By George Hilbish

31 August 2008

I've notice lots of images that appear to be non jpg images based on JPG standards and what makes it worse, they're getting tons of kudos. Of course, I'm still trying to get over the fact that the voting process isn't really about the image but rather about friends and contacts and how many thumbs up you give out etc. but, this is just one more thing that JPG Mag does that gets on my nerves.

Should people be able to submit what is clearly out of the realm of 'true" photography? They say you can't.

I mean, if you can't create it in a bath, then it shouldn't be in JPG Mag, right? That's the rub. What can be created and what can't? Some things are obvious but there is a world of material that is suspect. Who gets to decide? Some of your best work may be one of these suspect images. Poof, sorry, no go.

For example, I use a software that manipulates light and contrast in a specific way. (Non are on JPG.) It's obvious they cannot be created in a traditional liquid lab. Are they photos or graphic art? I'm not a graphic artist and say they are photos that have been rendered. That's my term for manipulation beyond lighting etc., rendering.

Hey, I like JPG. I'm on here everyday. I've said it before, this is a great business model. They've got the lot of us, hook, line and sinker. I would just like a little more clarification.

« Back to All Stories

Your turn: What are you thinking about today? Write a Personal Post!