Photo competition, image quality

fishmama wrote:

I understand the points made, I just would like for you guys not take the fun out of the competition - in order to 'improve it' or find a 'better way' - with rules to send stuff here and there, minimum/maximum requirement... and so on, I like it the way it is.

So stay with it, your choice. But if somebody wants to add "good quality" photo than let's him to do this.

Jez, I never thought this topic would create such a stir.

I think there have been some good points made, thanks for posting. I might not agree with all but I do respect them all.

Most importantly @Sean I never meant for this to be any critique directed at yourself or any other moderator/admin/member. You are doing a great job and I think that part of that the photo competition has had so many entries the last runs is because of your hard work, not at least in promoting it and reminding members to join in/vote. Thank you for that and please keep up the good work! Pm sent

When writing this post I simply thought that the replies would be either: “yes we can do that, it’s a good idea” or “no it would be problematic to implement/take too much time/space”. I would have understood both of these.

I for one, finding it hard to even post these days and would not request this if It takes more time from moderators who are already sacrificing their spare time.

It’s not a big issue for me and I think that I’m fairly “chilled out”, maybe my posts came out the wrong way, maybe it’s a cultural/language issue I don’t know. My hair is certainly not turning grey over it; although I am starting to lose my hair but I blame that on poor genes rather than this thread.

I really enjoy fishkeeping and photography which is why I find the photo competition great. The last thing I want would be if people stopped entering their photos because they feel pressurized to get a better camera or improve their skills. I enjoy all photos entered not only the sharp ones but I really can’t see why there should be a conflict.

Do I understand it the right by assuming that people that want the photographs to be below a certain size and reduced in quality want this because it somehow lessens the gap between DSLR cameras and phone/compact cameras?

I took a few snaps with my phone at work today and the photographs took up an average space of 800KB. The phone is two years old and was under 100 Euro to buy. Still those photographs take up about 40 times as much space as the second photographs i posted in this thread. If I’m not completely wrong an increase in size of the photographs would affect all entries no matter if they were taken with a DSLR or a compact?

I have probably missed some replies but will have a look again after some sleep.
And again, it’s not a big issue. If I thought people would think so strongly about this I would not have bothered posting.

Melander (Andreas)

I did get a little lost in this thread as Melander did not mention anything about expectation of a DSLR vs a Compact camera.
So, I'm not really sure how the thread wandered into those realms as that is not the topic of the thread.

I do think that the discussion on DSLR vs Compacts vs Mobile Phone should be left to specific discussion topis on "which camera to get or is best" rather than on a query on altered submitted quality on the photo comp.

For the record, I have only entered the competition once and used my compact camera.....as I have used for most pictures I post here. But the compact camera cost 4 times than the value of my DSLR....hence by using a DSLR I'd be using a much much cheaper camera

But that has dunna to do with the original post.

ian

Melander wrote:

My hair is certainly not turning grey over it; although I am starting to lose my hair but I blame that on poor genes rather than this thread.

Melander (Andreas)

Lol, nice one, my Niece asked years ago if I was losing my Hair, I told her I never lost it , it ran away from me!!

Good one Andreas, nothing is worth worrying about too much.

Kev.

JohnH wrote:

I think there have been a few misconceptions following Melander's first post, as I read it (and I could be wrong myself) he was mentioning the degradation of images after they have been sent into the competition.

As I tried to explain we need to have the images hosted (and Photobucket seems to be the host of choice for the Forum) (as it always has been).

No matter what size of picture is received, once it goes through the Photobucket process it gets downsized (as a matter of course - by Photobucket) so any image ends up being almost a proverbial 'shadow of its former self'. But at least this happens for every one of them, as far as I know it isn't selective.

When I first took over the running of the competitions from Valerie Photobucket changed the way it handled images and it took a bit of a while to sort out their new process and now it's a case of 'what you see is what you get'.

Not ideal, but at the end of the day does it really matter that much?

It's only a bit of fun, after all...nothing to lose sleep over.

You were still right to ask the question Andreas, it has added a bit of discussion to a part of the Forum which generally gets little attention.

John

Thank you for the clarification, I know both you and Ian tried to say this earlier in the thread.

That pretty much answers my question.

Melander

stretnik wrote:

Melander wrote:

My hair is certainly not turning grey over it; although I am starting to lose my hair but I blame that on poor genes rather than this thread.

Melander (Andreas)

Lol, nice one, my Niece asked years ago if I was losing my Hair, I told her I never lost it , it ran away from me!!

Good one Andreas, nothing is worth worrying about too much.

Kev.

I think mine is about to go on the run too, I don't know where it's heading though

Melander