Some journals say photos submitted may have NO electronic enhancement. If JPEG is manipulated in the camera, should they be disqualified? If this is true, only RAW un-manipulated photos would qualify. Oh, I know they will accept JPEGs, but I thought this is an interesting, likely unimportant, conundrum.
You can't submit a RAW "image". RAW is data only. It must be converted into an image. One can submit a RAW file but not a RAW image.
In other words, it is impossible to submit un-PP images. Also, if as most UHHers advise, we shoot RAW, then can't we submit them as they will have to be manipulated?
Take a picture, review the JPEG, if necessary, adjust the sliders in the camera, take another picture, review the JPEG, rinse, repeat as needed. Now you have an unedited edited JPEG SOOC.
The semantics battle again, so soon? Will it reach another twenty pages?
If your initial question was other than hypothetical, wouldn't it be best to contact whatever journal or journals you had in mind and learn exactly what their criteria is?
Les Brown wrote:
In other words, it is impossible to submit un-PP images. Also, if as most UHHers advise, we shoot RAW, then can we submit them as they will have to be manipulated?
You need to ask for guidelines from the organization you are interested in. If you shoot jpg, the camera sets white balance, color corrects to the color space you selected, sharpens, converts the data to 24 bits per pixel (8 bit bytes r, g, b), and compresses your image. For photo journalism, you don't want to go beyond that. Another option is to shoot raw, bring it into your PP software, do whatever PP the guidelines allow then convert to a tiff or jpg choosing the color space, file size / resolution, sharpening and the amount of compression to use (if any) on your own.
Just send them a mental image directly from your mind ...
Cany143 wrote:
The semantics battle again, so soon? Will it reach another twenty pages?
If your initial question was other than hypothetical, wouldn't it be best to contact whatever journal or journals you had in mind and learn exactly what their criteria is?
I believe he was being facetious.
CHG_CANON wrote:
Just send them a mental image directly from your mind ...
That way it looks exactly like you think it should.
Anyone can easily change the dates. I just did for this one I created this image over a week ago and modified the taken date to 8/31/19, 19 days in the future. It took me around 10 seconds in FastStone Viewer.
mwsilvers wrote:
Anyone can easily change the dates. I just did for this one I created this image over a week ago and modified the taken date to 8/31/19, 19 days in the future.
Try the others.
I can only change two (in Win 7). Without a super-duper file manipulator.
Longshadow wrote:
Try the others.
I can only change two (in Win 7). Without a super-duper file manipulator.
FastStone Viewer is not exactly a super-duper file manipulator. Its free to anyone and easy to use. I have around 4 or 5 others image viewers and file managers on my Windows 10 machine which can do the same thing, including Windows file manager. Here's an another image where I changed the taken date to two days in the future. I used the built in file manager to do it.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.