| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/16/2005 02:06:16 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Caitlyn:
Off topic, unless you are a paying member, you are only able to enter one contest at a time, is this correct?
|
Hi Caitlyn, welcome to DPC! It is correct that as an unpaid member, you can only enter one of the weekly challenges - you can choose between the two Basic Editing challenges. As a paid member, you can enter one of the two Basic Editing in addition to the Advanced Editing challenges (and any special ones that may pop up, like the Free Study). |
|
|
|
11/16/2005 02:22:03 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:
... but not everyone will vote them down. ... |
Everyone SHOULD vote them down. The rules say - "While voting, users are asked to keep in highest consideration the topic of the challenge and base their rating accordingly."
Here at dpc the Site Council enforces most of the rules, such as editing and date violations. But we, the voters, are entrusted with enforcing that entries meet the challenge topic. We expect the SC to strive for perfection in doing their part. We voters should do the same. We have room to improve.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 02:38:31 PM · #28 |
Alternatively, how about everyone just votes my image up? ;)
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 02:44:05 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
|
There's a problem of proof, though. Technically, unless you made your shot in a completely dark room with a single light source turned on, you are in violation of the topic. I doubt that many people went to that extreme.
R. [/quote]
Mine was taken in a dark room with only a flashlight, and it wasn't extreme at all. Certainly not difficult. I would certainly vote down any shot that doesn't look like it met the challenge. (haven't started voting yet) |
|
|
|
11/16/2005 03:00:33 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by FranziskaLang:
Alternatively, how about everyone just votes my image up? ;) |
Glad to see you back in the challenges.
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 03:03:45 PM · #31 |
Thanks ... I forgot how much fun this is. :)
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by FranziskaLang:
Alternatively, how about everyone just votes my image up? ;) |
Glad to see you back in the challenges. |
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 03:29:06 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:
the challenge was for a single artificial light to enhance your subject. what i am saying is that if you do not adhere to that rule, we will see sunsets, water drops, flowing water, baby pics etc.. because technically they didn't break the rules of editing. With that said, it makes every challenge a free study.
|
But don't you see that problem in nearly every challenge? Photos that are lovely, well planned and executed, but have no link to the challenge topic except maybe the title.
If this is seen as a 'technical challenge' as someone suggested, then maybe this should be emphasised in the challenge description, so we'd all know to stick to it, and voters would be more concious of it.
Judging by the comments in this thread a few people think my entry deserves a 1, but I'd be pretty demoralised if that happened. At present I'm on 5.4 (althought I haven't updated for at least 2 minutes now!) which may sound pathetic to a lot of you but is about average for me, so it shows voters aren't too concerned about my entry not meeting the challenge. |
|
|
|
11/16/2005 05:38:11 PM · #33 |
Not to be a dick, but if your picture doesn't use one artificial light to enhance your subject than it really deserves a 1. Not to say its not a technical/creative masterpiece that people will enjoy, but if it doesn't fit the challenge than it negates the entire 'set parameters' of a challenge.
No offense intended, but Im sure people see my point. |
|
|
|
11/16/2005 05:47:15 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:
Not to be a dick, but if your picture doesn't use one artificial light to enhance your subject than it really deserves a 1.
No offense intended, but Im sure people see my point. |
No offense intended here either, but this
could be seen as breaking the same rule.
At the end of the day, the voters make the decisions about an image, so we just have to see what happens. If everyone finds an image off-topic it deserves a low score, but if the image has some merits it can still do OK.
(Hope I don't sound like I'm on my high horse, because I'm fully aware that I'm a crap photographer) |
|
|
|
11/16/2005 06:02:50 PM · #35 |
I think meeting the challenge requirements is important. Otherwise, what's the point of having challenges? Why don't we all just take pictures of whatever we want with no guidelines at all?
I may become especially picky with this challenge, since I sat in a pitch black room for an hour trying to get a half decent shot!
I've also noticed how some challenges are meant to focus on technical aspects of photography rather than artistic aspects (eg. lighting vs camouflage) Voting on a technical challenge really should pay more attention to the details of the challenge.
That's my two cents ;)
|
|
|
|
11/16/2005 06:43:58 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Viking054:
I think meeting the challenge requirements is important. Otherwise, what's the point of having challenges? Why don't we all just take pictures of whatever we want with no guidelines at all?
I may become especially picky with this challenge, since I sat in a pitch black room for an hour trying to get a half decent shot!
I've also noticed how some challenges are meant to focus on technical aspects of photography rather than artistic aspects (eg. lighting vs camouflage) Voting on a technical challenge really should pay more attention to the details of the challenge.
That's my two cents ;) |
I think everyone should be quite picky on this challenge as the challenge description was quite defined in what was required. |
|
|
|
11/18/2005 08:45:07 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by scales:
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:
Not to be a dick, but if your picture doesn't use one artificial light to enhance your subject than it really deserves a 1.
No offense intended, but Im sure people see my point. |
No offense intended here either, but this
could be seen as breaking the same rule.
Just so you know, it finished 389th place out of 399 entries. Voters showed me next time follow the rules. I stand by my statement that yours should be a 1 if it didn't follow the rules.
At the end of the day, the voters make the decisions about an image, so we just have to see what happens. If everyone finds an image off-topic it deserves a low score, but if the image has some merits it can still do OK.
(Hope I don't sound like I'm on my high horse, because I'm fully aware that I'm a crap photographer) |
|
|
|
|
11/19/2005 02:12:09 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by Viking054:
I think meeting the challenge requirements is important. Otherwise, what's the point of having challenges? Why don't we all just take pictures of whatever we want with no guidelines at all?
I may become especially picky with this challenge, since I sat in a pitch black room for an hour trying to get a half decent shot!
I've also noticed how some challenges are meant to focus on technical aspects of photography rather than artistic aspects (eg. lighting vs camouflage) Voting on a technical challenge really should pay more attention to the details of the challenge.
That's my two cents ;) |
I think everyone should be quite picky on this challenge as the challenge description was quite defined in what was required. |
My reading of the challenge was to use a single artificial light source to create a dramatic effect. It doesn't say that there can't be any other light sources, just that a single artificial one has to create drama.
The ones that I liked best were the ones that achieved this without having to go into a dark room to do it.
All that said, any photo (in any challenge, whether it is a "technical" one or not) won't get better than a 4 from me if I don't think it meets the challege....no matter how good a photo it might be. However, I don't make a distinction between "technical" challenges and "non-technical" ones. You have to meet the challenge, whether the challenge is how it is shot or what is shot.
kat |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 03:02:46 PM · #39 |
I feel for Karen here and I have to acknowledge that she tried to do the right thing by asking for her image //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=258032 to be withdrawn.
She produced a truly stunning image and it made 4th, just 0.139 away from a ribbon so we do have to take issue with the rules.
The result of this particular situation is a gross injustice to those who have worked hard to comply with the technical requirements of the challenge by using just a single artificial light source. To deny oen of these photographers a top 10 place is just patently unfair. Again I emphasise this is not a critism of Karen, she tried to get her entry pulled.
As someone said, what is the point of even trying? Of course whether something has met the challenge rules is normally a very subjective thing. However in this case, the rules are crystal clear and well defined.
So ... is there a solution? I believe there is. A Challenge such as "Single Light source" could be marked as a "Technical Challenge" as a special rule. This yellow-flags it and allows the statement to be made that any image not using a single artificial light source will be disqualified.
Special rules have been used often and recently in "Pumpkin Carving" and "Triptyc". I'm sure there have been technical challenges in the past which would have benefitted from such an approach, perhaps never before has an non-copliance image scored so highly and therefore highlighted the issue to this extent.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2005 03:40:20 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by KiwiPix:
I feel for Karen here and I have to acknowledge that she tried to do the right thing by asking for her image //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=258032 to be withdrawn.
She produced a truly stunning image and it made 4th, just 0.139 away from a ribbon so we do have to take issue with the rules.
The result of this particular situation is a gross injustice to those who have worked hard to comply with the technical requirements of the challenge by using just a single artificial light source. To deny oen of these photographers a top 10 place is just patently unfair. Again I emphasise this is not a critism of Karen, she tried to get her entry pulled.
As someone said, what is the point of even trying? Of course whether something has met the challenge rules is normally a very subjective thing. However in this case, the rules are crystal clear and well defined.
So ... is there a solution? I believe there is. A Challenge such as "Single Light source" could be marked as a "Technical Challenge" as a special rule. This yellow-flags it and allows the statement to be made that any image not using a single artificial light source will be disqualified.
Special rules have been used often and recently in "Pumpkin Carving" and "Triptyc". I'm sure there have been technical challenges in the past which would have benefitted from such an approach, perhaps never before has an non-copliance image scored so highly and therefore highlighted the issue to this extent. |
You make some very valid points but I'm not sure we can get around this problem, basically it's an honour system and the only reason we know about Karen's entry is she called herself out. |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:02:04 PM · #41 |
In defense of us who gave the image a high score:
Over the past weeks I have voted on 1000's of images in a score of challenges. I consider myself a rather strict constructionist regarding meeting a challenge, if an image doesn't meet my interpretation of the challenge topic it gets a 1, only because I can't give 0's. That said, I do also apply the widest possible definition of the challenge I can imagine.
When I voted on the picture in question, I scored it a 9, finding the patterns made a dramatic pleasing image. I understood what the light source was, it was a window with blinds. I don't think I've every seen a natural window, let alone one with blinds. Of course I assumed the light behind the blinds was the sun, but it could have been a streetlight, car headlights, a flood light, or the glow of a UFO. What was important to me was that the ultimate source was the window, an artificial source.
Perhaps this whole issue is simply a matter of perspective. I glad Karen got to share this photo with us, and glad it scored as well as it did.
|
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:14:11 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by KiwiPix:
...perhaps never before has an non-copliance image scored so highly and therefore highlighted the issue to this extent. |
I missed a ribbon for Miniature by .008 points with THIS entry. There certainly wasn't anything "miniature" in the shot, so your criticism would be equally justified on that one. Not meeting the challenge has never been grounds for DQ, and for good reason: even when the description seems clear, people have different interpretations of what DOES meet the challenge. The appearance of a natural light source or miniature subject might be a 1 for some people and a 10 for others. It's up to each voter to judge for themselves. I wouldn't have it any other way. ;-) |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:15:02 PM · #43 |
I'll second what Jammur just said. You can go back through all the past challenges and find ribbon winners that could easily be interpreted as not meeting the challenge. I also looked at it as the window and blinds created the artificial light.
In any event, not meeting the challenge has never been a reason for DQ'ing so I don't even know why this is being debated.
 |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:15:20 PM · #44 |
OK...I am taking a chance here, because I suggested this before and got no response from the masses :))
I was thinking that we could have two scores for each image, one for fitting the challenge and 2 for the image itself..the average of the 2 could be the winner, and we could have a ribbon for best meeting the challenge, or just image, as well....more bang for yer buck, no??!
This problem comes up over and over again, I think we need Some kind of resolution that keeps everyone sort of, kinda happy.... |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:21:20 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Rae-Ann:
OK...I am taking a chance here, because I suggested this before and got no response from the masses :))
I was thinking that we could have two scores for each image, one for fitting the challenge and 2 for the image itself..the average of the 2 could be the winner, and we could have a ribbon for best meeting the challenge, or just image, as well....more bang for yer buck, no??!
This problem comes up over and over again, I think we need Some kind of resolution that keeps everyone sort of, kinda happy.... |
There have been lots of suggestions of breaking down the voting into categories - I campaigned heavily for it when I first "moved in" - it's been discussed and debated over and over and it always comes back to keeping it simple - the way it is. :) |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:21:38 PM · #46 |
I commend Karen for voluntarily requesting that her photo be DQ'd, but I don't think that it should be DQ'd.
If we had an Ice Cream challenge, where the challenge description said to "take your best picture of ice cream this week", and someone took a photo of an ice cream sundae, except that they substituted mashed potatoes for ice cream, since mashed potatoes look like ice cream yet don't melt under hot studio lights, then should that photo be DQ'd, too? I don't think so. Your opintion may differ...
Message edited by author 2005-11-27 16:22:26. |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:23:18 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
they substituted mashed potatoes for ice cream, since mashed potatoes look like ice cream |
Mmmmmmm.... mashed potatoes and hot fudge... |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:25:43 PM · #48 |
As some people have said, whats the point in having a challenge if people dont take any notice of the challenge description?
I see just too many entries that are so way off the challenge topic that it makes me look at them, wonder why the hell anyone could or would want to enter that particaular photo and why am I wasting my time.
Its come to the stage now that I am finding it very difficult to vote on any of the challenges. I am even finding it difficult to enter any challenges anymore , why bother? I can sit in a room with a candle take a hundred photo's of a Buddah (yeh it was boring) and enter it when I could have used sunlight or moonlight or whatever but then I would have felt that I had cheated everybody and I cant do that.
Karen - your photo is excellent, you did request a dq (well sort of). There is only one honourable way out...
|
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:27:33 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by MikeOwens:
There is only one honourable way out... |
And what would that be? |
|
|
|
11/27/2005 04:28:55 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
Originally posted by MikeOwens:
There is only one honourable way out... |
And what would that be? |
hara-kiri (sp?) |
|
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: 11/01/2025 09:50:09 AM EDT.
