Re: [photo-3d] C.G. vs. real (was: Re: Digest Number 286)

[Dan Vint <dvint@xxxxxxxx>]

I would think it would depend upon the activity and the reasons for outlawing 
a CG image. Whether or not I can tell the 2 images apart I would ceratinly hope
the artist/photographer would be honest enough to follow the requirements
even if they can't be written to outlaw the example here. 

The question was asked about CG in a photo contest, what about photo's in a CG 
competition? If realism and control of the scene is what is being strived for
in the CG world, then I should always win with a photograph. I can also go 
to some surreal places like Mono Lakes and other places here in California and
shoot with infrared film and other techniques and generate bizarre worlds that
might compete with the CG worlds being developed. Is it fair of me to enter a
photo or to even expect that it be allowed?

Depending upon the club or competition focus I would think that even using 
photoshop and inkjet printers might not be allowed in a group that was about 
darkroom and puresilver work. But in a group that was more about capturing the
image than photoshop work would be ok. Then if you were in a purely creative/
artisic group of multiple medias and techniques than no limits on the 
creativity and methods should be introduced.

My $.02 anyway ...

..dan

> 
> Well, what would you call a photograph of a computer screen?  I can set
> my camera up to photograph my display and thus meet your criteria that
> the image was photographed.  I can also, with the proper equipment, send
> my computer generated image directly to film and then send the roll in
> to have it developed and mounted/printed.
> 
> It's not simple and the rules seem ambiguous enough to permit this in
> certain circles.  Besides,
> I've seen some of Boris' work and it's great!
> 
> Ron
> 
> Herbert C Maxey wrote:
> > 
> > >>Somewhere along the way I missed a bunch of posts (or a post) on the
> > >>validity or suitability of computer generated imagery in a competition
> > of
> > >>photography.
> > 
> > Well, it is simple..... computer generated images are NOT photography. No
> > Way, No how. So it seems clear that anything generated by the computer
> > should be absolutely rejected. There are plenty of competitions for
> > computer images.
> > 
> > Bob
> 
> 
> 
>