There's a simple answer, don't vote for the HDR entry if you don't like it. I personally don't like the effect. Yeah it's dramatic and has it's place somewhere but for my taste It's overdone and ruins a very nice looking model.

If someone wants to push the envelope with adding missing details or covering up flaws all just to win a free kit as a prize then good luck to them. Tricks will make a good model better but not an average model into a prize winner.

As for the rest of the available photoshop tricks, we're living in a digital world, we post digital pics on forums, right here in fact. Most finished model pics are cleaned up with light balancing and some sharpening, usually not to fool anyone but to compensate for lighting and camera quality. We live with it or go back to reading paged print ......

Brent

While I agree with the sentiments that presenting a photo of work that doesn't truly represent the actual appearance of that work is not playing fair, the only course here is to rely on the honesty of the entrants to ethically follow the intent of the contest.

I think it all boils down to Jesse's observation and comment about "enforceability." How could the contest managers reasonably enforce any of these allowances, exceptions, or restrictions?

How much lighting improvement is OK and how much is crossing the line? How much HDR is allowed to improve exposure and when is it too much? Etc, etc, etc...

If the rule is unenforceable, then all it can possibly lead to is endless arguments, accusations and finger-pointing. That is, unenforceable rules are pointless.

Modeler A accuses modeler B of submitting a photo that's been altered more than is allowed by the rules. How does modeler A prove his accusations? What can modeler B do to defend himself? What are the contest moderators supposed to do? What is this accusation is made after the fact of the end of the contest?

The list of questions about the practicality of enforcing these rules is nearly endless.

All that can really be done here is for guys to speak up and voice their opinions that they believe that such and thus submission has been made in violation of the spirit of the contest. Only a group norm "enforced" by peer pressure can be expected to hold most guys to some ethical standard that cannot be clearly defined, much less formalized by enforceable rules.

That is, rather than try to create a formal rules set, speak up when you think some entry has crossed the line and does not fairly represent the true nature of the actual work. If enough guys feel that way and say something, then the ethics of the contest may become a self-regulating group norm.

Even a clear statement by the contest moderators that all the photos submitted must reflect the true nature of the work is unenforceable.

The best that can be done, IMO, is for the moderators to say that the intent is for the photos to represent that true nature. But without actually comparing the work with the photo, side by side, there's no way to say that intent is being followed or not.

The nature of an on-line contest based on submitted photos which never actually looks at the works in question is the limiting factor here. The only way the true nature of the actual work can be assessed is in person.

Simply not possible here.

That "true nature of the works" part is IMHO the problem. As long as I do not image manipulation (Adding/Removing elements) a picture DOES represent the true nature.

A normal human eye has a dynamic range equivalent to 13 or 14 exposure values (EV) in a camera. That means it is extremly good at getting details both in the shadows and in the light at the same time.

The most common DSLRs are using an APS-C sensor and have 9-11 EV, a high end compact/bridge has 7-9 EV. So most cameras are not actually capabel of showing "what is there" in a single exposure. Enter HDR that gives back those missing parts by adding 1-2 levels at the lower and upper end of the dynamic range (1/1 is more common) bringing a picture back to what the nacked eye would see.

The shifts in color etc. some examples show are badly done HDR pictures/overdone EV brackets and bad software.

You are absolutely RIGHT about those EV values so The HDR process simply restores the photograph to a dianamic range more closely approximating the human eye.

Boy I wish I had thought of that!

Guys, if the model sucks you see it anyway. If the model is good, but you took images with mobile - isn't that your own problem?

Hi mmeier

Thanks for taking the time and effort to explain about HDR etc. and debunk the opinion of those who wrongly regard HDR as cheating and all the other uninformed opinions regarding its use.

As I mentioned on page one, regardless of what way you see its use there can be no way of enforcing a "no use" rule even if it was needed, which personally I don't think is needed.

Thanks again.

Alan

You may well be correct in what you state, but you missed a detail that is important in this discussion: neither human eye nor a camera can use the whole dynamic range in one glance or view: you can't see both dark and well lit parts of "scene" you look at with you eyes (think of a bright meadow with a few bushes and how you can't see what is in the deep shadows), your camera also has trouble here, that's why HDR shows something you won't see in reality. It does not compensate for cameras lack of EV stops, it creates a possibility those few EV stops camera has can be used in one scene. You can't possibly pull that trick with your eyes either because the low range is not available when you are adapted to bright scenes and vice versa.

Cheers
Greg

Actually the ranges statet above are the "single shot" useable ones. The total of the human eye is even bigger at around 24EV equivalents. But as you rightly statet that can not be used in one look.

But even if one can see a bit deeper "into the shadow" I see no problem. That makes it more difficult to hide faults in a model. Just like adding another light source or a decoupled flash to put extra light on the tracks/road wheels thst a single overhead light would leave in the shadows.

Guess someone must do a few samples to show multiple light sources vs HDR using otherwise same setup in f stop etc. Say 18mm, f11, 1/50sec, +-1 or 2 EV and one light source vs the same but multiple light sources. And maybe RAW + Camera supplied tool vs In Cam processed JPEG with a few different picture styles

Again I will throw a couple of pennies in here. HDR is in, ok that's cool. The horse about what it shows is dead it seems, let's put down the whip. Now about the contest....
A simple quick search on this site shows three threads asking about how to get better pictures of models. Yet in none is there any mention of HDR. If as stated, HDR can be done with basic cameras, how about one of its champions write an article on how to use it and get good results and the site either link it from the contest thread or sticky it with the contest.
This way all who enter will know about it and then it's their choice to use it or not. Then we are back to a some what level playing field are we not?

Do not know if this will offer anything of help but I was taking these photos yesterday in support of another blog topic and thought of the discussion here:

______________________________________________

There has been a lot of discussion of late about color balance, exposure and artificial (read electronic) adjustments commonly made to model photographs. I thought it was time I took some photos of my MAZ in natural sunlight to get a better read on how the colors would reproduce.


Available sunlight with full on fill flash. Slight enhancement of EV range using Photoshop curves tool. Darkened background and lightened vehicle using Photoshop burn tool


Straight sunlight with no fill. Slight enhancement of EV range using Photoshop curves.


Sunlight with slight fill using a white reflector. Slight enhancement of EV range using Photoshop curves.


Sunlight only.

At no time did I utilize any form of HDR (High Dynamic Range) enhancement or color adjustment.

That is a nice example:

The stuff you used both while shooting and in post prozessing achives the same effect as a HDR. Extra light (flash or reflector) and pushing EV range as well as minor adjustments. Did you use a JPEG as base or RAW?

All thst HDR does is making the stuff faster, easier, more seductive. And with cookies

Was working with .jpg rather than RAW.

This MAY be of interest to many viewing this thread:

A totally FREE image processing software program very similar to Photoshop can be downloaded for either Mac or PC at the following URL:

http://www.gimpshop.com/gimp/?gclid=CNPSx7f8sMACFWELMgod8QoAvA

This free software is called Gimp and is almost as good as the Photoshop package costing $700+ and in many ways Gimp is even better! Also you won't be bombarded with ads attempting to sell you things or with unwanted marketing e-mails. This is a very liget outfit!

It now means that anyone with a digital camera and a computer can jump in the image editing pool and swim with the rest of us!

There is a learning curve to the Gimp software and previous experience with Photoshop makes this a bit easier but with time and a little patience anyone can improve the product of their photography with Gimp! Also there are a number of online video tutorials offered by Gimp to fast track the novice so you can get into productive image editing quickly.

So . . . Go fourth and photo edit!

HDR is when you take a stack of images and then process them, right?
Then I have to disappoint you as Michael (author of King Tiger) was not using that approach. Only correction of white balance, and sharpening.

He contacted me a year ago and I gave him the same advice as written in my blog entry.
So it is mostly about having sufficient light and no cheating with advanced photography.


As mentioned above " you invested hours and sometimes months to finish a model, why would you ruin the presentation of it?".

your absolutely right & there's no way to police it.
Since we are on the topic of "contest's" , I have another quib....the figure contest.
Why on earth are people entering 3 figures, is it not a single figure contest? That just makes it even more confusing. More then 1 figure should be disqualified.
I like looking through the contestant pieces , I do participate by casting my vote but...I'd rather vote on 1 piece , not 3 pieces...honestly, I didn't even view the multi figure entries.
This software enhancement topic is pretty scary. Did you know, if a person was really good at Photoshop, they wouldn't even need a real model. All they would need is a model without any paint...they could then paint it through software , make it look realistic.
There is a software tool one can use to detect image manipulation. Every digital image has a digital signature & there's software out there that can dissect digital image "layers".

valid point about figure competition!

With your comment about "modeling in Photoshop" you have now crossed over into the venue of "digital modeling".

I have seen any number of fine digital models exhibited on the web. Models that exist only inside a computer. Given the amount of work that goes into these "models" there has to be a place for them as well in the modeling world. However, they clearly need/deserve to be kept in a category to themselves.


Starting with a manufacturer's basic CAD model such as this M6 US Heavy Tank from Dragon Black Label models:



Or hightly detailed "white models" such as this European Steam Locomotive by Il Marco:



To this masterful rendition of the MAZ-537 Russian Heavy Tractor by kellyq1234:

p.s. That is a North American Steam Locomotive ( probably Canadian National) NOT a European Locomotive

If u need a free photoshop alternative that give you a productive solution, photoshop online will be a great option.