[alison]

Oops I put the most recent Tongue and Ear out with the recycling after reading and now realise it had the instructions for entering the photo comp in it. Could some kind soul put them up on the forum please?

Thanks,

Alison

[shanec]

Hi Alison
Here is a copy.
cheers,
Shane
=====================================================
This year we have SIX categories:
– Water
– Landscape
– Hut and camp life
– Drama
– Flora and fauna
– Overseas
There’s also the People’s Choice award where those present on the night can vote for their
favourite photograph.
Rules:
– You must be a member of WTMC to enter
– Photographs must have been taken since October 2007. Subject matter is not
restricted to club trips.
– Obvious modification of images is not in keeping with the objectives of this
competition and may result in disqualification.
– No print formats will be accepted. Please get your print/slide images transferred onto
CD in order to enter. Write your name and contact phone number on the CD. Save all
the photos being entered onto the CD using the following naming convention:
category entered_your name_title of the photo.
– There is a limit of TWO entries per person per category.
– By entering this competition you are giving consent for publication of your images in
the WTMC journal/newsletter/calendar; and display at the WTMC lodge. Images will
not be published on any websites without permission.
– All entries for the competition must be on a CD with your name and contact phone
number on it, and handed to Sarah Young/Marie Smith no later than close of club
night 12 November 2008. CDs will not be returned.
– The judge’s decision is final.

[alison]

Thanks

[Pete Marshall]

What does

– Obvious modification of images is not in keeping with the objectives of this
competition and may result in disqualification.

mean?

Any good photographer will do a small bit of Post Processing on their photos be it cropping, tonal curve or saturation etc, is this acceptable?

Can we enter HDR photos (Photos taken with multiple exposures)?

[Mike McGavin]

I asked a similar question last year, and Shaun Barnett’s response was relayed by Marie into the forum at https://wtmc.org.nz/forums/read.php?5,5350 (see the third post in that thread). I expect he’d say something very similar this year. His guideline seems to be anything that you might normally have done in the darkroom, but nothing terribly obvious.

[Mike McGavin]

Oh, and if you have a funky camera that does post-processing-style things (like colour enhancements) using certain modes within the camera itself, don’t expect Shaun to treat it any differently from how he’d treat something that was digitally altered afterwards. I think he prefers things that look as natural as possible.

[Pete M]

All good that link makes a lot of sense. Anyway of looking at what people entered last year or look at the winning entries – are they anywhere on the Web?

[sharron]

Pete
You can see photos on the Alpine club website http://www.nzalpine.wellington.net.nz if you go into photo galleries, pretty awesome photos… Sean also judges their competition presumably applying similar standards.

[Social Convenor]

Hello,
This is the direct quote from Shaun:

“I’m actually rather a purist when it come to outdoor photos..

I would consider that cropping would be OK, but I reckon it’s better to compose carefully when you actually take the photo rather than try to rely on post-processing.

As for most other post-processing, I would not be in favour of it all. Certainly not removing or adding anything, altering colours, or merging two pictures.

I think acceptable post-processing would include: some shadow enhancement. Limited cropping. Unsharp mask to improve crispness. Basically anything that you would have done in the old darkroom to a print is allowable, but using photoshop to significantly alter images is not.

Of course, if a competitor is clever enough at using photoshop, I’m not going to be able to tell if it has been unfairly manipulated or not.

But it is probably worth saying that I would view this practice as unethical in the photo competition. If I found out an image had been unfairly manipulated, I would request that it was disqualified.”

[Don Goodue]

Before that days of digital cameras and fancy software, the photo competition was simply judged on artisitic merit, the ability of the photographer to capture the mood and moment and composition. It would be sad to see it become a competition of technology where the photographer may not have got it quite right of taking the photo but subsequently improved the result through the use of “after-shot” technology.

[Mike McGavin]

I usually prefer photos that don’t have obvious digital manipulation, but in some respects I think it’s okay to accept that digital post-processing is just another tool for getting a good photograph. It’s definitely a revolutionary tool which has lowered the barriers for many more people to produce photographs that look good.

Photographers have always used combinations of technology (eg. filters, lenses, film, etc) to adjust the outcome before a photo is taken. Many of these tools and methods weren’t available to photographers 20 years before them, just as digital post-processing wasn’t available until recently. Obviously it still requires a lot of skill and experience to use these tools effectively, and it’s not always a sure thing. The difference with digital post-processing is that the photographer has more control over some of the effects after the photo’s been taken, and can continue to experiment until it works.

I definitely agree about conveying “the mood”, and this is probably the most important thing for me. Once a final photo is considered, though, I don’t really see much difference between technical methods that do this whether they’re applied before the shutter is released or after. It’s the end result that matters to me, and no photo will ever match what’s seen by the human eye, anyway… it’ll always be an expression by the photographer (or by the camera if the photographer doesn’t care).

Maybe the biggest difference lies in what different people consider “the mood” to be. Having been to a couple of the recent photo competitions, I know that my preferences definitely don’t match Shaun’s. This is fine though because he judges it after putting what must be a lot of effort into being as fair as possible by the standards he’s chosen to make objective, and will make it clear why he prefers one photo over another.

[Pete Marshall]

^^ What Mike said

Also another thing to remember is with Digital Camera’s now days the quality of the Glass (Lenses) and cameras aren’t as good as the old flim SLR’s unless you spend a packet load of money which people just cant justify or afford.

PP can be a nice way of getting a sharper image, bringing out those colours. You may have an excellent composition already but because of the technology you took it with it might not look that good.

2 more cents from me

[Author]

Posts