[roto]

Originally Posted by lucidcreations

Liking the Urban Couture idea.

I was kinda kidding...but it is along the lines of fashion (which is not included in the list).

And stop with all the talk about your poles

[Brown]

Originally Posted by lucidcreations

Thats not fair, you can alter contrast, exposure, dodge and burn in the dark room so why not in Photoshop?!

well do it in the dark room then.

[cyk]

Originally Posted by Brown

well do it in the dark room then.

Its easier to use photoshop than build an entire dark room. Photoshop should definetly be allowed for colour/light/contrast/ etc. I've had this discussion on other forums and we've agreed that its ok to adjust images. Think about. You use a digital camera, its essentially running photoshop on it to process your images anyway. I can alter sharpness, exposure, white balance, etc as part of the RAW format on my 10D. Thats got nothing to do with photoshop, its just part of the format. Most modern digital cameras allow people to take pictures in black and white, sepia tones, and other fancy effects. So were do you draw the line?

[adras]

I have entered numerous photography contests, which were sponsored by big corporations. In all the contests the regulations would allow you to use Photoshop to adjust contrast/brightness curves or even add a border - however you shouldn't stitch photos together nor submit any photos that have heavy Photoshop manipulations such as filters and objects added from other photos etc.

[roto]

Adras has spoken.

[lucidcreations]

Originally Posted by Brown

well do it in the dark room then.

I can do it in a dark room, night classes eh

Its just a whole lot easier with PS so whats the point.

EDIT: only in B&W though.

[flatcat]

Does "urban culture" have to be the total graffiti/rap thing necessarily? I was going to take a picture of some friends chilling in a swank lil martini bar, but maybe it was a misinterpretation on my part?

[lucidcreations]

[tomson]

Originally Posted by flatcat

Does "urban culture" have to be the total graffiti/rap thing necessarily? ...

course not - it could be a bunch of piss-heads scrapping outside a kebab shop or a queue of grannies waiting for the post office to open.

The whole graffiti/rap thing is relevant - but far too obvious.

[cyk]

Originally Posted by adras

I have entered numerous photography contests, which were sponsored by big corporations. In all the contests the regulations would allow you to use Photoshop to adjust contrast/brightness curves or even add a border - however you shouldn't stitch photos together nor submit any photos that have heavy Photoshop manipulations such as filters and objects added from other photos etc.

Hmm, I guess it depends on the filters. The unsharpen mask is a very handy filter. Filters that only adjust light levels, contrast, saturation and colour tones should also be permitted imho. What about shadows and hightlights? They're all part of the modern photography toolkit really. I personally feel that anything is ok apart from manipulations, as in two totally different shots blended into one. Obviously merging two shots to fix exposure problems is fine.

[adras]

Originally Posted by cyk

Obviously merging two shots to fix exposure problems is fine.

That's pushing it.

[flatcat]

Originally Posted by tomson

course not - it could be a bunch of piss-heads scrapping outside a kebab shop or a queue of grannies waiting for the post office to open.

The whole graffiti/rap thing is relevant - but far too obvious.

Indeed, but if someone actually did the graffiti/rap thing, they could merely be identified as a talentless donkey from here on out

[cyk]

Originally Posted by adras

That's pushing it.

I wouldn't think so. You can take double exposures with film cameras and merge shots together with film, why not with digital? If you want to take a shot of something and not have the sky over-exposed you can fix that. You could fix it with film, so you should with digital. It seems really silly to take a step back now just because.

[Forever]

Urban Culture does not mean that you need to make pictures of graffiti!?

I'll show you an example of Urban Culture:



Thank you.

And about the idea of letting the winner choose the next theme. I disagree.

[Forever]

Someone asked "what are the photoshop limitations?".
It is kinda easy to figure out. You are meant not to use any kind of photoshop software.
Just show us your pictures, straight from the digicam.

So no adjusting in brightness etc.

[DRAGLiNE]

what if you don't use a digital camera and prefer film, but your scanner is crap and reproduces images with poor colour/brightness/contrast?

and please dont say "buy a knew scanner" - that's what Santa is for.

[lucidcreations]

Originally Posted by Forever

Someone asked "what are the photoshop limitations?".
It is kinda easy to figure out. You are meant not to use any kind of photoshop software.
Just show us your pictures, straight from the digicam.

So no adjusting in brightness etc.

WHY!?

You can do it in the dark room with film, so why not digital. Would it be allowed with film? This really doesnt make sense. Look at the rules from loads of other photography competitions, they allow basic manipulation. I agree there is a point where you start to take the piss though. But all this is only the same as doing it on the enlarger with film.

How about cropping? That's another thing thats done all the time on film and digital.

Photography isnt just about taking technically perfect photos straight from a camera not matter the format, its about the end result.

[flatcat]

And so dies, the photography contests. :p

[cyk]

Originally Posted by Forever

Someone asked "what are the photoshop limitations?".
It is kinda easy to figure out. You are meant not to use any kind of photoshop software.
Just show us your pictures, straight from the digicam.

So no adjusting in brightness etc.

TBH thats not possible at all with RAW files. You can't just download them from the camera and upload them to a site. They have to first be converted with a RAW converter. The default options that you get from this are things like;

contrast
brightness
shadows
saturation of red/blue/green
sharpness
exposure

and various other things. So fine, ban photoshop, but you really have to understand that we are in the digital age and that there is no escaping it. Like I previously said, pretty much *ALL* digital cameras have sepia tones and black and white modes, so how can you ban those modes? You can't ask us to ban RAW files either. So if you technically limit us to whatever our cameras offer, then some of our cameras offer Photoshop style features. It really does take the piss.

We should be allowed to do anything that you can do in the dark room. It simply wouldn't be a fair competition otherwise.

[lucidcreations]

I 2nd that. I use RAW as well.

Hey my enteries might be shit yet so what does it matter anyway