OcUK Photo Comp - Season Five : Round Two - "Religion" Discussion

Sorry for not replying to this thread for a while...

Raymond Lin said:
now lets make it clear...we still need that box even with EXIF info?
Click to expand...
Nope, you wouldn't need the box if your image had the EXIF embedded.

TerraS said:
I don't think we need anything like this. It is far too confusing for new people to have to fill in a box before they can enter. The competition is meant to be easily accessible. This just creates a deterent which will stop a lot of people entering. Also, people with film cameras might not know the exact date. Remember, it is impossible to prove a date and is dependent on trust.
Click to expand...
They don't have to fill in a lot of the stuff the only thing you must fill in the the camera make and model. You're right though, I need to move the date to the optional section.

Takhisis said:
As someone who has been lurking for a little while, something like the box would be very helpful for a new person - its clearer on what is required and what is optional than it is in the opening post.

Other than whether the flash was used, I wouldn't be able to tell you any other the other optional stuff, so rather than not entering because I'm worried my lack of info would be frowned upon, it would just be a case of not entering because I 'm a coward :o
Click to expand...
This is exactly the kind of thing I was trying to do. If it's up there in black and white then hopefully it's as easy for a new person to enter as it is for an old hand.

Richard T said:
Surely all the digital guys can just post the image with the exif data embedded. If people are not sure on this then there needs to be instructions at the start of a thread or a thread on posting images with the exif data entact.
Click to expand...
You'd be amazed at how many digital entries don't have EXIF information in them. Three out of the seven entries for this round don't have proper EXIF embedded. We can't really cover all the image editing programs out there. We could do a couple of the more popular ones I guess...

In summary, what we're trying to do here is help everyone out. We're trying to make it as easy as possible to enter the competition and not get your entry disqualified. By adding all the optional information it allows us judges to see how the camera was set up when the shot was taken which in turn makes marking the technical section easier and more accurate.

Moving the date to the optional section makes the template look like this:
Code: 
[b]Required Information[/b]
Camera (make & model):	Canon 10D, Canon 50mm mkII f1.8

[b]Optional Information[/b]
Date:                   01/01/2006
Aperture:               f8
Shutter:                1/250th sec
ISO:                    100
Focal Length:           50mm
Flash:                  No
 
Ok, so only one thing is compulsory now, so why even both listing the optional stuff? I think it makes things too confusing.
 
Exif embedding is also pointless for those of us who often use manual lenses too so it's better to just keep things as were before, list the settings used from memory and if exif is correct then even better.
 
RichDay said:
Before things get too far in, the other judges and I have been having a discussion and we'd like to introduce a template for information that we'd like you to post with your entry that contains all the infomation we need about your photo if you don't provide the EXIF.

*snip*

Hopefully this will avoid any of the confusion we had last round with what is and isn't required.
Click to expand...
Looks like a good idea to me. Camera make/model and date as mandatory and the actual exposure info optional. Sometimes I think some people get a bit carried away with posting all their Exif info.
 
RichDay said:
Moving the date to the optional section makes the template look like this:
Code: 
[b]Required Information[/b]
Camera (make & model):	Canon 10D, Canon 50mm mkII f1.8

[b]Optional Information[/b]
Date:                   01/01/2006
Aperture:               f8
Shutter:                1/250th sec
ISO:                    100
Focal Length:           50mm
Flash:                  No
Click to expand...

As you have a requirement of the max age of the photo, I think you should keep the date in the required section, even if its classed as "Approximate Date"
 
with the date issues, why not have the required dates as 'march' rather than ?? of february. this will mean people having to take specifc pictures for the comp rather than trawl their archives of recent shots (i am as guilty of the next person on this one), which could generate a better class of pictures rather than the 'point grabbers' that happen sometimes. (again this includes me :) )



On another note, an idea..........

if the winner of this round chose the compotition after nexts theme, we could start the next comp while the judging was already going ahead insted of waiting for the winner to be announced and then choosing the next theme, as this takes in the region of two weeks.

so the idea would be...


Comp 1 winner chooses comp 3 theme
comp 2 winner chooses comp 4 theme
comp 3 winner chooses comp 5 theme

etc. etc.

the only stumbling block will be the themes for the first two comps, but that would only occur once, then all would be good.


i hope that came out as i imagined it :)

cmt
 
That would be getting way too complicated, and the Photo Mags in the UK have far simpler comp guidelines and this is just a non prize compo :p
 
WRT the date thing.

Unfortunately the date isn't enforceable. With digital you can hack the EXIF to make it read whatever you want and film users are stumped because there isn't any in the first place :( So basically the whole thing is based on trust.
 
i think we should just go back to changing the rules midway through like we used to, much simpler! :D
 
matty said:
i think we should just go back to changing the rules midway through like we used to, much simpler! :D
Click to expand...
Nah, I think we should make it more like "the other forum" that matty runs...








...NOT! :p
 
Kiddies, no forum wars please. If we could just stick to discussing this photo comp that would be thuper.
 
FAO: Pickers

hi i just thought i would have a play with your entry as i thought the image might have more significance with red selective colouring as a symbol of christs blood while he dies on the cross.. anyway heres the result, its just a bit of fun and thought i would share it i didnt spend hours just a quick change so i hope you dont mind as its your entry.

the colouring not perfect but i still quite liked it.

religion0rq.jpg
 
You see, this is where we get problems... when people ask for opinions on an idea ;)

Lets just sort it out, and post changes if there are any. So much easier than having long and drawn out discussions about things, and then going off in totally random directions :)

I personally think the template idea is a great one, and don't see how it can confuse people, actually surely it'll be much the opposite as it tells you EXACTLY what is required. The only arguement for it being confusing, is that it's different, but how do we get anywhere if we don't change things?
 
Ghost in the Shell said:
hi i just thought i would have a play with your entry as i thought the image might have more significance with red selective colouring as a symbol of christs blood while he dies on the cross..
Click to expand...

Believe me it was considered, but the whole reason I chose to take that photo was the green/blue tinge of copper oxide staining the stone. I liked the analogy of the natural evolution (dare I say, decay?) of the statue (i.e the metal running) with the religious event in question. Red would make it too literal I feel and you would lose the subtlety.

Thanks for the comment though - am very new to this and very much appreciate these kinds of comments
 
Pickers said:
Believe me it was considered, but the whole reason I chose to take that photo was the green/blue tinge of copper oxide staining the stone. I liked the analogy of the natural evolution (dare I say, decay?) of the statue (i.e the metal running) with the religious event in question. Red would make it too literal I feel and you would lose the subtlety.

Thanks for the comment though - am very new to this and very much appreciate these kinds of comments
Click to expand...

i dont disagree and i like the picture its good work. im glad you dont think i was trying to tell you to change your entry (i.e. it wasnt any good) as thats not the case.

i dont think mine was any better at all but it was interesting enough to post. its not easy trying to make it look authentic anyway the red needs to be a lot darker to be beliveable and i couldnt acheive that :(
 
Completely OTT but you can go deeper and darker, this is just a rush job.

You'd need to be a bit more judicious with your editing than I've been if you wanted it to look anything approaching realistic.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom