| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/18/2006 02:17:57 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by deapee:
I could tell the second I saw the photo that it wasn't done in basic editing. I'd be willing to bet the 'original' isn't missing. |
Innocent until proven guilty - guess that's your motto eh? ;^)
edit to say the above comment was being sarcastic, but it may not be read correctly...so, I'll rephrase:
Guilty until proven innocent - guess that's your motto eh? ;^)
Message edited by author 2006-08-18 14:20:54. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:21:05 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by MIN-BITER:
Is it really that great to win a challenge BECAUSE another pic was dqed ?? I guess that the new winner still considers owning a red, or at least it would be my case. In such situation I think that the real winner should have a warning, with all his upcoming pictures being controled instead of removing his ribbon. Rules are too rigid here ! |
Let's look at the flip side -- I work hard on a shot that comes in fourth. Not bad. I followed all the rules, and provided my original when asked. Then, I find out that one of the winner's could not provide their original, even though they checked the box saying they could before they entered. My shot got beat by someone not following the rules. yea, that's fun. and fair. and worth it.
The rules are rigid here for a reason. It helps to perserve the integrity of the site and that measn that the results, even if jsut little pixel ribbons, actually mean something, at least within the community. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:27:03 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
It's pretty darn rare that a blue ribbon winner gets "constructive" criticism after the results, and usually not in the photo comment area (unless requested). Yes, I've seen follow-up posted in forums along the vein of "why did this image...?", etc...that critiques the winners, and even then that's pretty darn rare as well.
Anyone can read the comments in the recently DQ'd image that this thread is about. I'll not say more but let each decide for themselves if any comments seemed disrespectful. |
Could that be because anyone who dares express anything less than gushing praise is immediately thrashed? Why are the ribbon winners off limits? We call ourselves a learning site, we complain about how "out of the box" always fails and yet, we accept nothing other than holy praise for what the majority has ruled the winner. Why? Why is someone's opinion suddenly less valid because the challenge has ended? That we can't express less than favorable opinions simply because everyone else likes something seems pretty ludicrous to me. There was nothing "sour grapes" about Imagineer's critique. And to those who find it disrespectful, I'd be interested to know how you justify multiple threads full of personal attacks.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:43:02 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by imagineer:
"I think you're actually very lucky to be blue, as I'm sure you realise too. This is a relatively average, over exposed shot made 'better' by some fairly clumsy processing. Sorry, but this is the kind of editing becoming prevalent here at DPC and it's not a good thing." |
I think it was this portion of the comment that was so inflammatory. Many who responded likely read it as an attack on DPC in general. "this is the kind of editing becoming prevalent here at DPC" which he had just called "fairly clumsy". Not only that, but now everybody else who voted the shot high is having their taste called into question because we voted for something "clumsy" and "very lucky to be blue".
I'm surprised there wasn't a stronger reaction. The rest of the comment, a more typical critique I think is totally reasonable, but to say the blue doesn't deserve to be there is to question every person who voted it a blue...
|
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:48:06 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by mk:
... Could that be because anyone who dares express anything less than gushing praise is immediately thrashed? Why are the ribbon winners off limits? We call ourselves a learning site, we complain about how "out of the box" always fails and yet, we accept nothing other than holy praise for what the majority has ruled the winner. Why? Why is someone's opinion suddenly less valid because the challenge has ended? That we can't express less than favorable opinions simply because everyone else likes something seems pretty ludicrous to me. There was nothing "sour grapes" about Imagineer's critique. And to those who find it disrespectful, I'd be interested to know how you justify multiple threads full of personal attacks. |
Hmmm. Not sure where/who this was directed at, but since you used my quote I'd better clarify a couple of things.
1) I never used the term "sour grapes"...that came from somewhere else.
2) I've not posted anything specific about any user nor quoted any specific comments - I said that people can look at the comments posted and come to their own conclusions.
3) "...multiple threads full of personal attacks." ??? I hope you're talking in general terms as I've not started any threads of such nature. If such threads are out there 9 out of 10 times I'm defending the person being attacked if I participate in that thread.
As for my position on comments posted to a ribbon winning image after the challenge is over - I still stand by what I said; I think negative remarks at that point are out of place. Discuss it in forums sure, but why rain on someone's parade. JMO of course. ;^)
Wow. So much effort...think I'll get back to work and let everyone else have fun in here. ;^) |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:50:00 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
... I'm surprised there wasn't a stronger reaction. The rest of the comment, a more typical critique I think is totally reasonable, but to say the blue doesn't deserve to be there is to question every person who voted it a blue... |
Geez. What HE said. ;^) Well stated...and more gutsy that me. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:52:42 PM · #32 |
Sorry, Barry. Really only my first sentence was in response to your post. The rest was just in general to everyone involved.
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I'm surprised there wasn't a stronger reaction. The rest of the comment, a more typical critique I think is totally reasonable, but to say the blue doesn't deserve to be there is to question every person who voted it a blue... |
Using that logic, we really ought to flame every person who posts in a "underrated pics" thread, right? I mean, aren't they questioning every person who voted it wherever it ended up? |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:54:10 PM · #33 |
| What bothers me is, that if so many peoples were sure that it was violating the basic editing rules, how come nobody requested this picture to be validated during the voting period? |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:56:34 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by mk:
Using that logic, we really ought to flame every person who posts in a "underrated pics" thread, right? I mean, aren't they questioning every person who voted it wherever it ended up? |
Usually underrated threads don't come with comparable phrases to "very lucky" and "fairly clumsy".
Most people who post to an underrated thread are saying, "this photo spoke to me although it didn't to everybody". The few times someone has actually said "you guys are idiots for voting this low" (specialk and his own photos quickly spring to mind) they HAVE been flamed quite crispily...
Message edited by author 2006-08-18 14:57:41.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:57:32 PM · #35 |
It's absolutely fine to post an honest critique of any shot, ribbon winner or not, including what you don't like. Whether a shot is a ribbon winner or not should make no difference in how we critique it.
It's true, ribbon winners don't get many critical remarks, but that shoudn't be unexpected. A shot that surpasses perhaps hundreds of competitors in voting is bound to get darn few negative reactions.
Accusatory comments/posts are a completely different animal. They are not constructive in any way. DPC clearly asks *all* to vote as if a shot were legal, and if the voter suspects otherwise, to ask for it to be reviewed for validity. As Shannon posted, all we know in this case is that an original was not available. A file *was* provided (twice) but it was not valid due to how it was saved/transferred.
The "vigilantism" leaves a new user with a very negative impression of our community, one that is in large part innacurate. Let's all do our part to make sure this doesn't happen again.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2006 02:58:08 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Alain_cdn:
What bothers me is, that if so many peoples were sure that it was violating the basic editing rules, how come nobody requested this picture to be validated during the voting period? |
Then it could have ended up even higher, since many people were probably (improperly) lowering their vote rather than requesting validation. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:00:59 PM · #37 |
Ribbon or not, if there is no more room for critique then why wasn't it a unanimous vote of 10?
I personally don't think it should matter when a comment comes in HOWEVER I've tried critiquing a ribbon winning photo a few times in the past and got nothing but flack for it.
It's not rude, it's just honest. It's so hard on this site to know when people are happy and willing to hear constructive comments and when they don't. That is by far my largest frustration here.
IMO there is NO SUCH THING as a perfect photo. There always be different perspectives on what may make a photo better - no matter who shoots it.
I don't agree that the forum is the place to critique a photo after the challenge. The photo is the place to critique the photo, otherwisw they may as well lock the comments box after a challenge. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:12:41 PM · #38 |
| a lot of this brings me back to my request/suggestion that they offer up separate counts of comments made before and after a challenge... |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:14:39 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by skiprow:
a lot of this brings me back to my request/suggestion that they offer up separate counts of comments made before and after a challenge... |
Perhaps after the challenge, there should simply be a check box that says "good job" and no comment area at all. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:17:09 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by MIN-BITER:
Is it really that great to win a challenge BECAUSE another pic was dqed ?? I guess that the new winner still considers owning a red, or at least it would be my case. In such situation I think that the real winner should have a warning, with all his upcoming pictures being controled instead of removing his ribbon. Rules are too rigid here ! |
Let's look at the flip side -- I work hard on a shot that comes in fourth. Not bad. I followed all the rules, and provided my original when asked. Then, I find out that one of the winner's could not provide their original, even though they checked the box saying they could before they entered. My shot got beat by someone not following the rules. yea, that's fun. and fair. and worth it.
The rules are rigid here for a reason. It helps to perserve the integrity of the site and that measn that the results, even if jsut little pixel ribbons, actually mean something, at least within the community. |
I don't think that being 4th instead of 5th makes of you a better photographer, above all if you reach this new rank because another person cheated (and this has to be proved). If the 'cheater' hadn't played, voters would not have appreciated your picture more, that's for sure !
I'm taking part in challenges to improve my skill by getting opinions, not to get the highest mark possible or to collect as many ribbons as possible, simply because it's meaningless. All of these numbers, marks, ribbons, are for children, I think that personal improvement counts much more than admiration of other users to your rank. So... if you're a ribbon hunter, i understand your position, but if your goal is to improve yourself, questions of justice shouldn't be taken in consideration as far as YOU respect rules. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:19:59 PM · #41 |
And I quote:
Originally posted by kirbic:
As Shannon posted, all we know in this case is that an original was not available. A file *was* provided (twice) but it was not valid due to how it was saved/transferred.
The "vigilantism" leaves a new user with a very negative impression of our community, one that is in large part innacurate. Let's all do our part to make sure this doesn't happen again. |
Message edited by author 2006-08-18 15:20:37. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:21:26 PM · #42 |
Everybody needs to chill the hell out, put this in the rants or something, get over it! Whether the guy made a mistake or did it on purpose, either way it was caught & the people that deserved the ribbons (legally) got them. I emailed the SC & asked for a self-DQ because I realized I had used editing not allowed in basic challenges, sometimes it really is an honest mistake. To those of you that this offends, upsets whatever, I really don't care to hear your reason, this is all my opinion, take it for what it is.
IMO if this person already had a bunch of DQ's or something I could understand the rants in this thread, but from what I've seen he didn't seem to have any previous complaints about him.
I think we need to get "The Bar Is Open" thread back up to the top, it's Friday, chill out & enjoy, be glad that you got moved up in rank & let it be done.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:24:24 PM · #43 |
I think what bothered me about the comments on the former blue ribbon was that they were essentially saying that the guy didn't deserve a blue ribbon, because the commenter/s disagreed with the composition and the style of editing.
I think it's fine to disagree with the composition/editing, but to say that the ribbon was not deserved was too much. It's OK to be critical, but to say that someone is "very lucky to get" the ribbon is just not right. It's disrespectful not only to the photographer, but also to the voters. And then a bunch of other people felt entitled to chime in and agree.
I also was bothered by the hinting that somehow the picture would be DQed. This is a newbie, for crying out loud. He says he didn't do any illegal editing, and it is perfectly possible to achieve his results in basic, so why jump to conclusions and say, ahead of time, "if it is DQed". That just isn't right IMO.
OK, this is the first time I ever dare to disagree with mk. I hope she doesn't hate me for it.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:26:19 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by deapee:
I could tell the second I saw the photo that it wasn't done in basic editing. I'd be willing to bet the 'original' isn't missing. |
Innocent until proven guilty - guess that's your motto eh? ;^)
edit to say the above comment was being sarcastic, but it may not be read correctly...so, I'll rephrase:
Guilty until proven innocent - guess that's your motto eh? ;^) |
I didn't come here to argue whether or not anyone else thinks the shot was illegally edited. I could personally care less what anyone thinks. It's really obvious to me that it was edited by some means other than what is legal in basic editing. The fact that the original disappeared leads to my conclusion that it was illegally edited.
If you're drunk and driving, you can refuse a breath test or a DUI test, but you were still driving drunk.
|
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:27:25 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by deapee:
I could tell the second I saw the photo that it wasn't done in basic editing. I'd be willing to bet the 'original' isn't missing. |
Innocent until proven guilty - guess that's your motto eh? ;^)
edit to say the above comment was being sarcastic, but it may not be read correctly...so, I'll rephrase:
Guilty until proven innocent - guess that's your motto eh? ;^) |
I didn't come here to argue whether or not anyone else thinks the shot was illegally edited. I could personally care less what anyone thinks. It's really obvious to me that it was edited by some means other than what is legal in basic editing. The fact that the original disappeared leads to my conclusion that it was illegally edited.
If you're drunk and driving, you can refuse a breath test or a DUI test, but you were still driving drunk. |
You are correct that no original makes you suspicious, but I don't think you are right to say that it is "really obvious" that the editing was illegal. It's not "really obvious". |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:28:45 PM · #46 |
| I say to you newcomers - Beware! We have ways of finding out your dark secrets and lies. We will find you, torment you, and punish you. Beware the wrath of DPC! |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:29:06 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by skiprow:
a lot of this brings me back to my request/suggestion that they offer up separate counts of comments made before and after a challenge... |
Perhaps after the challenge, there should simply be a check box that says "good job" and no comment area at all. |
Could this proposed check box be hidden inside of a bag ;)
BTW, I'm ecstatic! Not only did my pic move from 111 to 110, i'm on a whole new page with some pretty special people.
Break out the lens wipe solution! |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:32:51 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by deapee:
I could personally care less what anyone thinks. |
The phrase is: "I could NOT personally care less what anyone thinks."
It's supposed to signify that you don't care about what anyone thinks, rather than the way you phrased it, which suggests that you DO care about what anyone thinks, but you yourself think you could do with less caring about what anyone else thinks.
In terms of you spotting that the shot wasn't done within the parameters of basic editing, bravo and kudos to you, BUT IN TRUTH, I COULD NOT CARE LESS ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK, and about whether or not you were right.
The pertinent point is that there was a mechanism for validating shots. It seems nobody called out this shot during voting. Only after voting did people bandwagon and hammer this shot, and raised questions about its legality. As other people have pointed out, that's just petty. And pointless, given that an AUTOMATIC validation process was going to take place for that particular shot due to its placement.
So yeah, you were right on. BUT SO WHAT??? BIG WHOOP. |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:40:47 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by ursula:
I think what bothered me about the comments on the former blue ribbon was that they were essentially saying that the guy didn't deserve a blue ribbon, because the commenter/s disagreed with the composition and the style of editing.
I think it's fine to disagree with the composition/editing, but to say that the ribbon was not deserved was too much. It's OK to be critical, but to say that someone is "very lucky to get" the ribbon is just not right. It's disrespectful not only to the photographer, but also to the voters. And then a bunch of other people felt entitled to chime in and agree.
I also was bothered by the hinting that somehow the picture would be DQed. This is a newbie, for crying out loud. He says he didn't do any illegal editing, and it is perfectly possible to achieve his results in basic, so why jump to conclusions and say, ahead of time, "if it is DQed". That just isn't right IMO.
OK, this is the first time I ever dare to disagree with mk. I hope she doesn't hate me for it. |
Haha! I could never hate you, Ursula. :) Now as for everyone else...
No, I'm kidding. My whole point here is that there's nothing wrong with disagreement. Having someone disagree with your opinion doesn't make your opinion less valid. We all know that not everyone agrees with the ribbon winners, the votes received are nicely charted just below the photo. There's not really any reason that we should be surprised about it then. That someone else didn't pick a photo for first place doesn't somehow tarnish the fact that you (in general) did. It's just getting increasingly more difficult to be able to say anything around here. People insist they want comments but honestly, the criteria for giving them is nearly impossible. Constructive critiques are okay but only on the second through fourth days of voting and only on photos that are likely to place with the 35-63% percentile.
Oh blah blah blah, I could go on forever but who really cares and is actually going to read it anyway? Ursula, let's go make out. ;) |
|
|
|
08/18/2006 03:42:21 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by mk:
Ursula, let's go make out. ;) |
*grabs camera*
|
|
