scottychaos wrote: Bucyrus wrote: Scot,The points you made in the above post are all well stated and right on the money. Nobody is suggesting that people look for ways to cheat the contest. And nobody is complaining about TRAINS trying to make the contest fair. My point is that they might bring about the unintended consequence of making the contest unfair if they impose a rule without any way to verify that the rule has been adhered to by the contestants.I am confident that TRAINS will modify the rules of the contest to reflect what Mr. Danneman has suggested in an earlier post in this thread. thanks.. but I suspect it may be already too late to change the rules for this years contest, because the rules have already been printed in at least one issue of Trains magazine. once its "out there" in print, I dont know if they could change the rules now..maybe they can, I dont know..im sure we will hear either way.Scot
Bucyrus wrote: Scot,The points you made in the above post are all well stated and right on the money. Nobody is suggesting that people look for ways to cheat the contest. And nobody is complaining about TRAINS trying to make the contest fair. My point is that they might bring about the unintended consequence of making the contest unfair if they impose a rule without any way to verify that the rule has been adhered to by the contestants.I am confident that TRAINS will modify the rules of the contest to reflect what Mr. Danneman has suggested in an earlier post in this thread.
Scot,
The points you made in the above post are all well stated and right on the money. Nobody is suggesting that people look for ways to cheat the contest. And nobody is complaining about TRAINS trying to make the contest fair. My point is that they might bring about the unintended consequence of making the contest unfair if they impose a rule without any way to verify that the rule has been adhered to by the contestants.
I am confident that TRAINS will modify the rules of the contest to reflect what Mr. Danneman has suggested in an earlier post in this thread.
thanks..
but I suspect it may be already too late to change the rules for this years contest, because the rules have already been printed in at least one issue of Trains magazine. once its "out there" in print, I dont know if they could change the rules now..maybe they can, I dont know..im sure we will hear either way.
Scot
It seems like the rules have already been changed in this thread by Mr. Danneman.
Bucyrus wrote:Scot,The points you made in the above post are all well stated and right on the money. Nobody is suggesting that people look for ways to cheat the contest. And nobody is complaining about TRAINS trying to make the contest fair. My point is that they might bring about the unintended consequence of making the contest unfair if they impose a rule without any way to verify that the rule has been adhered to by the contestants.I am confident that TRAINS will modify the rules of the contest to reflect what Mr. Danneman has suggested in an earlier post in this thread.
I see photography in two subjects: photo as in art - and photo as a captured moment in time. The latter would get post processing to make it look like what actually happened. The prior - well, that's when you can delete mountains and add wires - or the reverse if you will.
Sorry, I'm not a photographer major though.. so my definitions are purely made up in my own head.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann wrote:It is just that people are blaming Trains for trying to make the contest fair - when we know that there are just too many dishonest people out here.
It is just that people are blaming Trains for trying to make the contest fair - when we know that there are just too many dishonest people out here.
well..I dont think anyone is blaming Trains for trying to make the contest fair..
trying to make the contest fair is a good and noble thing.
the problem is that the rules that have been given to "try to make the contest fair" are unenforceable..thats what all the controvesary is about.
and now the original rules seem to have been relaxed a bit, so first the original rules were inpossible to enforce as stated, so Trains magazine clarified them a bit in this thread, which was good, but the clarification contradicts the original rules! which are still in place..
that, in a nutshell, is what this all is about.
Trains magazine is trying to do the right thing, but because of the technology of digital photography, they simply cant have the rules they would like to have.
IMO, digital alterating of digital photographs is no different than doing manual dodging and burning in the darkroom..they both "alter reality"..
Not one single Ansel Adams photograph you have ever seen was "real".. He heavily altered the scene to make shadows lighter and highlights darker..its called the "zone system" and Adams invented it..it involves changing the negative, in developement, AFTER the photo was taken! ;)
much like digital improvements after the picture is taken. Ansel Adams would be disqualified from this contest because of the way he made his photographs.
And the real "problem" here that Trains is trying to fix, is that some people will complain about "fairness"..
"its not FAIR that someone else knows how to use photoshop and I dont! wahhh!"
well..is it fair that someone knows how to use an 8X10 view camera and you dont? they might have better pictures than you because of that! is it fair?
is it fair that someone has a digital SLR and you dont?
is it fair that someone knows how to make good use of filters on the lens and you dont? (ohhh..which reminds me..technically filters should not be allowed, because they alter reality! ;)
its all just various photography skills.. digital skills are no different than film skills. I was a photography major in college, I can do Ansel Adam's zone system to vastly improve B&W photos..is that fair? sure it is..I learned it, I should be able to use it..same with photoshop.
Im repeating things I have already said in other forums on this topic..(or was it THIS forum?? I lose track! ;) but I wills ay it again anyway:
IMO, all of this is a big fuss over nothing..99% of what makes a good photograph takes place in the photographers mind before the shutter is pressed.
You can own a $10,000 professional digital SLR and know Photoshop backwards and forwards..but if you dont have the skill, you wont take a great photo.
conversely, if you have the skill, you can take a prize winning photo with a pin-hole camera made from a pepsi can!
Trains is just trying to placate the whiners, to make "everyone happy"..it cant be done... no matter what you do, someone wont be happy..this "photos cant be altered" rule probably made more people angry than it made satisified! because GOOD photographers understand what digital editing means, and how its a good and necessary thing..and they understand this rule is impossible to enforce, making it meaningless, and only harms the contest, not helps it.
zugmann wrote:That is the problem with cheaters. If they spent half as much time learning technique as they do in figuring out how to cheat - they wouldn't need to cheat!!!!
Exactly.
Anyway, if I happen to catch an image that I think is relative to this contest, I might submit. And if I do, I will send one unprocessed RAW and one processed JPG. If they don't want to take the time to review my entry because I included a "true to life" processed image, then so bet it. I will not switch to shooting in JPG mode just to try to capture an image for a contest.
zugmann wrote:I see some getting so worlked up about that "rail pictures" website, and trying to shoot to their definitions. Please. Can you imagine OWL sending photos tothat site? Bad motive, eh, too much foreground clutter...
I see some getting so worlked up about that "rail pictures" website, and trying to shoot to their definitions. Please. Can you imagine OWL sending photos tothat site? Bad motive, eh, too much foreground clutter...
Well, I'm sure Ogle had his share of rejects as well. We only get to see his good stuff.
Bucyrus wrote:So to answer your question: There is no guarantee that film entries will be equally unaltered because there is no requirement that they be unaltered.
So to answer your question: There is no guarantee that film entries will be equally unaltered because there is no requirement that they be unaltered.
So what you're saying is film entrants CAN be altered? Hmmm....
Semper Vaporo wrote:Hmmmm...Altruism is one thing.Fame is another.But... a new camera? Hmmmm...Do you want ANY entries in the contest? You will need at least one of the latter two or you will have nothing to publish.I can imagine O. Winston Link sending photos to a network site. Still, I wonder if his photos would be as famous or desireable if he had.Art IS in the eye of the beholder... even good RR photos are a subjective thing. And, I have seen winners in the previous contests that were NOT of the pretty mountain scene, having more to do with railroading than calendar art.I have never entered a photo in a TRAINS photo contest... having never taken a good photo of a train. I did send in the winning photo once to a newspaper contest, though... too bad the judges didn't think so.Glad I ain't a judge!
Hmmmm...
Altruism is one thing.
Fame is another.
But... a new camera? Hmmmm...
Do you want ANY entries in the contest? You will need at least one of the latter two or you will have nothing to publish.
I can imagine O. Winston Link sending photos to a network site. Still, I wonder if his photos would be as famous or desireable if he had.
Art IS in the eye of the beholder... even good RR photos are a subjective thing. And, I have seen winners in the previous contests that were NOT of the pretty mountain scene, having more to do with railroading than calendar art.
I have never entered a photo in a TRAINS photo contest... having never taken a good photo of a train. I did send in the winning photo once to a newspaper contest, though... too bad the judges didn't think so.
Glad I ain't a judge!
That was simply my opinion. I know many shoot to please others - and these contests are a product of that mentality. As far as having something to publish - I'm sure there would still be tons of entires - and probably some good ones. Some photogs have great stuff - but aren't going to submit it in order to win some token prize.
But to each his own. I am just not a competetive person. It is just that people are blaming Trains for trying to make the contest fair - when we know that there are just too many dishonest people out here.
Poppa_Zit wrote: "Digital submissions MUST NOT be altered in any way,..."Let me be play devil's advocate here for a minute.Would not the same apply then to prints? Few if any print photographs used for publication are "unaltered". I'll bet some of the old B&W photos that appeared in Trains magazine years ago and now reside in the archives were retouched by an airbrush/highlight artist. Even old B&W news photos shot with 4x5 Speed Graphix cameras were enhanced for publication -- even if the person doing the developing "feathered" some shadowy areas for clarity.How many railfans drop their rolls of film off to be printed at a photo processor? Unless specified (which very few people do) the processing machine will automatically compensate for improperly exposed photos and also adjust (i.e., correct) colors. (That's what those numbers mean on the back of each print, by the way. They record the settings the computer determined for that print.)So, to pick a nit, in essence is there any guarantee that film entries will be equally "unaltered"?
"Digital submissions MUST NOT be altered in any way,..."
Let me be play devil's advocate here for a minute.
Would not the same apply then to prints? Few if any print photographs used for publication are "unaltered". I'll bet some of the old B&W photos that appeared in Trains magazine years ago and now reside in the archives were retouched by an airbrush/highlight artist. Even old B&W news photos shot with 4x5 Speed Graphix cameras were enhanced for publication -- even if the person doing the developing "feathered" some shadowy areas for clarity.
How many railfans drop their rolls of film off to be printed at a photo processor? Unless specified (which very few people do) the processing machine will automatically compensate for improperly exposed photos and also adjust (i.e., correct) colors. (That's what those numbers mean on the back of each print, by the way. They record the settings the computer determined for that print.)
So, to pick a nit, in essence is there any guarantee that film entries will be equally "unaltered"?
That is true that film photos get altered in the same way that digital photos can be altered. So if there is a concern about one then there ought to be a concern about the other. Yet the rules only prevent alteration of the digital submissions. The explanation that I have heard is that digital alterations can easily go beyond what is readily doable in film photography, in that subject elements can be added and subtracted. My understanding is that this is what TRAINS is concerned about. They are not concerned about the image graphic alterations to improve the image appearance. Yet the only way they can prevent the objectionalble cutting and pasting that is possible with digital is to forbid any alteration whatsoever.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Let me get out the old soapbox.
I never understood photo contests. To me, photography is an art. So how do you judge such art? Technical standards, or the infamous supreme court's opinion of "I know it when I see it"? I can see how looking good can be used to determine whether something gets published - but to win a contest? I'm sorry, but soemthing is lost on me. A photo is just that. More than likely, some scenic lake or field, with a mountain backdrop with a shiny new engine will win. Always happens. Where is the grungy yard power working some long forgotten industrial lead? Or some poor railroader throwing switches in the pouring rain? All are worthy subjects of railroad photography art.
If you're shooting to win a prize, then I do beleive you're doing it for the wrong reason. I see some getting so worlked up about that "rail pictures" website, and trying to shoot to their definitions. Please. Can you imagine OWL sending photos tothat site? Bad motive, eh, too much foreground clutter...
I think the ultimate photo contest would showcase the winners photos without prize, and without the names being published. Let the art speak for itself, without the glory that many will cheat to win.
Ain't that a sticky wicket!
Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to come up with a set of rules that everybody can agree with.
I wonder, at this stage of the game... could the rules be "improved"? Or is that against the rules?
J T wrote: Semper Vaporo wrote: MY interpretation of that answer is:YES! You can do absolutely anything you want to the photo; filter, enhance, crop, clean, rotate, fold, spindle or mutilate it. Just send BOTH the original, untouched, unaltered, un-renamed, photo file ALONG WITH what ever you want to enter into the contest; i.e.: you send TWO files to them. They might disqualify your entry, based on just how badly you mutilated it... i.e.: did you produce a photo of an unrealistic sight? As long as they can verify that you produced the original image with the camera in one photographic instance and that you did not ALTER REALITY in your artistic rendition, then your entry should (MY interpretation) be allowed. I think that's fair. Submitting two images, the original unprocessed RAW as well as the processed JPG should be allowed. They then can determine if said processing manipulated the image beyond what was reality. Simple contrast and levelling should be acceptable. One should not assume that a 350D, as I have (or any other consumer grade DSLR), is capable of taking flawless, perfectly exposed photos.
Semper Vaporo wrote: MY interpretation of that answer is:YES! You can do absolutely anything you want to the photo; filter, enhance, crop, clean, rotate, fold, spindle or mutilate it. Just send BOTH the original, untouched, unaltered, un-renamed, photo file ALONG WITH what ever you want to enter into the contest; i.e.: you send TWO files to them. They might disqualify your entry, based on just how badly you mutilated it... i.e.: did you produce a photo of an unrealistic sight? As long as they can verify that you produced the original image with the camera in one photographic instance and that you did not ALTER REALITY in your artistic rendition, then your entry should (MY interpretation) be allowed.
MY interpretation of that answer is:
YES! You can do absolutely anything you want to the photo; filter, enhance, crop, clean, rotate, fold, spindle or mutilate it. Just send BOTH the original, untouched, unaltered, un-renamed, photo file ALONG WITH what ever you want to enter into the contest; i.e.: you send TWO files to them. They might disqualify your entry, based on just how badly you mutilated it... i.e.: did you produce a photo of an unrealistic sight? As long as they can verify that you produced the original image with the camera in one photographic instance and that you did not ALTER REALITY in your artistic rendition, then your entry should (MY interpretation) be allowed.
I think that's fair. Submitting two images, the original unprocessed RAW as well as the processed JPG should be allowed. They then can determine if said processing manipulated the image beyond what was reality. Simple contrast and levelling should be acceptable. One should not assume that a 350D, as I have (or any other consumer grade DSLR), is capable of taking flawless, perfectly exposed photos.
But contest rule number two says:
From this rule, I don't see how an entrant would conclude that an altered image would be considered as long as it is accompanied by the unaltered image for verification as has been suggested here by Mr. Danneman. If it is true that an altered image can be submitted for judgment, it seems to me that the contest rules should say so.
Otherwise some entrants will follow the rules as written, submitting only unaltered files, only to discover later that some of their competitors enjoyed the unfair advantage of having their images reviewed in an altered, improved, state.
Here are the rules:
http://www.trainsmag.com/trn/objects/pdf/tr_canon_photo_contest_2007.pdf
Semper Vaporo wrote:MY interpretation of that answer is:YES! You can do absolutely anything you want to the photo; filter, enhance, crop, clean, rotate, fold, spindle or mutilate it. Just send BOTH the original, untouched, unaltered, un-renamed, photo file ALONG WITH what ever you want to enter into the contest; i.e.: you send TWO files to them. They might disqualify your entry, based on just how badly you mutilated it... i.e.: did you produce a photo of an unrealistic sight? As long as they can verify that you produced the original image with the camera in one photographic instance and that you did not ALTER REALITY in your artistic rendition, then your entry should (MY interpretation) be allowed.
Poppa_Zit wrote: Semper Vaporo wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote: OK, Mr. Danneman, let's have some more fun:It would be acceptable for the purposes of this contest for a photographer to use any number of photo-enhancing filters on his lens to improve his original final exposure [photograph] -- ranging from a polarizing filter to a haze filter to a graduated sky blue filter. Yes?I have a professional industrial program that can add the effects of over 100 filters in post-production -- in PhotoShop. Would this be illegal?Thinking small,PZI think he stated the answer already...MY interpretation of that answer is:YES! You can do absolutely anything you want to the photo; filter, enhance, crop, clean, rotate, fold, spindle or mutilate it. Just send BOTH the original, untouched, unaltered, un-renamed, photo file ALONG WITH what ever you want to enter into the contest; i.e.: you send TWO files to them. They might disqualify your entry, based on just how badly you mutilated it... i.e.: did you produce a photo of an unrealistic sight? As long as they can verify that you produced the original image with the camera in one photographic instance and that you did not ALTER REALITY in your artistic rendition, then your entry should (MY interpretation) be allowed. Agreed.Not to be a troublemaker, but how will they know where exactly to draw the line? What criteria will be used?
Semper Vaporo wrote: Poppa_Zit wrote: OK, Mr. Danneman, let's have some more fun:It would be acceptable for the purposes of this contest for a photographer to use any number of photo-enhancing filters on his lens to improve his original final exposure [photograph] -- ranging from a polarizing filter to a haze filter to a graduated sky blue filter. Yes?I have a professional industrial program that can add the effects of over 100 filters in post-production -- in PhotoShop. Would this be illegal?Thinking small,PZI think he stated the answer already...MY interpretation of that answer is:YES! You can do absolutely anything you want to the photo; filter, enhance, crop, clean, rotate, fold, spindle or mutilate it. Just send BOTH the original, untouched, unaltered, un-renamed, photo file ALONG WITH what ever you want to enter into the contest; i.e.: you send TWO files to them. They might disqualify your entry, based on just how badly you mutilated it... i.e.: did you produce a photo of an unrealistic sight? As long as they can verify that you produced the original image with the camera in one photographic instance and that you did not ALTER REALITY in your artistic rendition, then your entry should (MY interpretation) be allowed.
Poppa_Zit wrote: OK, Mr. Danneman, let's have some more fun:It would be acceptable for the purposes of this contest for a photographer to use any number of photo-enhancing filters on his lens to improve his original final exposure [photograph] -- ranging from a polarizing filter to a haze filter to a graduated sky blue filter. Yes?I have a professional industrial program that can add the effects of over 100 filters in post-production -- in PhotoShop. Would this be illegal?Thinking small,PZ
OK, Mr. Danneman, let's have some more fun:
It would be acceptable for the purposes of this contest for a photographer to use any number of photo-enhancing filters on his lens to improve his original final exposure [photograph] -- ranging from a polarizing filter to a haze filter to a graduated sky blue filter. Yes?
I have a professional industrial program that can add the effects of over 100 filters in post-production -- in PhotoShop. Would this be illegal?
Thinking small,
PZ
I think he stated the answer already...
Agreed.
Not to be a troublemaker, but how will they know where exactly to draw the line? What criteria will be used?
I think he answered that also above. And I suspect "the line" will become pretty "fine"!
Most contests include the flat out statement; "The decision of the judges is final."
Perhaps some of your questions can be answered by the following google search on RAW FORMAT
According to these results, each camera manufacturer has their own RAW format, and there is now a proposed (but not agreed to ) standard from Adobe....so you pretty much have to have each camera's software to (initially) read the info....and there is also some "Meta" data which tells the programs how to read the Raw data...it is not specifically stated, but I did not see anything about being able to save data in the RAW format once its been read (and changed).
Any fairly competant programmer should be able to figure that out... but have they bothered to do so?
tdanneman wrote: Good questions Semper. I'm not sure I can answer them totally, but I will tell you what I know. I heard about the CRC's, but to be totally honest, I really wouldn't know how we would use them to determine whether an image was altered or not (I'm admitting that I'm not the most technically savy person ). However, I did do a test on some of my own photos (in PhotoShop) to see if I could "trick myself," and make modifications to both a RAW file as well as a jpeg without it being "detected." I could NOT figure out a way to make modifications to a photo, whether it was a simple color tweak, or a larger "alteration," without changing the exif, or meta data. Even a simple "save as" will change the data, even if the original file name is retained. I'm guessing that their might be ways around it, but I'm not aware of them. I saw somewhere that someone said you can re-save an image as RAW file. While this is true, the image will be a PhotoShop (or other digital photo software) RAW file, not a camera RAW file. So when it arrives here, we should be able to tell if it's been modified just by reviewing the file. To be clear, if a photographer wants to submit a print of the digital file. They should first copy or duplicate the image so that the original stays intact, and make the tweaks to the copy (which naturally, should have a different file name). I mentioned in my last post that you can do a "save as." This is true, but make sure you rename the file something different so you don't overwrite the original, thereby changing the exif or meta deta. Geez! I hope that makes sense. To answer your question about where we draw the line as far as alterations. Well, that's a tough one. But I can say that if a photographer sends in a print, as well as an original file, we will be able to see the changes made simply by comparing the two as well as examining the file itself as I mentioned above. So, I guess we'll have to determine whether a file has too many "alterations." You are correct about your examples. The last three would most likely not get a seal of approval. This is not an easy subject, but one that I'm sure we'll be paying more attention to as we go along.Tom Danneman
Good questions Semper. I'm not sure I can answer them totally, but I will tell you what I know. I heard about the CRC's, but to be totally honest, I really wouldn't know how we would use them to determine whether an image was altered or not (I'm admitting that I'm not the most technically savy person ). However, I did do a test on some of my own photos (in PhotoShop) to see if I could "trick myself," and make modifications to both a RAW file as well as a jpeg without it being "detected." I could NOT figure out a way to make modifications to a photo, whether it was a simple color tweak, or a larger "alteration," without changing the exif, or meta data. Even a simple "save as" will change the data, even if the original file name is retained. I'm guessing that their might be ways around it, but I'm not aware of them. I saw somewhere that someone said you can re-save an image as RAW file. While this is true, the image will be a PhotoShop (or other digital photo software) RAW file, not a camera RAW file. So when it arrives here, we should be able to tell if it's been modified just by reviewing the file. To be clear, if a photographer wants to submit a print of the digital file. They should first copy or duplicate the image so that the original stays intact, and make the tweaks to the copy (which naturally, should have a different file name). I mentioned in my last post that you can do a "save as." This is true, but make sure you rename the file something different so you don't overwrite the original, thereby changing the exif or meta deta. Geez! I hope that makes sense.
To answer your question about where we draw the line as far as alterations. Well, that's a tough one. But I can say that if a photographer sends in a print, as well as an original file, we will be able to see the changes made simply by comparing the two as well as examining the file itself as I mentioned above. So, I guess we'll have to determine whether a file has too many "alterations." You are correct about your examples. The last three would most likely not get a seal of approval. This is not an easy subject, but one that I'm sure we'll be paying more attention to as we go along.
Tom Danneman
I take it then that your corporate PC has a program resident on it that will give some sort of "yea"/"nay" as to validity of a photo file for the contest. You run the program and tell it the name of the photo file and it says, valid or invalid. Right?
You have thus taken a photo with your camera and saved it to the computer and run said program and it said "Yea". Then you ran Photoshop and saved the file using "Save As..." and gave it the same name as the original file (which overwrites the original file, or you put it in a different directory) and then the verification program says "Nay" on that file. If the original still exists someplace, the verification program still says "Yea" on it. You should be able to "COPY" the original file to other directories (drag and drop, in Winders) and still get a "Yea" on them.
This implies that the photo editing program did "something" to the content of the file, even if YOU did not intentionally alter the visual image, nor does the actual visual image look like it was modified when you display it again.
Whether the file is a "camera RAW" file, or a "Photoshop RAW" file (whatever a "RAW" file is to begin with... I don't know) all files are just collections of ones and zeros that have some specification as to what each of the positions of those ones and zeros means. There are dozens of specifications, thus all the "formats" that are "Photo" files. (And "CODECS" for videos and sound files.)
Somewhere someone has defined a RAW specification and so also with the .JPG file.
As an EXAMPLE: (Please, I don't have the actual information about this! I am just supposin'!)
Suppose, that the first bunch of "bits" are divided into groups such that the first 16 are taken together as the number of pixels that are in a row of the photo, then the next 16 are the number of these rows in the photo. This has to be defined in the file so the actual picture data in the file can be split into the correct groups so the photo can be reconstructed. (If the number of pixels in a row were off by just a few, the photo would look like a "barber pole". If it were off by more than just a few the resulting image would just be jibberish.)
The next few bits might be the camera brand/model or any of many other things. All divided into groups of certain unchanging size. The CRC of the file as written by the camera might be one of these groups.
I have seen these types of definitions... created a few myself in my work. The designer of the file format usually has to leave a few bit positions undefined. Some are labeled as "Unused" or "For future expansion". Some are specifically reserved as "Mfg defined". (Things get sticky when the specification gets out in the world and some programmer decides he needs to use some of the "Unused" bits for some reason that he thinks is important, and some other programmer decides the same thing, but they didn't talk to each other and use the same bits for different things. This is where specifications have ".A" or "Rev B" added to them!)
Anyway, some of the bits in the photo file header are probably "reserved" for the CRC number. The specification says to either leave the bits alone or set them to all zeros when saving the file (if the program saving the file is NOT a camera creating an original).
When doing a "Save" or "Save As..." the photo editing software probably rebuilds the header and starts with all zeros and just changes the groups that are needed to rebuild the image... might put its own "Mfg defined" data in one or more of the groups... only one chance in a million-billion to accidently create a number that the Verification software would call a valid CRC.
My concern is that if you have the verification software, then someone else could get it too. That someone else could have the savvy and inclination and lack of scruples to reverse engineer it to determine the CRC algorithm and thus be able to forge photos. It might be very hard to reverse engineer it, but it is not impossible to do. Although EGO is a strong motivator, I doubt that anyone will reverse engineer the software just to try to enter a photo contest. BUT, in the legal arena, being able to alter a photo could aquit, or convict, someone and I can see where some of the larger crime cartels could foot the bill to do this (but I bet they would simply steal the information from the source... lots easier and cheaper).
All this, of course, on the assumption that there really is a CRC in the files for this purpose.
scottychaos wrote: Its been stated dozens of times in dozens of different railfan forums..there is NO way to determine if a JPEG or a RAW has been edited. you can take the photo, as a JPEG or RAW, make a billion edits/changes to it, save it as a JPEG or RAW with the same filename it had from the camera, and no one will be able to tell if it has been edited. (unless you do a bad job of it! ;) or do something obvious, like put a flying pink elephant in the sky)but if its subtle, like removing a bird from the sky, or some minor changes to color or density, and its done well, no one will be able to tell.which is why the Trains contest rules are pointless and meaningless.(hmmm..how long before this post gets deleted?) Scot
Its been stated dozens of times in dozens of different railfan forums..
there is NO way to determine if a JPEG or a RAW has been edited. you can take the photo, as a JPEG or RAW, make a billion edits/changes to it, save it as a JPEG or RAW with the same filename it had from the camera, and no one will be able to tell if it has been edited. (unless you do a bad job of it! ;) or do something obvious, like put a flying pink elephant in the sky)
but if its subtle, like removing a bird from the sky, or some minor changes to color or density, and its done well, no one will be able to tell.
which is why the Trains contest rules are pointless and meaningless.
(hmmm..how long before this post gets deleted?)
I know this has been discussed at length on this and other forums, and I understand your position. Based on what you said about there being no way to detect whether or not an image has been altered, I asked TRAINS how they could verify that a submission is un-altered in order to enforce their rule that requires submissions to be un-altered. I would like your comments.
I posed this question to the editors at TRAINS:
"Consider a case where an entrant has taken the RAW file directly from the camera, altered it to improve the quality, saved it as another, re-named RAW file, and then submitted it to the contest. There is no way to tell that the file has been re-named, or that it is not the original RAW file directly from the camera. So, how can you tell whether or not the image has been altered?"
I got this response:
"Thanks for the questions about the photo contest. Actually, digital submissions may be sent as RAW or unaltered JPEG files. A RAW file is one that comes directly from the camera; no software programs exist that allow a person to save a file as a RAW file. By its very nature, it can't be done."
tdanneman: Thanks for the clarification.
Let me elucidate (well, conjecture) on the technical discussion a moment, then I have another sticky question.
Well... Pardon me whilst I ramble a few paragraphs... upon further consideration...
It is common to embed a number in a file that is called a "Checksum" or "Cyclic Redundancy Check" (CRC). This is a number that is the sum of all the individual numbers in the file multiplied by the numerical position of the number in the file. The answer is then truncated to just the last few digits, say the lowest 8 or 16 digits, or so.
The original purpose for this type of thing was to ensure that when the data is transmitted from one place to another (whether over miles of wire/radio or just from the harddrive to the memory) that the correct data has been received. The number is calculated by the Sending entity and sent with the data. The Receiving entity then calculates it again and compares the two answers and if they are the same, then it is assumed the data was transmitted without error. The chances of multiple errors canceling each other out is so small as to be discounted. If there is an error, then the whole set of data has to be re-transmitted to get it right. Even if the only failure was a lightning spike while sending the CRC... i.e.: the file was okay, only the CRC was damaged.
Okay, what has this to do with the photo files? Well, if the camera writes a CRC to the file that has included the numerical values of the letters of camera's assigned filename, then if you change the name of the file, a re-calculation of the number will include the wrong filename and result a different CRC.
Other things can be done to "encrypt" the CRC to make it harder to figure out what was done to create it... like when the numerical value is more than 8 digits, remove all the digits to the left of the 8th digit and add that value to the right most 8 digits, and then just for the heck of it, add 3. It doesn't really matter what is done, just so long as you don't tell anybody about it, but remember what is done, so you can do the exact same thing later, to generate the number again for verification.
Changing the filename does not change the data in the file. But the gist is that when a new number is calculated to verify the file, there will be a difference due to the name change. All that anyone can tell is that something is changed; could be an alteration to the data that produced the photo (enhancement, crop, etc.), or just the filename.
I don't know if all cameras produce this internal number.
I guess the scenario is that the person wanting to verify a photo would send it to the camera company to use their internal/non-public "proprietary" software (that they keep secret) to see if the number matches what it should. You might have to supply the serial number of the camera that produced the photo. Not only might this number be included in the CRC, it might be necessary to tell them which version of CRC software produced the original CRC, (in case there have been revisions to the software that might affect the CRC).
So, now, I can see how the contest can weed out dishonest photos.
But this is only good so long as the CRC algorithm is "secret". At present I know of no software that can create a photo file that contains a method to forge a CRC in a file.
Now for my new question... and this just gets stickier and stickier.
I appreciate the clarification... I can take a photo, and maybe do a bit of artistic cropping and some color enhancement and even remove a speck in the sky. As long as I do that to a COPY of the RAW (or original JPG) file. Then I can send BOTH my "artistic" rendition of the image AND the original file for verification that all I did was "improvements".
Now the dumb question... what constitutes TOO MUCH artistic license? A bit of color enhancement? Okay!Crop off the bare pot-bellied railfan on the left? Okay!Erase the dust speck in the sky? Okay!Enhance the number of the engine so it is readable? Hmmmm? Maybe?Erase the high tension electric wires overhead? Well?Change the engine number? No?Substitute a steam locomotive for the Diesel? WHAT!How about showing MILW 261 giving a Boeing 747 a boost?
Well, okay, I know those last ones are not allowed! But where do you "draw the line"?
I do NOT envy the judges having to make those decisions!
tdanneman wrote: This is a great discussion about digital photography and formats, etc. I just wanted to make it clear that the intention of the rules are to eliminate what Semper mentioned as photos that have been "retouched." Or maybe a better term would be "altered." The concern isn't whether you remove a speck from the sky, or if you've made some adjustments to the brightness, contrast, etc., but to eliminate submissions that have been altered in a way that makes the photo illegitimate. An example would be meshing two photos taken at different times to give the impression of something that didn't really happen. Think of this example. I'm set up at some over-under railroad crossing. I take a photo of a train on the track that goes underneath the other, and maybe just minutes after that train disappears, I photograph a train on the tracks that go over the other. Later I mesh the two together in PhotoShop so that it appears that the two trains crossed at the same time. Unfortunately, in this age where PhotoShop is being used, and in some cases being used well, to alter reality, we have to make the rules so that it's fair to everyone, and that the photographers that are proficient at PhotoShop don't have an edge. The contest is about photography, not knowledge of photo editing software.With that said, It would be fine if the photographer wants to send a color print of the digital photo after they've made some adjustments to the color, or maybe they've removed one of those pesky spots in the sky caused by a dusty sensor. We are just asking that they send us the original file (whether it's a jpeg or RAW file). You might be asking how you can make a print from a RAW or jpeg file without processing or changing it. Simply do a save as, or copy the file, and change the name so as not to overwrite the original. Go ahead and process that copied file to your hearts content, just be sure to keep that original file intact, and send that to us with your print. I should also mention that RAW files are ALWAYS the preferred format for any digital submission. As it's been mentioned in this discussion, RAW files give you the best opportunity to get the best results from your images, and gives us the best chance to set up the photo the best it can be for our particular printing process.
This is a great discussion about digital photography and formats, etc. I just wanted to make it clear that the intention of the rules are to eliminate what Semper mentioned as photos that have been "retouched." Or maybe a better term would be "altered." The concern isn't whether you remove a speck from the sky, or if you've made some adjustments to the brightness, contrast, etc., but to eliminate submissions that have been altered in a way that makes the photo illegitimate. An example would be meshing two photos taken at different times to give the impression of something that didn't really happen. Think of this example. I'm set up at some over-under railroad crossing. I take a photo of a train on the track that goes underneath the other, and maybe just minutes after that train disappears, I photograph a train on the tracks that go over the other. Later I mesh the two together in PhotoShop so that it appears that the two trains crossed at the same time. Unfortunately, in this age where PhotoShop is being used, and in some cases being used well, to alter reality, we have to make the rules so that it's fair to everyone, and that the photographers that are proficient at PhotoShop don't have an edge. The contest is about photography, not knowledge of photo editing software.
With that said, It would be fine if the photographer wants to send a color print of the digital photo after they've made some adjustments to the color, or maybe they've removed one of those pesky spots in the sky caused by a dusty sensor. We are just asking that they send us the original file (whether it's a jpeg or RAW file). You might be asking how you can make a print from a RAW or jpeg file without processing or changing it. Simply do a save as, or copy the file, and change the name so as not to overwrite the original. Go ahead and process that copied file to your hearts content, just be sure to keep that original file intact, and send that to us with your print. I should also mention that RAW files are ALWAYS the preferred format for any digital submission. As it's been mentioned in this discussion, RAW files give you the best opportunity to get the best results from your images, and gives us the best chance to set up the photo the best it can be for our particular printing process.
I understand the intent of the TRAINS rule about editing.
However, I have a basic question about how you can verify whether or not a contest entry has been altered. I have been chasing this question around, and have almost concluded that there is no answer, since every answer seems to generate more questions. So I will take it one step at a time. Here is the most basic question broken down into a couple components:
If a person takes a RAW file right from the camera, edits it, does a save-as to create a second RAW file, does not rename the file, and submits the photo for the contest, how can you tell whether or not it has been edited? (or is this not possible to do?)
What if they did all that, but did change the name? How could you tell that it was not the un-altered RAW file right from the camera?
Bucyrus wrote: Let us set aside the issue of a possible algorithm that would prove whether a digital photo has been altered. Question number one: If you shoot a photo in RAW format, can that file be saved as another RAW file if it is renamed?
Let us set aside the issue of a possible algorithm that would prove whether a digital photo has been altered.
Question number one: If you shoot a photo in RAW format, can that file be saved as another RAW file if it is renamed?
RAW format is just a file of ones and zeros, so why not? I do it all the time when I am really intending to delete a bunch... I am clicking several files with the "Ctrl" key held down so I can select the files as a group and accidently move the mouse just a bit too much with the button down and the dumb cornphewter decides that I just did a "drag and drop" to the same directory and bam!!!!, I got copies of all the files... the system automatically renames all the copies by prepending "Copy of" to the original filenames.
Then I try to delete all of those and as well as the first group and do it again and and get another set of copies of the copies!
I used to tell people that the computer is just an interim solution until we perfect the paper and pencil... I fear we have lost sight of that goal.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.