Yeah, but I don't think that them not having as many PS skills than others is in fact a "disadvantage" or makes an unlevel playing field. To me, it is no different than somebody entering the contest who has more photographic technical knowledge than the guy next to him. Or for that matter, the guy sporting the latest Nikon film body (or whatever), when compared with someone sporting an old Spotmatic. I think that it should be judged on the final results that are presented to the judges and not how the photographer achieved the result. PS manipulation to me is akin to dodging and burning etc in the darkroom - it is a means to an end and it is the artists vision that should be judged.
As long as every entrant has access to all of the available mediums/technologies etc, then that is what I would consider a level playing field, and comparing one person's knowledge or skills base is irrelevant. The display of somebody's knowledge, skills, creative vision in the form of a captured image is what the competition is all about, imho. However, practically speaking, it needs to be as easy for the judges as possible and by adding all these twists and turns it would only make things more complicated. And, god help us if some quick fingered theif ever climbed the mountain during that particular weekend, can you imagine the $$$ value of all of the equipment being carted up there?!?! And if we are talking of adding photoprinters and laptops to the mix, holey dooly! tan. > Or allow PhotoShop manipulation as Paul suggested. Though I think that > distinctly makes an unlevel playing field. As some are a lot better at > it. But maybe > that would make any worries go away. Wouldn't help those that do not > have > laptops, but the rules would be clear that those without would > probably be at a > disadvantage. >
