AARGH or Insert Curse Word Here

[bvanant 190]

As we speak the LAUPS (yes us again) are currently having our International Competition judging. Lots of really great images but in some categories everyone it seems is cheating. Many of us at LAUPS think of ourselves as relatively competent photographers but when you see some of the entries you think, God, I really suck. Perfect exposure, pure black background, no backscatter etc. So we asked for lots of raw images. And know I think I don't suck so bad. Some pictures were indeed magnificent in raw as well as in the final image, but many were really really good photoshop jobs. Lots of background bits removed, tons of backscatter removed, probably by compositing etc. I guess if there is a $2500 prize people will cheat but in some categories more than half the entrants clearly violated the rules. One guy actually had what I think would have been a winning picture but his crab was missing a claw. He added it back (very skillfully) then asked was that OK. I told him while we didn't have an explicit rule about adding back body parts to his subject it was a no no. So a question, is it reasonable to ask for raw images for every submission, or would folks not enter.

 

thanks

 

Bill

[scubamarli 5]

I have two feelings about this, having been a film photographer first, and running photo contests in the days of slides, when it was common for competitors to touch up backscatter with pens. Cloning body parts is ridiculous; no one would disagree with that: I have had photo editors clone in bits to fit a given space, but that was their choice, and although I may not have liked it, so be it. Digital has allowed us to improve upon the environment we deal with. Judges should be judging on artistic merit, rather than "gosh, their guide found a six gilled giant pygmy squid reproducing". I have no issue with removing a few spots here and there, and increasing contrast and bumping saturation to mimic Velvia: I think a lot of contests originated in film days and have still not transitioned in terms of how photographic media and the process has changed. There is a much higher artistic content aspect now, if the advantages of digital technology are embraced. My personal feeling is that UW photo contests have relied on the big animal, girl with flashlight, formulaic choices for too long: in other words, editorial shots versus artistic. Digital photography allows for artistic changes, much like a painter enhances a painting with their technique. If this creates a philosophical quandary, then have specific rules disallowing any changes: the nature of shooting RAW requires some changes. If you define what is allowed and not, have the winners submit RAW files, but don't crucify them for following what is necessary to process their shots. It is difficult to compare workflows, as some of us may do everything in Lightroom or Camera Raw, and others may enlist Photoshop. My gut feeling is that if you can do the changes in a Raw processor, let it be. Others would disagree. It is only in the Underwater contests that I see such finickiness. In General photography contests, which include underwater shots this is a non-issue. I get that people want a level playing field. However, unless we are all in the same place with the same equipment and guides, it will never be an equal field, hence the need for artistic standards, which have seemed to take second place to unusual critters/rare situations and sexy pool shots.

 

Just my 2 cents, which is worth 1.7 cents today! (Canuck bucks). You don't need to ask for Raw files from everyone; just let everyone know that the files are expected to claim a prize.

 

Cheers,

Marli

Edited November 22, 2011 by scubamarli

[MikeVeitch 0]

I would ask for RAW files once it gets to the final round. All RAW images from all contestants is too much bandwidth I am sure. Once you pair it down to the finals then ask as it will be from that group where your winners come from.

[uwxplorer 4]

girl with flashlight

 

Let's ban "diver with flashlight" pictures! I am sick to my stomach of them!!!

[johnjvv 11]

As we speak the LAUPS (yes us again) are currently having our International Competition judging. Lots of really great images but in some categories everyone it seems is cheating. Many of us at LAUPS think of ourselves as relatively competent photographers but when you see some of the entries you think, God, I really suck. Perfect exposure, pure black background, no backscatter etc. So we asked for lots of raw images. And know I think I don't suck so bad. Some pictures were indeed magnificent in raw as well as in the final image, but many were really really good photoshop jobs. Lots of background bits removed, tons of backscatter removed, probably by compositing etc. I guess if there is a $2500 prize people will cheat but in some categories more than half the entrants clearly violated the rules. One guy actually had what I think would have been a winning picture but his crab was missing a claw. He added it back (very skillfully) then asked was that OK. I told him while we didn't have an explicit rule about adding back body parts to his subject it was a no no. So a question, is it reasonable to ask for raw images for every submission, or would folks not enter.

 

thanks

 

Bill

 

Hi Bill,

 

I am quite new to this, both uw photography and using lightroom.

 

I previously posted a topic asking thoughts on how much editing with lightroom is deemed acceptable. I don’t see myself entering competitions shortly however maybe sometime in the future. Since I am learning about this I would like to start of correctly. The one thing I would like to highlight is that JPEG images out of my camera look better than RAW images before I have processed them, it always seem like the RAW images are duller than JPEG until I have adjusted them in lightroom, so I personally do not see the benefit of RAW in the first place if images should not be edited at all.

 

Therefore I would like to ask you the same question to you, how much editing is acceptable and at what point does spot removal become excessive before you discount a the picture as a cheat or fake? It would be great to have some guidelines to keep within boundaries!!

 

Cheers,

John

[Alex_Mustard 0]

This is easy. Competitions must be judged according the rules. If the rules are explicit then you must enforce them - it is the only fair way to those who were good photographers underwater (and honest competitors).

 

It is just sad that so many people think they can bend the rules to suit their shots. If it was just a few then you could think it was a mistake, but I know from the Wetpixel/OWU/DPG Inte Comp that we've had to exclude almost every finalist before. Sadly, I have seen several images we have excluded go on and win in other contests (with similar rules) where they should have been picked up too.

 

There are only two solutions. The best is to RAW check at least 50 images per category, before the final stage of judging (a real PITA as it means a judging panel needs to be convened twice). Or make the competition for prints only - which means photoshopping is free - but you need a decent RAW file to get a decent print. Which tends to naturally exclude poorly shot images (although provides no control over cloning).

 

Alex

[davichin 18]

I can´t understand it either

 

Raw is the only way you can check for altered pictures. But, for some reason, we all develop a sixth sense that tells us most of the time if a pic has been altered or not...specially with those cleaaaaan and deeeeep blaaaack backgrounds, but with other stuff too...

 

The one thing I would like to highlight is that JPEG images out of my camera look better than RAW images before I have processed them, it always seem like the RAW images are duller than JPEG until I have adjusted them in lightroom, so I personally do not see the benefit of RAW in the first place if images should not be edited at all.

 

In fact, raw files are not images yet. What we say is that you can shoot raw, then develop that raw file (by develop I mean changes that affect the whole picture like WB, saturation, contrast or sharpenning; but to the whole pic - no masking etc...) to generate a TIFF or JPG . At this point you would have a pic that could be entered in any competition (your straight from the camera JPGs are just the same because the "development" is done by the camera).

 

Now, we take that TIFF and open PS and start cropping, cleaning, cloning, layering, local sharpenning etc... At this point you can only enter this pic in a competition/category that allows for it. That´s why OWU and other have "Traditional" and "Unrestricted" categories.

 

One way of enforcing a "cleaner" entering is to include in the rules a: "A photographer list will be made public with the pics that did not pass raw screening"...

[scorpio_fish 5]

So a question, is it reasonable to ask for raw images for every submission, or would folks not enter.

 

thanks

 

Bill

 

Probably unnecessary and a waste of bandwidth for every submission. I would suggest, as judges, you go deeper in your final selection. Say, if you have three places plus three honorable mentions, you select the best 12. Then ask for raw files. Briefly explain the process in the competition rules. Hopefully, there won't be a 50% rejection rate and you have to go to number 13. You can then adjust the number of raw request in subsequent contests. (hopefully less than 12)

 

BTW, I see nothing wrong with removing backscatter or selectively darkening the background. I purposely shoot my images "flat", as in not a pure black blackground. I can then work my canvas to get the blackness I want. I don't consider this cheating.

Edited November 22, 2011 by scorpio_fish

[errbrr 73]

I like the competitions that specify shots straight out of the camera - harder, but it removes the is this ok, is that ok, what is everyone else doing dilemma for me. I also think auditing the RAW files is a good idea, especially when there are significant prizes and glory involved....I'm sure people can locate and submit a few files for $2500! Quite a few competitions seem to narrow the field to finalists before asking for RAW, presumably (sensibly) to reduce their workload.

 

My question about competitions - is it possible for wide angle temperate water shots to compete with wide angle tropical shots? The vis and water colour just aren't going to be the same....do you get points for technical difficulty in cold and dirty water? Or points for artistic compositions and new perspectives? Or do those of us who dive every weekend in colder climates need to take our competition-winning wide-angle shots on tropical holidays once a year?

[davichin 18]

My question about competitions - is it possible for wide angle temperate water shots to compete with wide angle tropical shots? The vis and water colour just aren't going to be the same....do you get points for technical difficulty in cold and dirty water? Or points for artistic compositions and new perspectives? Or do those of us who dive every weekend in colder climates need to take our competition-winning wide-angle shots on tropical holidays once a year?

 

I don´t think Paul Nicklen dives very often in tropical waters...(well for his swordfish pics he did but still...) and he has done very well! Also, Sardine Run pics have always infested many contests and are taken in temperate to cold waters. My opinion is that nowadays there are more opportunities to take fresh pictures on temperate/cold waters than on tropical ones, where we usually see similar pictures/subjects of softcorals etc...

[Drew 0]

I don´t think Paul Nicklen dives very often in tropical waters...(well for his swordfish pics he did but still...) and he has done very well! Also, Sardine Run pics have always infested many contests and are taken in temperate to cold waters.

 

[Autopsea 7]

As Alex said, does it fit the rules? But then, look back at the rules as well. If in the rule you allow general changes and removing particules, then you allow it. Even if the jpeg shot look very different than the RAW because the photographer has post-production skills (which still, are skills...), why should you judge him less than the next photo that have no post-production, as long as the first image (image) is better. The second guy just didn't use (or didn't have?) skills to make his image the best, too bad.

 

The problem is not cheating : the problem is that probably 90% of the photographer that you think are cheating are sure they aren't, and they do know the rules perfectly.

 

Maybe the best would be to do a screen shot of post-production software with all windows open, and put in red the tools that aren't allowed. But still, some people with less camera skill and more post-production skill will be able to make better images. But is post-production not part of the photography? Can you not choose to invest more in one "branch" or another? what about equipment price? it does make a difference and it is not related to the photographer skill, should all DSLR used juged the same? the one with 15k$ and the one with 2k$ stuff? the one diving in front of his house and the one paying 4k$ a week to be in the sardine run? etc...

 

My point of view is, look at the 'High pass' filter of both the original and the jpeg. If they look the same, it should be allowed. If not, something else than particules have been added / removed -> it is out of the rules.

 

 

Sorry if this is a bit hard to read, I'm having much fun zooming 200% on all my shots and make them "perfect", or "different", or whatever sometimes, and I think this is a part of the game

(I didn't enter the competition )

[loftus 42]

I think the problem is that allowing some manipulation and not others ultimately leads to arbitrary application of rules - for example how much spotting is OK, how much contrast enhancement etc. If a competition is dedicated to minimal manipulation of images then it is quite simple to demand standard in camera JPEG conversion only. In fact this way, the RAW could be submitted and the JPEG conversion applied by the judges themselves to check if needed.

The competitions that folks like David participate in are clearly the purest expression of this.

Either have an all or none approach, or create two categories - untouched (snapshot JPEG settings in camera only) and freestyle allowing manipulation.

Personally I think high quality natural history underwater images are now so common with the advent of digital, that even the work of the top professional guys is starting to just blend in. If cameras like Eric's lightfield camera become a reality for high quality imaging, not only will the photographer not have to focus, he will not even have to decide the point of focus till after he has taken the image. I think it's time to see more creativity in creating underwater and wildlife imaging as art now that digital manipulation facilitates this.

Edited November 22, 2011 by loftus

[uwxplorer 4]

I am not a photographer, just a videographer (but I occasionally write software) so pardon the stupid question: is it not (in principle) possible for a decided (and skilled) cheater to produce a raw version of a Photoshoped/processed image? This, then, would defeat the purpose of requesting the "original" raw file. I would suppose that to make it realistic, would require some work (add some subtle noise, etc) but again, it appears possible to design a clever converter to do this automatically. As far as date, camera metadata, etc, this can also in principle be faked pretty easily. Not a trivial job, but again, if the reward is significant, it could motivate someone. Again, I am a videographer... and playing the devil's advocate

[decosnapper 34]

My question about competitions - is it possible for wide angle temperate water shots to compete with wide angle tropical shots?

 

Yes. Not always as easy, but more than possible. Anecdotally, fewer dive in cold water and by extension there are less cameras venturing into the chill so perhaps we see more warm water images just because there are more divers?

[DerekB 2]

I find this an easy solution for future competitions.

 

1) Host two different categories. 1) Only basic editing such as Wb.... and a photoshop free category.

 

If you are hosting an art competition, then let the artist create art.

[Alex_Mustard 0]

untouched (snapshot JPEG settings in camera only) and freestyle allowing manipulation.

 

And camera's default JPG settings only? Are you allowed to upload a processing curves from the computer? Where do you stop! :-D

 

--------

 

To make a serious point, it is up to each competition to set their rules they want and for competitors to play by the rules (and competitions to enforce them). If you don't like the rules of a comp, don't enter it. It is not like there is only one competition for UW pictures out there! And actually, I think all posts in this thread agree with this.

 

The solution is simply to have strong enforcement. Even if that means asking for 30-50 RAW files per category when you are only after a top 3. It is important that RAW audit is done before final judging - because one shot may be discarded because it is the second best shark shot - but then the judges discover the best shark is manipulated. RAW audit should come after pre-judging, before final judging.

 

Alex

[rinjani 9]

This has been a touchy subject since we started with digital. I agree with Alex, you need to see the RAW files first to eliminate anyone who didn't follow the rules and determine who is eligible for the final judging. One reason I don't enter any of these contests anymore because it's impossible to know exactly what manipulation will fall within the rules.

 

Taking the current LAUPS General Rules for manipulation (for monthly comps):

 

"Complex manipulations requiring masks, advanced elements like the healing tool or clone tool, and precise brushes are not allowed. Burning simple backscatter out of a black background with a coarse brush is allowable; precisely healing backscatter in a complex background is not."

 

One person's precison on healing backscatter might be far better than someone else's so they don't think it's a problem. Also, would this would cover fixing of sensor dust problems, I don't know but that's not backscatter, right?

 

If I use a complex filter such as Viveza or Noiseware is that allowed, no masks, very simple slider controls? What about creating a digital version of a "contrast mask", it's just three or four simple steps in Photoshop and not a mask but a layer, so the old "film" phrase for it suggests it wouldn't be allowed, but I call/think of these as "contrast layers" myself.

 

My biggest problem is going from RAW to a final JPG file to submit or use for printing. You have to do all kinds of adjustment layers after dealing with the RAW conversion to get the "look" you want and I assume if it's too far from the RAW file (and I do not know how to determine if I've reach the "too far" point) it'll be disqualified. I know my final images from a RAW file are nothing close to the RAW file, same with the jpg files that my camera produces. Just changing the light temp a few 100 Kelvin in RAW can have a big effect on the final output but sometimes that makes things work well. Adding saturation, vividness, brightness, hue, contrast and so on are all required to post-process RAW but when do these sucessive steps become excessive and break the competition rules?

 

It really needs to be up to each competion judging board to set their rules, convey them as well as possible, and then review RAW files to decide which are eligible ( say the top 15-20 in each category).

 

One possible idea, have a post-mortem to show why certain entries were discounted (although I can see other problems with that such as folks getting upset with being exposed [sorry, had to say it ] or having winning entries from other competitions disqualified). Maybe you can create an examples page to show approximately were you draw the line - a lot of work of course but then it gives people an idea of what is considered acceptable (and, of course, the judge's have the final say).

 

Jon

Edited November 23, 2011 by rinjani

[Rocha 0]

I think the post above clearly exemplifies why this problem happened in the first place. LAUPS allows for "some" manipulation but not "lots" of manipulation, so that is open for interpretation. I think you would eliminate more than half of your reported cases of "cheating" if you simply set the rules to NO MANIPULATION AT ALL.

 

In other words, I don't think this has anything to do with a $2500 prize, and everything to do with how people interpret rules. And as stated above, instead of asking for RAW images for every file, it would be a lot easier to simply make the rules of zero manipulation and state that RAW files will be required from all finalists.

[errbrr 73]

I don´t think Paul Nicklen dives very often in tropical waters...(well for his swordfish pics he did but still...) and he has done very well! Also, Sardine Run pics have always infested many contests and are taken in temperate to cold waters. My opinion is that nowadays there are more opportunities to take fresh pictures on temperate/cold waters than on tropical ones, where we usually see similar pictures/subjects of softcorals etc...

When the water gets *really* cold, the vis clears up again! New question: can you take competition winning wide-angle shots in average 10m vis? Or, do I shoot natural light only or only enter competitions that allow extensive backscatter removal?

 

Yes. Not always as easy, but more than possible. Anecdotally, fewer dive in cold water and by extension there are less cameras venturing into the chill so perhaps we see more warm water images just because there are more divers?

True, I think. I wonder what the ratios of warm water to cold water entries is for some of these large competitions.

[Drew 0]

Luiz, I think you've forgotten about that the human reaction to a challenge. Just like people who claim no harassment, non-captive etc when they submit pictures into comps that ban stuff like that! It's about trying to beat the system! Fame, fortune and that free t-shirt are incentives to do so. I remember Alex telling me that photo comp prizes can be turned into money earners. WPOY give £20k as a first prize. For some, that's worth trying their luck!

 

That said, I agree with you that rules tend to be imprecise and very open to interpretation as well. I say get Adobe locked in with promotion and ask for Photoshop files with steps and everything else!

[Paul Kay 62]

The RPS Nature Group have IMHO a very good policy on images - they can be modified (cleaned, adjusted, etc.) but there must be no change to the "essential truth of the image". So, whilst back-scatter elimination might be acceptable, refitting a crab's claw would not - as with everything else surrounding images which are subjectively judged, there is a lot which could still be argued about though (and I'm sure that raw files will be re-creatable eventually - or may even already be).

 

I have not put images into competitions for years simply because I see no point in leaving even a few specs of back-scatter in an otherwise perfectly good image - you can't actually see back-scatter when you take a photograph and it is a result of the actual process of taking a photograph - a technical problem for which there is now a solution. I personally prefer to try to light a shot better knowing that some (removable) back-scatter might result. Until competition rule writers change their minds on post adjustments I won't bother entering anything (adjusted or unadjusted) because as far as I am concerned the digital process allows us to deal with frustrating problems over which we may have no control at the taking stage. Harking back to the days of film when a photographer was supposed to have total mastery over the photograph taking process is simply to ignore many of the possibilities of digital processing

 

As a compromise, perhaps it would be illuminating for a contest to be run which has two categories; one with no post adjustment and one which allows it (the same images could be even entered in both). It might be interesting to see the difference in image numbers entered in each as well as the difference in final image 'quality'?

[davichin 18]

The RPS Nature Group have IMHO a very good policy on images - they can be modified (cleaned, adjusted, etc.) but there must be no change to the "essential truth of the image". So, whilst back-scatter elimination might be acceptable, refitting a crab's claw would not - as with everything else surrounding images which are subjectively judged, there is a lot which could still be argued about though (and I'm sure that raw files will be re-creatable eventually - or may even already be).

 

I have not put images into competitions for years simply because I see no point in leaving even a few specs of back-scatter in an otherwise perfectly good image - you can't actually see back-scatter when you take a photograph and it is a result of the actual process of taking a photograph - a technical problem for which there is now a solution. I personally prefer to try to light a shot better knowing that some (removable) back-scatter might result. Until competition rule writers change their minds on post adjustments I won't bother entering anything (adjusted or unadjusted) because as far as I am concerned the digital process allows us to deal with frustrating problems over which we may have no control at the taking stage. Harking back to the days of film when a photographer was supposed to have total mastery over the photograph taking process is simply to ignore many of the possibilities of digital processing

 

As a compromise, perhaps it would be illuminating for a contest to be run which has two categories; one with no post adjustment and one which allows it (the same images could be even entered in both). It might be interesting to see the difference in image numbers entered in each as well as the difference in final image 'quality'?

 

The thing is that backscatter is in the water and I have seen many winning pics with backscatter (it even sometimes gives an "atmosphere" to the picutre...). I don´t care about backscatter very much (I used to though... ) as long as the picture is impressive... I think the best competitions judges are not too picky either with backscatter.

 

There are such competitions with those two different categories; search for OWUs results and you will not necessarily see a great quality difference...

 

I had not read LAUPS contest rules and I have to admit that they are not very clear in this aspect.

[davichin 18]

Seven years ago they had the same digital manipulation dilemma (it seems we have not advanced much in this matter):

 

http://wetpixel.com/i.php/full/wildlife-ph...r-doug-perrine/

 

And it also had backscatter!

[bvanant 190]

Luiz, I think you've forgotten about that the human reaction to a challenge. Just like people who claim no harassment, non-captive etc when they submit pictures into comps that ban stuff like that! It's about trying to beat the system! Fame, fortune and that free t-shirt are incentives to do so. I remember Alex telling me that photo comp prizes can be turned into money earners. WPOY give £20k as a first prize. For some, that's worth trying their luck!

 

That said, I agree with you that rules tend to be imprecise and very open to interpretation as well. I say get Adobe locked in with promotion and ask for Photoshop files with steps and everything else!

The rules are imprecise because I haven't found any precise way of defining what our objective is and in the past cheating was far less rampant than it has become; we trusted the photographers.

 

In the slide/film/print competitions of years past almost no one actually developed their own slides/film and printed their own images. You could of course give the printer some instructions for dodging/burning/spot removal but most photographers didn't do that themselves. Now everyone has a computer and photoshop as well (or some other program). We are of course open to any suggestions on how to write our rules to allow us to showcase the "best in amateur underwater photography". We have thought of having two categories, traditional and open for each type of entry (one camera JPG conversion only) and one manipulate to your heart's content; the image is the only thing but that means having to get twice as many prizes and with the profusion of competitions many sponsors are getting overloaded with requests (or at least that's what we hear). So if you have a good set of rules please let me know.

 

Thanks

Bill