The "Rules"

[BobTrips]

Pardon me if this is has been talked to death in the last month or so. I'm traveling and haven't had the opportunity to follow all the discussions.

I'd like to return to the discussion of what modifications are permitted to a submitted photo.

It seems as if we have gotten into a process of listing those editing techniques which are permissible (adjusting contrast, color, ...) and those which aren't (combining objects from different photos).

How about a different, and simplier standard?

This site is about traveling and what one might see. Why not limit the postings to things/scenes that one might possibly encounter while traveling?

This would rule out green camels and the Taj Mahal on the banks of the Nile.

[BobTrips]

Sometimes we manage to produce a photo which requires no editing to be pleasing to our eye.

When I shot slide film I constantly attempted to achieve perfection in one click. I rarely managed to produce a photo that couldn't be improved by editing.

Now I continue to attempt to produce a perfect photo each time I press the shutter but have no hesitation completing the process in the dry darkroom.

Some of us hold ourselves to the higher standard of 'no editing'. I view this is a very valid, but personal, standard.

For those who choose not to edit why not allow the self-annointed award of a "Bayleaf" or similar designation that the photo is in original form? (No disrepect meant to Bayleaf, I just remember that he prides himself on no/minimal editing).

[adam]

"How about a different, and simplier standard?"

I like simple. This is an interesting idea, as your many suggestions always are, Bob. Anyone have any arguments against this idea?