Unfair contest?
- Thread starter m1ndless
- Start date
Canopy Chameleons
Established Member
As stated in another thread, it`s not about the camera. It`s mainly the operator. Sure, an SLR helps, but I`ve taken some awesome pictures with a point and shoot. You just have to be patient and learn to work with your camera.
JimNPHX
New Member
Well with all things being equal, then yes, it is hard to compare pics from different "level of quality" cameras.
But, you can always try for the creative shot. I think many of the members would appreciate it and it would level out the playing field. At the very least you would get photos of your chams out in front of everyone!
But, you can always try for the creative shot. I think many of the members would appreciate it and it would level out the playing field. At the very least you would get photos of your chams out in front of everyone!
Lost Lake Chameleons
New Member
I agree. Most point and shoots have a bunch of settings that allow you to make adjustments. Sure DSLRs go beyond that but it is actually easier to get a "better" picture with a point and shoot, because the camera does all the work for you.
These 3000 dollar cameras can take some god awful photos..ones you would never see with a point and shoot, because the photographer has to make all the setting choices and not the camera.
For every good picture posted, there are literally hundreds and hundreds of crappy ones. It takes practice, and a ton of bad shots to get a good one.
Talking to justin the other day, we laughed at how many pictures we have taken of the water running in the shower to that running water "look" perfected and how to repeat it at will.
Anyway. I ramble...but at least semi on topic.
Last edited:
Justin Carl
Avid Member
Just fo finance an SLR with your bank.lol
User, operator, timing, and head space has something to do with it too.
This has already been said, but I agree a SLR does pick up more detail than a PS.
Dodolah had posted this on last months contest.
Maybe two seperate contest: PS and SLR.
haha dont forget the sink Josh!
User, operator, timing, and head space has something to do with it too.
This has already been said, but I agree a SLR does pick up more detail than a PS.
Dodolah had posted this on last months contest.
Maybe two seperate contest: PS and SLR.
haha dont forget the sink Josh!
Justin Carl
Avid Member
AncientCritters
Established Member
I think its all fair. I dont have a SLR. I dont feel its a disadvantage either. Ive taken some awesome pictures in my time but for some reason dont enter the photo contest. I feel that when I do enter the contest though I will have a fair chance at competing.
fabos
New Member
ive used both SLR and Point and shoot...
in the past year ive not even gotten close to winning a photo contest with my SLR! But b4 i got my SLR i received 3rd place from a picture taken on a Point And Shoot camera!
If u think the SLR is whats winning these contests ur 100% wrong because im still learning how to work mine after a year! and im still not close to being able to take a award winning picture!
in the past year ive not even gotten close to winning a photo contest with my SLR! But b4 i got my SLR i received 3rd place from a picture taken on a Point And Shoot camera!
If u think the SLR is whats winning these contests ur 100% wrong because im still learning how to work mine after a year! and im still not close to being able to take a award winning picture!
royden
New Member
Dead on, Josh. I have so many ugly gigs of my cham sitting on my hard drive.
A DSLR won't save your pictures. The amazing DSLR images seen on this site are product of a lot of time and energy into learning about photography. If there's anything about the equipment that is unfair, it's the lenses, not the camera.
pedro92
New Member
what type of cam is that
Justin Carl
Avid Member
Nikon D40
I have a bunch of good ones, but they are to large to post.
It is so crazy trying to use a DSLR.
I shot most of my pictures in Aperature.
I have found that this take really good pictures.
I have taken about 1000 pictures in the month that I have owned this thing.
Trying to learn ISO, White Balance, how open you want the shutter, etc etc
It is really hard, and takes soooooo long to learn.
so maybe it is fair....hmmmm....
I have a bunch of good ones, but they are to large to post.
It is so crazy trying to use a DSLR.
I shot most of my pictures in Aperature.
I have found that this take really good pictures.
I have taken about 1000 pictures in the month that I have owned this thing.
Trying to learn ISO, White Balance, how open you want the shutter, etc etc
It is really hard, and takes soooooo long to learn.
so maybe it is fair....hmmmm....
pohchunyee
Avid Member
I won two silver medal....all with point and shoot camera.
Marc10edora
Avid Member
I agree with everyone here. The camera is just a tool. Wether it cost $1000 or
$100, it all depends on how you use it. I take pics on a camera that costs less than $100. It all comes down to lighting, composition, and subject matter. If you want to learn how to get an edge up on taking some killer picks, start with researching 3 point lighting. Trust me it will make a difference.
$100, it all depends on how you use it. I take pics on a camera that costs less than $100. It all comes down to lighting, composition, and subject matter. If you want to learn how to get an edge up on taking some killer picks, start with researching 3 point lighting. Trust me it will make a difference.
VerteX
Avid Member
I think this proves that you can take impressive pictures with a point and shoot camera: https://www.chameleonforums.com/irwin-1yr-little-8949/
But who am I to make this statement, I own an SLR.
Author claims that the photos are taken with an iPhone. I'm sure it took a lot of patience and planning to take such amazing pictures.
But who am I to make this statement, I own an SLR.
Author claims that the photos are taken with an iPhone. I'm sure it took a lot of patience and planning to take such amazing pictures.
Last edited:
dodolah
Retired Moderator
To some aspect, i agree with you guys..
Composition and designs do make a difference..
But, we cannot deny the fact that SLR will help.
I can use a point and shoot camera... but if i am allowed to use photoshop and go all crazy (without misrepresenting the chameleon, off course.. so you won't see a rainbow veiled chameleon).. that would be great.
I can turn a photo shot by polaroid looked like being shot by D3000 without altering the chameleon natural colors..
you know.. a little gaussian blur here and there, increase contrast on the back, play with level and curve (to those who know how to use photoshop)
The problem is... Will you guys let me do that and still think that it is a fair game?
To me, SLR still tipped a favor a bit with the color brilliance and level of details (and like Royden said when he talked about the "Lens".
I mean.. if it really does not make a difference then Ansel Adams would use a Fuji point and shoot camera for his subject matter.
Just like a difference between using a cheap watercolor crayola paint with winsor newton professional paint.
In the hand of maestro, crayola can be used to make a good painting.. but a maestro with winsor newton can create a stunning masterpiece.
In my line of work, a good medium wins half of the battle.
I wonder, if we can have a contest where everybody is restricted to use a point and shoot camera and get creative..
and see where it leads.. just for fun
I would love to see how people get creative and not just rely on the magic of the lenses.
Composition and designs do make a difference..
But, we cannot deny the fact that SLR will help.
I can use a point and shoot camera... but if i am allowed to use photoshop and go all crazy (without misrepresenting the chameleon, off course.. so you won't see a rainbow veiled chameleon).. that would be great.
I can turn a photo shot by polaroid looked like being shot by D3000 without altering the chameleon natural colors..
you know.. a little gaussian blur here and there, increase contrast on the back, play with level and curve (to those who know how to use photoshop)
The problem is... Will you guys let me do that and still think that it is a fair game
?To me, SLR still tipped a favor a bit with the color brilliance and level of details (and like Royden said when he talked about the "Lens"
.I mean.. if it really does not make a difference then Ansel Adams would use a Fuji point and shoot camera for his subject matter.
Just like a difference between using a cheap watercolor crayola paint with winsor newton professional paint.
In the hand of maestro, crayola can be used to make a good painting.. but a maestro with winsor newton can create a stunning masterpiece.
In my line of work, a good medium wins half of the battle.
I wonder, if we can have a contest where everybody is restricted to use a point and shoot camera and get creative..
and see where it leads.. just for fun
I would love to see how people get creative and not just rely on the magic of the lenses.
Last edited:
m1ndless
New Member
Wrong.
You cannot take anywhere near the same type of picture with DSLR that you can with a point and shoot.
You can not take high speed shots, good marco shots, cannot adjust shutter speed or apature, those are the basics of photography, and a PandS wont get you the same results a DSLR will get you.
A $75 kodak 3.2mp camera is going to have a crappy/blurry picutre, a basic DSLR will get you an amazing shot regardless of how you use it.
Therefore, the contest IS unfair to those with a crappy camera.
Brad Ramsey
Retired Moderator
And yet 3 awards have been mentioned on this thread ... all for pictures taken with a point and shoot camera.
-Brad
-Brad
