Digital Competition Discussion

See the Digital Competition Instructions page for the background to this discussion. That page will probably get updated as a result of this discussion.

Using this page

This page is for discussions about the trial digital competition on 26 September 2006, and for members to make suggestions on how to prepare files for digital projection.

If you want to make a quick comment, please use the comment box at the bottom.

It would be helpful if people occasionally edit the page to summarise the advice.

As this could be a very busy page for a few days, please always tick the 'Release edit lock' box when you save changes so that other people can then comment on your comments straight away,

-- AndrewFindlay - 26 Sep 2006

File formats

The most successful file format seems to be JPEG. The projection software cannot cope with 16-bit images, so stick to 8-bit.

Profiles and colour spaces

The projection software expects images in the sRGB colour space. If your images are in other spaces they will look wrong when projected.

If you do not understand about colour spaces then do not worry too much: you are probably working in sRGB anyway. The other colour spaces are mostly used for professional print work.

Discussion

27 Sep 2006 08:33:58 MikeKiely:

8 bit jpegs seem to be the way to go, folks. and thanks to andrew for setting this page up. keep visiting for updates and keep looking at the guidance for digital submissions page (link at the top of this page). Thanks also to Rod and Mark for their efforts yesterday.

27 Sep 2006 12:06:21 RodBird:

It's important to remember that a projected image will never be identical to that which you see on your computer's screen. The colours might be similar (and we should try to get them as close as possible) but they won't be the same, so people shouldn't expect a perfect match.

In fact it's always been the case with slides. A different projector, a different screen, a longer or shorter throw from projector to screen, varying levels and colours of ambient light in the room from exit signs and so on - all these things meant that the appearance of the projected image could never be guaranteed to be the same as you saw on the lightbox at home.

That's life, and we'd better get used to it!

27 Sep 2006 19:13:00 JohnAshford:

The difference between sRGB and Adobe RGB 1998 is quite significant for many applications. Is the projection system hard-wired to sRGB? Otherwise anyone taking (Adobe 1998) pictures with lots of shades of green is going to have to be very careful to avoid losing efffect and avoiding generating factitious lines & surfaces.

Otherwise it seeems very impressive.

27 Sep 2006 20:51:25 RodBird:

Adobe RGB 1998 seems to be what all the books and magazines recommend you should stick to.

27 Sep 2006 20:59:04 MarkRussell:

John, The FAQ for the Competition software we use (see www.photocompviewer.co.uk) states the colour space used is sRGB.

The colour Gamut of sRGB is a close match to what typical CRT monitors can do, I can not find any information on what our projector is capable of.

I agree that ADOBE 1998 is a good colour space to use in your camera (if you don't use RAW) as it gives a larger dynamic range. But when entering our digital competition use profile to profile to convert your file to sRGB.

28 Sep 2006 12:22:33 BobKeene:

28 Sep 2006 12:31:59 BobKeene:

Hi Mark, Extract from Photocomp blurb: Submitting entries The competition organiser can receive image files as e-mail attachments or on CD, floppy, memory stick or CF. Alternatively, to make entering digital competitions easy, club members can download and install the PhotoCompEntry? program on their home computers. PhotoCompEntry? can then be used to select which images they would like to submit, give them titles and package them into a single file, which is then e-mailed or sent by disc to the competition organiser. The program also builds a useful archive of the entries the member has submitted to past competitions.

When the organiser receives an entry via e-mail or disc, he simply clicks on it and the PhotoCompBuilder? program will unpack it and add it to the competition database. If he chooses, he can then send an automatic acknowledgement to the entrant by e-mail.

Sounds like we should get this system up and running to ease the burden on you/comp secretary. I presume the club's license allows us to download PhotoCompEntry? free ?

28 Sep 2006 16:58:30 MikeKiely:

28 Sep 2006 16:59:21 MikeKiely:

Bob The extra functionality you describe looks great but there is too much of a financial burden - it is not FREE!! thanks Michael

30 Sep 2006 16:33:00 GlynnGrylls:

I'm sure we'll sort the colour out, however one of my concerns was the random projection order. It did lead to two similar pics from at least one author being projected one after the other. I like to choose the order in which my pics are projected (and displayed in a print competition), particularly if I'm entering two similar styled pics I prefer them to be projected nos 1 and 3 - and I also like to put the stronger pictures last. Its quite common for a judges generosity to change over the evening - some mark markedly higher in the second half, others the other way round. Also some use their time badly and are forced to hurry later on, or gabble on to fill up the time. A system that could put all my pics in the first or last half dozen, does not seem fair to me or to others. Is there any way this can be sorted.

01 Oct 2006 10:38:59 BobKeene:

01 Oct 2006 10:43:42 BobKeene:

Hi All, Following the discussion last Tuesday, I just want to make sure that it is clear that this is all one competition for slides and digital combined, so you can only enter 3 slides or 3 digital images, not both. Entries from those members who are new to photography will go into the restricted section. If you are new to the club but an experienced photographer please tell us, as it would be unfair to put your images into the restricted section. We have put a lot of planning into this new variation of our competition programme. We hope it will all go smoothly but if there are any initial "glitches" please be patient. See you Tuesday. Bob Keene.

04 Oct 2006 10:56:15 GlynnGrylls:

Well done Mark- last night went as smoothly as could be expected. My images project much lighter than they appear on my screen - I don't know how they compare with the clubs laptop screen. They are brighter throughout the range, but particularly in the darker areas which show more detail than I wish. Today went round to Chris's to look at them on his Mac - and they look very much the same as mine, so its unlikely that my monitor calibration is way out. He felt his pics were also very bright last night. There were one or two comments made about how bright the pics appeared. Could it be a Mac vs PC thing? Certainly I know pics on a web site appear much lighter on a PC than they do on a Mac. I've checked my basic macv system monitor calibration and it seems to be OK. Question 1: Can we do anything about it generally? Question 2: Did anybody else with a Mac have the same problem? I'll run the Spyder calibration software over my mac as soon as I get the chance and see if that makes a difference.

05 Oct 2006 12:02:46 MarkRussell:

For any one that relies on 'recent updates', you will be missing the discussion, following Johns email, on the what the images should look like on the Play Pen

20 Oct 2006 10:49:18 JohnAshford:

This topic has now got spread across Play Pen Play Pages 7, 15 and 16.

One strand, that of how to select the best compromise between file size, quality of reproduction and the practicality of bringing off a decent page per competition in a reasonable time seems to be converging. 14th Novemeber should tell.

The other, colour profiles & apparent brightness is still very open.

15 Aug 2007 10:57:20 JohnAshford:

After a bit of experiment & a lot of reading, I hope I have resolved the Mac screen gamma issue. According to several sources, but most clearly the Adobe Lightroom detailed manual*, the Mac 1.8 'standard' is a left-over from earlier days, and best current practice is to use 2.2. Since I switched (about February 2007), my projected images are coming out much more consistent with the on-screen versions than before. Sometime I want to put a Mac and a PC side by side and look at the same pages for Competition Images to check that they are also consistent.

* You need it but it is worth it!

12 Sep 2008 18:43:26 JohnAshford:

This is all beginning to look a bit like history! JA

Topic revision: r15 - 12 Sep 2008 - 19:43:26 - JohnAshford

Parent page:
- MembersArea