Last edited Tue Jul 19, 2022, 02:12 PM - Edit history (3)
I came in second place, with the shot of the Osprey. FYI, the only editing that I did on my photo was some heavy cropping, image sharpening, and I made the sky a little bluer than the original. I used a 500mm lens on a 45mp camera. I'll post the original here for comparison.
People often ask me "did you photoshop that picture?" My answer is usually, "well, you know, we don't really have darkrooms anymore, so yes, I did use a computer to process the photo." Most of us have been using digital cameras or phones for about twenty years now, and we've lost sight of a few things. We've all forgotten how wonderful Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Kodacolor, Fujichrome, Agfa, etc. were. The colors were deep and saturated right out of the camera, and they were beautiful. Many people just don't realize that the cameras and phones are actually processing the photos for us, and in most cases, doing a very poor job of it. We've become accustomed to drab, washed out, or muddy photos, and we think that they're okay. They're not.
As some of you know, I worked in broadcast news for forty years, so I'm very familiar with the ethics of image manipulation. In our business we sometimes referred to the raw news video of an event as an "actuality." I think that speaks for itself. I have a friend who once was suspended for a week because he was shooting an interview in a clothing store, and he moved the clothes on the rack behind the interviewee to get a better background. That was considered manipulation, and it wasn't allowed. The rules were strict.
The other area where manipulation is forbidden is the gathering of forensic evidence for a legal proceeding, for obvious reasons.
Well, I'm retired now, and my perspective has changed. I now want to produce images that people like to look at. I hope it gives them some enjoyment, and I hope that they will want to put them on their wall and look at them everyday. I participated in over eighteen thousand broadcasts, and no one will ever remember a single one of them. My photography is something that will live on after I'm gone. I've won several of the contests here, and in every instance, I certainly used my skills to enhance the photo. In my mind, I'm just trying to achieve what we did with Kodachrome forty years ago.
That said, let me say this about processing for contests. I often enter contests for "Outdoor Photography" magazine. Their rules state that basic edits concerning exposure, color balance, cropping, etc. are acceptable, but not much beyond that. I've checked, and our rules don't say that. Anything goes here. I'm very competitive, but I also realize that most of the folks here don't have that high of a skill level, so I try to keep my photos relatively simple.
Here is an excerpt of our contest rules:
"There will be no extra rules on the Seasonal Contest beyond keeping your entry no larger than 1024 pixels in its longest dimension and under 675K in file size and limit photo editing to a reasonable amount. We would prefer your photo look like a photograph instead of a digital design. If you aren’t sure, ask the group in a separate thread. You’ll get plenty of feedback to specific questions."
I support AndyS, and I think his photo was sensational. I almost voted for it. Almost! 
His entry was well within the rules. If some folks think the rules should be changed, that is something that can be considered.
Don't forget this is a fun contest. Let's just have fun.
Just my humble opinion.
Grumpy
Original
Contest entry
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read