If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 8/7/2012 6:12 PM, tony cooper wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:11:12 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 8/7/2012 1:58 PM, tony cooper wrote: On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:18:19 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 8/6/2012 10:09 PM, Robert Coe wrote: On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:39:05 -0400, wrote: : On 8/5/2012 11:22 AM, Alan Browne wrote: : On 2012-08-05 10:21 , me wrote: : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg : : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4950_1024.jpg : : Nice, esp. the first one (other than the cropped wing tip). : : : Nice capture. The first is a strong image. Shame the speakers get in the : way. They make the shot ineligible as a PSA nature shot. Cloning them : out would make the first a lot stronger, but if you decide to play, : don't enter the image in a PSA competition. I don't understand that. I'm guessing that nobody told the ospreys to build their nest there. So why is it less natural than if it were in a tree or on a rock outcropping? It's probably a pretty good location: good visibility and easy to defend from all but airborne predators. Bob I don't agree with that rule either. PSA is in transition, as are camera clubs. IIRC Tony Cooper's camera club only permits extensive editing in their creative category. My CC permits any amount of editing. If the PSA rules are in transition, no slack in the area of manipulation is apparent: "In the interest of credibility, photographs that misrepresent the truth, such as manipulation to alter the subject matter, or situations which are set up for the purpose of photography, are unacceptable in Photojournalism competition. No elements may be moved, cloned, added, deleted, rearranged or combined. No manipulation or modification is permitted except resizing, sharpening, cropping, selective lightening or darkening, and restoration or original color of the scene. No special effect filters can be applied. Any adjustments must appear natural." The top image - http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg would be accepted in the Color (non-creative) category at my CC with the speaker on the left cropped out of the image and the speaker on the right cloned out. That wouldn't be considered to be a change that significantly alters the image. If that fish in osprey's claws was from another image, that would be a clear example of significant alteration. So would cloning out the speakers. I don't think you read my comment with understanding. I said that a) PSA has not relaxed the rules on cloning, but, b) my camera club's competitions would accept a version with the left speaker cropped out (no requirement for a standard ratio) and a clone of the right speaker (as the Duck did) .. Then I certainly misunderstood, or forgot your statement about your club. However, the PSA now has a creative category that allows only images with "altered reality." http://www.psa-photo.org/divisions/cpid/individual-creative-comp/ The club rules are pretty much on the honor system. If the submitter doesn't think he/she significantly altered, it would pass. There recently was a sick situation in another club, where a member submitted work that was not his, in a national competition. He would have been ranked the top shooter on LI, but was stripped of all his winnings. I call it "sick" because the grand prize was about $250. When i made my comment, I was referring to the Nature Division, which currently has rules similar to those in the PJ division. The rule revisions referred to are related to the extent of permissible adjustments for exposure compensation, sharpness and blurring. I have heard noting about reality changes. I can't see anyone submitting the other image for competition or bothering to do a lot of post on it. It's a good catch for the photographer, but it's not a competition-worthy image. agreed. -- PeterN |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 8/7/2012 5:25 PM, James Silverton wrote:
On 8/7/2012 3:11 PM, PeterN wrote: On 8/6/2012 7:57 AM, Neil Ellwood wrote: me wrote: http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4950_1024.jpg I hope the speakers don't keep the chicks up. In my younger days I would try to keep the chick up all night, if possible. Wait, Oh! you mean THAT kind of chick. "Keep...up all night"; surely not! Well it now takes me all night to do once, what I used to do all night. (Journalistic latitude taken.) -- PeterN |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 2012-08-07 12:11:12 -0700, PeterN said:
On 8/7/2012 1:58 PM, tony cooper wrote: On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:18:19 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 8/6/2012 10:09 PM, Robert Coe wrote: On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:39:05 -0400, PeterN wrote: : On 8/5/2012 11:22 AM, Alan Browne wrote: : On 2012-08-05 10:21 , me wrote: : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg : : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4950_1024.jpg : : Nice, esp. the first one (other than the cropped wing tip). : : : Nice capture. The first is a strong image. Shame the speakers get in the : way. They make the shot ineligible as a PSA nature shot. Cloning them : out would make the first a lot stronger, but if you decide to play, : don't enter the image in a PSA competition. I don't understand that. I'm guessing that nobody told the ospreys to build their nest there. So why is it less natural than if it were in a tree or on a rock outcropping? It's probably a pretty good location: good visibility and easy to defend from all but airborne predators. Bob I don't agree with that rule either. PSA is in transition, as are camera clubs. IIRC Tony Cooper's camera club only permits extensive editing in their creative category. My CC permits any amount of editing. If the PSA rules are in transition, no slack in the area of manipulation is apparent: "In the interest of credibility, photographs that misrepresent the truth, such as manipulation to alter the subject matter, or situations which are set up for the purpose of photography, are unacceptable in Photojournalism competition. No elements may be moved, cloned, added, deleted, rearranged or combined. No manipulation or modification is permitted except resizing, sharpening, cropping, selective lightening or darkening, and restoration or original color of the scene. No special effect filters can be applied. Any adjustments must appear natural." The top image - http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg would be accepted in the Color (non-creative) category at my CC with the speaker on the left cropped out of the image and the speaker on the right cloned out. That wouldn't be considered to be a change that significantly alters the image. If that fish in osprey's claws was from another image, that would be a clear example of significant alteration. So would cloning out the speakers. When i made my comment, I was referring to the Nature Division, which currently has rules similar to those in the PJ division. The rule revisions referred to are related to the extent of permissible adjustments for exposure compensation, sharpness and blurring. I have heard noting about reality changes. Damn! Are these CC fuddy-duddies trying to take the fun out of PS? http://db.tt/P4xMpAXa -- Regards, Savageduck |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 8/7/2012 7:53 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2012-08-07 12:11:12 -0700, PeterN said: On 8/7/2012 1:58 PM, tony cooper wrote: On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:18:19 -0400, PeterN wrote: On 8/6/2012 10:09 PM, Robert Coe wrote: On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:39:05 -0400, PeterN wrote: : On 8/5/2012 11:22 AM, Alan Browne wrote: : On 2012-08-05 10:21 , me wrote: : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg : : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4950_1024.jpg : : Nice, esp. the first one (other than the cropped wing tip). : : : Nice capture. The first is a strong image. Shame the speakers get in the : way. They make the shot ineligible as a PSA nature shot. Cloning them : out would make the first a lot stronger, but if you decide to play, : don't enter the image in a PSA competition. I don't understand that. I'm guessing that nobody told the ospreys to build their nest there. So why is it less natural than if it were in a tree or on a rock outcropping? It's probably a pretty good location: good visibility and easy to defend from all but airborne predators. Bob I don't agree with that rule either. PSA is in transition, as are camera clubs. IIRC Tony Cooper's camera club only permits extensive editing in their creative category. My CC permits any amount of editing. If the PSA rules are in transition, no slack in the area of manipulation is apparent: "In the interest of credibility, photographs that misrepresent the truth, such as manipulation to alter the subject matter, or situations which are set up for the purpose of photography, are unacceptable in Photojournalism competition. No elements may be moved, cloned, added, deleted, rearranged or combined. No manipulation or modification is permitted except resizing, sharpening, cropping, selective lightening or darkening, and restoration or original color of the scene. No special effect filters can be applied. Any adjustments must appear natural." The top image - http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg would be accepted in the Color (non-creative) category at my CC with the speaker on the left cropped out of the image and the speaker on the right cloned out. That wouldn't be considered to be a change that significantly alters the image. If that fish in osprey's claws was from another image, that would be a clear example of significant alteration. So would cloning out the speakers. When i made my comment, I was referring to the Nature Division, which currently has rules similar to those in the PJ division. The rule revisions referred to are related to the extent of permissible adjustments for exposure compensation, sharpness and blurring. I have heard noting about reality changes. Damn! Are these CC fuddy-duddies trying to take the fun out of PS? http://db.tt/P4xMpAXa No! They are trying to evolve. I'v repeated a prior link. We would not have to wait for the reality of your image to submit it in the proper PSA category. Well Done Image BTW, though the cloud on the right side is distracting. http://www.psa-photo.org/divisions/cpid/individual-creative-comp/ -- PeterN |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 2012-08-07 19:53 , Savageduck wrote:
Damn! Are these CC fuddy-duddies trying to take the fun out of PS? http://db.tt/P4xMpAXa I didn't think they ate fish. -- "Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities." -Samuel Clemens. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 2012-08-08 06:21:42 -0700, Alan Browne
said: On 2012-08-07 19:53 , Savageduck wrote: Damn! Are these CC fuddy-duddies trying to take the fun out of PS? http://db.tt/P4xMpAXa I didn't think they ate fish. Hell! They'll eat anything. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 09:21:42 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote: On 2012-08-07 19:53 , Savageduck wrote: Damn! Are these CC fuddy-duddies trying to take the fun out of PS? http://db.tt/P4xMpAXa I didn't think they ate fish. One of the vernacular names for the osprey is the "fish hawk". A- |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 2012-08-08 16:37 , Chemiker wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 09:21:42 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2012-08-07 19:53 , Savageduck wrote: Damn! Are these CC fuddy-duddies trying to take the fun out of PS? http://db.tt/P4xMpAXa I didn't think they ate fish. One of the vernacular names for the osprey is the "fish hawk". You did look at the link? -- "Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities." -Samuel Clemens. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On 2012-08-08 15:00:48 -0700, Alan Browne
said: On 2012-08-08 16:37 , Chemiker wrote: On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 09:21:42 -0400, Alan Browne wrote: On 2012-08-07 19:53 , Savageduck wrote: Damn! Are these CC fuddy-duddies trying to take the fun out of PS? http://db.tt/P4xMpAXa I didn't think they ate fish. One of the vernacular names for the osprey is the "fish hawk". You did look at the link? I guess it is time for an update for the Peterson or Audubon field guides. (Though I have found myself using iBird Pro 6 for the iPhone and iPad, not free but very good and informative. http://ibird.com/products/iphone-ipod-touch/pro ) -- Regards, Savageduck |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Osprey returning to nest with dinner
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:18:19 -0400, PeterN
wrote: : On 8/6/2012 10:09 PM, Robert Coe wrote: : On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:39:05 -0400, PeterN : wrote: : : On 8/5/2012 11:22 AM, Alan Browne wrote: : : On 2012-08-05 10:21 , me wrote: : : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4947_1024.jpg : : : : http://edwardgruf.com/_DSC4950_1024.jpg : : : : Nice, esp. the first one (other than the cropped wing tip). : : : : : : Nice capture. The first is a strong image. Shame the speakers get in the : : way. They make the shot ineligible as a PSA nature shot. Cloning them : : out would make the first a lot stronger, but if you decide to play, : : don't enter the image in a PSA competition. : : I don't understand that. I'm guessing that nobody told the ospreys to build : their nest there. So why is it less natural than if it were in a tree or on a : rock outcropping? It's probably a pretty good location: good visibility and : easy to defend from all but airborne predators. : : Bob : : : I don't agree with that rule either. PSA is in transition, as are camera : clubs. IIRC Tony Cooper's camera club only permits extensive editing in : their creative category. My CC permits any amount of editing. My comment wasn't intended to address the ethical or legal issues of editing. What I question is the notion that the speakers have to be cropped or cloned out. They were there before the birds were and are therefore part of the birds' natural environment. That they built their nest there - and are evidently willing to tolerate the noise - is interesting in its own right. A possibly related fact is that various birds of prey seem increasingly willing to consider developed areas of large cities to be a suitable habitat. Bob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
IT'S OSPREY TIME AGAIN! | Alan Browne | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | May 17th 10 08:45 PM |
What's for dinner | Raimo Leino | Digital Photography | 0 | February 6th 09 09:25 PM |
DINNER FOR TWO WITH THE 20D ! | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 2 | July 9th 07 02:11 PM |