| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/08/2003 04:10:40 AM · #1 |
Just a suggestion:
Should we introduce mandatory DQ checks for the top 5 (or even top 10) images? That would probably dissuade everybody from even trying to spot-edit or otherwise break the rules. As far as I know, the way it works now, if you are good in PS (so nobody notices anything unusual), you can easily get away with editing a photograph.
If the motivation for editing a picture is to score higher, and the motivation for scoring higher is to get in the top 3, then routinely checking the top 3 (or 5, or 10), would automatically remove the reasons for editing and (if my theory holds water) rid us of the disqualifications once and for all.
Haje
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 04:14:44 AM · #2 |
| wierd, i thought that policy was already in place for the ribbon winners, but i'm probablly wrong. I think it's an excellent idea. |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 04:23:39 AM · #3 |
I agree, this should have been implemented a long time ago. I wonder how many spot edited entries have already slipped through unnoticed...
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 06:52:42 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by SharQ:
Should we introduce mandatory DQ checks for the top 5 (or even top 10) images? That would probably dissuade everybody from even
|
What would you look at? EXIF info?
EXIF headers are very easily rewritten from one file to another OR am I missing something in your suggestion? |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 06:56:09 AM · #5 |
I would guess spot editing would be fairly easy to notice if you could compare the original digicam photo with the altered version.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:05:38 AM · #6 |
| I think it should be that way. Not everybody nows how to mess with the info on the picture. And I think it should not be allowed to take a picture of a spot editet picture like a picture that won not so long ago I think that is cheating :p |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:17:41 AM · #7 |
Oh, editing EXIF data is not particularly hard. But doing a perfect spot-edit on a raw camera file is quite a lot harder than it seems (spot editing is usually the first step in the digital workflow, before colours, contrast, and resizing happens, all of which in effect helps disguise the spot editing in a digital image file).
It was just a thought.
Message edited by author 2003-07-08 07:18:10.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:29:15 AM · #8 |
I agree with SharQ, that is an excellent idea :)
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:40:08 AM · #9 |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:41:48 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by heida:
I think it should be that way. Not everybody nows how to mess with the info on the picture. And I think it should not be allowed to take a picture of a spot editet picture like a picture that won not so long ago I think that is cheating :p |
It is against the rules to do this anyway
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:50:03 AM · #11 |
| if its against the rules why was that picture validated? |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:51:24 AM · #12 |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:52:39 AM · #13 |
well mabey cause the picture was in the background it was a very cool picture anyhow ;) picture that won self portrait
Message edited by author 2003-07-08 07:53:07. |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:57:34 AM · #14 |
Oh yeh it had a light bulb and stuff in it as well, which was in front of the screen, which makes it okay :)
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 07:59:49 AM · #15 |
I agree with SharQ. This has actually been suggested in the past as well. I think it be a good idea and I would be willing to support it.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 09:03:10 AM · #16 |
It`s a good idea but i hope nobody shots with a 14mp camera in raw with a dial up connection. I hate to think how big the file would be.
Message edited by author 2003-07-08 09:04:48.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 09:45:42 AM · #17 |
When I first started participating on DPC I thought they would automatically ask for exif data if you won. Of course I knew I would never win, place, or show so I didn't worry about needing to provide that information. Well, guess what, I was on vacation and traveling accross the US and the picture I entered before I left home was doing real well. Each timeI would call my kids and they would tell me it was getting a higher score than the last time. You think hitting the refreash button is addicting, try doing it on a cell phone in the middle of the Great Salt Flats. Then I began to worry about exif data in the case that I might win. None of my kids knew how convoluted my storage system was and I didn't think they could find it if it became necessary.
Low and behold I placed third in the challenge and thank God they never asked for the information, which was a relief and also a let down. I lost a degree of faith that everyone was on an even playing field and unlawfull changes might go un-noticed.
In a nutshell I support that at least the first five positions should submitt EXIF and the original file. |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 09:56:05 AM · #18 |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 09:59:41 AM · #19 |
| I completely agree with the mandatory check for top 5 or 10 photos. Some photos I've seen in the current challenge were so good I wondered if they were really possible for DPC people. |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 10:04:39 AM · #20 |
There is of course another possibility - we could vote for spot editing to be allowed. Then we wouldn't have to worry about people cheating. Just a thought...
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 10:44:05 AM · #21 |
[quote=Martus]There is of course another possibility - we could vote for spot editing to be allowed.[quote]
Hahaaaa!! not falling for that one - that topic has about 400 threads already.
HJ
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 03:15:11 PM · #22 |
Depending on the program you use to edit, the EXIF data may be included in your submitted picture. PS7 will retain the EXIF data, and I'm pretty sure some other apps do as well. And, the EXIF data is really only a small piece if the verification - it won't tell if spot edits were made, will it? As Marbo hinted at with the 14mb raw comment, you'd have to submit the original, unprocessed photo. (Raw might be an issue with proprietary formats - would it have to at least be converted to JPEG?) And, timing could be an issue: at what point do you require the original? After voting, before the announcement, require it from the top X pictures two days before the end of voting? And if DPC doesn't receive it in time, is it DQed automatically?
BTW, I support the idea. There's just a lot of extra issues that may need to be worked out... |
|
|
|
07/08/2003 03:37:53 PM · #23 |
With nothing at stake but bragging rights I can't comprehend why someone would knowingly cheat. How could you get any personal satisfaction knowing that YOU are a fraud?
Of course many of the DQ's are honest mistakes and that is an entirely different situation.
The problem is the real cheaters will find a way to cheat the EXIF data too.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 03:43:06 PM · #24 |
I favor the honor system myself. If someone is actually going to cheat to get a little ribbon next to their name, let them have the ribbon... Their self-esteem is obviously in desperate need of the lift.
For me, I prefer to trust folks. I may be taken advantage of from time to time, but my stress level is nice and low.
Also, who is volunteering to go through these extra 15 to 30 shots a week looking to see if a hot pixel has been cleaned up? And how are we to trust whoever does it? Eventually, you need to trust someone... Just trust everyone and don't worry so much :)
EDIT : Please excuse my use of colonial spelling... Since we broke with the Kingdom, the American education system has deteriorated...
Message edited by author 2003-07-08 15:46:25.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2003 05:25:08 PM · #25 |
Now, granted is the fact that I personally will never win a ribbon with the camera I have, so I don't have to worry about cameras that don't save EXIF info. And all the people that do win generally have good cameras that do save EXIF info.
But what if, by some strange happening, I accidently do finish in the top ten with a photo that is completely unedited. Would my photo be DQed because I have a low end camera?
Just something to consider.
Message edited by author 2003-07-08 17:31:43.
|
|
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: 08/29/2025 05:56:49 PM EDT.
