) control all my (minimal) amounts of PP I do. Changing JPEG settings in camera is doing exactly the same thing, just with inferior software to say, CS5. If you shoot Canon default JPEG's (with a similar lens etc) you'll usually find them more saturated and contrasted, just because of software.

However, I do see the point that digital can make people lazy, overshoot, not think enough etc. When I see photography magazine covers that say things like 'Photoshop tips to turn your average shots into masterpieces', I cringe.

And what is the point of 'in camera' only processing? You're doing largely the same things as on computer software, just with generally inferior output.

**Ash** · 07-29-2010, 02:03 PM

I get the concept, though the 'rules' of an 'unprocessed' image comp would have to be stipulated like 'limited to in-camera or RAW processing (as with ACR) only'. Then it has to be decided whether in-camera HDR effect and other special filters are permitted.

Bramela · 07-29-2010, 03:07 PM

I agree, Ash, some thought would need to be put into the actual details, however, I do think such a challenge would be a very interesting exercise.

landscaped1 · 07-30-2010, 08:24 AM

I like the idea of the challenge being whatever you can get out of the camera.

I do however see your point CWyatt about it still being PP (just from different software) but I think the point and interest would come in seeing what some of these cameras can do on there own.

Seems like a fun, different challenge!

**nater** · 08-03-2010, 10:19 AM

In the three photo courses I took in high school, most of the learning process was darkroom developing techniques. Dodging, burning, use of different enlarger filters (using filters of one contrast level to expose one part of the print, other filters to expose another part of the print), and adjusting the times in each of the chemical baths to get a print just right. Sometimes I'd make over 36 attempts at a 'final' print before I got it right. In my mind, post-processing is an integral process of image making, with how much you do and what you do where a lot of the art comes in.

That said, a contest can have any rules it wants, and maybe for some people they don't mind dealing with a limitation such as no post-processing, so it might appeal to them.

Mountain Vision · 08-04-2010, 11:01 PM

If you ever have a chance to see Ansel Adams glass slides you'd be underwhelmed. You of course would think that they are just faded with age, but the fact is Adams took a base negative and did magic to it. Sure the composition, and basic exposure was excellent, but the printing was the masterpiece. Don't believe me, there is a book of Adams color chromes floating around. Not too impressive.

Personally, I go all over the place with processing. 99% of my landscapes are natural in terms of RAW processing followed by sharpening. But sometimes I like to break out the bag of tricks and see what i can do.

Here is an example of breaking out the bag of tricks on what was an ok photo but didn't have the mood i was looking for:

I think if Ansel was alive today he'd be processing junkie to get the mood he was looking for.

But yeah, I agree, you CANNOT take your ordinary photos and turn them into a masterpiece via photoshop. You can only make a marginal photo passable, and a good photo better. Bad photos deserve the recycle bin or the waste paper basket if it's film.

FishrOfGrizz · 08-15-2010, 07:53 PM

Its almost comical how folks can get so hostile so quickly about something that was just offered as a challenge. What it should basically boil down to is, you're in or you're out. Nothing more need be said other than, 'what are the rules?'. Look at it this way. All submittals could turn out horrible and those who declined to participate could say, 'I'm sure glad I didn't get in on that one'.

Kindest regards to you all.

07-29-2010, 06:46 AM	#1
Gary Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cheyenne, Wyoming Posts: 18	Photo contests I've been looking at some of the entries in the photo contest section and they are fantastic. I've noticed that many of them have some kind of post processing. Wouldn't it be fun to see a contest that doesn't allow any post processing? In other words the photographer would have to rely on his or her skills as a photographer without the use of software. Just the photographer and the camera. Just a thought.

07-29-2010, 07:50 AM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,597	Yes, that would be fun! I can run one in the near future Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Rules for Official PentaxForums.com Monthly Photo Contests	Adam	Monthly Photo Contests	3	08-31-2011 06:33 PM
Suggestion Using the new Albums for Monthly Photo Contests?	brecklundin	Site Suggestions and Help	2	01-10-2010 11:39 PM
Donation of gear to photo contests	hinman	General Talk	7	12-27-2007 06:32 PM

07-29-2010, 07:51 AM	#3
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Although I occasionally get a shot right out of the camera that is near perfect, I consider processing a part of the skill of using a DSLR and have no problem when it is applied. Compact cameras are already "cooked" to process what you get, and actually require less processing that those of a DSLR, which relies on you to do the work to get the desired result, in particular if you are a RAW shooter. My thoughts are that it would be like asking a film shooter to just exhibit the negative...... Regards!

07-29-2010, 08:07 AM	#4
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,481	Quote: Wouldn't it be fun to see a contest that doesn't allow any post processing? In other words the photographer would have to rely on his or her skills as a photographer without the use of software. There is no such thing as an unprocessed image. The camera uses basic settings to process the image. Getting it perfect in the camera with only basic settings is a lofty goal, but with so many variables to review on a 3" screen, it is difficult to be perfect on a regular basis. With the ease of use of processing software, it is sort of silly not to use it. And Rupert made an excellent point about the negative. Even Ansel Adams' shots look like guano before he had his printer dodge and burn the heck out of them.

07-29-2010, 08:38 AM	#5
landscaped1 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Louisiana Photos: Gallery Posts: 153	I personally think it would be an interesting challenge. I do however agree with the above comments, but it would be interesting to see what we could get our cameras to process. I know there are lots of filters and effects in camera that I personally have not experimented with and this could be a good opportunity. So maybe stretch the challenge to in camera only processing!

07-29-2010, 09:46 AM	#6
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,555	Way back in the "good ole days" of film, we had to get it pretty much the way we wanted it with the camera. While it was possible to dodge and burn and have custom printing done, it was expensive and time consuming. Having your own darkroom wasn't possible for many folk, even if they wanted to. We carried a bag of filters and a few rolls of film and at the end of the day, dropped the film off to be developed and hoped for the best. If I had something I thought was really special, then I might have a custom print made. There wasn't much room for error. I have salvaged digital shots that would have ended up in the garbage with film. It will make an interesting contest, just using the camera settings and various lens filters without any PP.

07-29-2010, 10:03 AM	#7
Gary Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cheyenne, Wyoming Posts: 18 Original Poster	I'm not disputing whether someone should use processing or not, I'm saying that it would be fun to try shooting without the use of external processing to the camera. Like I said, just the camera and the photographer. Even a film camera has to be adjusted to take a good image.

07-29-2010, 10:14 AM	#8
Gary Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cheyenne, Wyoming Posts: 18 Original Poster	I agree with you, reeftool. I'm also one of those guys from the "good ole days." That's what I was thinking about when I suggested this contest. Getting back to basics and making every shot count. Seeing what we can actually get out of the camera with our own understanding and skill of composition, color, texture, line, shape, value, etc. I think it would be fun as well as challenging and perhaps educational too.

07-29-2010, 01:21 PM	#9
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	Originally posted by SpecialK: There is no such thing as an unprocessed image. The camera uses basic settings to process the image. What SpecialK said. This is opening a can of worms really, I shoot RAW because I want to (and have the time to) control all my (minimal) amounts of PP I do. Changing JPEG settings in camera is doing exactly the same thing, just with inferior software to say, CS5. If you shoot Canon default JPEG's (with a similar lens etc) you'll usually find them more saturated and contrasted, just because of software. However, I do see the point that digital can make people lazy, overshoot, not think enough etc. When I see photography magazine covers that say things like 'Photoshop tips to turn your average shots into masterpieces', I cringe. And what is the point of 'in camera' only processing? You're doing largely the same things as on computer software, just with generally inferior output.

07-29-2010, 02:03 PM	#10
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	I get the concept, though the 'rules' of an 'unprocessed' image comp would have to be stipulated like 'limited to in-camera or RAW processing (as with ACR) only'. Then it has to be decided whether in-camera HDR effect and other special filters are permitted.

07-29-2010, 03:07 PM	#11
Bramela Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Newcastle Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,284	I agree, Ash, some thought would need to be put into the actual details, however, I do think such a challenge would be a very interesting exercise.

07-30-2010, 08:24 AM	#12
landscaped1 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Louisiana Photos: Gallery Posts: 153	I like the idea of the challenge being whatever you can get out of the camera. I do however see your point CWyatt about it still being PP (just from different software) but I think the point and interest would come in seeing what some of these cameras can do on there own. Seems like a fun, different challenge!

08-03-2010, 10:19 AM	#13
nater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: New England Photos: Albums Posts: 706	In the three photo courses I took in high school, most of the learning process was darkroom developing techniques. Dodging, burning, use of different enlarger filters (using filters of one contrast level to expose one part of the print, other filters to expose another part of the print), and adjusting the times in each of the chemical baths to get a print just right. Sometimes I'd make over 36 attempts at a 'final' print before I got it right. In my mind, post-processing is an integral process of image making, with how much you do and what you do where a lot of the art comes in. That said, a contest can have any rules it wants, and maybe for some people they don't mind dealing with a limitation such as no post-processing, so it might appeal to them.

08-04-2010, 11:01 PM	#14
Mountain Vision Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: America's First Wilderness Posts: 529	If you ever have a chance to see Ansel Adams glass slides you'd be underwhelmed. You of course would think that they are just faded with age, but the fact is Adams took a base negative and did magic to it. Sure the composition, and basic exposure was excellent, but the printing was the masterpiece. Don't believe me, there is a book of Adams color chromes floating around. Not too impressive. Personally, I go all over the place with processing. 99% of my landscapes are natural in terms of RAW processing followed by sharpening. But sometimes I like to break out the bag of tricks and see what i can do. Here is an example of breaking out the bag of tricks on what was an ok photo but didn't have the mood i was looking for: I think if Ansel was alive today he'd be processing junkie to get the mood he was looking for. But yeah, I agree, you CANNOT take your ordinary photos and turn them into a masterpiece via photoshop. You can only make a marginal photo passable, and a good photo better. Bad photos deserve the recycle bin or the waste paper basket if it's film.

08-15-2010, 07:53 PM	#15
FishrOfGrizz Junior Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 34	Its almost comical how folks can get so hostile so quickly about something that was just offered as a challenge. What it should basically boil down to is, you're in or you're out. Nothing more need be said other than, 'what are the rules?'. Look at it this way. All submittals could turn out horrible and those who declined to participate could say, 'I'm sure glad I didn't get in on that one'. Kindest regards to you all.