Secreto come on now
- Thread starter MEPOKEU
- Start date
jojackson
New Member
If its that obvious, who cares? I think its pretty artistic and looks great. If photoshopping is out then itll be noticed. Incidently I posted two by accident, I thought the second would cancel the first. I just entered for fun though, Im too far away.
Hes not photoshopped though, its 'as is', hes a very distinctive cham with 'IJ' markings.
You can see his pic elsewhere here.
Im not sure if Im allowed, but I would have thought you would get an error message if you couldnt post. I didnt know you could vote? Ive never been able to find a button, maybe they're just judged by brad or something? Im curious about the Uni thing too
sandrachameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
If you want to create a contest, you'll have to do it elsewhere
Site Rule: Members may not solicit for fundraisers, donation drives, or charities. Also, do not solicit for or create contests in the forums or other site features.
Site Rule: Members may not solicit for fundraisers, donation drives, or charities. Also, do not solicit for or create contests in the forums or other site features.
Docility
New Member
i voted, and im a jr member
jojackson
New Member
Contest rules say it all: Real Chameleons in real environmental settings. Nothing wrong with that. this is what all this is about, NOTHING FAKE. Just real Chams in real settings!
Thats great, but were not talking Big winnings, mayhem and Murder over rules here, Just community Fun.
It dosent Have to be officially a 'contest'. There dosent Have to be a prize of any kind. Does anyone know how to have a little harmless creative fun without 'Going Legal Eagle' with the 'Rules'?
Its an online cham fanciers community, Not Alcatraz!
I did ask Brad specifically. I know folk love pointing out the rules But rules are a guideline, not the bible ok. I dont see what harm it could possibly do.
Give Brad a chance to answer about it please?
MEPOKEU
New Member
Thats great, but were not talking Big winnings, mayhem and Murder over rules here, Just community Fun.
It dosent Have to be officially a 'contest'. There dosent Have to be a prize of any kind. Does anyone know how to have a little harmless creative fun without 'Going Legal Eagle' with the 'Rules'?
Its an online cham fanciers community, Not Alcatraz!
I did ask Brad specifically. I know folk love pointing out the rules But rules are a guideline, not the bible ok. I dont see what harm it could possibly do.
Give Brad a chance to answer about it please?
rules are a guideline?
i think that kind of thinking is what got Microsoft in trouble
jojackson
New Member
Yeah I understand That Mate, That was in the official contest and therefor under the rules, But Im talking about specifically allowing that stuff just for artistic Fun, not as part of the official contest.
Did you see the veiled/jacksons photoshop pic? Silly but alot of fun.
LOl about Microsoft!
Did you see the veiled/jacksons photoshop pic? Silly but alot of fun.
LOl about Microsoft!
warpdrive
Avid Member
I know I'm realy late to this topic, but I find a few flaws with this rule...
or better yet, the lack of understanding of how digital photography works.
fist of all, let me discus how a .jpeg happens in our cameras:
(I'm gona keep this ultra simple for the non photographers out there)
when we take a photo of a chameleon, the image is recorded in RAW format from the censor.
then the RAW image is saved on our cards in .jpeg format "AFTER" filters are applyed.
thies filters help with contrast, sharpnes, saturation, hues, vibrancy, and so on.
no matter how good the filter presets are from the manufacture, they are never perfect.
in other words, your photo is a flawed representation of what you are shooting, not a die hard perfect match.
you will never get the greens perfect in vibrancy, hue, saturation, and so on, from your chameleon from any digital camera with out some outside editing.
sorry, it's imposable.
for the simple folk, your camera IS editing your shot before it is being saved on your card...and that editing can and will be flawed to some degree.
it is only by editing your saved .jpeg in photoshop or lightroom that you can then "try" to match what you were able to see with your eyes.
personaly, when I'm shooting for a job, I always shoot in RAW format.
.jpegs are too compresed and lack detail...that you will never be able to get back from editing.
RAW formated photos HAVE to be edited afterwards in photoshop or lightroom as the camera does not apply any filters to the image.
so when someone says to me, but hey you edited the sky to look more "blue"...
my reply is like, sure, that's how the sky "looked" to me when I shot it.
in fact I probably edited alot more of that shot too.
such as, I probably tryed to darken some highlights to add extra detail in that washed out area.
I also probably lightened up some shadows too for the same reason.
the reason I would do such a thing is because my censor on my camera does not have the dynamic range that some larger censor camers have.
(and our eyes have even more dynamic range then most pro SLRs)
I might edit for noise.
I might edit for dust on the censor.
I might edit for lots of reasons that are normal and reasonable, yet does not make the image fake in any way.
this is not to say that all editing shoud be reasonable for a contest.
just that we shouldn't think that the saved image in our camera is a "true" representation of what the subject realy looked like when the photo was taken.
Harry
or better yet, the lack of understanding of how digital photography works.
fist of all, let me discus how a .jpeg happens in our cameras:
(I'm gona keep this ultra simple for the non photographers out there)
when we take a photo of a chameleon, the image is recorded in RAW format from the censor.
then the RAW image is saved on our cards in .jpeg format "AFTER" filters are applyed.
thies filters help with contrast, sharpnes, saturation, hues, vibrancy, and so on.
no matter how good the filter presets are from the manufacture, they are never perfect.
in other words, your photo is a flawed representation of what you are shooting, not a die hard perfect match.
you will never get the greens perfect in vibrancy, hue, saturation, and so on, from your chameleon from any digital camera with out some outside editing.
sorry, it's imposable.
for the simple folk, your camera IS editing your shot before it is being saved on your card...and that editing can and will be flawed to some degree.
it is only by editing your saved .jpeg in photoshop or lightroom that you can then "try" to match what you were able to see with your eyes.
personaly, when I'm shooting for a job, I always shoot in RAW format.
.jpegs are too compresed and lack detail...that you will never be able to get back from editing.
RAW formated photos HAVE to be edited afterwards in photoshop or lightroom as the camera does not apply any filters to the image.
so when someone says to me, but hey you edited the sky to look more "blue"...
my reply is like, sure, that's how the sky "looked" to me when I shot it.
in fact I probably edited alot more of that shot too.
such as, I probably tryed to darken some highlights to add extra detail in that washed out area.
I also probably lightened up some shadows too for the same reason.
the reason I would do such a thing is because my censor on my camera does not have the dynamic range that some larger censor camers have.
(and our eyes have even more dynamic range then most pro SLRs)
I might edit for noise.
I might edit for dust on the censor.
I might edit for lots of reasons that are normal and reasonable, yet does not make the image fake in any way.
this is not to say that all editing shoud be reasonable for a contest.
just that we shouldn't think that the saved image in our camera is a "true" representation of what the subject realy looked like when the photo was taken.
Harry
Last edited:
Sancho
New Member
It's sad how many people try to cheat Yes I understand some people have very nice cameras and some have point and shoot cameras but some point and shoots do almost the same. And some advance cameras are cheats also cause they have auto saturation and either stuff that you can put on the setting before clicking the picture.
Yes I understand some people have very nice cameras and some have point and shoot cameras but some point and shoots do almost the same. And some advance cameras are cheats also cause they have auto saturation and either stuff that you can put on the setting before clicking the picture.
warpdrive
Avid Member
It's sad how many people try to cheat
and that is my point too.
while my main camera is the Canon G9 and has many of the pro features that even some SLRs don't have...it is still not perfect.
on my camera, I not only have landscape, portrait, and vibrancy modes, but I even have an advanced setting that I can change just about everything under the sun.
I can even change all the individual settings independantly.
such as saturation, contrast, vibrancy of red, blue, green chanels independantly, and so on.
in other words, I can make the blue sky more saturated, yet all the other colors in that image wont change.
sometimes, this is needed and manditory to have the image closer to reality.
this is not what I would call a cheat. but I can see how if it is misused then it would be cheating.
this is why I feel that some basic editing is OK for the contest, but not drastic changes.
changes that make the image look more real or a better representation of what the subject looked like at the time you took the shot should be fine.
just my thoughts,
Harry
merumontanus
Avid Member
Rules unfortunately aren't always fair, logical, or in the case of law, moral or "right". So, if the rules here are to avoid post-production enhancements, then we must abide by those rules. That doesn't mean we can't point out the flaws in those rules.
At the same time, I could not agree more with Harry-- the example of the pardalis given a couple of posts ago, in which it is said that the edited photograph is not a real representation of the chameleon, does, in fact, ignore basic, fundamental, elements of photography, and does not take into account the inexperience of the photographer (or his/her inability to setup aperture, shutter speed, white balance, etc, in order to ensure that the camera sees as closely as we see prior to the photograph).
I assure you that many here have taken photographs (including me) and later found that the photograph did not closely resemble the animal the way we saw it, with our eyes, while taking the photograph. Compensating for black point, vibrance, saturation (or desaturation) and white balance can help us do this, but it can also allow others to overcompensate-- which can actually be well done but is often done incorrectly, resulting in a photograph full of artifacts and chromatic aberrations.
In the end, photography is a dynamic medium and all forms of photography have their artistic merit-- including cell phone and polaroid photography, so there's a place for everything.
Cheers,
Fabián
