Nope! Went ahead and posted the more moderate version. Hey, I like that one, too.
Maybe one month we can have a competition for – oh, wait. I could open a thread for 'How wildly have you manipulated a photo?"
For the record I think EddyTeddyFreddy’s first (ultra processed) photo is not in the spirit of the contest.
I am totally fine with cropping, B&W conversion, exposure adjustment, etc.
I was playing a party game with a group of friends last night. There was a lot of room for the interpretation of whether a given strategy or answer should be allowed or not. After giving several examples, the official rules ended with: “If it feels like cheating, it probably is.”
mmm
Thanks! I’m glad I asked first, and reconsidered. Maybe a separate, noncompetition thread for ultra-processed photos would be good.
Sort of reminds me of a shot I missed out on years ago that would have been perfect to pull from the archives for the ‘Moody / Atmospheric’ contest.
I used to carry around a camera and tripod everywhere in my car in case I saw a good photo opportunity while driving. On the way to work I drove past an old historic cemetery. On one particular morning, it was still early dawn so the lighting was slanty and dim, and a layer of mist lay over the cemetery. It was the perfect condition for a shot.
As I was setting up the camera and tripod, a police car with two cops in it pulls over and asks me what I was doing. I said I’m an amateur hobby photographer and it’s a great moody, atmospheric scene for a shot.
They said, well can’t be too careful-- there’s a water tower in the background, and for all we know, you could be a terrorist taking scouting shots. After sufficiently grilling me and deciding I wasn’t a terrorist, they left.
I turn back to the cemetery, but the moment had passed-- it was now full daylight and the layer of mist had completely dissipated 
What a pity! Those kinds of ephemeral shots are rare opportunities.
You might do well to familiarize yourself with this, and to print out a copy of it and keep it with your photographic equipment.
The First Amendment has been established to broadly protect one’s right to photograph anything or anyone that is visible from public property, with very few, very narrow exceptions.
Hoo boy. While I understand that you do, indeed, have the law on your side, I think as a practical matter it would be wiser to keep that document tucked away and, instead, speak with the officer in a calm and friendly manner while explaining your intent (as @solost appears to have done).
mmm
Not just the law on my side, but basic common sense and common decency.
I suppose if you want to allow yourself to have your essential human rights stomped on by corrupt offers of the law, not having the will or courage to stand up for yourself, then that’s your choice, but don’t go looking to me for any sympathy, when you do.
Those like you who willingly submit to tyranny and corruption only make it easier for them to get away with it, and harder for those of us who have the will to resist.
Doing as you say is what cost @solost a great shot; and he got off easy. There is a lot more to lose this way, than just that.
No kidding. One time, years ago, I was coming west on I-84 towards Portland, reflection of Mt Hood was perfect on the Columbia River, gorgeous mirror shot…couldn’t stop to get the picture, haven’t seen it since.
For sure. Just yesterday I passed several magnificent misty scenes during my long, early morning drive through rural Pennsylvania. I was on I-80, zipping along at 75 mph (surrounded by many who were zipping at 80+ mph), I knew I was forgoing certain Doper moody/atmospheric glory in the interest of safety.
mmm
Moderating:
While an interesting topic, this is NOT the subject of this thread, and this is the wrong place to engage in this hijack.
If you wish to discuss this topic, please create a new thread.
How to Reply as a linked Topic
Click Reply, in the upper left corner of the reply window is the reply type button, looks like a curving arrow point to the right.
Choose Reply as linked topic and it starts a new thread. As an example, you can choose GD, IMHO or The Pit for it.
Once you get the hang of it, this interface is really easy.
Revisiting the Photo of the Year contest, I’d be happy to post the poll (I’ll leave the creation of the calendar to someone else 
)
We will have more than 12 entries due to occasional months in which there was a tie. My thought is to post the photos without identifying the photographer (I know the entrants can be identified easily enough, but I’d like the photos to stand on their own merits as much as possible).
Should we allow just a single vote? Three? Other?
Any other thoughts?
mmm
re:
Disturbingly thermonuclear!
I am more convinced than ever that black and white is where my photography joy lies. Last week I went to Washington Crossing State Park and shot some film of autumn trees, but I only had B&W with me, so I returned on Friday with some Kodak Gold 200 and took plenty of proper Fall photos.
You know which ones I like better? The black-and-white ones!
I’d suggest ranked voting; it’s been done a few times recently in the MPSIMS - Polls only thread.
How many pictures are we doing?
- 12
- 13 - 12 months + cover
- 14 - 12 months + cover + Dec
Are all of the pictures available still or did whoever won in Jan or Feb or ___ remove it from whatever site they were hosting it on?
We probably need to consider alternate entries as well. I’m thinking you’ll need the winners to email the photos to whoever is coordinating this; depending upon where & how they’re hosted you may not be able to download a version of sufficient resolution for printing. What if one of the winners doesn’t email their photo?
Are we putting any text above/below the photo? User name, contest won, maybe location shot if they provide that.
I’d also suggest setting this up thru a print-on-demand place where whomever wants one pays the vendor online directly. No dealing with getting payment from other dopers, ordering extras or needing one or two more because someone didn’t order by the deadline.
I was on the next bridge up Fri nite/Sat morn.
I’m guessing they were yellow leaves but it almost looks infrared in B&W.
I’ve heard it said that Ansel Adams never used a lens cap, because some of the shots he captured would have been lost in the time it took to remove it.
Speaking of which, I wonder what @minor7flat5’s photo above would look like using Adams’ zone system.
Exactly like that. The idea is to choose what you wish to appear as the darkest thing where you want to see detail and place that in Zone 3, then make sure you have the whitest whites somewhere around Zone 8 or 9.
I printed this in the darkroom on Thursday and did a few experiments where I got the brightest white I wanted (leaves of center tree) and had them in Zone 8, then made sure I had shadows where I wanted them. I didn’t care about the shadows in the lower left area, nor the pavilion.
The most basic way to do this in the darkroom is to get that highlight nailed through test strips and then use contrast filters on variable-contrast paper to get the darks where you want them.
My image was on 35mm film and I don’t have a decent spot meter, so I really don’t have a good way to get the exposure perfect on film, but film has tremendous latitude, so without much effort I was able to see what I was looking for.
Yep. Yellow.
And I was using a red filter, so most of the green was quite dark, while the fall colors were much lighter.
I really tried to give that picture just a simple title without getting deep into the event. But my title was a little verbose and I hope it meets the spirit of the rule!