Dodging/Burning

Forums Forums Get Technical Farktography tech talk Dodging/Burning

This topic contains 12 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by  sleeping 6 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #2877

    ravnostic
    Participant

    Can I get a quick FYI on what these are, and how they apply. It’s my understanding they’re legal to use, but I’m clueless on what they mean (yes, I know I could look it up, but I’m looking for fark-friendly advice, and a sense of community support, etc); plus, I’m out-the-door to do last-minute shoots for this week’s theme and won’t have time to research this).

    #49816

    fluffybunny
    Participant

    Can I get a quick FYI on what these are, and how they apply. It’s my understanding they’re legal to use, but I’m clueless on what they mean (yes, I know I could look it up, but I’m looking for fark-friendly advice, and a sense of community support, etc); plus, I’m out-the-door to do last-minute shoots for this week’s theme and won’t have time to research this).

    Generally not as dramatic as this example, I usually employ a largish brush with a feathered edge and weak effect so I can “paint” the amount of dodge/burn I need. The terms come from darkroom print making when you would use masks to add exposure (burn) or limit exposure (dodge).

    #49817

    ennuipoet
    Participant

    So, a history lesson first. Dodging and Burn were techniques to selectively lighten (dodge) or darken (burn) areas of a print during exposure in the darkroom. There were several tools one could use to achieve the effect ranging from physical cutouts on lightproof paper to the “dodge wand” which is used in Photoshop to represent the tool. It was a laborious and tedious process that required a real expertise, none of which possessed but could make a huge impact on a print.

    In Photoshop or Lightroom, the same effect is made by a selective brush and changing the exposure value of particular areas of the image.

    By adjusting the size and relative light/dark of the adjustment you Burn and Dodge the image as needed. The difference between Burn and Doge and changing the global exposure of the image or the global contrast/black/highlight etc. is the brush is limited only the exact area it is applied. The only real difference between this and other Photoshop enhancements visa vie Farktography is the history behind the technique, practically it is no different than other PShop enhancements.

    #49818

    ravnostic
    Participant

    But this is legal in farktography? I kinda thought things needed to be global, but then I was reading (somewhere) that it’s usable here (and damn–just something else I gotta learn!!)

    #49819

    linguine
    Participant

    The reason why we allowed digital dodging and burning was because they were originally a darkroom technique that were allowed for film users so they were condidered more of a traditional photography technique.

    #49820

    fluffybunny
    Participant

    The way I’ve approached the farktography aspect is one of moderation, if it’s not overdone and doesn’t make the image looked too processed then it’s OK. Yes it’s subjective but I think it meets the intent.

    #49821

    Yoyo
    Participant

    The reason why we allowed digital dodging and burning was because they were originally a darkroom technique that were allowed for film users so they were condidered more of a traditional photography technique.

    I respectfully disagree with your historical explanation for the exemption because air-brushing (to remove elements like belly-buttons) was also a film technique, and it’s right out as far as Farktography is concerned. Combining multiple exposures likewise. I would say the rules are the rules the way they are just because that’s the way they are.

    #49822

    linguine
    Participant

    Im not going to claim the rules are perfectly consistent, but that was part of the reasoning from when we changed the rules to allow burning and dodging(even if I can’t find that thread right now)

    The reason why we allowed digital dodging and burning was because they were originally a darkroom technique that were allowed for film users so they were condidered more of a traditional photography technique.

    I respectfully disagree with your historical explanation for the exemption because air-brushing (to remove elements like belly-buttons) was also a film technique, and it’s right out as far as Farktography is concerned. Combining multiple exposures likewise. I would say the rules are the rules the way they are just because that’s the way they are.

    #49823

    Choc-Ful-A
    Participant

    I didn’t think we changed the rule to allow dodge/burn except when used to remove minute, incidental glitches in the photo. I thought the only local changes (meaning ones not applied to the entire image) were constrained to making very minor adjustments to unimportant, small elements on the page. Basically, that translates to allowing small corrections to “noise” in the photo locally, and lots of changes allowed globally.

    I might be remembering it wrong though, so I’m glad someone asked so I can get it straight…

    #49824

    linguine
    Participant

    Am I just missing it or did the rules not make it into the new site? This is the last major rules discussion I could find
    http://farktography.net/index.php?module=forum&file=viewtopic&t=1380&highlight=burning+dodging
    and the vote on them
    http://farktography.net/index.php?module=forum&file=viewtopic&t=1390&highlight=burning+dodging
    Is there anything more recent or is that the latest set of rules that we’ve been using? In these it doesn’t specifically say burning and dodging but it allows for image corrections and in the discussion the allowing of burning and dodging seemed to get fairly good support.

    #49825

    Choc-Ful-A
    Participant

    As it turns out, I chimed in when the second discussion linked in liguine‘s comment happened. Back then I was concerned that where the line between acceptable and
    “too much change” was when it comes to selective alterations to the image. I think that’s still the issue. What’s “too much”?

    #49826

    CauseISaidSo
    Participant

    linguine‘s links are before my time, but it’s been discussed since then, too. I don’t recall exactly when or where, but I remember at some point it being either overtly stated or at least strongly hinted at that burning and dodging were allowed. I remember because it surprised me as I previously thought that spot (dust/hot pixel) removal was the only acceptable localized alteration.

    After reading the rules stated in linguine’s links, I’m surprised again to find that perspective correction is allowed. I’ve had several entries that I thought would’ve benefited from perspective correction, but I didn’t think it was kosher, so I’m also curious as to whether those rules are the latest & greatest.

    #49827

    sleeping
    Participant

    Rules are here: http://www.fark.com/farq/farktography/#What_are_acceptable_and_unacceptable_modifications.3F

    The blanket prohibition on localized corrections was removed some while back, but I don’t know if it’s particularly clear exactly what’s allowed or not.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.