Pure Photo Suggestion...make it a real pure photo totally unedited.

  • 2
  • Idea
  • Updated 8 years ago
I have a suggestion for the Pure Photo category..because there is a lot of chatter about Pure Photo and what it is and isnt.... why don't you start all over with Pure Photo and make it a real true Pure Photo, completely untouched by editing.. straight from the camera to pixoto without tweaking or even adjusting light/ contrast or color saturation... of course we would have to have the honor system go into play here.. but think of the real challenge to post a photo that was truly pure with no editing at all... the exact photo you shot.. posted in competition.... I think we would all be amazed at what we can be capable of without any tweaking or fine tuning... let a pure photo be exactly what the name implies.. a untouched pure photo from the camera to the leaderboard...

Now THAT would be a true challenge, instead of relying on software and editing programs to fix our photos.. we have to rely upon ourselves and our abilities verses what software can do to enhance a photo...

I would suggest if we had a category like that, that there be a mandatory check box indicating you are stating that the photo is pure and untouched with no photo editing done.....
Photo of JoAnn Palmer

JoAnn Palmer

  • 457 Posts
  • 92 Reply Likes

Posted 8 years ago

  • 2
Photo of Di Elderton

Di Elderton

  • 99 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
I'm inclined to agree!
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
I would say if that happened it would be either very low entries or full of "not" pure images and we would have another reason for people to plague this site with moans about why this is not being deleted or why have they got away with it again, "Pixoto do your job" that kind of bad atitude !

In an ideal world it would be nice but in reality it wouldnt work !

Just my opinion
Photo of Di Elderton

Di Elderton

  • 99 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Unfortunately, I guess you're right Ralph!
Photo of JoAnn Palmer

JoAnn Palmer

  • 457 Posts
  • 92 Reply Likes
probably right.. but what a challenge that would be.. to post a pure unedited or tweaked photo....I could so get into that...another place.. another time...
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
With my camera and lens i could post and often do post some completelly unedited images, but i have a reasonable camera and lens that i have taken a long time to get, a good one will have no problem so it will end up again being only those that can afford it will get ahead !

I think the real challenge to a site like this is to teach the members who are not as good and want to learn, to take better pictures so they can compete on a more even field

I cant see the need to call an image "Pure" its not like that will make it better, it isnt more sellable, a good image is a good image pure or not ! thats what we need to aim for !
Photo of Michelle Meenawong

Michelle Meenawong

  • 1297 Posts
  • 138 Reply Likes
I think the idea is good but, like Ralph mentioned, I also can see the amount of complains we will get. And I'm sure that many people even don't know what a pure photo is. Most started with digital and never shot a picture with a film. I don't mean that digital photographer don't know how to set up aperture, shutter speed but many people think if the picture is not perfect they still have any software to make it better. You're right JoAnn this could be a challenge but I'm not sure, this could be possible. Sad but true
Photo of Sounav Maikap

Sounav Maikap

  • 24 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Good idea. But to me, precisely there is nothing called "pure" as the definition goes. Lets consider the camera - if the output is jpeg - the process of extracting from the sensor to the jpeg goes through a series of embeded algorithm (noise reduction, filters, interpolation, etc - even the intermediate to jpeg conversion (DCT encoding etc) its all again software process. Now for the upload - considering my camera EOS 550D - each jpeg varies from 6-7 mb, for storing purpose, most of the site scales down photos to there own way/format. For viewing, even for image deals/viewing on browser - pixel subtraction is used to fit the image in a small area. All result in image blurring etc. So logically every pixel goes alteration from the sensor to even viewing. I use software to do the same stuff, so that there is minimum interpolation during the later (viewing) stage. Pixel alteration logically translates as "editing".
Photo of Fernando Toro

Fernando Toro

  • 15 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm not the expert on this but can RAW files contain editing? if not this category could require the upload of RAW files only
Photo of Anita Apars

Anita Apars

  • 22 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I am reluctant to check my photos off as pure because I love editing them and I rarely post anything that is completely untouched. Once I edit, I am not sure where the "pure" line is, so I don't check it off.
Photo of Sandra Kenny-Veech

Sandra Kenny-Veech

  • 87 Posts
  • 24 Reply Likes
I know there is probably some wiggle room to "pure"... I consider an old fashioned dark room- how long you expose the paper to light, these same small tweaks that are normal for converting from RAW to jpg- perhaps a bit of sharpen or less than one stop exposure change.... That is all within reason...and still leaves the image looking natural.
I have just been frustrated when I have seen what I would call "portraiture" style photoshopped images- extremely smoothed skin, enlarged, brightened, highly coloured or saturated eyes, all very obvious- and still there's a "pure" label in the left corner. This may be a lovely image...but it's not PURE. There are images like that within the top images on the site. Again, it may be lovely, but please don't call it pure.
Photo of Keith Boone

Keith Boone

  • 36 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
So what happens with in-camera HDR? My camera, and most others these days, has this setting. In my opinion, an image, straight out of the camera should still qualify as "pure". Also, cropping, colour balance, and sharpening should also be accepted as long as they are only minor tweaks...
Photo of Keith Boone

Keith Boone

  • 36 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
Here's an example of what I'm talking about. This is my own shot, which I have flagged as "pure". It did use the in-camera HDR setting, and I have cropped slightly, and sharpened a tiny amount. What do you think? Is this pure or not? I would be interested in hearing other's opinions, and I don't mind removing the Pure flag if the majority object to what I've done...

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

gaiafrique

  • 727 Posts
  • 129 Reply Likes
Personally, Keith I would see no problem at all in that particular photo being flagged as pure.
Photo of Keith Boone

Keith Boone

  • 36 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
Thank you... so Pure may be a matter of striving for realism instead of going for eye-popping effects? In any case, minimal use of Photoshop or other editing software would be a key factor, but it seems there is a bit of a gray area here.
Photo of gaiafrique

gaiafrique

  • 727 Posts
  • 129 Reply Likes
Pleasure - but I'm an amateur and relatively new to Pixoto - so it would be better for some of the more experienced players to comment - and preferably one of the Pixoto team too... was just giving my opinion. There is quite a bit on the forum about HDR and its "good" uses and "over" uses. To my mind, in that pic you put it to "good" use.
Photo of Dipali

Dipali

  • 1846 Posts
  • 94 Reply Likes
I think a little bit tweaking of contrast and saturation should be considered 'Pure' and HDR should be considered 'Non Pure'.
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
Hi everyone, I was double checking on this, if the image looks processed or fake in any way it is not PURE. I would say Keith's image is fine labeled as PURE and a beautiful image too.
Photo of Keith Boone

Keith Boone

  • 36 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
Thanks Sherry! I love this site...
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
You're welcome Keith and me too! :D
Photo of Nebojsa Markovic

Nebojsa Markovic

  • 16 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Since I have experience in working with agencies, under partly Pure photo, thought to be adjusting to the use of light / contrast and unsharp if need be, it's Pure photo. Anything more than that is a photograph that has a larger work in Photoshop. My photos are in 80% of cases is done already on the card, only if necessary adjusting light / contrast.
And I agree that there should be a special category and not to compete for a fake HDR images with exaggerated colors, with amateur photos. Quality should be separated.
Today, looking back at all the photos that have won against my photos, :-( stramota cyst ... not that I mind when you vote for a better photo of mine but I was wrong when the majority votes against bad my photo is a bad photo. It's sad.

I call upon those responsible to the site to look at my photos and to compare with photos of what I lost in duels, not to mention that this morning at 9 am, so far, I could not exceed more than 40 votes, and good and bad.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.