Oblivion wrote:anyone can make a photo look great with digital manipulation.
sometimes it ends up being pretty far away from what the original photo was.
thats coming down to who can manipulate their picture the best, rather than quite simply 'who has a nice plant'
It should be a balance of a great plant-photographed well, and yes mostly unedited although cropping is fine as it is just removing the unwanted part of the photo, which is needed in most circumstances unless you have a super macro lense.
Oblivion wrote:if what you say is true then i'll take the best pic youve ever seen but it'll be of a dead fly trap or sarra...
do you think ill win the contest? :O
It happened the first contest: http://www.flytrapcare.com/phpBB3/downl ... hp?id=3625 http://www.flytrapcare.com/phpBB3/first ... t5833.html
A good photo of a deadish plant and what appears to be some carfully placed Insects. I don't think animals or insects should be artifically placed in a photo(seemed to be the theme of one contest), but great if naturally captured.
Oblivion wrote:at our ACPS meets we do the same thing but without the photo.
everyone brings a plant for "show n tell" as i call it.. and then we vote on who has the nicest plant.
That'll be the difference between a Plant contest and a Photo contest.
If you took an awful picture of an amazing plant should it win a photo contest?
I think we should all just vote for our favourite 3!(not one) photos
with judgement based on both plant quality and photographic quality. And not vote for substandard photos to ward off compeition, otherwise its pointless.