365-Blog

Copied and understood, Sir. Loud and clear.

What is the difference between "edit saturation" and "modify colour and tone"?

Originally posted by maceddie:

What is the difference between "edit saturation" and "modify colour and tone"?

you can make the color deeper or fainter but you cannot change from red to yellow or from color to blacknwhite
I think so

The list is surely incomplete. It doesn't include most of the tools I actually use on a daily basis... noise reduction, sharpness, unsharp mask, levels, red-eye reduction (which is actually 'colour replace', which is what I use to remove eye-shine from night-shot animals because their red-eye isn't usually red), spot removal (essential on macros) etc... plus one or two other tools on occasion to remove/blur unwanted artefacts.

I'm sure you can use convert to black-and-white, because that's simply the equivalent of an in-camera modification and you are "allowed" to shoot in black-and-white.

when did we discuss this new rule?

Originally posted by derspecht:

when did we discuss this new rule?

This summer from 5 august here and then in moderators forum, as you know.

Originally posted by Words:

It doesn't include most of the tools I actually use

Well, you will have less work to do for your 365 shots.

Read below, for all.

Originally posted by igorditerni:

Well, you will have less work to do for your 365 shots.

yes, you are right!

Originally posted by igorditerni:

Originally posted by Words:
It doesn't include most of the tools I actually use

Well, you will have less work to do for your 365 shots.

Well, yes because I'll stop posting. Seriously.

All the tools I've listed are very standard photo-processing tools and they should all be allowed.

If the tools you listed are not used to modify the color, for example, they are obviously allowed!
Probably we have not to talk about tools but about how is allowed to correct in the photos (without talking about which tool to use to get that results).

This can be a good way, i think.

Ciao, Igor

I don't get this obsession with colour (really), but it wasn't obvious that the other tools were allowed. But thanks!

I think all we need to say is that "minor editing is allowed, including standard processes such as cropping, rotating, sharpening, noise reduction, red-eye removal, brightening, contrast, moderate adjustment of levels and saturation, and minor blemish removal."

"Unsharp mask" is basically a very refined contrast tool, working on the individual pixel level. So is "Smart blur", but it works to lower contrast between pixels.

When I had my first and last album here, I was not aware of such strict unwritten ideals like one is not allowed to express any kind of "artistic or fantastic imagination". Later on I learned that was/is the goal of those members and moderators who have started this group. So, I guess the idea here is pretty much just document the daily life as basic cameras capture it and when modern software not used.

This means 365 Photos is not a group for those who like to express their "vision" of a daily life. One has to find some other groups for that, or do it on their own albums. Unless, members and moderators become active and vote by expressing their opinions and try to change the group into what they want.

Originally posted by serola:

Later on I learned that was/is the goal of those members and moderators who have started this group.

Not so... the original rules had no such restriction... just one photo a day was about the only rule. All the editing/composite/creativity constraints came later. I've posted screen-grabs and collages in my early albums, not many but there are some floating around in them. And it is about documenting your own life through the camera, so if you are creative - and see the world that way - I think it's fine (and more interesting).

The original rules said:

#1 You'll have to take a picture everyday, even if you don't post on a daily basis

#2 You'll have to do so for a whole year (365 days)

#3 You can't post two or more photos taken in the same day, only one for everyday.

#4 You must post your own pictures!

We amended rule 2 to say:
#2 You'll have to do so for a whole year, and if you don't upload a single picture more than 60 days your album is automatically deleted.

That was it.

Originally posted by Words:

the original

The original 365 project is documentary.
Limitations come at first in comments and then in rules because some people started making creative editing instead of documentation.

Originally posted by Words:

minor editing

Originally posted by Words:

moderate adjustment

Who can say what is minor and what not?

Ciao, Igor

Originally posted by igorditerni:

The original 365 project is documentary.

But that's never mentioned anywhere here at 365 Photos forums or blog, or is it? We can't expect people take that external page as some common rule what this "365 pictures along the year" is about. Therefore more specific rules her on this group are needed.

Originally posted by serola:

But that's never mentioned anywhere here at 365 Photos forums or blog, or is it?

The link i linked is linked in recommendation 1: "...To understand in detail the spirit of the 365 project read these tips to get started page..."!

Ciao, Igor

Nothing in that article says you can't edit or be creative with how you present the photos. In fact it encourages you to be creative with photography!

With photography, not with editing.

- Your year-long photo album will be an amazing way to document your travels and accomplishments, your haircuts and relationships. Time moves surprisingly fast.

- Taking a photo a day will make you a better photographer. Using your camera every day will help you learn its limits. You will get better at composing your shots, you’ll start to care about lighting, and you’ll become more creative with your photography when you’re forced to come up with something new every single day.

1) Document your day.
2) Do the best you can with your camera thinking before the shot, not after with editing.

Originally posted by Words:

Nothing in that article says you can't edit or be creative with how you present the photos. In fact it encourages you to be creative with photography!

I agree

Originally posted by igorditerni:

With photography, not with editing.

- Your year-long photo album will be an amazing way to document your travels and accomplishments, your haircuts and relationships. Time moves surprisingly fast.

- Taking a photo a day will make you a better photographer. Using your camera every day will help you learn its limits. You will get better at composing your shots, you’ll start to care about lighting, and you’ll become more creative with your photography when you’re forced to come up with something new every single day.

1) Document your day.
2) Do the best you can with your camera thinking before the shot, not after with editing.

Originally posted by igorditerni:

With photography, not with editing.

- Your year-long photo album will be an amazing way to document your travels and accomplishments, your haircuts and relationships. Time moves surprisingly fast.

- Taking a photo a day will make you a better photographer. Using your camera every day will help you learn its limits. You will get better at composing your shots, you’ll start to care about lighting, and you’ll become more creative with your photography when you’re forced to come up with something new every single day.

1) Document your day.
2) Do the best you can with your camera thinking before the shot, not after with editing.

The Phrase doesnt mention about post editing? by being creative the author is giving us the free hand to improve our photo as long as the bird will not be deduced into a butterfly, that is how i understand it.

No improvement is intended except your ability to take a photo with your camera. And for a documentation intent.
Art can be documentary too but creativity is not every time documentary. You have to be a photographer, not an editor of images to create a beautiful image.
When you take the photo you can think what is the better way to shot composing better you are able, thinking about where come the light and where to place your camera. The work ends there, then upload the shot, like it is, in the album and it document that day.

Ciao, Igor

if you say so

Well, what I have seen is peeps use some fancy camera software on their mobile phone cameras to shoot heavily edited pictures. And when asked what they did, they say: "I just took a picture, I have no time to edit."

So, one can buy a camera that takes "strange looking" pictures to "document the reality".

Originally posted by serola:

"strange looking" pictures

Strange looking pictures are not documenting photos (except if you are taking a photo of a strange looking place/subject).

Ciao, Igor

Igor, I think you are confusing the idea of 'documenting' experience through photography (which can include creative manipulation if it makes the document a more meaningful expression of what was felt, conceived, experienced at the time) with 'documentary' photography where manipulation distorts the image.

My understanding of the project is that I am documenting my experience of a year, not making a documentary of my year. The difference is subtle, but very real as we are discovering in this dialogue.

Originally posted by Words:

I think you are confusing the idea of 'documenting' experience through photography (which can include creative manipulation if it makes the document a more meaningful expression of what was felt, conceived, experienced at the time) with 'documentary' photography where manipulation distorts the image.

You can document what you feel with editing but if it's raining you can't edit the photo to take a blue sky because you feel a raining day like a sunny day or a blue apple because you'd like to get one. This is not documenting your life, is creating a different life and you can do in Secondlife, not here.
You sure have to document your experience of a year but using one photo for each day, not creating an image using your photos.

Ciao, Igor

I profoundly disagree with the approach you are taking and since I cannot comply with your editing rules as currently posted I have withdrawn my current album from the group.

I'm very annoyed by all this!! I don't know why we are arguing about a so stupid thing!! 365 has always been (and I hope it will remain) a "quite" place where to share photos. We are (especially one of us) turning a single rule into too many little and insignificant rules!!
EDITING PHOTOS: nowadays digital photography requires a minimum of post editing on computer, that's a fact! And that has to be permitted in a photography group!!
What 365 doesn't want is a picture that is the result of an heavy manipulation (like using drawing tools to create something different from the original scene, for example) or the addiction of graphic images over our photos etc!!
You can add simple frames and your sign (be sure to not use too big text size)!!

I think it's simple to understand and the recommendation 6 it's all there, so the discussion can be stopped, please!

Peace & Love!!

Originally posted by Zephirine:

nowadays digital photography requires a minimum of post editing on computer, that's a fact!

No, they don't if you shot correctly. If you are not able to shot correctly you can learn...

Finally a new proposal...
And can be an acceptable proposal (why have not come before?!).
It is, more or less, the same required in photographic contests where editing sometimes is not allowed and usually is allowed only for little corrections to get a better balanced photo in contrast, white balance etc.

I was reading the terms and conditions of the LUIS VALTUEÑA INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN PHOTOGRAPHY AWARD and more or less are the same:
- The original structure of the digital image can be altered using darkroom techniques such as adjustments to brightness, color contrast, overexposure and underexposure. No other change to the original digital image will be allowed.

- Only singe frame photos will be accepted. Photomontages and multiple exposures will exclude the photograph from the award.

- In order to confirm compliance with the award rules, the organisation reserves the right to request original image files as registered by the camera and before manipulation; or a scanned copy of the print, negative or transparency before manipulation.

Originally posted by Words:

since I cannot comply with your editing rules as currently posted

Mine?! OUR, not mine!

Originally posted by Words:

I have withdrawn my current album from the group.

Have you deleted your last 365 album??? Why?!?!?!
Except the image you created using two shots (and the mysterious one where you copied some parts of the photo that i have not recognized) no other photos where to be deleted and the album was correct because no editing was appearing to be against the allowed tools list expected results. And we are here discussing about it to make again a different recommendation 6.
So is a nonsense deleting...

Ciao, Igor

My album has moved... to my own blog space. I'm tired of all the debate about rules, about who can post what etc... I come here to post and share photos, and to enjoy pictures that people create. If I stayed I would lose that enjoyment.

And for what it's worth, Zephirine is completely correct when she says that "nowadays digital photography requires a minimum of post editing on computer, that's a fact!"

Awwww, c'mon guys, why do we have to come to that? Surely we all could meet halfway, right?
derspecht have also remove his album.

Hi I have been a member of this group for a short time, relatively speaking, but it seems that there is no organised structure for deciding changes to the rules etc.
One individual (Igor, for it is he) seems to have decided what will be, and although he says that he welcomes other suggestions, when people make them he seems to ignore them.
Why is there no collective responsibility for these kinds of decisions?
Igor, I like your photos, but don't you think you are being inflexible?

Originally posted by RachelJuleiane:

derspecht have also remove his album.

This is a sad day. When I first joined Opera, his was one of the first 365 albums that I followed and commented on, helping me to participate in the group. Judging by the frequency of his (and Words) nominations for Photo of the Month, this will be a great loss to the group.

Originally posted by maceddie:

it seems that there is no organised structure for deciding changes to the rules etc

The structure is organized enough. There are well titled forum topics for moderators. The problem is that almost 100 of us who have moderator rights here are not organized. Peeps had plenty of time (months, maybe even a year) to say what they think about the proposal for new rules and recommendations. According to my calculations somewhat 3 bothered.

And I can say that I'm one of those moderators who accepted the rules and recommendations as they are currently formulated. I don't know yet if that was a bad or good decision but I sincerely hope that rules and recommendations would make also the moderation more simple. If moderators have no rules and recommendations to back up their job, then it can just as well become rather messy.

My personal opinion about the current editing limits is that we can only limit the tools aka techniques. But we can't say how much to use them. So, if someone decide to decrease contrast to create totally gray frame, then that should be possible. That is what I agreed on.

From my point of view the only way to get even close to rules how to keep pictures "documentary" is that we name the tools. Then people at least are not allowed to use techniques like HDR, alter colors with 'Hue', lineart, solarization, invert etc. It is way more easy to say what is okay than try to list myriad none allowed techniques.

Moreover and once again, the rules and recommendations are meant also to make the job easier for moderators. Moderating is not easy! The ideal is to be fair to each member. It would be not right if someone is allowed to post something like this:
http://thumbs.myopera.com/sz/colx/serola/albums/5418132/lines2.JPG -
By excluding that kind of editing with these recommendations, we can make it clear to members not to do so, and clear to moderators that we can ask that kind of editing removed.

The new rules are somewhat acceptable, its the ARROGANCE of the moderator's reply that is annoying.

ok

Originally posted by igorditerni:

Finally a new proposal...
And can be an acceptable proposal (why have not come before?!).

If you are referring to me, I told the same several times in the moderators forum, in blog and photos comments, but I don't think you have never cared about my and other opinions!

and I'm very sad about Swen and words decision of removing their album!

Sami is also right in his last comment, the wrong fact is we haven't find a simple way to present the rules, I think.

Originally posted by serola:

Originally posted by maceddie:

it seems that there is no organised structure for deciding changes to the rules etc

The structure is organized enough. There are well titled forum topics for moderators. The problem is that almost 100 of us who have moderator rights here are not organized. Peeps had plenty of time (months, maybe even a year) to say what they think about the proposal for new rules and recommendations. According to my calculations somewhat 3 bothered.

And I can say that I'm one of those moderators who accepted the rules and recommendations as they are currently formulated. I don't know yet if that was a bad or good decision but I sincerely hope that rules and recommendations would make also the moderation more simple. If moderators have no rules and recommendations to back up their job, then it can just as well become rather messy.

My personal opinion about the current editing limits is that we can only limit the tools aka techniques. But we can't say how much to use them. So, if someone decide to decrease contrast to create totally gray frame, then that should be possible. That is what I agreed on.

From my point of view the only way to get even close to rules how to keep pictures "documentary" is that we name the tools. Then people at least are not allowed to use techniques like HDR, alter colors with 'Hue', lineart, solarization, invert etc. It is way more easy to say what is okay than try to list myriad none allowed techniques.

Moreover and once again, the rules and recommendations are meant also to make the job easier for moderators. Moderating is not easy! The ideal is to be fair to each member. It would be not right if someone is allowed to post something like this:
http://thumbs.myopera.com/sz/colx/serola/albums/5418132/lines2.JPG][/IMG]
By excluding that kind of editing with these recommendations, we can make it clear to members not to do so, and clear to moderators that we can ask that kind of editing removed.

I get the point, Sami. It just appears sometimes from the outside that these decisions are being taken by one person, when in reality they may not be. For what it's worth, I would like to see 'sharpening' included in the list of allowed editing tools. Also, I think Words has a point about 'red eye removal' - is that so bad?

Originally posted by maceddie:

I would like to see 'sharpening' included in the list of allowed editing tools. Also, I think Words has a point about 'red eye removal' - is that so bad?

No, I think those could be added. At least the sharpening. What comes to red eye removal, that's something where one can improve photographic skills to avoid it in the first place. Use external flash (if you have one) to lit the person from a side. Or use "red eye mode" on your camera's flash if available.

Red eye removal/red eye detection are built in and can be a post editing option. And its not distorting photos or creating another image we are just removing the unpleasant. Would you like to see yourself with red eyes in a photo?

Some folks have neither an external flash nor in-camera redeye correction.

Originally posted by Words:

My album has moved...

No reason to move.

Originally posted by maceddie:

One individual (Igor, for it is he) seems to have decided what will be, and although he says that he welcomes other suggestions, when people make them he seems to ignore them.
Why is there no collective responsibility for these kinds of decisions?

No individual. The discussion were open to all 95 mods for more than two months and only 3 of us (the active ones) joined it and we agreed about the new recommendation 6 that we built together.

Originally posted by serola:

The structure is organized enough.

Serola told all perfectly even if i don't agree with contrast decrease to totally gray frame.

Originally posted by maceddie:

I think Words has a point about 'red eye removal' - is that so bad?

It isn't.

Originally posted by RachelJuleiane:

its the ARROGANCE of the moderator's reply

Arrogance? In which case? I think Words have not manifested arrogance so much more about me and other moderators.

Originally posted by Zephirine:

If you are referring to me, I told the same several times in the moderators forum, in blog and photos comments, but I don't think you have never cared about my and other opinions!

I don't remember you have proposed it in the forum discussion about recommendation 6 before now. And you agreed with this recommendation 6. And, from mods forum, on 6 august 2011 you wrote "Yes, I think a list of things allowed and not is good" and then you suggested tools as us, contributing to create this list.

Originally posted by Zephirine:

and I'm very sad about Swen and words decision of removing their album!

Me too.

Originally posted by Zephirine:

we haven't find a simple way to present the rules, I think.

Well, i think our is a good, not perfect, work and it is the best we were able to do. Probably other not active moderators were able to do a better work but they never joined the discussion in the last two years (but now they don't like our hard work and instead of proposing a revision and discussing about to get a better rules/recommendations list they leave)!
Sorry but i'm angry because we all worked for months (years starting from rules) and the only help is to criticize our work and leave instead of constructive collaboration from who is expected and titled to help us.

Originally posted by RachelJuleiane:

Would you like to see yourself with red eyes in a photo?

Sometimes it is funny.

Ciao, Igor (even if i prefer the ninja)

Originally posted by igorditerni:

and instead of proposing a revision

Actually I did. Just read this thread.

Originally posted by igorditerni:

i don't agree with contrast decrease to totally gray frame.

Then what is too much or too less contrast? What do you say peeps? Here we have scale from -120 unit to +120 unit between 20 unit scales used on GIMP. In the middle is 0 aka what camera recorded on auto settings.

I really wonder why so many people resent photo editing on a PC. When you consider that we are all amateurs and have fun taking pictures.

It's a similar discussion like when someone says that the DSLR camera is better than a compact camera

Some people are purists!