about unfairness, imho, in the rules

[sleeping]

One quick question, would it be good to leave this in the rules:

NOTE:

While the above modifications are allowed for Farktography, you should
strive to keep your results in the realm of the realistic. For
example, the contrast and saturation tools can yield cartoonish
results when cranked up to their maximum strength. Such use of these
otherwise acceptable tools is discouraged and may subject your
photograph to disqualification.

? (with slight rewording to recognize that we’re not listing a bunch of acceptable modifications any longer)

Or do we care that much? I’d kinda like to see that (or some shorter statement to the effect) left in to keep us from getting people running amok with processsing…

I agree – it would be good to include something along these lines. It might also be worth specifically excluding things like “artistic” conversion filters (watercolor, etc.)

[Elsinore]

Good point there, sleeping. We’d also talked about selective color still staying out of bounds, and that’s along the same lines.

[schnee]

write’em up, please. my head is not in it right now.

[Elsinore]

working on it now…

[Elsinore]

How’s this?

* What are acceptable and unacceptable modifications?



** These are the Submission Guidelines for all Farktography Contests,

unless otherwise stated in a theme description.



* Submissions must be photographs. Screen captures do not count as

photographs.

* You must be the original photographer of your entry. Do not

submit anyone else's photography as your own.

* You are only allowed to enter a photograph once. Do not submit

the same photo to another contest later.

* Up to 3 photos can be entered into each contest, as long as each

photo is of a different composition. Please post each photo

separately so they can be voted for individually.



** General Photographic Guidelines:

* Compositional changes, particularly those that involve adding or

removing elements of the photo, are bad. No adding Elvis, no erasing

utility lines.



* Image corrections are accepted. Color or value correction?

Perspective? Pin cushion? Unsightly blemishes? Stray hairs

falling over your model's alabaster face? Fix these. That's cool.



* You should strive to keep your results in the realm of the realistic.

Cartoonish results from turning the saturation up to 3000, selective

coloring (we can see your boyfriend's pretty green eyes without

turning everything else black and white), and the use of "artistic"

filters that turn your photos into paintings or drawings are not what

we're going for here.  Such use of these otherwise acceptable tools

is discouraged and may subject your photograph to disqualification.



** Unacceptable Modifications (These are right out):



* Combining exposures in post-processing is not allowed (e.g. HDR,

stitching, stacking negative, &c - not allowed). However,

multiple exposures produced in-camera are always acceptable.



* Removing or adding compositional objects or textures via cloning

or copying. Cropping is fine, but no removing the branch that

seems to be growing out of Aunt Edna's head.



* DO NOT divide by zero



If you have any questions about the acceptable modifications, or if

you'd just like to chat and learn more about photography, feel free to

drop by the forums at Farktography.net or email

questions@farktography.net.

[sleeping]

I like it!

[schnee]

+1

[DeaconBlues]

+2

This is awesome. I think it will be a boon to Farktographers everywhere. Thanks to all of y’all, especially the folks that did the heavy lifting of rewriting the rules 🙂

[Elsinore]

Ok the poll is up. 7 days for voting.
http://www.farktography.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=15699#15699

[swampa]

Awww but I wanna divide by zero! I love my NaN. 😛

[FutherMucker]

My vote of YES has been entered. I’m a bit cursed by being a perfectionist, and it’s sometimes very hard for me to select a photo that I feel is worthy of being posted to a “contest.”…I rarely print my photos, but when I do, I utilize nearly every PS tool available. There is almost always something that doesn’t belong, and the clone tool is probably my favorite. I know that these new rules will not allow this, but I feel that the added flexibility here will make me feel better about some of the images I would like to enter, but am normally reluctant to do so…..+1 !!!!

Some dude named Ansel Adams once said: “You don’t take a photograph, you make it.”

8)

[Choc-Ful-A]

I voted no and explained why in the voting thread. Should I cut-n-paste here too?

[FutherMucker]

So a long way of saying I’m not in favor of the changes as written due to the vagueness of the do/don’t line and concerns about where this slippery slope leads.

Politely conveyed…Please elaborate on what is vague about the proposed changes, and why they seem slippery.

/Curious….that’s all.
//Despite what you’ve mentioned in the voting thread.
///Give me more, please.
////Put it in trailer park terminology, if you must.
8)

Something like: “I just think……..

[staplermofo]

I’m not crazy about people removing unwanted hair and blemishes.
It seems a bit too far. I mean, can I remove a scuff from a stapler? Are people going to come out looking like they spent the night under a floor buffer? Are staplers? It’s all so many words! The light show at lollapalooza shines at my office window when I’m working and it’s distracting! I’ll probably hear those punk kids all night tonight! I can’t find my keys! My VCR is blinking 12:00! The sky is falling!

(I’ll probably support it when I can get some sleep)

[Choc-Ful-A]

So a long way of saying I’m not in favor of the changes as written due to the vagueness of the do/don’t line and concerns about where this slippery slope leads.

Politely conveyed…Please elaborate on what is vague about the proposed changes, and why they seem slippery.

/Curious….that’s all.
//Despite what you’ve mentioned in the voting thread.
///Give me more, please.
////Put it in trailer park terminology, if you must.
8)

Something like: “I just think……..

My grandmother lived in a trailer until a few years ago when the roof started to look too dodgy, so I can relate to that slashy comment, but I’ll stay on topic.

First let me first admit openly (drum roll…) that I’m not a particularly technical photographer, which you can tell from my photos. I tend to focus (ha, I funny!) on composition and visual impact first and maybe other tricky details after that if I can manage it. So that probably has something to do with the way I see this rule change. Having said that…

In the interest of time I’ll offer one example of what I mean by a “clean definition” and then will clarify or add more over the weekend if requested. I’m still at work and really, really want to leave at this point, heh!

When I’m cleaning up an image scanned from a negative I generally work pretty zoomed in to find dust and scratches. Sometimes I see something I want to remove from an artistic perspective but it’s not obvious (from a zoomed perspective) if it’s on the negative or a scanning artifact. So I zoom out and check before removing. The point I’m making is that the rule governing what is and isn’t allowed is very clear and easy to understand. If the offending mark/spot/blotch is part of the negative I leave it, even though it’s annoying. But if it was introduced in the process of digitizing the negative, I remove it.

The goal of the rule changes being discussed here seems to be to redefine the boundary of what non-global changes are allowed in a Farktography contest. The point being to allow corrections that don’t represent a significant change to the image. I think the tricky part is giving people a clear set of guidelines for deciding what can be changed without crossing that line. As written there’s almost no specifics so it will be left to each person (and each moderator) to decide.

Consider the rules around what’s NSFW in a posting, which is admittedly more applicable in the PS contests then Farktography. There are guidelines available to help people decide when they need to put up a placeholder image and link to the real one. But it’s still highly subjective model and people routinely guess wrong, various moderators interpret things differently, and most people wind up asking for a ruling in advance of the contest going live. I don’t think much of that will happen with this change, since I doubt people will get banned for excessive spot correction of a Farktography image. 🙂 But it’s similar in many ways, if the rules are vague and open to interpretation, then there will be some amount of confusion amount the participants and more work for the moderators.

So I’m asking if there’s a way to clarify what changes are now allowed in more detail to reduce (not remove) the level of ambiguity. It would be interesting to see if we could all agree on a word to describe the level of change we’re trying to allow.

[Author]

Posts