Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 1

Over Manipulation of Images?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

JohnParminter
22 Oct 2012 - 6:59 PM


Quote: If it's stated clearly in the rules what is and isn't allowed there's no arguing at the end.

I've read their rules Pete and to me they are very clear what is acceptable and what isn't however, that will be no guarantee that folk don't submit very clever photoshopped images.


Quote: The thing is how are they going to tell?

Firstly they have stated they don't want over-manipulated images, this is slightly different to photoshopped fake nature images. I would have thought it easy for their judges to determine what is over-manipulated and unreal for their tastes and criteria.

They may indeed find it a little harder to tell a fake nature image, a clever photoshopped Bengal tiger in unusual but compelling surrounds for example. They would have to use their judgement and err on the side of caution and ask to inspect RAW data for winning entries perhaps for verification.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
22 Oct 2012 - 6:59 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

monstersnowman
22 Oct 2012 - 8:10 PM

What if you don't shoot in raw ? I know many do but some people do shoot in jpg and I do occasionally.

snapbandit
snapbandit  102205 forum posts Northern Ireland3 Constructive Critique Points
22 Oct 2012 - 8:32 PM


Quote: What if you don't shoot in raw ? I know many do but some people do shoot in jpg and I do occasionally.

Well in the article they stated
" In case of the winners, we will ask for the RAW files, if available, to be submitted for review."
(bold added by me), so if raw not available they might just want the 'original' jpeg

Joe B

Last Modified By snapbandit at 22 Oct 2012 - 8:34 PM
Dave_Canon
22 Oct 2012 - 10:38 PM

This is nothing new. For camera Clubs, National competitions and international competitions sponsored by the main international organisations FIAP (the world except N America) and PSA (N America) have always placed limitations on a few subjects (natural History, documentary and some Travel competitions). In fact I think the requirements are more stringent than the National Geographic. However, for the vast majority of photographs entered (pictorial and other topics), there are no restrictions other than it all your own work.

I have taken photographs of tame owls which can create amazing photographs but would not dream of entering them under anything but pictorial. I can certainly understand why a genuine natural history photographer who has spent weeks tracking down a particular bird/animal/plant would not wish to compete with someone who had it all set up for them or heavily manipulated images to create the final photograph. I do use light to heavy manipulation and probably more of the latter but then I am not a natural History photographer.

Dave

mattw
mattw  105189 forum posts United Kingdom10 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 1:23 AM

While the NG guidelines seem badly written (from a photographic perspective), I don't see any real problem with them.

Their guidelines are similar (in sprit) to the Take A View competition.

It's always a question of 'how much is too much' when it comes to manipulation

Nick_w
Nick_w  73910 forum posts England99 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 7:18 AM


Quote: Their guidelines are similar (in sprit) to the Take A View competition.

It's always a question of 'how much is too much' when it comes to manipulation

Seems very subjective, if they haven't defined what is too much I can see a lot of problems ahead for NG.

keithh
keithh e2 Member 1023203 forum postskeithh vcard Wallis and Futuna33 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 8:15 AM

I see they will allow B&W images which in the digital world are often the most digitally manipulated of them all and very surprised that they will not allow stiched panoramas.

and once again HDR is seen as the pariah of photography whilst dodging and burning is seen as some kind of acceptable mouse clicking skill.

Nick_w
Nick_w  73910 forum posts England99 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 8:20 AM


Quote: I see they will allow B&W images which in the digital world are often the most digitally manipulated of them all and very surprised that they will not allow stiched panoramas.

and once again HDR is seen as the pariah of photography whilst dodging and burning is seen as some kind of acceptable mouse clicking skill.

But dodging and burning and black and white is seen as old school Keith, so of course there's a difference ..... With the old farts


But seriously why no stitched Panos? Or are they only wanting submissions from those with a medium format backs, 5Dmk3 or D800's?

keithh
keithh e2 Member 1023203 forum postskeithh vcard Wallis and Futuna33 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 8:42 AM

Neither do they want the world above water distorting with a fish eye yet seem happy for it to be altered by a lens baby.

Nick_w
Nick_w  73910 forum posts England99 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 8:47 AM

But the Lens baby reminds them of their 1923 Leica lens, they bought with their first pay packet

TimMunsey
TimMunsey e2 Member 386 forum postsTimMunsey vcard United Kingdom
23 Oct 2012 - 9:32 AM

Simple situation, National Geographic is a magazine reporting odds and ends from around the world, the images must be a statement of fact - a record. There is a place for manipulation, in art galleries, forums such as ephotozine, but not in a news report.
Weird about fisheyes and stitched panos though, what goes on there? Boring old fart.

Tim

User_Removed
23 Oct 2012 - 10:30 AM


Quote: It's the whole 'is photography art?' question all over again.

.

No it's not.

It is a statement of the type of photographs they want.

For some purposes (and some competitions) the objective is to obtain images that are as clear and accurate representations of reality as possible.

For other purposes (and some competitions) there may be an interest in using photography as a basis for creative art.

Any magazine or competition organiser is entitled to set the parameters they wish submissions to adhere to.

There is a lot of confusion in this thread between "image manipulation" and "post-exposure processing", maybe because the terms themselves are not well-defined or consistently applied.

As has been said, every Raw file does require some level of processing. Some may require more than others in order to get close to the original. The National Geographic criteria do not preclude this.

Image manipulation, on the other hand, can involve cloning out some elements of the picture, adding new elements, substituting skies, etc., etc. That, it seems to me, is what the National Geographic is precluding.

Some competitions are more rigorous than others. For the RPS Nature Group exhibition, for example, even giving a photograph what is described as a "cute title" will lead to disqualification. If you choose to enter, you stick by the rules.

Last Modified By User_Removed at 23 Oct 2012 - 10:31 AM
keithh
keithh e2 Member 1023203 forum postskeithh vcard Wallis and Futuna33 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 10:38 AM

I guess though, that by excluding HDR they also exclude blended exposures, whether done 'by hand' or by auto software and yet these do not alter the scene in anyway. They are merely a way of capturing a moment without the use of filters.

Margaret101
Margaret101 e2 Member 3Margaret101 vcard United Kingdom
23 Oct 2012 - 10:45 AM

To me, there is simple manipulation ie shadow/contrast/light/brightness. Which you get in most simple photographic programs . Then there is the more complex, ie photoshop, GIMP, well, the list goes on. I think simple manipulation is ok in most cases. The others have have their place as some wonderful images can be created in the more complex programs. I do feel that it should be stated that manipulation has been used and then it can be viewed in its own category.

Last Modified By Margaret101 at 23 Oct 2012 - 10:45 AM
keithh
keithh e2 Member 1023203 forum postskeithh vcard Wallis and Futuna33 Constructive Critique Points
23 Oct 2012 - 11:02 AM

The problem is that once you start defining what can and can't be done then you have to be more specific than the rules outlined.

Will focus stacked macro's be allowed for instance?

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.