I take my pictutes with samsung but I also have a Nikon camera. I almost ever use the nikon thoughLighting an lens make all the difference in the world. There is only so much you can do with an iphone (personally I would throw it in the garbage)
Now we're talkin!! My S7 takes great photos! but doesn't compare to what I can do with my CanonI take my pictutes with samsung
! Keep shooting until you get that perfect one .
I have the s6 too!
With my advise you can't lose!
With my advise you can't lose!
I totally disagree with this nonsense. If you have to photoshop the picture then you just haven't taken enough pictures
...
Total misrepresentation. If we are adding things and changing things, might as well add wings to it too and pretend you found a dragon in the forest. Photoshop and programs of the like have made it to where ANYBODY can take a good picture nowadays without knowing ANYTHING about how a camera works or even the basics. Why try to adjust this and adjust that and do this and do that for a good shot when you can pop off any picture you want and put it on the computer and enhance it?
I'm just going to enter a chameleon stick figure drawing
Make sure to add some stick figure skin and such.
I think someone has a difficult time recognizing humor/sarcasm ...Rules do state though that "Natural looking photos that accurately represent the chameleon species is the goal".
So enhancing your photos with Photoshop to make them look better than they really are in a natural setting, in real life, is suddenly considered "natural" now?
Ok. Here me out on this then....
Lets say someone enhances the colors of their chameleon and makes them really 'pop' more than they ever do in real life. They make a blue or a red that is WAAAY brighter on a picture than you will EVER see it in real life. The picture of the chameleon is absolutely bright as heck now and looks stunning. Way brighter colors than you will ever see it when holding it right in front of your face, even if it is fully fired up.... That's okay?
Let's say someone uses Photoshop to get rid of every single little flaw there may be on the skin. Any tiny little scratches there are. Maybe they edit a stuck piece of shed out of the picture. Maybe there is a burn mark or two, and those suddenly vanish. Maybe they edit out a small cut or scrape on the back or on the side. Maybe the tip of the tail is missing, or the casque on a Veiled is missing a chunk, and they add it back into the photo as if it was never gone. Suddenly, your chameleon looks in perfect health when in reality, it has lots of things going wrong with it. But as long as nobody can NOTICE IT in the Photoshop edit, that's okay?
Heck, let's even go as far as to pretend someone is SOOO good at Photoshop, that they make their totally red and orange Tamatave chameleon look like a totally blue Nosy Be. We all know that a Nosy Be isn't red and orange, and we all know that a Tamatave isn't blue. But say someone was to do this and totally change the entire locale of their chameleon just because they changed the color. Suddenly, there is a really sweet "Nosy Be" chameleon everyone is raving about when in reality, a "Nosy Be" is nowhere to be found in the picture. Then, you have all sorts of people voting for your "Nosy Be" because that is their favorite locale, but little do they know, they were lied to and it's not even a Nosy Be. You could even mislead them and LABEL it as a Nosy Be. As long as nobody can tell you altered the photo, right? Or, someone could ADD color spots here and there and make some really neat color schemes and patterns on their chameleon. Suddenly, you have a "super crossbreed" chameleon with all these spots and color patterns that looks NOTHING like it does in real life. As long as nobody can tell it's fake colors and patterns, that's okay?
What you're basically saying is that, "as long as the untrained eye can't tell I cheated and completely altered the photo, it's ok" ......
Enhancing a photo in any way technically isn't accurately representing the chameleon unless you are a wizard of some sorts and are enhancing the reptile in real life too. Just sayin. I've seen lots of entries that looked like they used post-processing. But how would anyone really know for 100% certainty? You wouldn't. Maybe the person has a multimillion dollar camera and took the picture with some thousand-dollar lenses. Or maybe, just maybe, it was taken on a 1970 Kodak camera and the person who owns that Kodak is ironically the best Photoshop user in the world and printed the photo (because digital picture capabilities didn't exist in a 1970 Kodak), scanned it on the office scanner to put it onto a computer, post-processed it to "perfection", and made it come out looking like the multimillion dollar camera's picture, but better.
As long as nobody CAN TELL huh? So we can all lie and be dishonest in the pictures, AS LONG AS NOBODY NOTICES?
And you wonder why there isn't more involvement in the photo contests sometimes. That's even been mentioned here on this site many times by Brad and a few others. About how there are thousands of members here, yet, some months, they have barely had any photo contest entries. So sometimes they have to extend the entry period deadline to try to get more photos submitted, or sometimes they accept entries that go against quite a few of the contest rules but they need a quota in order to run a photo contest. I've brought some of these points up to Brad before.
There's not a lot of involvement because some people win over and over and over again. Are those the kinds of people with thousand-dollar cameras, taking legit, un-processed pictures with thousand-dollar lens, using professional umbrella studio lighting kits used by professional photographers to get good lighting WITHOUT the need for post-processing? It could be. Is it people getting lucky over and over again, getting great shots, taking a 100% natural photo with no editing whatsoever? There's a slim chance. Is it the same people using computer software and enhancing their photos, misrepresenting them all of the time? It's definitely a possibility. Is it favoritism towards certain members? Maybe.
MAYBE... some people just get tired of NOT post-processing their pictures AT ALL.....EVER..... and yet, they ALWAYS lose to the people who DO post-process because those kinds of people could never really take a good NATURAL pic to begin with and RELY on photo enhancing software to make a good picture into a great picture. Or maybe people get tired of the same members winning over and over so they don't even bother anymore. Who knows.
But the fact remains - the photo contests have lacked participation for quite a long time now. And I can guarantee you one thing: It's not the tempting chance at winning a $50 gift card or that cool medal under your name that's scaring people away. It's other reasons. You can bet on it.
