Barry 472 Report post Posted March 10, 2018 A text book response, but we don’t live in a text book world. Why do I have to reduce my 1920*1080 Image to 900 pixels height for a competition where the image is likely to be thrown out because it’s a few pixels larger. The difference in quality is down to me, if there is one. Even if there is, it’s the authors choice. I will argue the difference between 1620 and 1920 is nothing so why force people into rules and regulations when they seem to be created to boost the egos of a minority. If our judges cannot see a hill on the horizon, so badly cloned that it has an identical twin, then talking about a minute difference in quality when comparing two extremes is hardly the vital thing. This month I have an image in mind from our clubs competition that has a raging blue cast. Judges miss that too, so when we discuss quality, it’s not the sharpness of the image that is the crucial point. The issue for me is more about unnecessary rules rather than any quality issues. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barry 472 Report post Posted March 29, 2018 I was unable to test large images against HD ones at the camera club this month, because when we got to our meeting rooms, the power had been cut off. Some issue involving the energy company, but it meant our meeting had to be cancelled. I may try next month if time permits 1 Morturn reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
