| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/08/2007 06:49:16 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by frisca:
what if he used the tips suggested by Nikolai on another photo? What if he used only 49% of the tips from Nikolai and the rest he thought of himself? What if he used 15% of those tips and the rest himself? What if he actually used a tutorial from somewhere on how to edit a magazine ad portrait and used that? Everyone learns from one another, and from the web.
Yes, I agree, what that user did seems pretty unethical, but we're not the ethics police. He is in compliance with the rule because the rule is about you actually doing the processing (pushing the buttons) yourself. its not about original ideas because hardly anyone has those anymore. |
He did it in a thread with a photo he entered in a challenge. That is the point. I could care less where he got the tips but it was done through a forum with other DPC members. If he would have learn how to process it with a different photo in the forum then took those tips and apply them to a different photo for the challenge, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Ok, so does anyone have that little avatar of the guy beating his head against the wall....that's how I feel right now.
Message edited by author 2007-05-08 18:53:53.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 06:51:27 PM · #77 |
I'll just get my super-awesome-processing friend, have him stand over my shoulder while I sit at Photoshop, and tell me exactly what to do. But I'm pushing the buttons so it's all okay!!
Good to know. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 06:51:46 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
Originally posted by frisca:
what if he used the tips suggested by Nikolai on another photo? What if he used only 49% of the tips from Nikolai and the rest he thought of himself? What if he used 15% of those tips and the rest himself? What if he actually used a tutorial from somewhere on how to edit a magazine ad portrait and used that? Everyone learns from one another, and from the web.
Yes, I agree, what that user did seems pretty unethical, but we're not the ethics police. He is in compliance with the rule because the rule is about you actually doing the processing (pushing the buttons) yourself. its not about original ideas because hardly anyone has those anymore. |
He did it in a thread with a photo he entered in a challenge. That is the point. I could care less where he got the tips but it was done through a forum. |
So, for you, the issue is that the help was obtained via DPC forum? If the help had come privately or from elsewhere -- that is not a matter of concern for you? I'm just trying to understand your point.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 06:53:25 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by klstover:
I'll just get my super-awesome-processing friend, have him stand over my shoulder while I sit at Photoshop, and tell me exactly what to do. But I'm pushing the buttons so it's all okay!!
Good to know. |
Your ethics are your own, and you have to live with yourself. We have no way to police this so yes, you'll get away with it, but whether you think its right is up to you. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 06:53:44 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
But anytime I have read in a thread that someone wanted to show a photo they are considering for a challenge, I have seen someone else say, no don't post it. Just make it fair. |
For a weekly "themed" challenge, that's fairly easy to do. For a month long Free Study, where you have no idea what you'll want to submit, it's not so easy (again, for the same reason that you won't know what you'll submit for your Best of Year entry until the end of the year, the only difference is the amount of time).
Everybody is worried about fairness. How about, instead of a lynching mob, we just lead, guide and direct. Make the experience a positive one, one that everyone learns from, without having to punish people every time they turn around.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 06:57:33 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
Originally posted by frisca:
what if he used the tips suggested by Nikolai on another photo? What if he used only 49% of the tips from Nikolai and the rest he thought of himself? What if he used 15% of those tips and the rest himself? What if he actually used a tutorial from somewhere on how to edit a magazine ad portrait and used that? Everyone learns from one another, and from the web.
Yes, I agree, what that user did seems pretty unethical, but we're not the ethics police. He is in compliance with the rule because the rule is about you actually doing the processing (pushing the buttons) yourself. its not about original ideas because hardly anyone has those anymore. |
He did it in a thread with a photo he entered in a challenge. That is the point. I could care less where he got the tips but it was done through a forum. |
So, for you, the issue is that the help was obtained via DPC forum? If the help had come privately or from elsewhere -- that is not a matter of concern for you? I'm just trying to understand your point. |
See I think its interesting that you don't post the entire thing I said. Here's what I posted since you picked out what I said
"He did it in a thread with a photo he entered in a challenge. That is the point. I could care less where he got the tips but it was done through a forum with other DPC members. If he would have learn how to process it with a different photo in the forum then took those tips and apply them to a different photo for the challenge, we wouldn't be having this conversation."
Please re read the second sentence.
Message edited by author 2007-05-08 18:58:21.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:02:17 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by frisca:
Originally posted by klstover:
I'll just get my super-awesome-processing friend, have him stand over my shoulder while I sit at Photoshop, and tell me exactly what to do. But I'm pushing the buttons so it's all okay!!
Good to know. |
Your ethics are your own, and you have to live with yourself. We have no way to police this so yes, you'll get away with it, but whether you think its right is up to you. |
Good point. Some things you just have to take on good faith as there is no way to really prove some of the rules we have. I've often wondered if some photos were actually taken by the photographer themselves. I know the rules allow that someone else can click the shutter but there are always some where you question if that's all they did. I think I've seen some photos where the photographer didn't take the picture nor was the idea even theirs. Makes you wonder what percentage of the process does the photographer need to own for it to be their photograph. Anyway, I digress.
Message edited by author 2007-05-08 19:03:48. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:06:04 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
See I think its interesting that you don't post the entire thing I said. Here's what I posted since you picked out what I said
"He did it in a thread with a photo he entered in a challenge. That is the point. I could care less where he got the tips but it was done through a forum with other DPC members. If he would have learn how to process it with a different photo in the forum then took those tips and apply them to a different photo for the challenge, we wouldn't be having this conversation."
Please re read the second sentence. |
I'm sure I must have quoted you before you edited your post.
Now that you've clarified, how would reconcile the apparent disparity in fairness where some photogs get help from a non-DPC source, (under your proposal, safe from DQ) and those that got help from a DPC forum thread, where you would like them to be DQ'd for what is really the same thing?
Help is help, isn't it? Why is the source of the help so important?
I don't agree with breaking anonymity, but I just don't see how it's an enforceable offense with regard to DQ's.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:09:03 PM · #84 |
SC - how about, at least, adding a line to the rules that will discourage people from doing it, and will show newcomers that it is NOT welcome.
Use words such as "strongly discourage" and/or "frowned upon" so the rule will remain as vague as the whole situation is now, but at least newbies won't decide from this (and some other similar) examples that it is a welcome practice.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:10:15 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by Beetle:
SC - how about, at least, adding a line to the rules that will discourage people from doing it, and will show newcomers that it is NOT welcome.
Use words such as "strongly discourage" and/or "frowned upon" so the rule will remain as vague as the whole situation is now, but at least newbies won't decide from this (and some other similar) examples that it is a welcome practice. |
A very sound suggestion. Thank you! |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:11:02 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
See I think its interesting that you don't post the entire thing I said. Here's what I posted since you picked out what I said
"He did it in a thread with a photo he entered in a challenge. That is the point. I could care less where he got the tips but it was done through a forum with other DPC members. If he would have learn how to process it with a different photo in the forum then took those tips and apply them to a different photo for the challenge, we wouldn't be having this conversation."
Please re read the second sentence. |
I'm sure I must have quoted you before you edited your post.
Now that you've clarified, how would reconcile the apparent disparity in fairness where some photogs get help from a non-DPC source, (under your proposal, safe from DQ) and those that got help from a DPC forum thread, where you would like them to be DQ'd for what is really the same thing?
Help is help, isn't it? Why is the source of the help so important?
I don't agree with breaking anonymity, but I just don't see how it's an enforceable offense with regard to DQ's. |
Ya know I cry uncle.
Peace and hopefully fairness to all
g
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:34:02 PM · #87 |
WOW!!!!!!
I'm the sinner here. I don't think I've ever done anything here to get this much attention. Thanks to those of you who brought this to my attention through private message. I don't know that I'll respond much but figured I would post my thoughts.
I took this picture weeks ago. Got opinions on which shot to use for a class assignment(what really matters). I posted my edit, recieved further advice and did some more editing. Anyone that doubts my ability to edit, look through my portfolio.
Please note that most of the thread was helping me decided which shot to edit, not how to edit. It just so happened that I got editing help later.
There was one jump in editing thanks to Nikolai that seems dramatic but was simply a small adjustment of curves. No one notices all the other work I put into it. What about all the cloning, healing, selective curves to fix skin. How about using the liquify filter to straighten the hair and make the lips pop out more. What about using the dodge and burn tools to make the lips, eyes, and hair pop more. No one told me any of those things yet that dosen't seem to matter. Please, I got help with editing but not THAT much help.
My intention in submitting the photo was simply to gain further feedback about what people thought. Its a Free Study, I had no idea I was going to submit but, lo and behold, the end of the month came around and that was my favorite shot.
In no way does this have anything to do with my trying to influence voting. After all, it seems it would only have hurt my score.
I hid every picture that I could even though you can still see all the thumbnails. I almost deleted every post I made in my own thread but decided someone else may still benefit from it.
I really don't even know what to say, I couldn't even finish reading the posts here. Just so every one knows, there was no harmful intent. What if we didn't allow help or input on the "Best of" shots, many great pictures wouldn't get entered. Anyways, sorry, I guess.
Message edited by author 2007-05-08 19:40:02. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:53:46 PM · #88 |
Most of us have taken advantage of the help provided by all the great people here at DPC, You can look- I've asked for help a lot of times- even you, trnqlty, have provided feedback. But all the times I then considered that picture for a challenge (which happenes) I thought... 'well, guess I'm SOL' and showing some restraint- I moved on, submitted something else, or submitted nothing at all.
I'm not saying that you could not have edited that photo on your own, and even unedited, it's a great clear shot, and my intention was never to out you.
To be honest, I'm a little sore that I didn't do it first- Had I, I'm sure my photo would have been improved...however I belive that getting help on a photo from the very people that score the photo is a bit unfair. If I was to discover (through this discussion) that I was the only one feeling that way (clearly not true) then you would be sure to see me eagerly taking advantage for the May challenge. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 07:59:53 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by WickedB:
If I was to discover (through this discussion) that I was the only one feeling that way (clearly not true) then you would be sure to see me eagerly taking advantage for the May challenge. |
You're absolutely right you're not the only one that feels that way. However your response automatically assumes that I was 'taking advantage' of people's help for a dpchallenge contest. I was looking for help for class, where I get a grade and a diploma, not trying to see how I could come up with the best picture for the free study deadline three weeks away. And I realize you weren't making a personal attack but I might as well defend myself.
edit: I really do dig your free study :)
Message edited by author 2007-05-08 20:01:01. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 09:21:22 PM · #90 |
:) thanks!
and I do not mean 'take advantage' in a negative sense, I guess i just can't come up with a better phrase. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 09:24:53 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by L2:
Help is help, isn't it? Why is the source of the help so important? |
I have no problems with people helping each other... the thrust of the argument in this instance is that someone sought input from fellow DPC members in an open forum on a photo they submitted to a contest.
Ask all you want in private PM's or on other sites, I have no problems with that... scenarios of this nature are prone to conditioning the potential voters viewing this in a more favorable manner, and can engender a level of resentment from those not fortunate enough to have benefited from such open forum enlightenment.
If indeed you have no objection to this type of pre-challenge assistance and approval process, then be prepared for the potential onslaught of similar requests in forthcoming challenges.
Something to consider.
Ray |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 09:26:14 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by mk:
Can we make it illegal to submit something you've posted previously? Sure, but do we really need to require more policing from the SC? You have power, use it. |
phase one - get the authority to create a new law to protect interest.
phase two - complaint there's too many law and not much freedom.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 09:29:11 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by trnqlty:
[long explanation of what trnqlty did]
I really don't even know what to say, I couldn't even finish reading the posts here. Just so every one knows, there was no harmful intent. What if we didn't allow help or input on the "Best of" shots, many great pictures wouldn't get entered. Anyways, sorry, I guess. |
Thanks! You've completely satisfied me. I wanted to know your thinking, and you've done a nice job of explaining it.
As far as I'm concerned, this specific case is closed. For the general case, you might want to think twice about getting quite that much help and then still entering it.
But I believe you that you intended no cheating. :)
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 09:30:50 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
If indeed you have no objection to this type of pre-challenge assistance and approval process, then be prepared for the potential onslaught of similar requests in forthcoming challenges.
Something to consider.
Ray |
It takes a very selective reading of this thread to conclude that we have "no objection" to this type of activity.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 09:54:41 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
If indeed you have no objection to this type of pre-challenge assistance and approval process, then be prepared for the potential onslaught of similar requests in forthcoming challenges.
Something to consider.
Ray |
It takes a very selective reading of this thread to conclude that we have "no objection" to this type of activity.
~Terry |
Perhaps you neglected to take into consideration the "If indeed" portion of the comment, which it could be argued makes the comment not a "Statement of Fact" but rather a query.
No one is attacking you or questioning your integrity... rather what is being sought are resolutions to a situation that even you admit finding "objectionable"
Ray |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 10:05:20 PM · #96 |
As noted above, the comments and votes usually lead to this type of situation resolving itself. As evidenced by  trnqlty's posts, that seems to be the case here. The system worked, so I see no need to change it.
Our general philosophy is not to try to legislate what can be handled peacefully by the voters and the community.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 10:11:42 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Our general philosophy is not to try to legislate what can be handled peacefully by the voters and the community. |
well said, and i'm happy that's how the site is managed |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 10:13:47 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by ursula:
...It would be unenforceable. Can't do that. |
I would beg to differ, as in this instance I know for a fact that this particular issue was brought to the attention of the SC at the very beginning of the voting phase.
If a rule is made and people are provided with the information as to what constitutes a violation, there is no reason why this type of activity cannot be curtailed.
Is it feasible that someone could circumvent the rules? ... most definitely, but I would hazard a guess that it would certainly do away with what we are witnessing in this instance.
Just a thought,
Ray |
It is a thought. However, people can and do post all over the internet, and take down images just as soon. I for one can hardly imagine how difficult it would be to actually try and enforce an anonymity rule. It's not doable. And in my opinion it's not needed. As CJ says, in general the system takes care of these situations. |
|
|
|
05/08/2007 10:18:40 PM · #99 |
The growing hysteria and witch hunting surrounding cheating is a blight on an otherwise great site.
Message edited by author 2007-05-08 22:21:59.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2007 10:25:36 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by ursula:
...It would be unenforceable. Can't do that. |
I would beg to differ, as in this instance I know for a fact that this particular issue was brought to the attention of the SC at the very beginning of the voting phase.
If a rule is made and people are provided with the information as to what constitutes a violation, there is no reason why this type of activity cannot be curtailed.
Is it feasible that someone could circumvent the rules? ... most definitely, but I would hazard a guess that it would certainly do away with what we are witnessing in this instance.
Just a thought,
Ray |
It is a thought. However, people can and do post all over the internet, and take down images just as soon. I for one can hardly imagine how difficult it would be to actually try and enforce an anonymity rule. It's not doable. And in my opinion it's not needed. As CJ says, in general the system takes care of these situations. |
I certainly am not advocating that the SC be called upon to monitor the totality of the internet... rather those specific types of activities such as those we are witnessing in this instance.
Surely it is not that difficult to tell the community that they shouldn't seek this type of input for images they subsequently enter in a challenge. It's not what was done that bothers me as much as the manner in which it was done... if you need input, seek it in private.
As for the argument that the system takes care of these situations, I fear that from my perspective, nonfeasance does not resolve issues of contention.
Ray |
|
