| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/25/2007 03:03:51 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by frisca:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by frisca:
We don't go back and retroactively DQ images where we had no way to know or investigate the dates at the time of the challenge or a reasonable time thereafter. So yes, images probably DO stay in challenges even though the are out of date. Put simply, we start with the honour system and hope people read and abide by rules, and we have a more or less random check/reasonable suspicion system to monitor and enforce the date rule. |
Of course no statement on DPC is ever 100% true... :)
DQ'd from the Landscape II challenge two months later... |
I see nothing to indicate when that photo was DQ'd, but thanks for the super supportive post! I suppose "reasonable time" is a fixed number in your mind. |
This photo was one of several DQ'ed by one photographer for violating DPC rules by manipulating the EXIF data of his photographs, if I'm not mistaken.
Message edited by author 2007-04-25 15:05:04. |
|
|
|
04/25/2007 03:47:21 PM · #27 |
On the original topic, that makes sense, thanks for clearing it up. I posted this in the forums instead of as a ticket just so any newbies around would not have gotten the wrong idea that their date stamps are illegal. They don't score well, so they're lamentable, but they are legal...
R.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2007 03:57:41 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by swhiddon:
This photo was one of several DQ'ed by one photographer for violating DPC rules by manipulating the EXIF data of his photographs, if I'm not mistaken. |
Yes, this is true. I only know it came 2 months later because it caused me to win my first blue ribbon ever long after the challenge was over.
I didn't mean any harm Frisca. I just think it's funny because truly there seem to be exceptions to every rule here. It just indicates the wonderful complexity of our little DPC world... |
|
|
|
04/25/2007 04:00:14 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by swhiddon:
This photo was one of several DQ'ed by one photographer for violating DPC rules by manipulating the EXIF data of his photographs, if I'm not mistaken. |
Yes, this is true. I only know it came 2 months later because it caused me to win my first blue ribbon ever long after the challenge was over.
I didn't mean any harm Frisca. I just think it's funny because truly there seem to be exceptions to every rule here. It just indicates the wonderful complexity of our little DPC world... |
Well, doc, I am not harmed. Just a little raw from the events of the last few days. We pick a certain path to avoid problems we know we've been confronted with in the past and still end up in some trouble, and it makes for a stressful job, especially when its unpaid! You're right, there are always exceptions, but without them, we'd be pretty big tyrants. :) |
|
|
|
04/25/2007 04:02:09 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I didn't mean any harm Frisca. I just think it's funny because truly there seem to be exceptions to every rule here. It just indicates the wonderful complexity of our little DPC world... |
We can go back and DQ a past entry, but in some cases we opt not to, since that then necessitates recalculating the challenge results.
I am pretty sure than any ribbon-winner later found to be illegal would get a DQ vote from me, regardless of any informal statute of limitations by which we might ordinarily abide. |
|
|
|
04/25/2007 05:01:17 PM · #31 |
Achoo, the example you pointed out was 2 months later. The example that Brad pointed out was 3 years. That to me is a bit different.
And Brad, if that had received a validation request, it would have been dq'ed.
This next sentence sound raw, but it is just an observation. There seems to be an underlying premise that the SC sees and knows the details on each and every picture. that is simply not possible. We see them when you do when we are voting, and with the exception of a couple of extenuating circumstances, we know the exact same details that you do. In order to find some of the stuff ya'll pull up, we would constantly be having to read every comment on every picture in every gallery almost daily. That just ain't possible. We're good, but we ain't that good. :) |
|
|
|
04/25/2007 05:03:56 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by karmat:
And Brad, if that had received a validation request, it would have been dq'ed. |
Is it too late to submit? |
|
|
|
04/25/2007 06:09:17 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I was a little surprised to see this image DQ'd for "added text":
Only text I can see is the time/date stamp, which the camera placed on the image. I was always under the impression that this is not "adding text" since it is a part of the original file straight from the camera?
R. |
I can't for the life of me understand why anyone in their right mind would possible think it is a good decision to have the date stamp put on a digital picture. ALL OF THAT INFORMATION, PLUS SOME, IS SAVED IN THE FILE INFO ANYWAYS! Why ruin a good picture by permanently stamping the front with the date too???
Message edited by author 2007-04-25 18:10:59.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2007 06:30:27 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by traquino98:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I was a little surprised to see this image DQ'd for "added text":
Only text I can see is the time/date stamp, which the camera placed on the image. I was always under the impression that this is not "adding text" since it is a part of the original file straight from the camera?
R. |
I can't for the life of me understand why anyone in their right mind would possible think it is a good decision to have the date stamp put on a digital picture. ALL OF THAT INFORMATION, PLUS SOME, IS SAVED IN THE FILE INFO ANYWAYS! Why ruin a good picture by permanently stamping the front with the date too??? |
I guess the answer to that is that the person is new to photography and really doesn't know any better.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2007 08:26:14 PM · #35 |
When my son was born, we didn't know any better so the date stamp is on all of those pictures. I love it. I know exactly when the picture was taken, so I can know how old he was. (you don't think you would forget stuff like that, but you do). Same way with some vacation pictures.
So, there is a valid reason for date stamps, but I would definitely clone them out of a challenge entry (or crop it if it was basic). |
|
|
|
04/25/2007 08:44:39 PM · #36 |
Darn tootin', Karma.
I think date stamps are very nice on snapshots. I used that feature all the time on my last film camera. I haven't printed too many digital shots, but does every lab always put info on the back?
I know it might be hard to remember, but normal, everyday people still look at a camera and think "I'll use that to capture a special moment in my life," not "I'll use my camera to take a shot, edit the bejeezus out of it, and then submit it to an online competition so that overly jaded people around the world can hack it to pieces."
Granted, I'll knock off a point or so for a date stamp, but there actually is a learning curve to competing, so let's just all give the new person a break, okay?
Message edited by author 2007-04-25 20:45:17.
|
|
|
|
04/25/2007 09:42:42 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
I haven't printed too many digital shots, but does every lab always put info on the back?
|
No! |
|
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: 10/14/2025 06:20:48 PM EDT.
