| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/12/2005 03:40:56 PM · #1 |
So at the bottom of my submission there is now a note that says, âYour submission has been validated, thank youâ. This is all find and well good but I was not even aware that it was being looked at, nobody ask for the original.
Well I guess it is good to be validated.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2005 03:42:37 PM · #2 |
Me too!! I was just coming to ask about the very same thing! No one asked me for an original either, so I don't know why it would be considered officially valid yet... weird.
Message edited by author 2005-02-12 15:42:59. |
|
|
|
02/12/2005 03:43:28 PM · #3 |
Probably something in your comments that explained the issue that was being questioned.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2005 03:49:08 PM · #4 |
There are a number of questions that might arise for which we don't need an original to answer conclusively. In these cases, we just vote on the subitted photo.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2005 03:52:03 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
There are a number of questions that might arise for which we don't need an original to answer conclusively. In these cases, we just vote on the subitted photo. |
Doesn't that get confusing if you later need to date validate it or validate it for other reasons? |
|
|
|
02/12/2005 03:56:32 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Originally posted by kirbic:
There are a number of questions that might arise for which we don't need an original to answer conclusively. In these cases, we just vote on the subitted photo. |
Doesn't that get confusing if you later need to date validate it or validate it for other reasons? |
It is still possible to "back up" and request an original if that is found to be warranted.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2005 04:01:01 PM · #7 |
| ah, I bet someone reported mine for being "not pink enough" as I do have a couple comments on that. (But 18 other people who think the pink is just fine... ;) ) |
|
|
|
02/12/2005 05:30:31 PM · #8 |
I got the message too -- I was about to ask what it means. Does that mean someone requested validation on my photo? I guess if that's the case, the site council could just tell it wasn't illegal because I didn't get a request.
Good job site council! thumbs up from me :-D
|
|
|
|
02/12/2005 07:08:06 PM · #9 |
I just found one of those comments on mine, too. Was about to start asking questions *s*.
Sounds like the poor SC is being kept busy by someone. |
|
|
|
02/12/2005 07:45:50 PM · #10 |
Me TOO! I'm thrilled! My first validation. I can now say, proudly, that my art has validity!
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2005 07:50:42 PM · #11 |
| In my '3' submission I was asked to supply original but no-one ever got back to me and as far as I know I wasn't DQ'd or validated???? |
|
|
|
02/12/2005 07:51:46 PM · #12 |
| If your photo is still posted in the challenge, you weren't DQed. We only put the validation notice on certain photos that have had many requests about the validity of editing. |
|
|
|
02/12/2005 07:53:21 PM · #13 |
Hee Hee! Better yet! "Many Requests"! The Power of Pink!
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2005 08:08:32 PM · #14 |
In that case, I have to wonder why the original was called for. If it was to see more naked female flesh then I hope whoever was viewing it wasn't eating at the time...it wasn't pretty:)
Maybe I should post it in my portfolio with "Gross" warnings:D |
|
|
|
02/12/2005 08:21:17 PM · #15 |
| I have a pretty good idea what one or more people are complaining about in the photo, in order to keep some degree on anonymity about whoâs photo is who I wonât say what it is beyond saying that it involves a form of editing that someone might not realizes is legal. Donât look at me like you all donât know what I am talking about either, you all know what you did. |
|
|
|
04/02/2005 08:42:40 AM · #16 |
| What the heck people? What's all the fuss about validating pictures? Id appreciate if someone could explain to me how you draw a line between request for validation and quality of the photo. I just submitted my first photo here the other day and was immediately request to submit the original. Is it supposed to mean the DPC team liked my photo???? thank you for any comments on this. |
|
|
|
04/02/2005 08:58:10 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by thelucas:
What the heck people? What's all the fuss about validating pictures? Id appreciate if someone could explain to me how you draw a line between request for validation and quality of the photo. I just submitted my first photo here the other day and was immediately request to submit the original. Is it supposed to mean the DPC team liked my photo???? thank you for any comments on this. |
It has nothing to do with quality per se; someone who voted on your image, maybe more than one person, thinks it looks like the rules were not followed, and calls it to the SC's attention. The SC looks, and if neccessary asks you for the oringinal image so they can determine if the rules were, in fact, followed in the submitted image.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
04/02/2005 10:49:32 AM · #18 |
Also, to clarify in response to some of the earlier posts in this thread.
At that time there was a procedural error where one or more member of Site Council had validated some photos even though no proof had been requested (that is, a DQ request came in, we voted that the DQ request was without merit, and someone clicked validate). In all cases, the validation was done WITHOUT an admin note, so the fact that the entry was validated was only visible to the submitter.
This has since been corrected, and it is now no longer possible to validate an entry on which proof has not been received.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
04/02/2005 02:01:01 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by mk:
If your photo is still posted in the challenge, you weren't DQed. We only put the validation notice on certain photos that have had many requests about the validity of editing. |
Does this mean that there must be more than one request for DQ on an image before the SC will rule on it's legality?
|
|
|
|
04/02/2005 02:10:57 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
This has since been corrected, and it is now no longer possible to validate an entry on which proof has not been received.
-Terry |
Does this mean that the SC can no longer rule an entry legal without receiving the original file? I thought that SC could make the ruling without the file if they were satisfied that there was no violation based on considering the issue raised by the person requesting the DQ, looking at the entry, and consideing the what the photog put into the Photographer's Comments section. Has this changed too?
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/09/2025 11:50:24 PM EDT.
