PDA

View Full Version : Questions concerning digital entries...



John_Metcalfe
05-07-2011, 09:00 AM
I am interested in hearing from people who attended the digital judging portion of the recent competitions.

How did the digital images score compared to the prints? Did you witness any advantages or disadvantages in using this form of presentation? Did the judges have the same opportunities while viewing digitally as they have with prints? Do you think a digital image should be prepared different than a print? Just some questions that are building.

Thanks!

JohnHeckler
05-07-2011, 08:22 PM
Well, I have been reluctant to go digital just yet and I have not had the opportunity to observe digital judging yet either ... other than an album. However, I do have a question regarding the "zoom", do the judges "zoom" when judging digital albums? I don't remember them doing it, but I may have just missed that.

Also, I think this has probably been asked and answered, but I was too lazy to search for it ... what is the "rule" for the judges wrt to "zooming", 100%?

Jeff_Dachowski
05-08-2011, 02:08 AM
John,
As far as I can tell zooming is not used anymore at all. Your file does not need to be deeper as it did before to account for the lights hitting the paper. I would not enter a high key image in digital. It is just too much light for the judges to handle when the images "turns"
Jeff

Sarah_Johnston
05-08-2011, 02:14 AM
I have been apart of the digital judgings on more than 1 occasion. The percentages that merit are similar to print. The main thing is to be sure to follow the instructions for preparing your image. Use the size and colorspace recommended. "Files must be sized so the longest dimension is 4,000 pixels (20 inches at 200 ppi). Each file must contain an embedded color profile of either sRGB or Adobe RGB1998 and be saved at a JPEG quality setting of 10. Total file size should not exceed 3.5 MB." There are also video tutorials in the competition section of the PPA site.
Not sure what you mean by "the same opportunities" John. Could you explain please?

Heather_L._Smith
05-26-2011, 04:31 AM
John,
As far as I can tell zooming is not used anymore at all. Your file does not need to be deeper as it did before to account for the lights hitting the paper. I would not enter a high key image in digital. It is just too much light for the judges to handle when the images "turns"
Jeff

Aahhh.... I must disagree with my learned colleague here :) I watched the digital room through all of SEPPA. I actually personally had two high key images that did quite well, so I don't think that's the case at all. I do agree, however, about printing down...or not, in this case. You still need that detail in the highlights and shadows, so printing down is not necessary with digital entry.

There is no more zooming - all images are at 100%, period. They can lean forward and look more closely, just like with a printed entry, but all the rules are exactly the same.

I'll be very interested to see how it all works at nationals - that's potentially a lot of prints that don't have to be physically handled or moved. We'll find out in a few short weeks!

Oh, and to answer your question, John, I think an image has just as much potential digital as print. I don't see digital submission as a detriment to the chances a print has. At least there isn't any data or patterns (yet) to back that up.

Rick_Massarini
05-26-2011, 06:13 AM
I don't see digital submission as a detriment to the chances a print has.

I agree with Heather - digital submission will be no detriment to the chances a print has - uhhh... since there is no print...
Sorry Heather, bad joke, but I just couldn't resist...

And Thank You, Heather for volunteering to help at the judging again this year. Looking forward to working with you again...

I'm sure that the PEC will have a much better handle on the pros/cons/effects of digital entry after the conclusion of this year's judging. The whole digital submission and judging is all still in it's very early days, so any judgement call they made here and now would be just a guess without any solid data to back it up. After this year is completed, they will probably be more able to draw some valid conclusions once they have the data to evaluate and a years worth of their experiences to draw upon.

Cassandra_Sullivan
05-26-2011, 03:02 PM
I entered all digital this year and the only disadvantage I've observed (at the state and district level) is there are less awards (if you care about such things) - digital entries are not eligible for most of the awards around now (i.e. Kodak Gallery, etc). Perhaps there will be new awards forthcoming for digital entries.

Keith_A_Howe
05-26-2011, 04:32 PM
At North Central District 49.465% of physical prints merited. 28.16% of digital files merited.

I would be interested in seeing actual percentages from other districts.

Keith

Cassandra_Sullivan
05-26-2011, 06:23 PM
I'm thinking that a good percentage of those that enter digitally could be 'competition newbies' - therefore the merited percentage could be lower.

Heather_L._Smith
05-27-2011, 01:39 AM
I have to agree with Cassandra on that one. At SEPPA, we had a TON of digital entries that were below exhibition standards. I think it's a case of competition newbies entering because the process is easier and they just simply didn't have the experience to know what they should be entering or how it should be presented. I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. When I look back at my first comp entries, it makes me laugh. There are a lot of folks out there that see competition on the same level as many of these online contests and whatnot... but they'll either learn and get better or they won't and they'll give up.

Keith_A_Howe
05-27-2011, 02:47 AM
the only disadvantage I've observed (at the state and district level) is there are less awards (if you care about such things) - digital entries are not eligible for most of the awards around now (i.e. Kodak Gallery, etc). Perhaps there will be new awards forthcoming for digital entries.

I understand your thoughts Cassandra, I really do.. But can you really blame them for wanting their awards (that they pay for and donate to the associations) to go to makers that support their product and the labs? After all in their eyes the associations have basicly said that the printed image is not important. Yes I understand that it makes it more affordable for makers to enter but does less expensive entries in any way help support these companies?

Not trying to pick on Cassandra here, just felt it was important to point out the other side that too many times we forget to consider. For what it's worth any time we see our vendors at out assocations tradeshows or when ever, It never hurts to tell them thanks for their support and show them a little love.:)
Keith

Rick_Massarini
05-27-2011, 07:35 AM
I fully understand Kodak's position on the Gallery Awards only going to printed entries, and from an industry standpoint, I agree with them.
Kodak does not make any money on sales of files. They sell paper and printing.
Just look at how digital has effected the color printing industry...
Proof presentation has gone to digital projection - so no more sale of proof prints
Some printed wedding albums have been replaced by sales of digital slide shows - so sales of finished prints for albums are down.
Some photographers are selling press printed (color laser) albums now - so album print sales are down for Kodak.
Digital competition is now out there - so the sales of printed competition prints are now down for all the labs, and so for Kodak.
It would not be in Kodak's best interest to award a Gallery Award to a non-printed entry - it's just not good for their business...

Cassandra_Sullivan
05-27-2011, 05:32 PM
I understand your thoughts Cassandra, I really do.. But can you really blame them for wanting their awards (that they pay for and donate to the associations) to go to makers that support their product and the labs? After all in their eyes the associations have basicly said that the printed image is not important. Yes I understand that it makes it more affordable for makers to enter but does less expensive entries in any way help support these companies?

Not trying to pick on Cassandra here, just felt it was important to point out the other side that too many times we forget to consider. For what it's worth any time we see our vendors at out assocations tradeshows or when ever, It never hurts to tell them thanks for their support and show them a little love.:)
Keith

Keith I totally agree with you! I was just making an observation, not complaining. Sorry if it came across that way.
And perhaps since PPA is trying to promote digital entries, they can influence some vendors to come up with a digital-only award. Maybe Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Adobe or someone like that who doesn't have a direct connection to printing.



It would not be in Kodak's best interest to award a Gallery Award to a non-printed entry - it's just not good for their business...
I definitely agree.

John_Metcalfe
06-14-2011, 01:05 AM
Very Cool... I ended up entering 4 digital images. I only entered one high key. I lowered what whites there were to 235-240 and was cautious with my blacks also. I adjusted my black numbers between the four images in the hope of a response. 0-5-10-15 if memory serves.

Thanks for responding...