was going to enter a competition........

Lynton

Lynton

awkward customer
Messages
10,606
Name
Lynton (yes really!)
Edit My Images
No
then saw this in the rules.

Please be fair and respect the competition and under no circumstances digitally manipulate or enhance the image, the National Trust may ask for the original files in case of doubt, which will be disqualified.

Going to be difficult as I generally shoot RAW.
 
Lynton said:
then saw this in the rules.

Please be fair and respect the competition and under no circumstances digitally manipulate or enhance the image, the National Trust may ask for the original files in case of doubt, which will be disqualified.

Going to be difficult as I generally shoot RAW.
Click to expand...

RAW Processing is not manipulation
 
asphotographymk said:
RAW Processing is not manipulation
Click to expand...

No, but every RAW file at least needs some sharpening applied. They could be a bit clearer as to what they mean, although I'm sure you could shoot jpeg just this once :)
 
i could - but for what i had in mind a B&W works better..........
 
Lynton said:
i could - but for what i had in mind a B&W works better..........
Click to expand...

So shoot in B&W then :lol: on a serious note I think it needs a little bit of clarification, my thought is that they don't what things added/removed from the image?

Matt
MWHCVT
 
Which comp is this?

You could always switch to b & w and do jpg + RAW :)

Wonder what would happen if you submitted an incamera generated HDR or panorama?
 
You might want to read the other terms and conditions, some competitions have a "rights grab" you end up pretty much giving your image away, don't know if thats the case here though.
 
Liking those last two suggestions..........

It's a localish comp organised by the NT. The whoohoo prize is a day out at Orford on an island taking pics with a pro togger.........with some tuition...

Undecided as if I can be arsed or not!
 
Depends on who the pro togger is. Might be interesting to spend a while with one.
 
Lynton said:
then saw this in the rules.

Please be fair and respect the competition and under no circumstances digitally manipulate or enhance the image, the National Trust may ask for the original files in case of doubt, which will be disqualified.

Going to be difficult as I generally shoot RAW.
Click to expand...

Could be even more difficult if you shoot with film and submit a print.
 
asphotographymk said:
RAW Processing is not manipulation
Click to expand...

Of course it is. You choose what white balance point, contrast, etc.

Even if you decide to leave everything on defaults, your choice of RAW processor could make a substantial difference to the resulting file. If I'm using RPP, I get to choose whether it does a Kodachrome 64 or Fuji Velvia emulation amongst others and set it as a default preference before I open the RAW file. Is that a digital enhancement or manipulation?

Can you crop the original? Fix a wonky horizon?

Lightroom allows me to adjust perspective, correct for lens distortions, add a graduated filter, dodge and burn, clone out dust spots (or unwanted passing ducks in the sky). All without leaving the RAW processor.

How about adjusting the saturation or lightness level of the colours in the image? That could enhance the sky and be outwith the rules.

Am I limited to only adjusting the Tone Curve sliders and not messing with the Exposure slider? If I can't do that, then Expose-To-The-Right metering is out of the question when taking the photograph in the field.

The rule appears to be pretty strict - 'no circumstances'.
 
I find these rules are stated in most, if not all competitions I have seen on forums, and it always puzzles me a bit.

There's always some amount of manipulation in photography, weather you're shooting film or digital. Of course, in many instances the manipulation will not be carried out consciously by ourselves - in which case I'd say that satisfies the rules. But digital slr images are designed to be 'manipulated'. Sharpened, saturated, etc...no matter how small.

Going by the rules, it seems that you'd sometimes be better off shooting on a compact, that produces better images out of the box.
 
Do all your processing in LightRoom, output to JPG. Then save this file as the original filename at full size as a jpg instead of raw and it will look like the output from the camera that has been put into LightRoom for resizing ?

Steve
 
Lynton,

Not really an answer to your question but I am looking at organising a day at Orford in October which is the same as one of their photography tours days. Have a look at the thread in the meeting place section. The day would obvoiusly cost rarther than being a freebie but you would have a load of us to keep you company:suspect:

Nick
 
Last edited:
Pretty common TBH. Much the same as the international photography federations use (for nature and photo journalism). You can still adjust levels, colour balance etc. and apply some sharpening. Adding and removing elements of an image is a no as is the use of effect filters etc.
HTH.
 
Last edited:
A JPEG has been effectively digitally processed as the camera has set contrast, saturation, sharpening etc in the camera in accordance with the style you happen to set the camera to shoot in (Standard, Neutral, Vivid etc on a Nikon) so I don't see the problem in doing the same on a RAW file. It's different when your spending hours in Photoshop creating something that wasn't there in the first place.
 
No damage occurred then - you read the small print, decided you didn't like it, didn't take part.

Not much of a story really, nothing to see here, move along?

If it makes you feel better, I would have turned them down too.
 
desantnik said:
No damage occurred then - you read the small print, decided you didn't like it, didn't take part.

Not much of a story really, nothing to see here, move along?

If it makes you feel better, I would have turned them down too.
Click to expand...


Erm no not really....... I was puzzled by this specific "rule" and wondered peoples opinions of it.

As mentioned above - the jpeg, is the camera's interpretation of the data which in digital is lots of 0's and 1's. Editing the RAW is my definition of it.

Should I feel say a 2:1 crop would work better is that manipulation? I could argue no, the remaining bits are not manipulated, however the original image is changed. If the latter is the case, then it kind of restricts the photographers "eye." (For example several pics I have taken in colour, that I knew would work better in B&W.)

As a side note, didn't realise had to be newsworthy..... and as of yet, I may or may not take part - or are you slightly confused with my other thread, whereby you left a similar comment regarding selling off the copyright of an image...........

Maybe, I'll post up all 20 odd T&C's tomorrow as that will surely cause a poo storm!
 
I suppose the idea behind it is to stop people drastically changing images, but the organiser either haven't fully understould the nature of digital and the fact that by it's design it manipulated to some stage. Or more lightly it's to make them easier to sell on after scrouging them off the mostly unsuspecting public.
Personally I think it's the latter (takes off cynical hat)
 
Lynton said:
Erm no not really....... I was puzzled by this specific "rule" and wondered peoples opinions of it.
Click to expand...

Its a standard rule in many competitions. Use the search button and you'll see it comes up time and time again.

Why not email the organisers and ask them to clarify - they obviously know what they mean (or more likely just copied and pasted someone else's t&c's)
 
The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust have a similar rule in their photo contest, it was added in either 2008/9.

This is what was added:

6. Adjusting your image: The faithful representation of what was captured at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained. Digital adjustments are only acceptable if limited to minor cleaning work (removing dust spots), levels, curves, colour, saturation and contrast work. Sharpening and minimal cropping is allowed.

7. Compositing, multiple exposures, sandwich shots and double exposures are not permitted. Adding or removing animals, parts of animals, plants, distractions, people etc into/from the image is not allowed.

I agree with this ruling, considering that most of these competitions are open to everyone, a level playing field should be maintained.

A five year old using a throwaway camera that needs processing at the local chemist should have an equal chance of winning as someone with much more expensive gear doing there own processing.


John:)
 
desantnik said:
Why not email the organisers and ask them to clarify - they obviously know what they mean (or more likely just copied and pasted someone else's t&c's)
Click to expand...

I have done. No reply.
 
j37r said:
The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust have a similar rule in their photo contest, it was added in either 2008/9.

This is what was added:

6. Adjusting your image: The faithful representation of what was captured at the time of the shot being taken must be maintained. Digital adjustments are only acceptable if limited to minor cleaning work (removing dust spots), levels, curves, colour, saturation and contrast work. Sharpening and minimal cropping is allowed.

7. Compositing, multiple exposures, sandwich shots and double exposures are not permitted. Adding or removing animals, parts of animals, plants, distractions, people etc into/from the image is not allowed.

I agree with this ruling, considering that most of these competitions are open to everyone, a level playing field should be maintained.

A five year old using a throwaway camera that needs processing at the local chemist should have an equal chance of winning as someone with much more expensive gear doing there own processing.


John:)
Click to expand...


I quite agree - though the hardline interpretation of the rule I posted, is no adjusting whatsoever..........

at least the WWT - go a step further to say what is permissable and not.


To be honest, I assume their interpretation is similar to the WWT as in no getting rid of people etc, but you can crop and turn to B&W........


Just what is a "sandwich shot" though?:shrug::shrug:
 
Lynton said:
I quite agree - though the hardline interpretation of the rule I posted, is no adjusting whatsoever..........

at least the WWT - go a step further to say what is permissable and not.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's far, far better.

"no manipulation whatsoever in any circumstances" is ridiculously simple to debunk as a reasonable proposition with a reductio ad absurdum analysis.

Lynton said:
Just what is a "sandwich shot" though?:shrug::shrug:
Click to expand...

My best guess: HDR?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top