[fionaB]

okies crew how about it then????????

a section for "straight" unadultarated photographs.........

Fi

[Steve]

Thanks for the suggestion, normally we would discuss this with the members but in this case due to certain circumstances we have taken the decicison ourselves.

Quite simply its not going to happen, sorry.

I am also going to spend some time on the forums today and will reply into the thread(s) regarding this topic. So if you need any more information or have questions relating to this you'll be able to ask me there

[fionaB]

okies........ not a problem...... if you dont ask you dont get!

Fi

[Steve]

Originally Posted by fionaB

okies........ not a problem...... if you dont ask you dont get!

Fi

If you want to start your own thread in the photo sharing section and invite people to submit their unedited shots, we would have no issues with that...

[fionaB]

may just do it.... or may leave it to someone else as i personally dont have a big issue with unedited or edited shots............. i put the sugestions here as no one else seemed to want to do it!

fi

[Rob Barron]

I think the thing is Fiona, we could only ever go on trust anyway as there is no way we could verify if a person's shot is unadulterated.

Secondly, if a person takes RAW photos, these are designed to be adulterated, they would be rather flat if we just used them as is because they are unprocessed, even by the camera. The whole point of RAW is to allow the user to select white balance, contrast etc. later. We still aim for the correct lighting in terms of shutter speed and aperture etc but still adjust after we open them in whatever processing prog we use for our RAWs.

So if you then said 'well, unadulterated means only played with RAW photos, etc' then we are back to square one.

If a person wants to say 'This picture came straight out of the camera' then fine. Frankly I never expect a photo to be completely untouched so going to a separate thread to see pictures in that category seems pointless. I think it could actually harm the neutral spirit that we try and maintain on Pixalo in that separating photos that are supposedly untouched could be divisive.

Only my own opinion of course, just really can't see the benefit of it.

Cheers,
Rob

[Markulous]

Originally Posted by Rob Barron

Secondly, if a person takes RAW photos, these are designed to be adulterated

Hmm, I process my RAW files and like to think I don't adulterate them - there are those that may argue otherwise!

I like the idea, in principle, of substantially unedited shots, but then I'd argue that I'm aiming towards those in any case! Occasionally an image will suggest significant post-production processing but that tends to the exception not the rule

[Steve]

Not the place to continue this dicussion gents, there was already two threads on the subject and one of those was closed to keep the other on topic. Please continue it in the one remaining open thread if you wish.

Cheers