Gordon Laing wrote:
I'm happy for there to be post processing so long as you tell us in the post. And collages are also fine by me.
BUT the final word goes to the person who set the theme, so zrmi, do you have any strong feelings for or against? If we don't hear from you, we'll assume it's ok.
Hmm..how does this work, I wonder?
Converting a color-image to B&W would rank as "heavy" post-processing in my book, for example. It's a more image-changing color-change than saturation or even a color-shift.
Cropping x-percent off the original image could be considered post-processing. In fact any and all changes after it's on the card - whether it's done with the in-camera features or with Photoshop is post-processing.
In fact, any settings other than RAW could be considered post-processing unless there is an "as shot"-setting on the camera (Canon only I believe).
Everyone's threshold for post-processing is different and ultimately personal. Heck, a "purist" might believe that changing the white-balance on an image after it has hit the card as RAW is post-processing.
I don't mean to harp on it, but the way I perceive it, wouldn't it have to be an "all or nothing" proposition. Either post-processing is strictly off-limits, including any and all sorts or it's "free for all"?
If we have a less than perfectly clear definition, we risk that someone puts a lot of effort into an image and then end up not following the rules because they are not clear and open to interpretation. That might be a needless disappointing experience.
Perhaps I am asking because I fear that I myself would probably cross an invisibly line unintentionally or do others wonder about this, the same way I do?