Dear Alex and Matthew,

I just watched this episode and wanted to send a proper thank you

(and also file a formal complaint, because you’ve made me feel oddly relaxed about competition submissions):

The Underwater Photography Show - How We Process Our Underwater Photos:

Seriously—thank you. You tackled the RAW-check topic in a way that didn’t feel like a courtroom drama, but also didn’t hide behind “trust us, it’s fine.” For the first time in a long time, a chunk of my contest anxiety quietly left the building. 🫠

For context: I’ve definitely done the two classic, equally ridiculous things that happen when confidence is low and the “invisible line” is unclear. On one end, I’ve submitted images almost untouched because I thought, “well, at least nobody can accuse me of anything.” Genius move - like entering a cooking contest with raw potatoes. On the other end, I’ve also gone full mad scientist in post because the line in my head kept moving, and I didn’t know what a jury would still consider reasonable. Your episode didn’t just explain the why; it cleared the fog.

Now, since you’ve already built a perfectly good stage and proven you can talk about sensitive stuff without setting the internet on fire, I have a wish episode request-selfish, yes, but I suspect a lot of underwater photographers would binge it immediately.

Could you do a special where a few brave souls (say, 3-6 volunteer UPY winners or past finalists) show their unprocessed RAW, then the final, and walk through what they actually did? Not in a “hand over the sacred secrets” way - more in a “here’s what a real, jury-safe workflow looks like when it’s done by someone who knows what they’re doing” way. Something that turns the abstract “how much editing is acceptable?” into concrete, visible examples.

And if you ever feel like going full premium content: a second episode concept I’d call “Winners & Sinners” (said with love). Imagine one to three extremely confident underwater photographers volunteering for a constructive post-mortem with Alex in juror mode: why something failed the RAW check, or why the RAW check might have pushed it off the top spot. Done with full consent, with a genuinely educational tone, and with the kind of humour and care you two already bring - so it’s never a public shaming exercise, just a rare look behind the curtain.

Alex, timing-wise, this might be a perfect one to record fairly soon while your judging impressions are still fresh. But to avoid any weirdness, speculation, or accidental comment-section chaos, you could feature images from earlier UPY years rather than the most recent winners - so nobody turns it into “this is about this year’s results,” and it stays purely about learning.

I know it’s sensitive territory. But that’s exactly why it would be so valuable. The uncertainty is what makes people do silly things - like submitting totally unprocessed files out of fear, or editing until the pixels start writing resignation letters. A calm, example-based, behind-the-scenes look - done in your style - be wildly helpful and genuinely inspiring.

Anyway: thank you again for the episode. You didn’t just explain RAW checks - you cured a little bit of the underwater photography community’s collective overthinking. Which, if you ask me, deserves at least a small trophy and a dramatic stingray fanfare.

Warmly,
a grateful viewer

Edited January 7Jan 7 by Davide DB
Added embedded link per user request

Thank you! Very happy that you liked our Christmas episode.

My experience of checking many RAW files for UW contests down the years is:

About 80% of shots that win are shot very well - with only the minor tweaking, small or no crops, similar to what Matthew and I did with our good shots in the video. I think many photographers would be shocked how most of the winners have actually had very little done to them.

About 15% have had bigger changes - bigger crops, large adjustments in colour, white balance, exposure, strong adjustments on masks etc - but all within the rules - but making quite noticeable changes.

About 5% fail - either by people deliberately pushing the limit and hoping nobody will check. Or by people processing an image when they first took, not thinking about contests, and then entering the processed file without remembering what they had done.

I'd also add that several times I have seen photos awarded in contests that I have seen in other contests, checked the RAW files and failed them. So I know that a couple of contests out there are not strict on enforcing their RAW file rules - despite saying they have them (better just to say they won't do them).

Anyway, I am going to be checking 200 RAW files from UPY 2026 in the next few days - so hopefully there won't be any new lessons or surprises!

Alex

Thanks so much for the detailed breakdown, Alex — that’s exactly the kind of reality check people rarely hear, and it’s incredibly helpful.

This line especially jumped out at me:

4 hours ago, Alex_Mustard said:

About 15% have had bigger changes - bigger crops, large adjustments in colour, white balance, exposure, strong adjustments on masks etc - but all within the rules - but making quite noticeable changes.

I suspect that “15% zone” is the part most photographers are most curious about — not because we want loopholes, but because it’s where the work becomes visibly transformative while still being completely legitimate. And it’s also where a lot of the confusion (and insecurity) tends to live.

Also, there are images where “noticeable processing” isn’t just optional polish, but part of what makes the photograph possible at all — provided it’s within the rules and properly declared. Things like HDR, stitches, and panoramas come to mind. A great example is the kind of wreck panorama work Tobi has produced in past years. That sort of result simply doesn’t happen without deliberate, skilled post work (and usually a pile of source frames).

Which leads me to a cheeky follow-up wish: if Tobi is literally with you right now as an interview guest for the show, could you grab him before he flies back to Germany and persuade him to do a “behind the curtain” walkthrough of one of those stitched wreck panoramas? Seeing the RAWs/source frames and how the final panorama is assembled (and then what the contest-specific “acceptable limits” look like around that) would be absolutely gold.

For example, something along these lines is exactly the kind of image that would make people go “wait… how is this allowed?” and then learn something genuinely useful:

And good luck (and strong coffee) for the UPY 2026 RAW-check marathon — hoping for zero surprises and maximum honesty from everyone entering.

Warmly, a grateful viewer

I suppose most didn't catch Matthew's comment, but I'd also be interested in how other color-deficient folks handle that defect. I also have a bit of red-green deficiency but rarely have someone tell me my colors are out of whack.

3 hours ago, RVBldr said:

I suppose most didn't catch Matthew's comment, but I'd also be interested in how other color-deficient folks handle that defect. I also have a bit of red-green deficiency but rarely have someone tell me my colors are out of whack.

the method shown below using Levels will automatically setup your colours - providing you have a full histogram with a bit of room at each end to allow you to make the needed adjustments.

https://www.photoreview.com.au/tips/editing/advanced-levels-adjustments/

It will properly correct a photo that is under flashed for example, very occasionally it might need a little more green removed or blue added, which you do with the midtones slider in the appropriate channel. Sometimes you might need to tone down specular highlights, but it works well for 95% of images.

We've done a follow up RAW episode - discussion about contests - which will be out in about a week (I am rather busy right now).

Alex

I have never entered an UW photo contest and the last contest of any sort that I entered was black and white film contest of street and people shots. I entered what I shot and developed in the darkroom because that is all there was.

I think there should be two tiers of entries, manipulated/processed using the various software and AI and then the other being the jpeg straight from the camera with no editing or cropping allowed and verified against the RAW.

Edit to add, I never said nor inferred one superior to the other, only that there should be a level playing field with known rules, one could be the wild, wild west, anything goes, the other nothing allowed.

Edited January 9Jan 9 by Nemrod

I guess that there‘s a contest for everyone out there. Non-processed is not „morally superior“ to AI-sharpened - it‘s a matter of budget (mostly) and taste. But if you enter a contest, you want the judges to make sure that everyone adheres to the SAME set of rules. And in the end, it should be the most pleasing pictures that win, not the most perfectioned ones (my opinion).