I had a question about the Photo Contest.
What do they mean "think small" about the theme? Thats confusing me alot.
As I read the information, I don't think there was a single interpretation of the theme. It's all about you, how you interpret the theme as it relates to railroads/railroading and how you choose to show that in your photo.
It's definately an interesting theme, and I'm kind of anxious to see the winners. If contests were something I did, I might even submit a shot...
-ChrisWest Chicago, ILChristopher May Fine Art Photography"In wisdom gathered over time I have found that every experience is a form of exploration." ~Ansel Adams
J T wrote:Well, they certainly didn't make it fair for those of us who shoot in RAW.
I thought they require shooting in RAW. Why would it be unfair?
nanaimo73 wrote:I can understand why the contest winner is called Grand Prize, but why is the second place picture called First Prize ?
Hype. Grade Inflation. Which also begs the question, why isnt "First" good enough any more?
Probably also related to why you can't get a small soft drink at a "fast food" place anymore...the cup with the least capacity is now called a "Medium". I guess they figure the consumer is dumb enough to think that $1.25 for an 12 oz medium drink is a better deal than $1.25 for a 12 oz. small drink....
At least the photo contest theme is "Think Small", not "Think Medium"...
Kinda hard to think small in a big-action area like ours, huh, Colin?
By the way, welcome back!
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
In the future, I look forward to "Ultimate Place", and "Mega Place" being the first two positions in most "events".
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
"Small" may be a matter of personal interpretation, but I do note that the rules limit smallness at 2-foot-gage.
Bucyrus wrote: J T wrote:Well, they certainly didn't make it fair for those of us who shoot in RAW. I thought they require shooting in RAW.
I thought they require shooting in RAW.
No.
Why would it be unfair?
The answer to that can found once you understand the difference between shooting in RAW and JPG modes.
CopCarSS wrote: As I read the information, I don't think there was a single interpretation of the theme. It's all about you, how you interpret the theme as it relates to railroads/railroading and how you choose to show that in your photo.It's definately an interesting theme, and I'm kind of anxious to see the winners. If contests were something I did, I might even submit a shot...
Why wouldnt you enter the contest? Your stuff is as good as any Ive seen. Dont cut yourself short. Or do you just not like contest?
Danny
videomaker wrote:Chris, Why wouldnt you enter the contest? Your stuff is as good as any Ive seen. Dont cut yourself short. Or do you just not like contest? Danny
Danny,
Thanks for the kind words. It's more of a "I don't enter contests" kind of thing. I've had some photographer friends really get burned by submissions to contests (over usage and rights issues). The Trains rules look good, but I guess I'm just kind of opposed to the whole contest idea.I guess I'm just weird like that...
J T wrote: Bucyrus wrote: J T wrote:Well, they certainly didn't make it fair for those of us who shoot in RAW. I thought they require shooting in RAW.No. Why would it be unfair?The answer to that can found once you understand the difference between shooting in RAW and JPG modes.
You are correct. In looking at the rules again, I see they allow shooting in RAW or JPEG. But why would it be unfair to those who want to shoot in RAW?
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
J T wrote: The answer to that can found once you understand the difference between shooting in RAW and JPG modes.
Bucyrus wrote: J T wrote:Well, they certainly didn't make it fair for those of us who shoot in RAW. I thought they require shooting in RAW. Why would it be unfair?
I prefer to remain clothed, thank you!
videomaker wrote: I havent shot anything in RAW format with my camera yet but RAW gives you the whole spectrum of color to edit anyway you want the pic to look..JPG is fixed at the camera setting with less pixels than RAW and you cant play with or change the photo very much at all..Anyone correct me or add to this is its not right...Danny
That sums it up pretty well.
For the average photog, taking pictures chiefly for his or her own amusement or to share, JPG is just fine. It's a common picture format that just about every computer can deal with.
If you are into "developing" your pictures, or playing around with them (my daughter removed the minister from one of her wedding pictures), the RAW is something to consider. Some cameras will shoot JPG + RAW, so you have both. A word of warning - on my Digital Rebel, going from straight hi-res JPG to JPG + RAW takes the number of pictures that a 1 Gig memory card will hold from 265 to 62.....
CShaveRR wrote: Bucyrus wrote: J T wrote:Well, they certainly didn't make it fair for those of us who shoot in RAW. I thought they require shooting in RAW. Why would it be unfair?I prefer to remain clothed, thank you!
Shoot in the raw and remember, think small.
Dave Nelson
So, because the contest rules stipulate that submissions not be edited in any way, the advantage of shooting in RAW instead of JPEG is lost. Is that correct?
RAW vs JPG is merely a matter of where and how an image gets processed into a JPG. If you shoot stright JPEG, you're basically allowing the camera (and the processing algorithms built into it) to make the final image. Granted, JPG's are editable, but not as losslessly as RAW.
When you shoot RAW, the camera is still making judgements on a picture, but only for the purpose of display on the camera's LCD. The RAW image merely records the information that the imaging sensor receives. Before you can do anything with the image, you'll need to convert it to JPG. This can be done with the software that came with your camera, or a variety of aftermarket products (Capture One, Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Camera RAW, Apple Aperture, etc.).
The advantage to RAW is that it allows you a lot more leeway in your picture. White Balance, exposure, saturation, etc. aren't really critical, because you can adjust them to your desire at your convenience after the shot. The downsides are the extra processing and larger file sizes (generally RAW images are losslessly compressed, but lossless compression isn't very much compression).
JPG images offer the advantages of smaller size and easier distribution, etc. after the shot. This comes at the expense of some image quality. Canon and Nikon both seem to do well with in camera JPG processing (though there is still more detail, etc. available with RAW). My K100D also does very well, but Pentax's mid level camera, the K10D does terribly with JPG processing. Even monster names like Leica do much, much better with RAW than in camera JPG's (and the M8 is a $5000 camera!).
For general photography, JPGs work just fine (and you'll find that most photojournalists even shoot RAW because it's much quicker). If, however, you are looking to enlarge an image to mammoth proportions, you are shooting in strange lighting or you just want all the detail you can get, RAW is definately the way to go.
Computer photo formats 101:
RAW format saves the data without any compression... i.e.: for every pixel of the photo, there is one "word" of color information for that pixel. A "word" is usually 24-bits; three 8-bit bytes, one byte each for Red, Green and Blue. A 6-MegaPixel image thus requires 18-MegaBytes to store.
JPG (or JPEG) format is a method of compressing the data to make the data-file smaller (so you can store for more photos).
The compression that is used makes a file smaller by combining groups of pixels and storing only one "word" for the group. Each group has some overlap with adjacent groups (left, right, above, below and at the 45 degreen angles). If it did not do the overlapping, the number of effective pixels would be considerably fewer and the resultant image would be "blocks" the size of the groups of pixels. The color of the block would be an average of the single colors of that group and each of the adjacent groups that was stored for that group. The sizes of the groups varies based on how close they are to the edge, and how near they are to drastic changes in contrast in the image (that is why jpg files vary in size).
When uncompressing the image for viewing, the single words per group are recombined to (hopefully) recreate each pixel of the original image. But, it cannot recreate the exact data. Only some weighted average value per pixel is recreated, so there is some error in the recreated image. You can "see" the error in slight bluring (or muddying) of edges or large, nearly uniform, color areas (like the sky).
This problem is compounded if you use a picture editing program on the file. It uncompresses the file (thus the pixels you see are the recreated set which is not exactly the original image) so you can see it to edit it.
If you make no changes in the image, most photo editing programs recognize that no changes were made and if you do a "re-save", it does not re-compress the image, it just saves the original data back to the file.
But, if you make a minor edit to the image, like crop it (even just one row of pixels off of one edge), or smear a blemish, or do something more drastic, like color enhance it, or "sharpen" or "soften" it, or something even more drastic, like remove a utility pole and wires by copying some other piece of sky over them; then... when you resave the image, the compression occurs again and that will be compressing the "not exact" data (even areas you didn't touch) and a bit more error is introduced the next time it is uncompressed for viewing.
If you load a jpg file, edit it and then re-save it (an uncompress/recompresses cycle) multiple times, the image degrades a little bit more each time.
If you do want to edit a jpg file, doing so once is not too bad. But if you find later you want to make another edit, you really should have kept the original image in addition to the edited file. You should repeat the first edit on the original file (if you remember what it was you did!) and then also do the new thing you want to do (with no save and re-load in between). This eliminates the error introduced in a compression cycle.
Remember, it is the save and reload cycle that introduces the errors. If the edits you are doing are taking a long time and you must take a break from it periodically (I have spent HOURS! "retouching" a photo), don't save and re-load for each session... keep the editing program running with the partially edited image loaded. Granted, you should do periodic saves, just so that if your kid trips over the power cord and the computer dies, you won't lose everything you've done. But you then only risk introducing error from one re-load of the file, and hopefully if won't happen at all. (If it happens more than once, you need to rearrange your power cords!)
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Bucyrus wrote: So, because the contest rules stipulate that submissions not be edited in any way, the advantage of shooting in RAW instead of JPEG is lost. Is that correct?
I think the rule to not edit the photo is more because it is a contest for the photographer knowing how to compose the shot "at the camera"... angle, zoom, etc., and using the camera to set the exposure, color, etc.; rather than the "re-touch" artist cropping the photo to center the primary interest, erasing unwanted things, fixing blemishes, etc.
But, RAW format is the easiest to be re-touched undetected, whereas a JPG file will always be degraded by re-touching it.
I have a "photo" of Grant Wood's painting "American Gothic" with my grandkids faces in place of the farmer and his daughter.
I have a photo of ME sitting in the cab of the Milwaukee Road 261 with Mark D. firing for me. The throttle to the roof and the Minnesota country side is visible out the fireman's window. I was actually sitting in the cab, but Mark D. is the one that took that photo (I got his photo quite by accident later), the throttle was closed and there were tools hanging on the wall visible out the Fireman's window! A little re-touching and three photos become one!
I also have a photo of ME sitting in the cab of my 1:32 scale Aster Mikado Live Steam locomotive. NO amount of dieting will make anyone THAT small!
Re-touching is FUN! But the resulting photo is not "real".
Murphy Siding wrote: J T wrote: The answer to that can found once you understand the difference between shooting in RAW and JPG modes. Can you explain, in little words, to us non-photographers, what the difference is? Thanks
Others have explained in more detail, but I'll sum it up simply as:
JPG = in camera processing
RAW = post camera processing (with a program like photoshop, etc).
So basically what the Trains contest rules are saying is that if you shoot in JPG, the image can be processed, but if you shoot in RAW, it can not.
Semper Vaporo wrote:Re-touching is FUN! But the resulting photo is not "real".
To the contrary.
J T wrote: JPG = in camera processingRAW = post camera processing (with a program like photoshop, etc).So basically what the Trains contest rules are saying is that if you shoot in JPG, the image can be processed, but if you shoot in RAW, it can not.
Thank you JT and Charles for your explanations. So, as I understand it, when you say that in JPEG, the image can be processed, you mean processed only by the camera.
The rules state that no editing is allowed to be performed after the shot, no matter which format is used. The requirement is that submissions be made unaltered, not re-named, direct from the camera, in either RAW or JPEG format. Therefore, from what I have read in this thread, I conclude the following:
1) If you shoot in RAW, there is no alteration performed by the camera.
2) If you shoot in JPEG, some alteration is performed by the camera.
However, no matter which format you shoot in, no further alteration is allowed. Therefore all JPEG entries will be processed to some extent by the camera, and all RAW entries will not be processed at all. I can see why this would seem unfair to those who strive for the best possible work by shooting in RAW format, and post processing. In that sense, the rules seem to attempt to level the playing field by "dumbing down" the contest.
QUESTION:
What would you say to an assertion by the contest judges that they are capable of making a fair judgment by observation in comparing unaltered RAW files to each other, and in comparing unaltered RAW files to unaltered (but camera-processed) JPEG files? And in continuation of that question, what would you say to an assertion by the contest judges that they are not only capable of such judgment, but that they will add the appropriate post processing themselves so that the winning entries will all be optimally enhanced for display?
Semper Vaporo wrote: I also have a photo of ME sitting in the cab of my 1:32 scale Aster Mikado Live Steam locomotive. NO amount of dieting will make anyone THAT small!
Too bad you can't submit that one for the photo contest- it sure qualifies under the theme!
Brian (IA) http://blhanel.rrpicturearchives.net.
Bucyrus wrote: J T wrote: JPG = in camera processingRAW = post camera processing (with a program like photoshop, etc).So basically what the Trains contest rules are saying is that if you shoot in JPG, the image can be processed, but if you shoot in RAW, it can not. Thank you JT and Charles for your explanations. So, as I understand it, when you say that in JPEG, the image can be processed, you mean processed only by the camera. The rules state that no editing is allowed to be performed after the shot, no matter which format is used. The requirement is that submissions be made unaltered, not re-named, direct from the camera, in either RAW or JPEG format. Therefore, from what I have read in this thread, I conclude the following: 1) If you shoot in RAW, there is no alteration performed by the camera. 2) If you shoot in JPEG, some alteration is performed by the camera. However, no matter which format you shoot in, no further alteration is allowed. Therefore all JPEG entries will be processed to some extent by the camera, and all RAW entries will not be processed at all. I can see why this would seem unfair to those who strive for the best possible work by shooting in RAW format, and post processing. In that sense, the rules seem to attempt to level the playing field by "dumbing down" the contest.QUESTION:What would you say to an assertion by the contest judges that they are capable of making a fair judgment by observation in comparing unaltered RAW files to each other, and in comparing unaltered RAW files to unaltered (but camera-processed) JPEG files? And in continuation of that question, what would you say to an assertion by the contest judges that they are not only capable of such judgment, but that they will add the appropriate post processing themselves so that the winning entries will all be optimally enhanced for display?
EITHER format can be "processed" by an external, after the fact, photo editing program. The difference is strictly the loss of data caused by the compression process. If the camera saves the data internally already compressed (jpg) then one level of loss has already occured. Either format can be converted to the other by just about any photo editing program, but once it has been compressed some data is lost permanently.
Converting RAW to JPG introduces some loss in the image. The camera actually takes the photo in RAW format and then moves the data from the image chip behind the lense to internal storage. If the store function compresses the data, then loss occurs. It did not actually "process" the image to attempt to improve it, like what you and I would do if we loaded the image into an editing program and executed things like "Sharpen" or "adjust contrast", etc. The "processing" it did was to just compress it.
Converting a JPG to RAW just preserves the data in its present "lossy" form; it does not improve the image back to the original form. It is like putting an assembled jigsaw puzzle in a box. Shake the box like crazy and then look at the puzzle... some of the pieces may have come loose and the image is no longer correct. Shaking it again will not "improve" the image, only degrade it. A jigsaw puzzle can be reassembled because you have clues to the location of the pieces based on the shape and color variation across the piece; but the pieces (pixels) of a digital photo have no "shape" (they are all perfect squares) to compare to adjacent shapes, and each pixel is just one solid color so you cannot tell where one goes based on adjacent colors.
If you take a photo and the camera compresses the image and you transfer it to your computer, you can load it into a photo processing program and convert it to RAW format (often refered to as a "bit map" or .BMP file). Now you can edit, save, reload, edit, save, etc. to your heart's content without the compression loss attendent with the jpg file, EXCEPT for that first loss caused by the camera compressing the file the first time. You also have an 18-MegaByte file being carried around on your computer... space that could be used by several .jpg files that are a bit muddied by the compression function.
It is a trade-off of "perfection in storage" vs. I ain't got room to store another photo.
Ideally, one would take all photos in RAW format and once viewed on the computer, you then decide weather you really need "perfection" or can do with some muddyness in order to keep more photos on your computer. It is also a question of how many photos your camera can store internally before you run out of "film" (memory in the camera) and can't take anymore photos until you save them to some other media and clear the camera's memory?
If your camera only has 18-MegaBytes, then you can only take one photo at a time in RAW format, but could take maybe from 5 to 20 photos in JPG format.
Photos of distant trees can endure lots of compression loss because the leaves are all indistinct anyway, so who cares if it is a bit muddy. Photos of the text of the builder's plate on the side of the smoke box might leave the text unreadable if much compression occurs.
I can't speak for the judges abilities, nor for the particular reasons behind the rules of the contest. I suspect that with the advent of digital cameras the rules have had to be modified to allow for them. Before digitals, you had to have had the negative available so they could see if you had done any "re-touching" of the images... also called "air-brushing". There would be evidence of re-touching on the negative if you had.
To reiterate my thoughts from before, I believe the contest is to see who is a wizz at using the camera, not who is an artist at re-touching. For all my playing with digital re-touching, I must say that the BEST photos I have (few and very far between) were done using 35-mm film in a Pentax K1000, doing a time exposure, using a flashlight to illuminate the subject... a technique known as "painting with light". That way I had complete control of the lighting, where shadows would occur and what got enough light to see in the image. The hard part is the utter guesswork of how long to shine the light in any one spot or how long to leave the shutter open. You can shoot off a whole roll of film and have no idea if ANYTHING will show up on the prints.
You can tell the "processor", when developing the film to "Push it 1" or "Push it 2" to try to get something better out of it, but that could just as easily ruin the images. Once the film is processed to negatives there is not much you can do to improve the contrast or color. The best advice I ever got was to make sure light made it to the film... i.e.: slight over exposure is better than under exposure.
I am not sure if the "best advice" I ever got is applicable to digital photo taking... over
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.