PMC Discussion Thread: 3.0 Interest Check

[Nicknamealguem]

Tying into what Nick just said... the only issue I see with that process is that there could be edits done between the host sending the list to the judge, and the judge picking the final poll entries. So if I sent a PM saying one user's entries wasn't eligible, and before the poll is closed, they fix it... they might still be left out.

I think I'll just have to start using the powers available to me, and just lock threads on Sundays, once I send away the PM asking for the poll. This also cuts the whole "under the wire" issue, where people post knowing that the judge has been asked, but hasn't actually picked yet - saves confusion, and potential disappointment .

In addition to not being able to post, posts already in the thread can't be edited. That way, problem solved; and if someone hasn't bothered to meet the rules with their entry by then, after the whole week, well... too bad.

I thought of that and it was kind of giving me a step backward of that approach. I can always say that as well as entries after that post, edits may or may not be accounted for poll. The green text of post edits would allow me to know if someone edited their entry after the post and I believe Mods can see how posts were like before any edit (?), in case any problem arouses because of it?
Either that or closing the competition (without lock first). The problem with closing with lock is that quotes are disabled (and getting the code for polls gets...kind of unpleasant). No problem with lock after poll is posted, though.

Oh and forgot to mention something in my previous post, about j-cart idea, maybe it could be incorporated in the front page News, a quick interview with week winners about their images, would be good read.

Edit:

When you say late Feb/early March start, do you mean for the actual competition or for the entry thread, and if we are limiting the number of people that can enter the knockout will this be 32 for PMC and 32 for 2.0? I was thinking about this a bit earlier and this is how I roughly planned it..

By late Feb/early March, I mean the entry thread, that is the competition itself, come to think of it.

There will then be a multiple choice poll where voters can pick their favorite 5 or so (strictly enforced) entries.

I would leave the votes open, just asking people to vote on the entries they think it should go through next stage, without enforcing any specific number. It worked fine in past Tournaments.

Also, would you do PMC and 2.0 at the same time or separated and can we enter both? Oh and a bonus PMC winner vs. 2.0 winner would be a great idea too. 👍

Edit: G.M. I will feel sorry for your P.M. box.

 

[GM]

2.0 and PMC run at the same time

 

[[empty space]]

I miss pmc with brightness/contrast and level adjustment.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

We got rid of the simple editing because this way, everybody can enter (provided they can figure out how to get the images up and hosted ), and all be on level playing fields. And now that Premiums don't require hours of cleanup (unless you want to get really close), it's definitely easier/less intimidating to enter in 2.0 without needing to know all the ins and outs of Photoshop.

RE: The Tournament - I liked that we had to choose one or the other with regards to the rules set, personally. A bonus for-the-heck-of-it with both winners would be neat too. Also, I might be remembering this wrong, but the final round was almost always just "Open", correct?

Nick makes sense about just letting people vote for as few or as many images as possible in the qualifier; it'd be a nightmare to ensure everyone only votes for a set number, and even as a Mod, while I can remove unnecessary/accidental votes from the vote count for each entry, the board software doesn't let me choose whose name is taken off.

 

[GM]

Yeah unlimited votes sounds fine I guess

 

[atlop]

I miss pmc with brightness/contrast and level adjustment.

Yeah me too. I understand the reasons for leaving those out but still now the problem is you can't adjust the photo for PC monitor. Most of the time photos that looked good on TV have way too little contrast and color on PC. All shots against daylight are pretty much out. Night shots and reflections seem to survive the export fairly well. But I think we'll learn to know what is possible and what is not. And with these rules there will be less talk of cheating, we had that sometimes with GT4.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Eh, I miss the slight adjustments too; like Atlop said, it always looks different on the PC! Specifically colour saturation, at least for me. Everything always looks a bit washed-out in comparison when I bring it over to the computer. But yes, one of the primary considerations was with everybody working with zero editing, cheating will crop up less, and be easier to identify 👍

So, since I mentioned it in the poll thread, I'll bring it up here: thoughts on graphic design in entries? I believe in the two main comps, it should be limited to nothing more than a logo or signature, as they are afterall "photo" competitions. However, there's a good chunk of us who are interested in graphic design, so maybe this is a sign we need to hammer out ideas for the return of the Photoshop comp? What say the community?

 

[Pebb]

What about a contest, where you have to edit a certain shot.

 

[GT5photographer]

For the advanced comp, are you suggesting we limit to only editing on a signature? Wouldn't that be too close to the standard photo-mode competition?

I think for the advanced if we need to, set stricter guidelines and have a photoshop competition so people will see a better line of where to present heavy graphic design photos and level adjustment photos. I would love to see a Photoshop competition where one can be much more creative, and I would love to see stuff like magazine covers/ads as a competition too.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

What about a contest, where you have to edit a certain shot.

This could fly, but I wonder how much interest there would be. Mostly in the sense that half the fun is taking your own image!

For the advanced comp, are you suggesting we limit to only editing on a signature? Wouldn't that be too close to the standard photo-mode competition?

No no, the full spectrum of the "Allowed Photoshop Adjustments" would definitely stay, as those aren't an issue and don't really alter the geometry of the shot, just the colours. Actually, even though they do alter the geometry in a way, the "Allowed Photoshop Filters" aren't really a problem either; diffuse glows and noise just add a certain look entirely possible in real life, for example. And I don't think much blurring is really done now that the game does it for us (though if someone wants to do it by hand, why not).

What probably needs to be changed is the "What You May (Not) Do" sections for 2.0. Specifically, what sorts of changes are allowed in an image while still keeping it, more or less, "that image". If that makes sense...

I think for the advanced if we need to, set stricter guidelines and have a photoshop competition so people will see a better line of where to present heavy graphic design photos and level adjustment photos. I would love to see a Photoshop competition where one can be much more creative, and I would love to see stuff like magazine covers/ads as a competition too.

A Photoshop competition and/or magazine one would be fantastic! While they could be rolled into one, similar to how H2H was turned into a monthly thing for the two current comps, I have a feeling some of us would be itching to do magazine covers every time, so perhaps having both would be best. All we need is a host who can invest the time and has enough knowledge of Photoshop to run things smoothly. Someone like you or Rev

 

[Revolution.]

In regards to the 2.0 issue, my two cents are this:
The competition has been (in my view) always about image enhancement, using Photoshop. Enhancement, adjustment, not so much manipulation. Adjustment of the photo you've taken in game using the tools at your disposal (within reason) but not adding/removing elements from the image. There's a fine line of course, for example I wouldn't see a problem with removing small distracting elements, ie in the tunnel at SSR7 there are a number of big ventilation fans along the roof, in a photo I've taken recently I snapped half of one just on the edge of the frame, which proved to be quite distracting, and so I removed it. Small things like that I think are fine, but removing all the pillars on the tunnel windows at Eiger like in that recent Lamborghini entry is probably outside of the 'spirit' of the competition.
Thoughts?

 

[Pebb]

I wouldn't mind a HDRI contest.

 

[sheferd]

I cringe at the thought of HDRI there are very very very few good examples of this. They always look odd and patchy and miss coloured.

 

[franz]

We shouldn't take 2.0 comp too far as a graphic design competition. I think the anime style LFA was taking way too far. We should keep the competition within photography perspective. Like what we can do in Lightroom/Aperture. Other extra tools should be used for improving textures only.

I actually like HDR being included in the 2.0 competition, but I feel like most people prefer overly edited/saturated HDR photos. I have seen it in some landscape photography competitions, which makes me sad.

I would say a new competition with unlimited editing would be great. It should be very interesting as many new talents have arrived our photomode section, so it would be worth a try 👍

 

[[empty space]]

Re-HDR: it'd be nice to allow HDR shots because some programs allow editing of b/c, levels etc. Plus there has been a few shots which looked lime a good hdr shots and can be hard to tell if done correctly.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

I'm going to leave HDR out of 2.0 for now; while it's certainly great to see, it might make the gulf between non-PS users and PS users just too great. Is there a free alternative to Photomatix? If there is, that might help...

So, I'm not sure if everybody's noticed yet, but Jordan introduced a fantastic new feature:

Automatic Embedded Image Resizing

How does this affect the Competitions? Well, very little, actually. These are still full-size images, so the file-size is the same, they're just scaled for viewing (and clicking grows it back). So we will be sticking to the current Preview limit, for the consideration of people not on high-speed connections. This does make it easier for those too lazy to post thumbnails, meaning no more table-breaking images while browsing the site.

 

[franz]

It's nice to have resizing option, so no more left-right scrolling. Unfortunately if you have made some nice presentations on your gallery with any part of it over 624px, now you get yellow bars every where. Oh CPG directory is affected as well

 

[Revolution.]

Mmmm, I'm torn between either making my wide banners out of two images (split down the centre) or just resizing everything to 624 across.

 

[[empty space]]

Slip - Photoshop isn't free either

You also have to remember back in gt4 days when the top guys were rerendering their images in Photoshop.

But, I use HDRpad. It's free plus Allows adjustment of most basic Photoshop color tweaking as well.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Es - Yeah, heh, but there's some good alternatives that are free .

The Auto-Resizing Feature - Oof, never thought about CPG . Remember guys, there is an option to turn it off in your MyGTP section. I'm not sure if I will though, since heading into the general threads is always a rush of full-sizers. Think I'll do what Rev said; start splitting wider presentations into two images.

 

[tupacrulez]

I find that for the Photoshop uneducated, like me, who only do the more basic modifications, that GIMP works fine.

the inferface is alright, and if you don't like it, there is an Add-on that makes GIMP sort itself out and look much like PS.

look into it if you need a basic adjustments program.

edit: maybe I should get a free spell checker too. DAMN.

 

[speedthrill]

Eh, I miss the slight adjustments too; like Atlop said, it always looks different on the PC! Specifically colour saturation, at least for me.
Everything always looks a bit washed-out in comparison when I bring it over to the computer. But yes, one of the primary considerations was with everybody working with zero editing,
cheating will crop up less, and be easier to identify 👍

I too miss it, although i can only speak of the true beginning of the competitions in GT4, wich i even won one or 2 from. I'm not really sure if that was in 2.0 or the original one...

It is just a bit too difficult, now, to judge it with such an open rule book what can and can't. Although i actually like seeing alot of people's ideas and art popping up.

But indeed Slipz, those saturations eh... I hate it that you don't really know what the others are gonna see on their screen.
As i stated somewhere before where i better didn't stated it (i know that now), i think i need to calibrate my screen, as soon as possible.

Anyway, good stuff.

About the Graphical stuff, maybe a third comp for those who love to do that.
I remember something like that was going on in GT4's competitions too, am i correct?

Anyway, good stuff!👍

 

[GT5photographer]

A Photoshop competition and/or magazine one would be fantastic! While they could be rolled into one, similar to how H2H was turned into a monthly thing for the two current comps, I have a feeling some of us would be itching to do magazine covers every time, so perhaps having both would be best. All we need is a host who can invest the time and has enough knowledge of Photoshop to run things smoothly. Someone like you or Rev

I definitely want to, although I would like to combine efforts with Rev and do it together maybe. I've held competitions via other forums and I don't mind doing them although with the new semester at university beginning time is getting a bit scarce. So if Rev does it with me I would love to get one going.

 

[Revolution.]

That's an idea, combining efforts would split the workload between us equally... I'm game for that. Lets discuss this via PM.

 

[suzq044]

Suzy - So, can I take this as you throwing your hat in the ring? We do need a judge if one of the old Photoshop-heavy comps makes a return . Head on over to the Competition Discussion thread

To continue the conversation here; No, because I enjoy competing in them, and am rarely around enough to compete let alone run them. LOL
I was just thinking that it'd be cool to bring the old photoshop-heavy competitions back.

 

[Vonie]

To continue the conversation here; No, because I enjoy competing in them, and am rarely around enough to compete let alone run them. LOL
I was just thinking that it'd be cool to bring the old photoshop-heavy competitions back.

I agree, some of the most fun I've had with Photomode. 👍

 

[suzq044]

^ that, and it won't be confused with the 2.0, and a few of the entries that over-used photoshop.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

Well, the good news is, it will be coming back .

I'll leave the details to the hosts to flesh out, but yes, something for us Photoshop users is now in the works

 

[speedthrill]

👍

Getting better and better!

 

[ejronin]

Ok. SO I have an idea for a new competition. "Ads" - and before I get a swift kick to my "cash and prizes" or begins to fist pump like a Jersey Shore champ, hear me out.

Anyone can make an ad for a Ferrari, Audi, Mercedes, or some other 'dream' car that goes fast, makes loud noises or is wildly popular. So, the biggest limitation of this competition mode, should it have favor, is cars used may not be - muscle cars (classic or modern - Mustang, Vette, GTR,) exotics (Citroen GT, Lamborghini, Ferrari,etc.), luxury cars (Mercedes, Lexus, Infinity, etc), or liveried cars. This means you'd be looking at hybrids, passenger vehicles, sub-compact, and utility vehicles. You may also use cars that are commonly converted to be sportier or race with, like a neon, focus, clio, 207, prelude, civic, etc. because from the factory they typically don't blow any doors off. - basically - daily drivers and cars people would be able to honestly afford without taking a third mortgage on their house.

You may be asking "wtf? that seems lame!" Perhaps it is, but again - hear me out.

f you've watched the opening video sequence for GT5 you'll notice it's effectively conception and birth of a car. How dos it get to the consumer? Someone has to buy it, right? This means someone has to sell it.

Magazine covers and other artistic venues are well and good, and I don't deny it takes creativity to compose an image and layout for a magazine, or that finding the perfect angle to snap a drift image isn't a fair miz of luck, timing, and knowing how a particular car and driver interact. But, a challenge most people don't consider is convincing someone to spend money on something they don't want or don't need. We're subjected to it daily - So, why not ad campaign contests - starting with things like, "sell a hybrid," or "sell a non-muscle 60's vehicle." Who wants to buy a hybrid in a racing game, right? That's the challenge: to create an image that makes someone want something they don't. You'll have to be visually persuasive and verbally acute.

The rules are few and simple:

1.) you may not add, alter or remove scenery, livery, parts, geometry, people, places, logos or animals in post processing.

2.) no signatures (influences votes, even if just a little, IMO.)

3.) Text is required - sell it in 5 words or less, no restriction on typefaces but be forewarned some people know typography.

4.)No more than 4 photoshop layers total (this doesn't mean merge layers to end at four or merge layers at a time are you're working to stay at four through the process - or some other manipulative semantic idea), otherwise all filters and tools are open (barring the restrictions in #1 and HDR). [text is going to be a layer, the image will be a layer and you've got two free layers to do whatever you can - better pick your options wisely].

The idea is to utilize the entire creative process and sell an item.

Not a "good" example, but an example of the idea's basic concept

Obviously, this image would not be acceptable because it's a race car, more than 5 words and uses an actual slogan from Alfa Romeo. All three would be a no-no.