Forums › Forums › Farktography General Chat › This week’s contest › 3-6-13 – Software Hootenanny 3
- This topic has 99 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 6 months ago by
Yugoboy.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 20, 2013 at 3:33 am #50383
Yugoboy
ParticipantOK… I’m unlikely to do a warp-tool creature, just because that would be (maybe) too extreme.
However, I’m in the preliminary stages of making a couple Canadian buskers invisible. This is straight-up Photoshop clone-tool plus select, cut and paste (with a little creativity added in). Am I OK on this, or should I just dick around with various filters and the like?
February 20, 2013 at 3:55 am #50384CauseISaidSo
ParticipantSo let’s state the rules (or lack thereof) explicitly and see if we can get a final consensus. My interpretation of the feedback thus far (and also my personal vote) would be something like this:
“Anything goes, including combining multiple shots or elements thereof in any fashion you desire, but every pixel in your final image must have started its life as a pixel in a photo that you personally took. Note that all photos used in any way for this contest cannot be used in future contests.”
That rules out any straight-out “hand-created” elements, although we’ll likely have to rely on the honor system for that and reposts, but does that jive with what y’all were thinking? Speak now or forever hold your peace…
February 20, 2013 at 4:11 am #50385ParticipantYeah. Sounds good. And as for the “creative” part: in a project like this, where the people become invisible and their sleeves and collars are empty, you have to do something to show the back of the shirt. I usually rely on a piece from elsewhere in the picture, so I’m still in the OK on that one.
February 20, 2013 at 10:24 am #50386fluffybunny
ParticipantSounds good to me CISS, thanks for condensing it down to its pure form.
Let’s Hootenanny!
/Verb?
February 20, 2013 at 1:09 pm #50387
orionidParticipantWhat about the original definition. I’m too lazy to dig back through right now, but it was something akin to “HDR, Topaz, and other heavy-handed post-processing applications that would otherwise be forbidden.”
February 20, 2013 at 2:00 pm #50388ParticipantI’m good with that, too. As this was an executive decision and not a voted up theme, I’m fine with using the original definition. If I’m still here in 2 years and remember to submit it as a theme, I’ll define it my own way (which will be super-liberal), but I’m OK with simply going berserk with filters and monkeying with settings being the point of this. It also keeps the playing field somewhat level, as not everyone has my experience with Photoshoppery, but many people have had fun with filters, blend modes and screwing around with settings.
(And it’ll save me from about 3-4 hours of work on the buskers pic)
February 20, 2013 at 4:33 pm #50389ravnostic
ParticipantAny and all treatments not normally allowed software-wise are allowed/encouraged for this contest: artsy filters, exposure stacking/HDR, tilt-shift fakes, stitching, etc. NOTE: No pasting or moving subjects not in the original photo(s) like in a PS contest.
No pasting…does that mean no collages? In this instance, I’m not moving anything, but I’m taking sequential slices of sequential images and creating an image that blends 95 frames of the same scene taken over 20 minutes in time. ❓
//edit; having read the discussion thus far, I think I’m good. I’m burning through 95 images, but then…what the hell, I can take nearly the same images again on any given 80 days of a 365 day calendar year…
February 20, 2013 at 4:59 pm #50390ParticipantWhat about the original definition. I’m too lazy to dig back through right now, but it was something akin to “HDR, Topaz, and other heavy-handed post-processing applications that would otherwise be forbidden.”
The original descriptions were:
- Any and all treatments not normally allowed software-wise are allowed/encouraged for this contest: artsy filters, exposure stacking/HDR, tilt-shift, stitching, etc. Note: No pasting or moving subjects not in the original photo(s) like a PS contest.
- Any and all treatments not normally allowed software-wise are allowed/encouraged for this contest: artsy filters, exposure stacking/HDR, tilt-shift fakes, stitching, etc. NOTE: No pasting or moving subjects not in the original photo(s) like in a PS contest.
BUT, that’s what we’re here discussing – whether we want this to be an all-out hootenanny or not. Those who offered opinions previously seemed to lean towards allowing anything. Should I put your vote in the “Nay” column?
As Yugoboy said, I’m fine either way, but we do need to nail this down pretty quickly so that we can all work within the same ruleset.
February 21, 2013 at 1:52 pm #50391orionidParticipantWhat about the original definition. I’m too lazy to dig back through right now, but it was something akin to “HDR, Topaz, and other heavy-handed post-processing applications that would otherwise be forbidden.”
The original descriptions were:
- Any and all treatments not normally allowed software-wise are allowed/encouraged for this contest: artsy filters, exposure stacking/HDR, tilt-shift, stitching, etc. Note: No pasting or moving subjects not in the original photo(s) like a PS contest.
- Any and all treatments not normally allowed software-wise are allowed/encouraged for this contest: artsy filters, exposure stacking/HDR, tilt-shift fakes, stitching, etc. NOTE: No pasting or moving subjects not in the original photo(s) like in a PS contest.
BUT, that’s what we’re here discussing – whether we want this to be an all-out hootenanny or not. Those who offered opinions previously seemed to lean towards allowing anything. Should I put your vote in the “Nay” column?
As Yugoboy said, I’m fine either way, but we do need to nail this down pretty quickly so that we can all work within the same ruleset.
I like re-using number two. And Rav, your stitching should be fine. There’s no exclusion of time passage. Remember Flavivirus‘s Hong Kong shot from Panoramics?
February 21, 2013 at 5:20 pm #50392ParticipantCool, thanks orionid
February 23, 2013 at 1:07 am #50393ParticipantJust to confirm, we good with cut and paste as long as the source images are our own, yes?
February 25, 2013 at 2:01 am #50394ParticipantJust to confirm, we good with cut and paste as long as the source images are our own, yes?
Since there’s no theme submitter to make the final decision; Els said she was fine with it as long as we got a consensus; and of those that voiced an opinion, the strong majority were in favor of a let-it-all-hang-out contest, I think the answer’s yes, fluffy.
Elsinore, you still good with that?
March 2, 2013 at 6:27 am #50395ParticipantOK… so playing with filters and other stuff has been less than spectacular, so I’m making a warp-tool thing. Both the source material and the animal I’m crafting are photos of mine, but not the same photos. Which photo do I use for background? The source image (which is oriented vertically and wouldn’t really match the critter)? Or the background of my creature, into which my creature would fit perfectly?
I’ll do whichever, I just want to know (I’m still a few hours from being done, and I’m doing no more tonight, so I can wait for a response on this… just not too long…
March 2, 2013 at 5:26 pm #50396ParticipantAs long as they’re both your photos, I think it’s your choice of what to use for a background, Yugoboy.
I just finished my first entry last night. ‘Twas a lot of work, but I’m pretty happy with the result. Now, onto the next…
March 2, 2013 at 9:10 pm #50397ParticipantAs long as they’re both your photos, I think it’s your choice of what to use for a background, Yugoboy.
I just finished my first entry last night. ‘Twas a lot of work, but I’m pretty happy with the result. Now, onto the next…
I finished my three last week, part of the reason I didn’t play in “Lakes and Ponds”. I think I have some pretty unique stuff, but then again I have thought that in the past and been completely wrong. It’s what makes for an adventure!
-
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘3-6-13 – Software Hootenanny 3’ is closed to new replies.