Advance Editing Question - DPChallenge Forums

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

05/05/2005 03:01:20 PM · #1

"Literal photographic representations of existing works of art (including your own) are not considered acceptable submissions, however creative depictions or interpretations are permissible. This includes, but is not limited to paintings, sculptures, photographs, drawings, computer artwork, computer monitors, and televisions. A literal representation is one which is composed in such a way as to compel the voter to rate only the work of art represented and not the artistic decisions made by the photographer (e.g., lighting, composition, background elements, etc)."text

Now just exactly what does this mean. Does this mean that if the image is of a statue or a monument and is composed in such a way that the emphasis is on color, shape, and texture that is would be allowed? Please define this for me... Thanks in advance

Chinabun

Canon PowerShot SD990 IS

05/05/2005 03:12:05 PM · #2

i think it means that you can use those items art, photos, tv, etc in your photograph but it cant be the main subject. the voter shouldnt be voting on those items but how you might use those items in a photo..lots of people use statues and monuments they are architecture..Example "take a photo of a lake" u cant take a photo of a painting of a lake.

faidoi

Pentax K10D

05/05/2005 03:17:13 PM · #3

Taking a straight picture of the Mona Lisa is a no-no, but taking a picture of someone viewing the Mona Lisa is ok.

05/05/2005 03:17:58 PM · #4

In a nutshell, you must show the photographer's influence in some way. There should be something more than just the artwork itself in the image- added objects, unusual lighting or angles, significant context, etc. Let me know if you're still confused.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

05/05/2005 03:22:19 PM · #5

This is illegal, because the viewer can only react to the artwork:

This is OK, because it demonstrates some photographic choices in addition to the artwork:

Canon EOS-20D

05/05/2005 03:26:23 PM · #6

Originally posted by scalvert:

This is illegal, because the viewer can only react to the artwork:

Actually, I would vote that one as legal and this one as illegal.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/05/2005 03:27:52 PM · #7

Originally posted by scalvert:

This is illegal, because the viewer can only react to the artwork:

I don't know, I'm contemplating why a museum curator would allow Mona to be hung out-of-square ... if the frame was cropped off and it was only the painting, it would definitely be illegal.

Yeah, like mk demonstrates while I type too slowly!

Message edited by author 2005-05-05 15:28:31.

05/05/2005 03:28:31 PM · #8

You're right. There IS some slight dimension and context, but it's BAAAARELY legal.

Message edited by author 2005-05-05 15:31:43.

Man_Called_Horse

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

05/05/2005 03:42:40 PM · #9

this is a montage, with no origianl photograph.

So how much original pix has to be present before DQed?

05/05/2005 03:49:19 PM · #10

Ok., O.k., I'm gonna send ya another example here in a few minutes. It may blow a challenge entry, but it will be worth it.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

05/05/2005 04:24:43 PM · #11

1.) Legal due to lighting, colors, texture....? Or illegal?

2) Legal because of other scenery and people or Illegal

Message edited by author 2005-05-05 16:28:56.

Canon EOS-20D

05/05/2005 04:28:01 PM · #12

Originally posted by sofapez:

1.) Legal due to lighting, colors, texture....? Or illegal?

2) Legal because of other scenery and people or Illegal

I'd say both legal.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/05/2005 04:31:33 PM · #13

Sorry I had to edit, 1st time posting images.... woops

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/05/2005 04:36:57 PM · #14

I try to be "liberal" about this rule and would probably vote legal, but I believe you are treading as close to the line as you can get, and you'd quite possibly get votes to DQ as well.

I try to judge it by whether the photo would be suitable for a catalog, or in a travel book -- "Here is the famous Statue of ___ in the city of ____."

05/05/2005 04:39:54 PM · #15

Both legal, for the reasons you listed. There's more to each photo than just the art.

Message edited by author 2005-05-05 16:40:22.

buzzmom

Panasonic DMC-FZ20

05/05/2005 04:42:45 PM · #16

as long as we are on this subject...who approves the dq's....for example if someone feels that a photo should be dq'd, is the photographer approached and asked to support their entry or is it just pulled....

05/05/2005 04:50:35 PM · #17

So then to be legal the image must be more than a documentary photograph of a piece of "art". The photograph must have other attributes, however slight (background for mona lisa, color intensity, texture, background, people...)? (just nailing it down)

05/05/2005 04:57:42 PM · #18

Originally posted by sofapez:

Bingo.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

05/05/2005 05:02:05 PM · #19

Originally posted by buzzmom:

who approves the dq's....

If you (or anyone else) feels that an image is legally questionable, you may "recommend this photograph for disqualification." The Site Council will take a look and request proof if necessary. The SC members then discuss any issues and vote their opinions. The majority opinions rule, and the photo is validated or DQ'd as appropriate.

Dr.Confuser

Nikon D800

05/05/2005 05:04:06 PM · #20

Originally posted by sofapez:

Agree, but be aware this is an area that is a matter of interpretation. Some photos have been allowed which in my view ought to have been DQ'd. Others have been DQ'd that would seem to meet your test. Tread lightly and ask yourself whether it is really something unique or just a representation of the art. You might want to PM a few SC members to get a pre-submission opinion. I have done this in the past and received good guidance.

Man_Called_Horse

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

05/05/2005 05:05:19 PM · #21

so again, how much of the original pix has to be included before it is considered a DQ.

05/05/2005 05:06:23 PM · #22

Originally posted by Digital Quixote:

Originally posted by sofapez:
So then to be legal the image must be more than a documentary photograph of a piece of "art". The photograph must have other attributes, however slight (background for mona lisa, color intensity, texture, background, people...)? (just nailing it down)

Agree, but be aware this is an area that is a matter of interpretation. Some photos have been allowed which in my view ought to have been DQ'd. Others have been DQ'd that would seem to meet your test. Tread lightly and ask yourself whether it is really something unique or just a representation of the art. You might want to PM a few SC members to get a pre-submission opinion. I have done this in the past and received good guidance.

Do you send them the image when you do this?

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

05/05/2005 05:07:16 PM · #23

Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:

so again, how much of the original pix has to be included before it is considered a DQ.

I have no answer to this, anybody?

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

05/05/2005 05:18:34 PM · #24

Direct from the rules:

Adjustments can be made selectively to your photo. Cloning, dodging, burning, etc. to improve your photo or remove imperfections or minor distracting elements, etc. is acceptable. However, using any editing tools to duplicate, create, or move major elements of your photograph is not permitted.