For validation, it says you need original unaltered files straight from the camera. Is it alright though if i rename my files, to make cataloging them easier?
The name of the file shouldn't matter. It's the exif inside that is used for validation. The date of last modification would change, but not the internal (camera) date. It still might be a rule, but I would be very surprised indeed if it was. The name doesn't really provide any useful information straight from the camera. Indeed, renaming images, in particular for expert editing challenges, would surely be more descriptive.
Just my opinion. I don't know what the SC think...
For cataloguing I use light room and add tags. No need to do any renaming in that case.
Make a copy for renaming (cataloging) and retain the original with original file name and original everything else -- at least until some time after the challenge has ended.
i went through my old submissions just now on my external harddisk. all of my entries that were validated in the past were also renamed before I sent them in. I haven't entered in a while so i guess i just forgot about that.
Re-naming a RAW file has no effect on the validity of the file as an original. That's one of the benefits of shooting RAW for DPC entries. They are *much* easier to maintain as valid originals.
Re-naming a RAW file has no effect on the validity of the file as an original. That's one of the benefits of shooting RAW for DPC entries. They are *much* easier to maintain as valid originals.
yeah, so it seems. I also read in a forum that you can shoot RAW+Jpeg, and submit the jpeg version as the original even if it's a small jpeg. didn't realize you could do this.
Re-naming a RAW file has no effect on the validity of the file as an original. That's one of the benefits of shooting RAW for DPC entries. They are *much* easier to maintain as valid originals.
...I also read in a forum that you can shoot RAW+Jpeg, and submit the jpeg version as the original even if it's a small jpeg. didn't realize you could do this.
I'd be careful with this, especially in Basic. If you processed your actual entry from the RAW original, but submitted the JPEG as your original file, it might not be possible for the SC to verify that it's possible to reproduce your end result from the JPEG. For instance, you could pull back highlights in RAW conversion that would be irrevocably blown in the JPEG, so you'd never be able to replicate your RAW-based editing results using the JPEG.
In any case, the only benefit of submitting the JPEG is faster upload time. Big deal. If I processed from RAW, I'd submit the RAW as the original. But that's just me.
...I also read in a forum that you can shoot RAW+Jpeg, and submit the jpeg version as the original even if it's a small jpeg. didn't realize you could do this.
I'd be careful with this, especially in Basic. If you processed your actual entry from the RAW original, but submitted the JPEG as your original file, it might not be possible for the SC to verify that it's possible to reproduce your end result from the JPEG. For instance, you could pull back highlights in RAW conversion that would be irrevocably blown in the JPEG, so you'd never be able to replicate your RAW-based editing results using the JPEG.
In any case, the only benefit of submitting the JPEG is faster upload time. Big deal. If I processed from RAW, I'd submit the RAW as the original. But that's just me.
I agree. If a RAW file exists I see no reason to really ever submit a jpeg as an original file. Too much of an unnecessary risk.
