So do this. Take a screen shot of the challenge winners and your photo's scores (I did this for you in case they're gone). And realize that you did it!
If you know it's true, and most of us believe you. And it's a simple technicality. Don't forget that YOU got a WINNING photo!!!! Even if you don't get the ribbon. It was well ranked!
Just wanted to encourage you NOT to forget that...
I think that's perhaps the best approach one can take in this situation. I also shoot mostly in RAW (Nikon D70) but also, when shooting for a challenge, shoot at least a couple of shots as jpeg Fine just to be safe and will, if possible use one of THOSE files for my submission.
You can take away from this a deeper understanding of what could lead to a DQ and keep taking ribbon-worthy photos.
To members of the SC -- is there a list somewhere of which programs and editors it's reasonable to expect SC members to have access to so submitted files can be assured of viewability?
Therein lies the problem. Converting to the original specs is not the same as having never tampered with the file to begin with. Even if everything is exactly the same, the EXIF data will show that the file was modified. This is one of those welcome rules that isn't subject to SC opinion, and it doesn't mean that anyone thinks you cheated. The data either shows that the file is unmodified or it doesn't, and unmodified EXIF data is a requirement.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding but... if the tool grandmarginal is using allows her to select from a drop down to switch between original settings and new settings the original settings are not being overwritten. Can the SC not find a tool that will allow them to access the original settings which are clearly still stored within the raw file?
It's pretty reasonable to assume that whatever camera you are shooting with, at least some of us will be able to open the file. Where problems come in is when software like Picture Project is used to move files, and changes are made to the EXIF data on the way. In these cases, there is literally no way for us to validate that the file is an original.
As TheSaj posted, the best practice is to copy the originals to an archive directory using the operating system (in widnows, open both directories in separate windows, highlight the files, copy, paste). Then make "working copies" of the files you want to edit. Now only work on the "working copies" and you never have to worry about the validity of an original.
Not positive on how all the RAW editors record their info, but all the editors i have toyed with all do the same thing - as soon as youtry to aveit, even if you did no editing or changes of any kind, it cahnges teh EXIF to show it has been in/thru an editor.
I know in DPP I can adjust the RAW file settings (WB, exposure, etc) and my changes are 'saved' so the next time i open it the 'corrected' image is what is shown, and the 'as taken/shot/recorded' settings are there as well. BUT as soon as you save the file, the EXIF will be modified and NOT the original the SC is looking for.
The only safe way is probably to copy the RAW file before opening it and work on that copy. I shoot JPG 99% of the time and always do a Save As so the original file may have been opened, but not saved so the EXIF data is still virgin.
That's what great about RAW files... Everytime you save it, you keep all the info (including the original). It can't be altered...
You're confusing the image data with the EXIF data. The EXIF data is just additional information written within the file that tells about the image and the camera settings. It's the EXIF that is getting modified, not the photo.
That's what great about RAW files... Everytime you save it, you keep all the info (including the original). It can't be altered...
You're confusing the image data with the EXIF data. The EXIF data is just additional information written within the file that tells about the image and the camera settings. It's the EXIF that is getting modified, not the photo.
But you have the date of shot in the EXIF and the possibility to see the original file... What more proof do you need? You have all the data, I just hope someone will actually make the effort to look into it.
I want to know if SC will be willing to revise their rules on this one. It does not seem unreasonable. When I was shooting jpegs for challenges (not that was I ever in danger of having to have them validated), I followed the suggestions of saving a copy off somewhere before ever touching it with PS. With RAW files (that I use these days), I open the raw file with PS, apply basic conversion (if needed, usually only adjust exposure & WB) and save the jpeg to disk. I'm not sure if anything gets written to the raw file, but something must be since PS remembers what the WB settings were when I open the file again in PS.
I want to point out that the settings in the RAW file may get altered, but the image data does not. Wouldn't this be enough for validation reasons?
Are we (DPC, SC, Admins) supposed to validate that illegal elements were not added to the image? Or are we only concerned with the 512 bytes or so of EXIF information being intact? I'd be concerned if the EXIF is the only thing you care about, because that is the easiest thing to edit in the file...
That's what great about RAW files... Everytime you save it, you keep all the info (including the original). It can't be altered...
You're confusing the image data with the EXIF data. The EXIF data is just additional information written within the file that tells about the image and the camera settings. It's the EXIF that is getting modified, not the photo.
But you have the date of shot in the EXIF (and that can't be changed) and the possibility to see the original file... What more proof do you need? You have all the data, I just hope someone will actually make the effort to look into it.
Perhaps you can try to retrieve the original from the memorycard with some data recovery software. If it has not been fully overwritten since the day you loaded them to your HD there might be a small chance to find it back.
Sure someone over here can give a link to such a program (I have no experience with them)?
So far all the RAW editors I've used, Breezebrowser, Bibble, Adobe CS and RSE don't modify the RAW file at all, including EXIF, but keep separate settings files or a centralized database/file.
I'd still be curious to know which ones "DO" alter the EXIF so I can avoid them!
But you have the date of shot in the EXIF and the possibility to see the original file...
The EXIF data also shows the date modified. If the date modified is not the same as the date of shot, then it's not the original file. Even if the only thing modified was the EXIF data itself, the file has still been modified.
But you have the date of shot in the EXIF (and that can't be changed) and the possibility to see the original file... What more proof do you need? You have all the data, I just hope someone will actually make the effort to look into it.
But you have the date of shot in the EXIF (and that can't be changed) and the possibility to see the original file... What more proof do you need? You have all the data, I just hope someone will actually make the effort to look into it.
But your EXIF says "Modification Date", which is not the same as the date you took the photo, which means that it's NOT the original.
But you have the date of shot in the EXIF (and that can't be changed) and the possibility to see the original file... What more proof do you need? You have all the data, I just hope someone will actually make the effort to look into it.
But your EXIF says "Modification Date", which is not the same as the date you took the photo, which means that it's NOT the original.
The exif data has the date of shot... You can retrieve the original within the same file... It's all there.
Anyways... You guys do what you have to do but the proofs are there.
The rules clearly state that, "This original photograph must contain valid, unaltered EXIF data."
The EXIF data in your submitted file is altered. Whether or not it shows the date of shot or you have outtakes from the same day is irrelevant. The EXIF data must be unaltered, and everyone is held to the same requirement.
