It’s a zoomed in side view of an underlit suspension bridge so there are cable from top right to bottom left on both the near & far sides as well as two sets going from top left to bottom right. It should rotate thru colors but there was a problem in that the one section of lights were ‘stuck’ on blue so I detoured to get some shots of it. As an added bonus, there were some spinners doing donuts in the parking lot where I parked so I got some shots of them, as well.
Just posting this here as we were discussing this in the thread for last month’s competition. @Strinka and I have selected “change” as the theme for next month’s competition.
Not sure who sets these up and runs these now. Hoping @TwoCarrotSnowman is okay but happy to let @Mean_Mr.Mustard continue to deputise or I can do it as well.
April competition thread is up.
mmm
Nice one thanks for doing it
Thanks for taking this on.
You’re a peach, Mr. Mustard!
Hmmm, peach mustard? Maybe…
That is a thing.
https://mustardmuseum.com/products/terrapin-ridge-peach-honey-mustard?_pos=9&_sid=da3d99c27&_ss=r
I went for an interesting (albeit cluttered) image of change, but the other option was to take it very literally…
Beautiful shot @beowulff
I am quoting TwoCarrot’s original guidelines (bolding mine) in reference to @beowulff’s entry into this month’s contest.
I support TwoCarrot’s rule and, as such, I do not think the composite image should qualify for entry, as significant digital manipulation was involved (melding several images into one).
I am interested in others’ opinions and will go with the majority.
And no offense to you, @beowulff. Your image is magnificent.
mmm
- Allow composite images
- Do not allow composite images
0
voters
In this specific case, I would be in favor of allowing @beowulff 's entry. It is, after all, a depiction of a single event, not a composite of unrelated items. It could get tricky to try to objectively nail down a line between what I would think should be allowed, and what I would think should not, but in my opinion, this image is on the correct side of that line.
What would you think about images produced using certain High-Dynamic Range (HDR) or focus-stacking techniques, which involve taking multiple pictures of the same scene, in order to get detail that couldn’t be shown in a single shot?
Or panoramic image, made by taking multiple shots as the camera scans across a scene, to produce a single image taking in a wide field of vison than the camera can take in in one shot?
Here is an example of an image that might be on the wrong side of the line, as far as composites go, but I would not say that it is clearly so…
This is a composite of two different images, taken about ten years, and a similar number of miles apart.
First this image, taken in Rancho Cordova, about ten years ago…
…and this image, taken just a few months ago, of @Seanette posing on our couch, in our living room.
I mirror-flipped the Rancho Cordova image, just because the slope of the foreground tuft of grass better fit @Seanette’s pose. that way, and painstakingly cut out that foreground tuft into a piece I could past at the very front of the image, as well as cutting @Seanette herself out of the picture of her on the couch, giving me three layers to combine to make the fictitious image of Seanette laying in a field of grass.
I had actually done this for a different challenge, on another forum, but on asking for clarification on the rules, this turns out not to qualify because in that case, all of the images going into it were required to have been taken and processed within the period of time covered by that challenge.
The picture of @Seanette on the couch was taken during the challenge period, but the grassy scene was, as I said, taken about ten years before. I ended up rather hastily looking, shooting, and processing a different grassy scene, for the same purpose, that would fit within the parameters of that challenge.
FWIW: There is another thread for digital compositions:
Oh, wait, this may not be the thread I thought it was…
My opinion is that HDR and panoramic shots would be acceptable, largely because the image is portraying what you are seeing with your eyes. You are able to look and see both of those scenes in real time. You are not manipulating reality.
You cannot look up into the sky and see seven suns.
I would say that the woman in the grass is absolutely ineligible for our contests.
mmm
We have so far avoided rules. Our contest is an ad hoc affair in which we individually interpret even the topic. Beowulffs’ image well represents the letter and spirit of ‘Change’. To reject it would set a destructive precedent.
I think @beowulff’s image should be allowed. I think it’s more like a long exposure shot than a composite image that combines unrelated scenes.
I like these photo competitions because a casual photographer, like me, can both participate by submitting my photos, and learn from others how to frame good shots with the camera I have (my phone). ISTM once we start allowing manipulated photos we are straying from the spirit of these threads, because not everyone here has access to tools or processes or know-how that allow us to manipulate our photos in ways depicted above, and in the monthly thread. I mean, they are great photos and all, and I wont take anything away from them, but eventually these friendly monthly competition threads will get less casual photographers, like me, participating when professional-level efforts end up blowing everything else away.
Agree with @snowthx. I am not a fan of manipulated photos in general and especially not for this particular competition.
Regarding the eclipse, I just requested that the mods change the subject of this thread to encourage people to post their eclipse photos there:
But so many people had no chance to see the eclipse 