Forums › Forums › Farktography General Chat › Farktography Pub and Grill › about unfairness, imho, in the rules
- This topic has 91 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by FutherMucker.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 25, 2008 at 11:54 pm #17959SilverStagParticipant
I think we should be competing on the basis of the finished product, not how we got there.
This. Thanks for your kind words, soosh. It means a lot coming from someone as good as you are.
It’s the 21st century, and I don’t think we should artificially limit the tools available. I really don’t think what kind of camera one uses or what film or software one uses makes that big of a difference- cute kids or a funny idea can outweigh a $5000.00 camera and $1500.00 worth of software in any given contest.
I want to put my best image forward when I enter a contest as much as anyone else, and I’ve deliberately not used images that I thought were terrific because we are on our honor here, (and that means something to me, and I suspect to many other folks as well) and I felt that something I had done to the image was a bit outside the rules.
So, I have chafed at the rules from time to time, and thought there was a little bit of a luddite flair to them. To accomplish the same things I did in the darkroom 30 years ago as well as I used to do them almost requires some ‘banned’ operations.
I agree that cloning out anything in the frame is bad juju, and kitschy effects (like the selective color business) are right out.
Someone earlier mentioned Jerry Uelsmann: I saw an exhibition of his stuff in maybe 1988 or so, and was blown away. Utter amazement now, when you realize he had no Photoshop or digital files….
July 27, 2008 at 3:52 pm #17960SilverStagParticipantSo, I was thinking that reasonable rules re: Image editing programs might be something like:
Thou shalt not:
1. Combine images unless specifically allowed in an individual contest.
2. remove or add objects or textures via cloning or copy.
Thou may:
1. remove sensor dust, scratches, and other camera/film artifacts.
2. sharpen using any reasonable method.
3. Dodge(by any method), burn(by any method), and use curves.
I don’t intend to upset the applecart, and I’d really like to see some other peoples proposed rules or ideas.
I think self-examination is a healthy thing, and I’m glad we are doing this.
July 28, 2008 at 5:49 am #17961nutkick_42ParticipantI’m personally against spot touch-ups, but it’s primarily because I’m terrible at it. The way I see it, the current version of The Rules limits what the pros in this group can do a bit. That helps me compete with my crappy point and shoot and extremely limited software selection (I’m still trying to learn to use the gimp, but I’ve got plenty of more important things to do). I agree that often a good subject will outweigh superb technical work, but often times it does seem like I’m going to need to buy a DSLR if I’m going to add a #1 to my profile.
There’s my two cents. Feel free to ignore me. I think I may just be bitter that I’m not a better photographer, but there’s the way I see it.
July 28, 2008 at 6:28 am #17962FutherMuckerParticipantbut often times it does seem like I’m going to need to buy a DSLR if I’m going to add a #1 to my profile.
Nonsense !…That’s not what it takes…I’m living proof, and some of my best images have come from a P&S camera……Forget being judged on how well you apply the rule of thirds (turds), photography skills, composition, etc…..Think more on how well your image fits the theme….Just don’t buy into the hype that you need a better camera to be more appreciated by the voters…..Seriously !!!!……..It just doesn’t work that way.
July 28, 2008 at 10:34 am #17963staplermofoParticipantI got a #1 with a point and shoot camera. If that doesn’t cheapen it I don’t know what will.
For extra fun, if you look at my FSM profile and can name the contest I first used a DSLR you get a cookie. (No fair to look in the threads for me saying “OMFG I GOT A SUPER CRAZY ?BER SUPERLATIVE PREFIX AND SUFFIX CAMERA NOW LOOK HOW COOL IT IS ZOMG IT IS SO COOL”)
Don’t get me wrong, I notice a difference, but I don’t think too many other people notice or care.
Oh, and it doesn’t hurt to run the pictures by someone whose eye you admire. I pestered tea and idle_hands like mofoing crazy the first… ok, I never stopped. Asking for, and following advice works great.July 28, 2008 at 2:27 pm #17964schneeParticipantoften times it does seem like I’m going to need to buy a DSLR if I’m going to add a #1 to my profile.
I kind of used to feel that way. Looking at my porfolio, four of my six #1’s are done with film. DLSRs help with composition and selection – one of the digital winnars was selected from about 50 candidates. And the last digital winnar was just a matter of good timing (DSLR was incidental to the image).
Voting is notoriously hard to predict – trust me, I tried to determine the independent variables way back when. Best thing is to get TotalFark and post early, but even that isn’t as strong as one may assume.
July 28, 2008 at 2:49 pm #17965ElsinoreKeymasterSo, I was thinking that reasonable rules re: Image editing programs might be something like:
Thou shalt not:
1. Combine images unless specifically allowed in an individual contest.
2. remove or add objects or textures via cloning or copy.
Thou may:
1. remove sensor dust, scratches, and other camera/film artifacts.
2. sharpen using any reasonable method.
3. Dodge(by any method), burn(by any method), and use curves.
I don’t intend to upset the applecart, and I’d really like to see some other peoples proposed rules or ideas.
I think self-examination is a healthy thing, and I’m glad we are doing this.
We also need to include red-eye correction, which is currently allowable. As is converting to monotone images. Levels are also allowable, not just Curves. Brightness/Congrats are good, too. Double (or more) exposures are also ok if done in-camera as opposed to combining them after the fact. I would like to see that distinction continue; that takes care of both HDR and negative combining in the dark room.
The overarching thing I keep seeing you guys say is correction vs addition/subtraction of elements. If we re-write the novel that is currently the “How To Participate” document, it will certainly make it shorter (and probably less daunting), but that ideal should probably be emphasized.
When we get this stuff narrowed down into a final proposal, we should probably put it to a vote to everyone.
July 28, 2008 at 4:45 pm #17966SilverStagParticipantYes, I agree, Congrats are always a good thing 🙂
July 28, 2008 at 7:12 pm #17967nobigdealParticipantI have to agree withnutkick_42.
The rules we have seem to level the playing field enough so the guy with the camera phone has as much of a shot as a pro.
I always thought of Farktography as being more about the photo as it relates to the theme over the actual “quality” of the photo.
I would be willing to bet if we went back over the top tens we would find a large part to be spur of the moment type shots as opposed to set up shots.
(or funny stuff….KFC buckets thrown in the air!)That said I am not opposed to the changes that are being offered here. I think there is nothing outrageous being proposed.
July 29, 2008 at 5:19 am #17968nutkick_42ParticipantBest thing is to get TotalFark and post early
I know it’s only $5/month, but there are months when I don’t have $5 left to my name by the end of it.
/starving college student
July 29, 2008 at 5:50 am #17969SilverStagParticipantBest thing is to get TotalFark and post early
I know it’s only $5/month, but there are months when I don’t have $5 left to my name by the end of it.
/starving college student
I remember that. Enjoy a month on me.
July 29, 2008 at 10:29 am #17970schneeParticipantBest thing is to get TotalFark and post early
I know it’s only $5/month, but there are months when I don’t have $5 left to my name by the end of it.
/starving college student
Let me rephase that – best thing is to take good photos. The best non-photography thing is to get TF, but that is to only exploit the weak correlation between earlier posting times and number of votes.
And when I say ‘weak’ I mean that most statisticians would say the the correlation is statistically insignificant.
July 29, 2008 at 6:33 pm #17971nutkick_42Participant😯
I went to comment on a Fark thread, but was blown away by the system message.
SilverStag, thankyouthankyouthankyouthankyou!
schnee, I’m working on the good picture part, but at least now I have the slight statistical advantage. I also think there’s a psychological advantage if you’re one of the first in the thread to use one of the repeating subjects. Of course, that assumes that most folks don’t have the comments displayed in reverse order…
In short, I guess it’s time to quit my bitchin’ and take some pictures!
July 29, 2008 at 11:45 pm #17972SilverStagParticipantWith great power comes great responsibility 🙂 Use it wisely 🙂
July 29, 2008 at 11:58 pm #17973FutherMuckerParticipantIn short, I guess it’s time to quit my bitchin’ and take some pictures!
That’s the spirit…Congrats on your new TF status !….Very nice of you, SilverStag.
8) -
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘about unfairness, imho, in the rules’ is closed to new replies.