it is a way to attract attention to this fantastic site that we call DGrin!
I took it as a way to introduce my friends in my local camera club to DGrin. Of course I made it personal by saying I have a photo entered, but I left it up to them to vote for whatever photo they wanted to. Hopefully some of them will stick around and explore more of what DGrin has to offer.
It seems to be easier to get people to check out a new site by saying "hey, I have a photo entered in a competition and voting is going on now, go check it out" as opposed to "come check out this other photo site I belong to...". The former is less spammy sounding than the later.
I just hope that Andy doesn't disqualify any pictures due to the votes all of these new users will be giving.
This is my first time voting in this event... I was gonna post in the actual contest thread...
... I really hate these kinda contests, well voting. I really like all of them and being an indecisive fool... you guys really threw a wrench at me! :soapbox
Obviously there are lessons to be learned by the powers that be from going through the whole LPS Contest.
I think next years contest will have some additional rules and some clearer communication. Other than multiple votes from the same address another easy vote elimination would be based off lack of posts on dgrin. If a vote occurs but no other posts especially no pictures should be disregaurded as well.
Not all that difficult really. Let's not make it more than it needs to be- attempts to cheat will be seen easily enough.
Best of luck to everyone. There are some fantastic final images.
"The Journey of life is as much in oneself as the roads one travels"
These things can't be regulated. Dgrin has no idea where I live. Comcast can change my IP whenever they want. My girlfriend (who uses the same internet, through the same router, and hence the same IP address (externally anyway)) has been following the competition because I have entered a few shots. She is at both the same physical address and the same (apparent) IP address, should her vote not count? Is it only one vote per household?
Now, I don't know what the modmins are using as the cutoff for number of votes-per-address (and i dont really care, because I'm sure they are doing it intelligently), I just wanted to say that using ip/physical address is not the best way to set the rule.
Yes from ip address If they started to consider votes from same IP addresses God knows who wins . This is the reason i like to have judges
Oh one more thing i mentioned to my dad about contest and he was "ok i will tell others at office to vote for you". I knew it will create mess for me so i told him voting is over thanks.
And what i have seen is that even if i told my friends to participate in voting they will vote for my picture no matter they found it good or bad. So i thought to keep most of folks away only told one or 2 i hope they voted honestly
Thine is the beauty of light; mine is the song of fire. Thy beauty exalts the heart; my song inspires the soul. Allama Iqbal
If the only techniques you allow are those used by landscape shooters, then the competition will become, by default, a landscape photography competition. There is nothing wrong with a landscape competition, but it should be made clear up front what it is about and named appropriately.
Not true! 95% of my photos are portraits and I almost NEVER photoshop them! My final entry has two very minor things taken out, but the other photo I considered entering doesn't have ANY psing at all.
I know that the way I look at photography is different from some, but I don't think limiting PSing in any way constrains the TYPE of photos that can be entered.
And for what it's worth, I'd be *extremely* happy to see a photography only contest (meaning NO PSing at all) and a PS yourself as much as you'd like contest. I think these are two different types of art and should not be judged together. I'll even go so far as to say that if they aren't separated next go around, then I seriously doubt I'll be entering.
Having managed the image production of 6 national sport action magazine publications. Morphing and masking images together is as much an art form as taking the photo itself. The amount of time taken to mask a few images together and doing it right can take many hours. I recall training an intern for masking images for almost 4 hours per day for 2 weeks before I even let him work on an image for the magazine's.
I completly agree - this is an art form, but it's NOT photography. Done right, you can get amazing, beautiful images. I've done this on many occasions, but still think it should be done in two contests...
And for what it's worth, I'd be *extremely* happy to see a photography only contest (meaning NO PSing at all) and a PS yourself as much as you'd like contest. I think these are two different types of art and should not be judged together. I'll even go so far as to say that if they aren't separated next go around, then I seriously doubt I'll be entering.
Agree with you Andi, or at the very least less ambiguous rules and rules that are adhered to.
Judging from the PM's I've received quite a few people have become disenchanted with the competition and dropped out and frankly I'm not surprised.
For a 'photography only' comp., what'll be the stance on multiple (un ps'd) images stacked in s/w like Helicon Focus / CombineZ for greater DOF - as often employed for macro work?
I know that the way I look at photography is different from some, but I don't think limiting PSing in any way constrains the TYPE of photos that can be entered.
Actually, I wasn't reacting to the limiting of PS. Rather I was commenting on the idea to selectively include some PS techniques and rule others out. My personal feeling is that a "no Photoshop" contest should strictly adhere to a jounalistic standard. "No Photoshop" should mean "untouched in camera JPEG". Every attempt I have seen to define a middle ground is fraught with ambiguity and I think Shay and DoctorIt were very wise not to try.
Actually, I wasn't reacting to the limiting of PS. Rather I was commenting on the idea to selectively include some PS techniques and rule others out. My personal feeling is that a "no Photoshop" contest should strictly adhere to a jounalistic standard. "No Photoshop" should mean "untouched in camera JPEG". Every attempt I have seen to define a middle ground is fraught with ambiguity and I think Shay and DoctorIt were very wise not to try.
Ahhh.... i think you're right. It's a slippery slope.
But I'd enjoy a no PS contest! Basically anything you can do with LR, but no removing/adding anything would be wonderful.
Ahhh.... i think you're right. It's a slippery slope.
But I'd enjoy a no PS contest! Basically anything you can do with LR, but no removing/adding anything would be wonderful.
A Lightroom only contest would rock, but given that Lighroom is $300 program, I think it is something more appropriately sponsored by Adobe than Dgrin/Smugmug. Restricting post processing is tricky because you can only really do it effectively by limiting the allowed software tool set but mentioning specific software tools in the rules is politically difficult in a manufuacturer agnostic forum. In particular, Dgrin can't take the risk of alienating potential competition sponsors.
A Lightroom only contest would rock, but given that Lighroom is $300 program and competing with Aperture in that space, I think it is something more appropriately sponsored by Adobe than Dgrin/Smugmug. To run a tool-specific contest here, I think it would have to specify one of the open source or freeware tool sets. While that would be interesting in its own right, my bet is that many people who are currently using commercial photo software would be hesitant to radically change their workflow for a competition.
I get the idea that she was suggesting a contest with nothing more than what you can do when converting from RAW (so use your favorite raw converter; Andi can correct me if I'm wrong).
I like this idea more than a "straight out of the camera jpeg" thing because I have a computer that is designed to perform computation, and a camera that is designed to take pictures. Why would I use the camera to do what the computer is best at? Besides, that would unfairly balance the contest to those with camera's like the D3 or D300 with super awesome onboard processing. Food for thought.
Not true! 95% of my photos are portraits and I almost NEVER photoshop them! My final entry has two very minor things taken out, but the other photo I considered entering doesn't have ANY psing at all.
Have to agree, I absolutely do not photoshop (other than crop, dodge, burn) my photojournalism or, for the most part, street images ... so it would be much, much more than just landscape .... BUT ...
And for what it's worth, I'd be *extremely* happy to see a photography only contest (meaning NO PSing at all) and a PS yourself as much as you'd like contest. I think these are two different types of art and should not be judged together. I'll even go so far as to say that if they aren't separated next go around, then I seriously doubt I'll be entering.
While I have defended the inclusion of composites in this contest, I'm starting to back peddle a bit here because I had believed that unless extremely well done (as Shay once posted somewhere) they would never have a chance of winning. The same I believed would be true of overly staged or contrived non-composite images, or cliche McStock kinds of photos ... that images which strike a genuine chord or provide a unique insight or perspective always trump cliche or mediocre ... but I'm having doubts ...
As for no PSing? ... a little bit of a slippery slope there. I assume you mean overly PS'd composite-style images. So, dodge, burn and crop only?
I really, really want to agree with you ... almost do, it would certainly benefit me and most of my types of photography ... But ... okay, what about adding a moon to a landscape that was taken at the same time and place but out of the primary frame? I've done this (and disclosed it honestly, and took public choice once with it) and so have other leading landscape photogs ... including Marc. What about taking "just a few things out," would that be allowed?
So ... I guess in the end I don't think splitting things up would really be practical or advisable.
Rolled into this is the open voting.
I will go out on a limb and, hopefully without offending anyone, ask the question, does open voting really award the best images? (Right, I know, I know, it's all subjective but really ... there is such a thing as images that just don't quite get there ... I mean Thomas Kincaid is a wildly popular painter of quaint scenes with the masses but you won't find him in MoMA or any other art museum ... and this IS an art contest, because I believe photography IS art, not a standup comedian runoff)
And, walking a little further out on the branch, I do think appreciation of good photography takes time like appreciation of fine wine. My own concepts of what makes a great photo have changed dramatically in the last few years, even last few months. Yeah, perhaps that's an elitist argument but it may also be true.
In the end, I guess I've come to the conclusion that I would rather have my work judged primarily by top professionals who have developed an eye for good photography over years or decades (as it has been in every other contest I've entered) without an open vote subject to all kinds of extensive variables beyond just the subjective if I'm going to work my (butt) off to get a good image. {deep breath}
And I believe, with a well-mixed panel of judges who appreciate all types of photography, this non-open-vote approach would just skip right over the top of arguments on PS'd versus not ... and even photo styles and genres competing against each other which is also a bit unique to the non-categorized LPS ... i.e. this is coming back around to my belief that overly-staged or PS'd images, unless extremely well done, will never have a chance of winning ... if judged by respected professionals.
Crud, I'll probably look back at this and regret it, maybe this branch of thought has a fallacy at its heart.
I do believe, though, this has been a good competition at its core with incredibly generous prizes offered with the best of intentions and I'm confident no one here is suggesting otherwise. It could all just come up a notch without losing the benefits of it being a growth and learning opportunity for some really good photographers. Hopefully, this opinion will be useful as retooling of LPS progresses ...
And, of course, I'm just waiting to see what changes are made ...
My .02 worth of reflection upon first LPS
I am probably :deadhorse , but my biggest issue bar none with the current contest structure is totally inconsistent and utterly unpredictable judging .
My suggestion? Dedicated judges. Judges who are known and who can stay with the contest during its whole run. At least a pool of them to ensure the fail-safety. I think we have enough people here whose professionalism and opinion is highly respected by the whole community.
Don't get me wrong - it was fun. But it can be made better, and the judging system is the keystone, methinks.
We shouldn't forget that straight out of the camera JPEGS have been processed in-camera and we shouldn't therefore exclude those that shoot in RAW but choose to make those adjustments to saturation, contrast, sharpness etc in software rather than in-camera, after all a lot of cameras do a pretty poor job of it themselves.
Essentially we'd be talking about the sort of work that can be done in software such as Lightroom or Aperture only but already this attracts ambiguity.
For my mind there should be a contest where the rules state that elements may not be moved or added to an image and then a separate category where anything goes, fake it as much as you like.
I would agree with Nikolai and Seastack that consistent judging can make all the difference.
In the digital age, setting photoshop/no photoshop limits seems futile. In film era contests, you didn't just submit an undeveloped negative SOC. You submitted a finished print, which involved several skills that impacted the final product beyond "pressing the shutter"": film choice, filters, negative developing, print developing, etc. The point should be, how well did you use the tools at hand to acheive your VISION. And in the world of art, esteemed judges make those determinations, not the public. Otherwise this contest just becomes a USA today "pick the cutest christmas photo" contest. I think the public choice rounds are fun, and shouldn't go away entirely, but the only rounds that determine actual prizes? Not if LPS is to be considered a serious photo contest.
I am probably :deadhorse , but my biggest issue bar non with the current contest structure is totally inconsistent and utterly unpredictable judging .
My suggestion? Dedicated judges. Judges who are known and who can stay with the contest during its whole run. At least a pool of them to ensure the fail-safety. I think we have enough people here whose professionalism and opinion is highly respected by the whole community.
Don't get me wrong - it was fun. But it can be made better, and the judging system is the keystone, methinks.
I so agree with this! I understand if someone like Shay can't stick around then you have to replace him, but I think public choice should be a separate prize. The panel of judges picks the final 10 in the grand finale as in all the other qualifying rounds.
In other words appointed Judges pick the qualifying; public picks the semifinalist; appointed judges pick the grand finale 10. Then ALL the judges hash out who wins the grand finale prizes over a week of debate, private messages, phone calls, whatever.
I mean $7,500 at stake here...
and people are confused on if they can have more than one person vote from the same house or what the ethics are in campaining for one photo...
So then solve that with a public vote for a "public choice award" (similar to the semifinal votes) for a separate prize like a smugmug strap or a year free or a $250 BH Gift card (just silly examples) and clearly state if campaigning is okay or not.
Canon 40D : Canon 400D : Canon Elan 7NE : Canon 580EX : 2 x Canon 430EX : Canon 24-70 f2.8L : Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM : Canon 28-135mm f/3.5 IS : 18-55mm f/3.5 : 4GB Sandisk Extreme III : 2GB Sandisk Extreme III : 2 x 1GB Sandisk Ultra II : Sekonik L358
I would agree with Nikolai and Seastack that consistent judging can make all the difference.
In the digital age, setting photoshop/no photoshop limits seems futile. In film era contests, you didn't just submit an undeveloped negative SOC. You submitted a finished print, which involved several skills that impacted the final product beyond "pressing the shutter"": film choice, filters, negative developing, print developing, etc. The point should be, how well did you use the tools at hand to acheive your VISION. And in the world of art, esteemed judges make those determinations, not the public. Otherwise this contest just becomes a USA today "pick the cutest christmas photo" contest. I think the public choice rounds are fun, and shouldn't go away entirely, but the only rounds that determine actual prizes? Not if LPS is to be considered a serious photo contest.
I agree with this too, although I only have PSE4 and don't think I can merge many images w/ it. :cry
Canon 40D : Canon 400D : Canon Elan 7NE : Canon 580EX : 2 x Canon 430EX : Canon 24-70 f2.8L : Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L USM : Canon 28-135mm f/3.5 IS : 18-55mm f/3.5 : 4GB Sandisk Extreme III : 2GB Sandisk Extreme III : 2 x 1GB Sandisk Ultra II : Sekonik L358
Seastack, I appreciated your words out there on that limb regarding the open voting. I believe I'd like to join you out there. It makes very good sense. I second the motion. I couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks, you saved me about of hour worth of thinking and writing.
Post processing. We all use it, and it would be impossible to regulate. We'd be judging and questioning one another all the time. "Hey, that looks photoshopped! No it's not!......" So, I'm not in favor of it being regulated. On the other side, to have a contest without PS, I'd be disappointed, real disappointed.
Then came your skillfully made comments on select judges, and I think that's the direction I'd like to see things go too.
One more thing, I occassionally participate in chili cookoffs. There's Grand Champion chosen by the judges, and then there's an award for public choice. People like it set up that way. The following is not photoshopped I really do cook!
I am so not sticking my nose into the "other" debate, but re: judging, the system changed without notice near the end. Guest judges were originally announced at the start of each round, with links to those judges' web sites, so we could visit those sites and get a sense of what the guest judges shot/liked and perhaps cater to their tastes. Shay even encouraged us to do this to get a leg up, so to speak.
After the hiccup because of real life, guest judges started being announced after the rounds had closed. A big difference in strategy, and the only change-up that truly irked me.
I get the idea that she was suggesting a contest with nothing more than what you can do when converting from RAW (so use your favorite raw converter; Andi can correct me if I'm wrong).
Heh, that's exactly what I meant. There is no way to expect everyone to USE LR, only do what LR can do.
Essentially, what I mean by that is to be able to edit your photos as you would have 100 years ago in the darkroom with a single photo. A single photo with minimal edits (color correct, crop, remove spots).
I am probably :deadhorse , but my biggest issue bar non with the current contest structure is totally inconsistent and utterly unpredictable judging .
My suggestion? Dedicated judges. Judges who are known and who can stay with the contest during its whole run. At least a pool of them to ensure the fail-safety. I think we have enough people here whose professionalism and opinion is highly respected by the whole community.
Don't get me wrong - it was fun. But it can be made better, and the judging system is the keystone, methinks.
I completely agree. i think if at the end of every round, even if I didn't agree with the choices, but I still was impressed by them and learned from them and felt they were ultimately RIGHT (regardless of PSing), I'd be much less frustrated. But seeing photos at the top that I don't agree with because the judging is being done by the general photography public who changes from round to round culminating in the true general public judging the photos - with no guidelines at all.
And Seastack, I completely agree with you about the open judging.... Thanks for saying it!
Comments
I took it as a way to introduce my friends in my local camera club to DGrin. Of course I made it personal by saying I have a photo entered, but I left it up to them to vote for whatever photo they wanted to. Hopefully some of them will stick around and explore more of what DGrin has to offer.
It seems to be easier to get people to check out a new site by saying "hey, I have a photo entered in a competition and voting is going on now, go check it out" as opposed to "come check out this other photo site I belong to...". The former is less spammy sounding than the later.
I just hope that Andy doesn't disqualify any pictures due to the votes all of these new users will be giving.
Errrr, so when do you play good cop?
... I really hate these kinda contests, well voting. I really like all of them and being an indecisive fool... you guys really threw a wrench at me! :soapbox
www.tednghiem.com
I think next years contest will have some additional rules and some clearer communication.
Not all that difficult really. Let's not make it more than it needs to be- attempts to cheat will be seen easily enough.
Best of luck to everyone. There are some fantastic final images.
Aaron Newman
Website:www.CapturingLightandEmotion.com
Facebook: Capturing Light and Emotion
These things can't be regulated. Dgrin has no idea where I live. Comcast can change my IP whenever they want. My girlfriend (who uses the same internet, through the same router, and hence the same IP address (externally anyway)) has been following the competition because I have entered a few shots. She is at both the same physical address and the same (apparent) IP address, should her vote not count? Is it only one vote per household?
Now, I don't know what the modmins are using as the cutoff for number of votes-per-address (and i dont really care, because I'm sure they are doing it intelligently), I just wanted to say that using ip/physical address is not the best way to set the rule.
My Gallery
Oh one more thing i mentioned to my dad about contest and he was "ok i will tell others at office to vote for you". I knew it will create mess for me so i told him voting is over thanks.
And what i have seen is that even if i told my friends to participate in voting they will vote for my picture no matter they found it good or bad. So i thought to keep most of folks away only told one or 2 i hope they voted honestly
My Gallery
Not true! 95% of my photos are portraits and I almost NEVER photoshop them! My final entry has two very minor things taken out, but the other photo I considered entering doesn't have ANY psing at all.
I know that the way I look at photography is different from some, but I don't think limiting PSing in any way constrains the TYPE of photos that can be entered.
And for what it's worth, I'd be *extremely* happy to see a photography only contest (meaning NO PSing at all) and a PS yourself as much as you'd like contest. I think these are two different types of art and should not be judged together. I'll even go so far as to say that if they aren't separated next go around, then I seriously doubt I'll be entering.
I completly agree - this is an art form, but it's NOT photography. Done right, you can get amazing, beautiful images. I've done this on many occasions, but still think it should be done in two contests...
www.tippiepics.com
Agree with you Andi, or at the very least less ambiguous rules and rules that are adhered to.
Judging from the PM's I've received quite a few people have become disenchanted with the competition and dropped out and frankly I'm not surprised.
Charlie
pp
Flickr
Actually, I wasn't reacting to the limiting of PS. Rather I was commenting on the idea to selectively include some PS techniques and rule others out. My personal feeling is that a "no Photoshop" contest should strictly adhere to a jounalistic standard. "No Photoshop" should mean "untouched in camera JPEG". Every attempt I have seen to define a middle ground is fraught with ambiguity and I think Shay and DoctorIt were very wise not to try.
Ahhh.... i think you're right. It's a slippery slope.
But I'd enjoy a no PS contest! Basically anything you can do with LR, but no removing/adding anything would be wonderful.
www.tippiepics.com
A Lightroom only contest would rock, but given that Lighroom is $300 program, I think it is something more appropriately sponsored by Adobe than Dgrin/Smugmug. Restricting post processing is tricky because you can only really do it effectively by limiting the allowed software tool set but mentioning specific software tools in the rules is politically difficult in a manufuacturer agnostic forum. In particular, Dgrin can't take the risk of alienating potential competition sponsors.
I get the idea that she was suggesting a contest with nothing more than what you can do when converting from RAW (so use your favorite raw converter; Andi can correct me if I'm wrong).
I like this idea more than a "straight out of the camera jpeg" thing because I have a computer that is designed to perform computation, and a camera that is designed to take pictures. Why would I use the camera to do what the computer is best at? Besides, that would unfairly balance the contest to those with camera's like the D3 or D300 with super awesome onboard processing. Food for thought.
While I have defended the inclusion of composites in this contest, I'm starting to back peddle a bit here because I had believed that unless extremely well done (as Shay once posted somewhere) they would never have a chance of winning. The same I believed would be true of overly staged or contrived non-composite images, or cliche McStock kinds of photos ... that images which strike a genuine chord or provide a unique insight or perspective always trump cliche or mediocre ... but I'm having doubts ...
As for no PSing? ... a little bit of a slippery slope there. I assume you mean overly PS'd composite-style images. So, dodge, burn and crop only?
I really, really want to agree with you ... almost do, it would certainly benefit me and most of my types of photography ... But ... okay, what about adding a moon to a landscape that was taken at the same time and place but out of the primary frame? I've done this (and disclosed it honestly, and took public choice once with it) and so have other leading landscape photogs ... including Marc. What about taking "just a few things out," would that be allowed?
So ... I guess in the end I don't think splitting things up would really be practical or advisable.
Rolled into this is the open voting.
I will go out on a limb and, hopefully without offending anyone, ask the question, does open voting really award the best images? (Right, I know, I know, it's all subjective but really ... there is such a thing as images that just don't quite get there ... I mean Thomas Kincaid is a wildly popular painter of quaint scenes with the masses but you won't find him in MoMA or any other art museum ... and this IS an art contest, because I believe photography IS art, not a standup comedian runoff)
And, walking a little further out on the branch, I do think appreciation of good photography takes time like appreciation of fine wine. My own concepts of what makes a great photo have changed dramatically in the last few years, even last few months. Yeah, perhaps that's an elitist argument but it may also be true.
In the end, I guess I've come to the conclusion that I would rather have my work judged primarily by top professionals who have developed an eye for good photography over years or decades (as it has been in every other contest I've entered) without an open vote subject to all kinds of extensive variables beyond just the subjective if I'm going to work my (butt) off to get a good image. {deep breath}
And I believe, with a well-mixed panel of judges who appreciate all types of photography, this non-open-vote approach would just skip right over the top of arguments on PS'd versus not ... and even photo styles and genres competing against each other which is also a bit unique to the non-categorized LPS ... i.e. this is coming back around to my belief that overly-staged or PS'd images, unless extremely well done, will never have a chance of winning ... if judged by respected professionals.
Crud, I'll probably look back at this and regret it, maybe this branch of thought has a fallacy at its heart.
I do believe, though, this has been a good competition at its core with incredibly generous prizes offered with the best of intentions and I'm confident no one here is suggesting otherwise. It could all just come up a notch without losing the benefits of it being a growth and learning opportunity for some really good photographers. Hopefully, this opinion will be useful as retooling of LPS progresses ...
And, of course, I'm just waiting to see what changes are made ...
I am probably :deadhorse , but my biggest issue bar none with the current contest structure is totally inconsistent and utterly unpredictable judging
My suggestion? Dedicated judges. Judges who are known and who can stay with the contest during its whole run. At least a pool of them to ensure the fail-safety. I think we have enough people here whose professionalism and opinion is highly respected by the whole community.
Don't get me wrong - it was fun. But it can be made better, and the judging system is the keystone, methinks.
Essentially we'd be talking about the sort of work that can be done in software such as Lightroom or Aperture only but already this attracts ambiguity.
For my mind there should be a contest where the rules state that elements may not be moved or added to an image and then a separate category where anything goes, fake it as much as you like.
Charlie
My Gallery
Charlie
Hey Nik, didn't you judge a round?
Oh crap, that's right, me too! We are both our own worst indictments and evidence, lol ....
In the digital age, setting photoshop/no photoshop limits seems futile. In film era contests, you didn't just submit an undeveloped negative SOC. You submitted a finished print, which involved several skills that impacted the final product beyond "pressing the shutter"": film choice, filters, negative developing, print developing, etc. The point should be, how well did you use the tools at hand to acheive your VISION. And in the world of art, esteemed judges make those determinations, not the public. Otherwise this contest just becomes a USA today "pick the cutest christmas photo" contest. I think the public choice rounds are fun, and shouldn't go away entirely, but the only rounds that determine actual prizes? Not if LPS is to be considered a serious photo contest.
50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 24-70 2.8L, 35mm 1.4L, 135mm f2L
ST-E2 Transmitter + (3) 580 EXII + radio poppers
thanks for posting for the 1st time in my life i enjoyed reading something
My Gallery
You're such an anarchist! ...
Seriously, good points that boiled it down to the heart of the issue.
I so agree with this! I understand if someone like Shay can't stick around then you have to replace him, but I think public choice should be a separate prize. The panel of judges picks the final 10 in the grand finale as in all the other qualifying rounds.
In other words appointed Judges pick the qualifying; public picks the semifinalist; appointed judges pick the grand finale 10. Then ALL the judges hash out who wins the grand finale prizes over a week of debate, private messages, phone calls, whatever.
I mean $7,500 at stake here...
and people are confused on if they can have more than one person vote from the same house or what the ethics are in campaining for one photo...
So then solve that with a public vote for a "public choice award" (similar to the semifinal votes) for a separate prize like a smugmug strap or a year free or a $250 BH Gift card (just silly examples) and clearly state if campaigning is okay or not.
dak.smugmug.com
I agree with this too, although I only have PSE4 and don't think I can merge many images w/ it. :cry
dak.smugmug.com
Post processing. We all use it, and it would be impossible to regulate. We'd be judging and questioning one another all the time. "Hey, that looks photoshopped! No it's not!......" So, I'm not in favor of it being regulated. On the other side, to have a contest without PS, I'd be disappointed, real disappointed.
Then came your skillfully made comments on select judges, and I think that's the direction I'd like to see things go too.
One more thing, I occassionally participate in chili cookoffs. There's Grand Champion chosen by the judges, and then there's an award for public choice. People like it set up that way. The following is not photoshopped
www.tessa-hd.smugmug.com
www.printandportfolio.com
This summer's wilderness photography project: www.tessa-hd.smugmug.com/gallery/3172341
After the hiccup because of real life, guest judges started being announced after the rounds had closed. A big difference in strategy, and the only change-up that truly irked me.
Didn't stop me from entering, though.
Charlie
Heh, that's exactly what I meant. There is no way to expect everyone to USE LR, only do what LR can do.
Essentially, what I mean by that is to be able to edit your photos as you would have 100 years ago in the darkroom with a single photo. A single photo with minimal edits (color correct, crop, remove spots).
I completely agree. i think if at the end of every round, even if I didn't agree with the choices, but I still was impressed by them and learned from them and felt they were ultimately RIGHT (regardless of PSing), I'd be much less frustrated. But seeing photos at the top that I don't agree with because the judging is being done by the general photography public who changes from round to round culminating in the true general public judging the photos - with no guidelines at all.
And Seastack, I completely agree with you about the open judging.... Thanks for saying it!
www.tippiepics.com