Filtered/Enhanced/Edited Photos Need Own Category

  • 4
  • Idea
  • Updated 6 years ago
I think there should be a separate category for edited/filtered photos. I see so many photos winning high scores above 600 and winning challenges, that are all faked up with editing programs, obvious to anyone who knows anything about photography. You can see the fake, dramatic skies and enhanced unnatrural colors and it's not because of photography skills, it's just a good editing program and editing skill, not photography skills. My photos are real, what I see is what you see, and I win awards, but I see faked up photos getting higher scores than mine and many other people's because they have been enhanced to look super dramatic or better than what it was. You need a category for edited and filtered photos besides black and white to make it fair.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes

Posted 6 years ago

  • 4
Photo of Sonya Hutchison

Sonya Hutchison

  • 60 Posts
  • 11 Reply Likes
Actually in the early days of Pixoto there was a category for photos that had not been edited. Its been gone for a while now.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
That's a shame. Faked up photos should be pitted only against other faked up photos. Edited photos have their place and use, but running against actual photographers real photos is not one of them.
Photo of Sonya Hutchison

Sonya Hutchison

  • 60 Posts
  • 11 Reply Likes
I believe it was called the 'Pure or Unedited' category, and the problem was that photographers kept submitting photos that had been edited. Someone feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Dear Sonya :

I can of course see how this would be a problem for Pixoto. It seems to me though that the solution to this problem is very simple. As follows : If Pixoto were to stop bestowing awards to these " painters with a camera " unless their works were posted in their own category which I think should be " Digital Art " and ONLY in their own category the problem would solve itself in short order. Why should real photographers be forced to compete with " painters with a camera "? After all ANYBODY can take a bad photo and computer enhance it to Pixoto award standards but not just anybody can capture those " Kodak Moments " or that " Kodak Spirit ". It's not hard to become a Computer Techno Geek Wizard and win " photography " awards Ma'am.

Paul Stanner
Photo of Sonya Hutchison

Sonya Hutchison

  • 60 Posts
  • 11 Reply Likes
I really enjoy the post editing process, but I do think there should be a category for 'Pure' photos. The problem is that you will have photographers abusing the category. I'm not sure how you keep it 'Pure'.
Photo of Joyce Andersen

Joyce Andersen

  • 1078 Posts
  • 254 Reply Likes
the problem is... Pixoto is a highly automated site... Pixoto does not bestow anything.. the voter does. and all we can do is complain about it after the fact. So long as the driving factor for voting is just to get those credits, most voters don't give a rat's butt what they are voting on or what category it is in. And I mean most voters...not the people in this forum that obviously do care... but we are in the minority. And the ones to benefit from this are the people that pass off Digital art as any other category.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Joyce I agreew tih your observations but the solution still resides in Pixoto's hands. See my comment to Jasenka below.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Dear Anne :

I am currently fighting Pixto now due to the same problems you're having. It's so unfair to expect real photographers to compete in the same category and as the same art form as " painters with a camera ". Essentially what I've been told by The Powers That Be at Pixoto is that if I don't like it then just cancel my account and leave. They don't seem to care what their PAYING customers want.

Should you desire to see the thread I'm discussing this on and perhaps air your complaints there just look for the post titled. " Van Gogh vs. Ansel Adams ".

Good luck with trying to get Pixoto to do the right thing in this regard. Please keep me informed as to your efforts.

Warmest regards

Paul Stanner
Photo of Jasenka

Jasenka, Official Rep

  • 18280 Posts
  • 1325 Reply Likes
Hello Paul, I'm sorry but you were never told to leave if you do not like our post processing rule. You have asked about post processing and you have asked about way to close your account and get a refund and you were informed about both.
I'm sorry if you understood that I have asked you to leave if you do not like Pixoto rules, that was never my intentions, I have just answered your questions.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Jasenka I find the odds of one of my non computer enhanced photos being being recategotrized the day after I broached this topic astronomical to say the least. Color me suspicious about the motivations for that BUT if you tell me that it was indeed coincidence then I'll accept that at least for now.
As for the issue at hand the folks that do not believe that non computer enhanced photos should be forced to compete in the same category as computer enhanced photos pay the same price as those that do believe the opposite pay the same good American Greenbacks yet there efforts are not judged fairly so consequently they are not allowed to reap all the benefits of being a Pixoto member. That Sir is just plain and simply unfair. Pixoto's apparent refusal to rectify the situation is damn frustrating and especially so when considering that the solution to the problem is so easy and readily apparent.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Than you Paul...

Yeah when I am voting, I constantly see jacked up photos against real photos and see in the news feed, the faked up photos winning and getting the highest scores.

I love your title :D perfect...

I'll check it out, thanks
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Dear Anne :

I think I like you a lot. I like women with a sense of humor TwIStEd enough to appreciate the tile of that thread. lol

I'll be seeing you around Pixoto at least for a while I'm sure.

Paul.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Thank you :D Yeah, I'll be here ;)
Photo of Jasenka

Jasenka, Official Rep

  • 18280 Posts
  • 1325 Reply Likes
Hello Ann, please see Category description page: http://blog.pixoto.com/category-descr...

Specifically this part:

"Photography Photoshop/Post Processing Rules
In an effort to find the best, and most striking imagery, extensive use of Photoshop or other post processing techniques is allowed in all categories. However images that look like “digital art” rather than photography should be categorized as such. "
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Jasenka I'm fairly certain that Ann and all others that agree with my position on this issue understand Pixoto's position on where these offending types of photos should be posted however the fact of the matter is that the posters of those said photos are not cooperating. The solution is plain as the nose on your face and is solely in Pixoto's hands and is 95 % Pixoto's responsibility. The solution is that unless these " Computer Enhanced " photos are posted in the Digital Art category and ONLY the Digital Art category they are ineligible for any awards. Once the offenders get the message as regards that new policy the problem will resolve itself.
I would remind you Sir that Anne's money and mine and all other members money who believe as Anne and I do is equally as green as the " painters with a camera's " money yet our work is not allowed to be judged fairly thusly we are not afforded the same opportunity to reap all the same benefits as they are. I'll say it once again Sir.
Ansell Adams would lose to Vincent Van Gogh EVERY time were their respective art forms judged as the same art form. The " painters with a camera " need their own category and a little Pixoto discipline.

Paul Stanner
Photo of Sonya Hutchison

Sonya Hutchison

  • 60 Posts
  • 11 Reply Likes
Just ask for a 'Pure' category. The Digital Art category has typically been for photos that show for example: A cow flying or a train driving through a lake with a tornado chasing it...more graphic art. If I had to guess I would say that at least 90% of Pixoto submissions have been altered in some form or another. That being said I don't think Pixoto will put 90% of users in a Digital Art category to make you happy. Simply ask for a 'Pure' category.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
well photos with fake clouds, fake lighting, fake etc, are no different than the ones with the flying cows, because something is in the pic that wasn't there when they took it. Again, normal adjusting and total reworked over frankenphotos are 2 different things, somebody please GET THIS ! because I thought I clarified that like a 100 times over.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Anne I get it but the " painters " never will. They have too much invested in ego and awards and potential financial gains. I'm amazed that I had to come to Pixoto to find artists that get insulted when they're called painters and take offense when somebody credits them with evolving an existing art form into a whole new one uniquely their own. The " painters " are afflicted with a very serious case of Artistic Insecurity and Egomania. They should seek therapy.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
No, but most photos don't look fake like a painting, (not to put down painting, I paint as well, on canvas that is, but photography is photography)...the super enhanced textures and colors make it a category unto itself and that is attributed to some good techno skills in editing software, not so much photography. Good photography is good photography and needs no big enhancement. Those photos are good for commercial use where some fakery might be called for, but not for competing against true photographers in a contest. They become so repetitious, it's not the same as having "an eye" and having a unique view. It's just taking a so so image, dolling and tarting it up, and calling the attention to itself via fakery. True patrons of the art of photography know the difference.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Sonya I don't particularly care what the category is called as long as " the painters with a camera " know that that category and ONLY that category is where their work belongs.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Anne Santostefano I agree completely with your points. The truth is I know very little about the technical aspects of photography but I'm told quite frequently that I have a good eye for the " Kodak Moment " and a way of capturing those moments. Ultimately that is all I'm trying to do. It's a hobby for me Anne albeit a passionate one. I can certainly tell the difference between photography and " painting with a camera". I submit to you Anne that the most talented " painters with a camera " are wise enough to make damn sure their works look like photos when finished and not paintings. I have no problem with them.
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
I would like to know how many photos that some consider to be un-enhanced have actually been post processed by skilled individuals and are being held up as shining examples of "real" photography by the folks who disdain post processing.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Yes I am sure there are tons that have been tweeked to look like what the photographer saw when composing the shot, but that still looks like a real photograph... but you can almost always tell when fake golden sunglow, fake cloud formations, fake water fog, sometimes totally fake background, lighting and texture have been added,...at least if you know your stuff you will. I thought i made my point exhaustively and made the distinction between normal retouching and frankenphotos exhaustively, so how about we leave it at that. It's obviously a sore subject, but your photos don't actually classify as what I am talking about, thought I made that clear, but somehow it keeps eluding you and you keep milking this to infinite lengths. Either you are determined to have the last word, which I have never understood why anyone cares about having the "last" word, or you genuinely are not seeing the difference between the two editing concepts I am talking about. So I hope we can put this to rest now. Truthfully, since I am fairly new to pixoto, I thought feedback was private, when I gave it, I had no idea it would start a debate. Agree, disagree, whatever, I'm done.
Photo of Graham White

Graham White

  • 122 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
Paul and Anne need to get a room. Get over it, it's part of Pixoto.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
That was a very rude comment, and you need to get over the fact that half the people on pixoto couldn't win squat without heavy photo remodeling for lack of a more accurate word, because that's what it is.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
PS. Graham I looked at your profile...the photos I like best in your collection are the ones that look much less processed, and some maybe not processed, or lightly tweaked, and they are beautiful photos and look much better than the heavily edited ones..heck, I have voted for some of those, because I remember seeing them. those are the photos of yours that should head the top of your list as highest scores and yet they don't, the more artificial ones do...you don't find that aggravating ? because you should. Your more realistic and gorgeous work is getting a lower score the obvious painted. Don't know about you, but that pisses me off, and shows a lack of taste and integrity in the voters.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Well said Anne but I'm reasonably sure that Graham will dismiss your observations out of hand.
Photo of Graham White

Graham White

  • 122 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
I gave up trying to understand how the voters on here work, they don't vote for pure photography, the image that tops my portfolio is the only one that wasn't quality checked for the Proper Stock Sites yet it's top on here. People like processed pictures and you or me are not going to change the way they vote.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
You're probably right Graham but I am going to force Pixoto to enforce their own policies or annoy the shit out of every painter on this site. It's entirely Pixoto's choice. One way or another I'm going to get $ 72.00 of value out of this rip - off site. Oh and just in case you think I care whether you like that think again because I don't
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
It's true Graham and I think a lot of people say, If I can't beat em, I'll join em" I won't. Stick to your guns Graham, your regular work is awesome. I think you should enter them in other contests on other sites, where true photography is appreciated.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Despite what some of you might think, it's not about wanting to beat anybody, I have enormous respect for fellow photographers and enjoy their work. I just want to see fair categorizing and fair opportunity for all. I love getting the awards and hope it will lead to recognition. It's exposure, no pun intended, and that's always good in photography, to get our work seen, not so I can beat anyone, I hope we all make it...those of us pursuing professional photography... peace everyone
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Well Tim feel free to check out my Pixoto page. I can tell you that 99.9 % of all the photos there have not been enhanced. I set my camera and what D.D. saw you saw.
I confess that I did slightly alter 10 - 12 just to see if a slight alteration would make any difference. It didn't. Let me know what you think if you can be civil about it " painter " Painter said with a degree of affection in your case since you are probably the only " painter " I met that is even remotely reasonable about this issue. Also from what I've seen you are not one of the more egregious " painters " out there. Judging by the few of yours I've looked at it is evident that you are a " painter " at least in part but not a highly offensive one. In short while you're photos have been computer enhanced they still look like " photos " and not paintings unlike the vast majority of the various " painter's " works..
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
Thanks for your kind tone. (I gave you a good point star for your comment) It's not the "Painter" label that fuels my (good natured, I hope) debate with you. It is your definition of a "real" photographer as being one who produces photos with no post processing. I generally get the urge to snap images of things and scenes that a camera by itself cannot realistically reproduce.

..Such as needing to open the lens wide enough to record the details within dark shadows without blasting out the highlights on the other end...real photographers will know what this means.

A camera by itself cannot do that, (not counting the HDR mode, of course) I don't have photoshop or lightroom (although I wish I did big time) All I have is an old version of Windows photo gallery (yuk. I know). With that you have to adjust the highlights or shadows over the entire image at once, and that leads to the compromises in my work that you noticed. To record the type of scenes I enjoy I have no choice but to choose my exposure values with my post processing already in mind.

In my definition a "real" photographer is one who understands originals "must" sometimes be shot to look like heap big doo doo so they can be processed into a more realistic scene than the camera by itself could have produced.

...In other words...If someone thinks my work looks bad now,,,they should see how bad it would have been if I had chosen my exposure values with using the pic right out the camera in mind.
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Tim you are not paying attention. I never said what you seem to think I did. I stated my definition of a " painter with a camera " at the very start of this discussion. Unfortunately the " painters " were so busy being offended where no insult was stated or intended by me and protecting THEIR turf which is what this whole debate is really all about that they didn't even seriously consider what I was saying.. All I ever asked for was a fair competition for everybody. To force the , for lack of a better word , traditional or pure photographers to compete against heavily computer enhanced " photos " is patently unfair. It's akin to forcing Ansell Adams to compete against Vincent Van Gogh as the same art forms. What do you think would happen? Do you think Ansell Adams would be raising seven kinds of Hell about that ?

The bottom line about why the " painters " are so resistant to having their own categories is that it's just so much harder to win a fair fight. It's about the awards and potential financial gains Tim despite the painters protests to the contrary. When the pure / traditional photographers are denied a fair chance at those rewards it's patently unfair. It's cheating .
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
I'm sorry, I still don't get the Adams analogy. Ansel Adams would agree that his works and Van Gogh's are in the same category and he would want to be considered a painter. he called himself a painter with light. He was actually criticized for saying that his works and the old painters like Da.vinci's SHOULD be in the same category. He would not have raised any hell, he would have loved it. In fact, he would be completely baffled why you are using him as example of a non post processor...He invented post processing and was GIVEN hell for it. He would be against everything you are saying. If he were here today he would be one of the ones you are claiming have bruised egos because he would be defending traditional photography as a two step process, He spent his life arguing with his contemporary photographers who think what you think ...He called non post processors "document makers with a camera" He would be the one giving you all kinds of hell for your Ideas.

Your complete misread of Ansel Adams' attitude toward photography is what has me wondering what else are you way off about in this matter. You would do better to pick another mentor for your "right out of the camera is traditional photography" theory, because Mr Adam's thinking is the polar opposite of yours on all fronts.

I would agree with the idea post processed images which are not frankenphotos may belong in a different category as that category would be Traditional Photography, and right out of the camera pics would be in the snapshots category, think about it for a minute, that's where all the real snapshots would show up right? In the no processing category, no where else for them to legitimatey go. I'm not proud, some folk's snapshots come out way better than my photographs, Sorry, this is just my (and Ansel's) humble Opinion...Gotta love Ansel...

PS...Dear Anne. it was Paul that brought up the A.A. word this time, not...my,,,fault...hee hee.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
No Tim you are WRONG...snapshots are photos taken quickly with no thought for composition, exposure, shutter speed, etc...like the average family snapshot or shots people take on their vacations..I'm not sure where you have gotten your photography instruction from...you are quite hung up on the Ansel Adams philosophy and a philosophy is all lit is.. I can't believe this debate is still going, when like 1000 times I have stated I am talking about heavily processed frankenphotos. I don't care what Ansel Adams said, shooting for after processing is a sign you don't really know how to shoot and maybe it worked for him, but he was a rarity...
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
PS. Who are you saying invented post processing ?
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
Ca'mon Ms. Anne, Paul brought up A.A....I just feel sorry for Paul because he is so far off on AA's life and philosophy. Hey, Paul...I would probably like you very much if we ever met, but you sure are a hard guy to straighten out. Gotta admire your effort, though.

First, Anne...Respectfully, I didn't call your photos snapshots, I agree with your definition of snapshots, I'm just saying that snapshots, by that very definition, do not get post processed or edited, so true snapshots would have to go into the new "non-processed" category, simply because they are indeed. "non-processed' They can't go into any of the processed categories, because they are not processed...What next? Two new categories for processed snapshots, and non processed snapshots...No where else for true snapshots to go but into the new non-processed category...And the volume would be stifling.

Second, You asked who I said invented post processing. It's kind of like who discovered America..Columbus, Leif Ericson, or the Pacific Islanders? Columbus wasn't the first to arrive, but he was the first to claim it and profit from it. As was Ansel concerning print processing, as it was known in the pre-digital days. He said pics right out of the camera make the world look like an ugly place, and wanted to be the first artist with a camera, his term was "painter with light" . My point that no one seems to want to discuss is this...AA was put down by his contemporaries for wanting to be a painter with a camera, and yet somehow he continues to be held up here as an example of a producer of unprocessed photography.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Sorry, but we will just never agree on this topic. It is never necessary to create a separate category for "unsprocessed" photos...that's ridiculous. As to snapshots not being unprocessed ? balderdash, I think half the frankenphotos here are based on bad snapshots. I never offered AA up as a producer of unprocessed photography, I just pointed out that his philosophies are merely that, his philosophies, you see what you are and how you are, the world was an ugly place to him, because that's how he saw it and that was all he was able to produce without reworking it, in my opinion, he worked out his deep seated psychological issues via the reworking of the world, or his world view via retouching,he was trying to "fix" what he saw, but it was his perception that needed fixing... but I don't set my standards nor my example by him. I'm me, what I give to the world I want to be uniquely mine, not a carbon copy of someone's disturbed philosophy, no matter how well known he was.
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
I agree with that 100 percent. Believe it or not I was never the the one who brought up AA.in any of these discussions. I always want to know when I am wrong about thing so I can't seen to get to used to folks who don't care when they are wrong, or worse yet, have no idea they can ever be wrong...And I am not talking about you, I have found your ideas and and debate style to be interesting, even though I don't necessarily agree with you on all points you have earned respect in my mind. While "you know who" has sunk to going into my profile page and has begun writing offensive comments below my pictures, Thanks for not doing that along with him. If that's what happens to a new member of this community when someone disagrees I am truly discouraged. I may not join any other discussions because of what he is doing to my profile page. Thanks you you and everyone else who had kind and honest words to say....happy shutter clicking!
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Thank you Tim. I hear ya, it's good to have feedback on our ideas. Same here, I respect you and your work. Oh no, I can't support that at all. :( I wouldn't do that. You're welcome, same to you :)
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
Suddenly the comment(s) have been deleted, wouldn't you know!
Photo of Jasenka

Jasenka, Official Rep

  • 18280 Posts
  • 1325 Reply Likes
Hi Tim, I'm sorry about this. We do not allow offensive comments. We have removed one comment, and you can delete other comments (if you didn't already) or you can send me links to your images where there are comments you would like to be deleted (either here or to my e-mail jasenka@pixoto.com).
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Bruised Painter Ego Alert LEVEL 10 !!!!
Photo of Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

  • 140 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
Post processing is half of the final product. I can't even submit an unedited image as I only shoot RAW so I have to process it.. and I love post processing as much as I love shooting, it's all part of it for me. Some of the processing on here is beautifully done, some is awful, but that's just the way it goes. If an image has fake elements in it it should be in digital art category anyway so I'm not sure what the problem is here really.. we are in a digital age and digital processing is an important part of modern day photography
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
well that's precisely what I meant, the sort that looks fake, not regular post processing to bring the photo to what you saw in your viewer, but doesn't always translate post camera or on different screens, browsers, etc. I am only saying these faked up frankenphotos need to be in digital art, does everyone GET IT now ???
Photo of Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

  • 140 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
i think everyone agrees with that, it's just there are some people on here who seem to think a normal amount of post processing needs to go into digital art category as well..

stuff like this needs to be in digital art for sure...

http://www.pixoto.com/images-photogra...
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
Well said my friend! Did you know, Long before the digital age, Ansel Adams said,, "First, a photographer must have a vision of how he is going edit the final image, and then choose his exposure values accordingly".
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Yes, that's among them, but not even the best example. Oh here we go with Ansel Adams again... that was, of course, just his opinion, he is not "God" when it comes to photography. There were many greats who did not rely heavily on editing. And what of the very first cameras, including pinhole, what, was photoshop created alongside them ?...no, the advent of "photo retouchers" as they were called back in the day, came after photography and was done with brushes and paint on the photos themselves and sometimes the negative... but good composition, focus, etc, should not need that much post processing. And that's all I'm going to say on that.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
PS, the first part of my comment was aimed at Chincilla, as to example of photos.
Photo of Tim Hall

Tim Hall

  • 486 Posts
  • 228 Reply Likes
Anne...So sorry for the "here we go again with Mr. Adams" But I didn't remember Mr. Chinchilla in the last " real" photography debate fiasco. I thought it might be new to him, and that you would just ignore me!
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
lol
Photo of Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

  • 140 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
it is new to me :) and it's Miss Chinchilla actually hehe
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
haha, I knew it, I was saying to myself, he said he, but I feel it is a female :)
Photo of Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

Claire ~ Chinchilla Photography

  • 140 Posts
  • 33 Reply Likes
women's intuition :P
Photo of Joyce Andersen

Joyce Andersen

  • 1078 Posts
  • 254 Reply Likes
Anne, to be fair, I agree that the stuff that you are referring to is frustrating,, the point some are making is that it is a slippery slope... who makes the decisions that something is too much? It can not be done. there fore all editing is allowed. And unfortunately Paul has hijacked your concerns too and dragged you into his fight. Most people when they vote look at the two images for a total of one to two seconds... they click on the image that jumps out at them... and far too often it is the 'frankenphotos' that win. the one that is bright, bold, different that stands out. If you take this situation to the extreme that Paul is suggesting then ANY picture with ANY editing is digital art. He will suggest that if done properly... and stealthily editing and photoshop can be there if he is the one making the arbitrary cut off point. I am of the opinion that you allow the editing.. all of it, because there will never be a consensus of what is too much. Pixoto tries... that is why they have a digital art category... for those that seem too unreal. unfortunately each person has a vote and can report any image as going over the line. and we get a bottle neck. if it seems too unreal for you... report it... there is a chance that someone in the report team will agree. But calling people names (I am not referring to you here) will not solve the problems...Neither will hi jacking threads. and don't take what Graham says to seriously... he has his moments...I try to forget them quickly.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Well then perhaps Pixoto should start a digital art site and shift all the frankenphotos over there, that would be appropriate. Actually I had started my own thread before I saw his thread because I noticed all the incredibly, obviously, fake looking "photos" and I use the term loosely, with all the high scores. And you are right about the voting, I am guessing people just sit there and click through it just to get their credits so they can post and boost...
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
PS.If it looks like a painting, has obvious fakery in the clouds, lighting, textures, etc, it's TOO much. They all look alike, it's so boring, it is a total departure from having an eye, like a true photographer has when composing a photos. In fact some of these photos look so much alike, including the buildings and other items and landscapes in them, that I am wondering if those items are actually fake and just placed in the "photo", some have me wondering if they were ever photos at all, or just computer graphic compositions. Last week I got an ad for a free trial of an editing program that actually had green screen technology. I tried it for the fun of it and could not believe the features. This thing removed people, items, etc and allowed you to cover it up and match the scenery, but it also allowed you to totally replace the entire background with entirely different locations, mountain ranges, ocean sides, gardens, fake bokeh ( that really hurt, I love creating real bokeh ) you name it. It was horrendous, at least to me. It's ok if you are using it for commercial purposes, like you are doing pictures for an ad agency or maybe faking evidence in a trial, lol, but to use that and then enter it with other real photos, no way.
Photo of Joyce Andersen

Joyce Andersen

  • 1078 Posts
  • 254 Reply Likes
when I said Paul hijacked your thread... I was trying to deflect some of the comments a few people have thrown at you... it is unfair to tar people by the company they keep.. I am also concerned how you would have Pixoto determine how much is too much post editing? who makes that determination? where is the cut off point? Either you allow photoshop or you don't allow any... and this site IS for commercial purposes... people buy the photos. That is what it is sold as. A money generating business for selling stock and prints. the Duels and voting is to determine what the buying public wants... and they want flash and extra-ordinary images. Why should the site change for a few people that expect it to be something it is not? I don't recall any promises that the photos would be unretouched or pure photos... in fact they dropped that option a year ago. It simply looks like some people did not get the memo.
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Excuse me, I guess I mistook this site for a site that actually respects and promotes real photographers, apparently I was wrong, and it's just basically a photo pimping outfit, tart it up, we don't care, as long as it sells. So those of us who have integrity for our art will never sell here, because people who are buying anything apparently have the taste equivalent of those who buy those paintings on velvet, or the dogs playing poker and then call it 'art'...
Photo of Joyce Andersen

Joyce Andersen

  • 1078 Posts
  • 254 Reply Likes
I think you are starting to see the reality Anne... I noticed the change of focus nearly a year ago. It is sad but it is what it is. and no one has been able to give me any feedback as to 'what is too much editing' it is a qualitative/quantitative conflict. One that can not be solved... what is too much for one person is fine with the next.. so they just leave it open. As for selling here? I will never sell here either.. that is why none of my images are in the market. I really hope you find a site that suits you. this is not a facetious comment...being disappointed in how a site is run only makes people bitter and bitter people lash out at others. Good luck
Photo of Paul Stanner

Paul Stanner

  • 161 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Joyce your assertion that I dragged Anne into this is hysterically funny. Anne had these concerns way before I came on the scene. My instincts are that nobody talks Anne into doing anything she doesn't wish to.

As far as me hijacking threads excuse me for participating. I told you earlier today Joyce that until I am afforded the same opportunities by Pixoto to share in the the benefits of a Pixoto membership I will NOT be shutting up to make life easier for the " painters " nor will I be going anywhere so get used to it. Now by all means continue with your rant.

Also just so you'll know I've reported the " painters " posting in the wrong categories repeatedly since I got here . To date nothing has been done about it . Any other words of sage advice you'd like to offer?
Photo of Anne Santostefano

Anne Santostefano

  • 95 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
You got that right Paul, with rare exception... as to your instincts about me :D