I think I am dealt injustice. - DPChallenge Forums

Tamron AF 55-200mm F4-5.6 LD Di-II for Canon

01/18/2008 09:53:46 PM · #26

Originally posted by emlbaker:

Happy with that Wildcard, however I think I am not making my point clear. I understand that it was discussed at length. (BTW the 18 pages you speak of are over a 12 month period, not just due to this challenge).

Oops, my apologies I liked the wrong thread it was this 21 page thread.And also this thread. There were others but they all linked back to the main announcement thread. My point is that there is only so much hand holding that SC can be expected to do, if there's new rules and you don't understand them or they seem murky...ask. If you're still not sure... send a ticket. There are long discussions on the rules every time they change as people try and clarify what they mean ie what exactly is legal.

Originally posted by emlbaker:

My personal opinion is that I believe the rules or goal posts should not be moved after a challenge has opened for submission. To use a comparison, if a sporting body were discussing rule changes or format changes, and came to a decision to change the guidelines during a match, game etc, they would not expect those rules to be implemented during the current match/game.

Sooo you're saying they should implement the new rules and then say we can't use them until some future time? And you don't think people would scream at SC about that? The challenges are a little different from a sporting match in that they run for a week which should be time to seek clarification.

Originally posted by elmbaker:

I am not atacking you personally Wildcard, however I am enjoying the discussion.

Likewise :D

Originally posted by emlbaker:

I for one, do not spend all that much time in the forums, and consider the forums and chanllenges as two different elements in this site. Furthermore it did not say anywhere in the challenge details that entrants should read the forums to ensure that they meet the guidelines for the challenge as they are subject to change after the challenge starts.

There was a flag on the challenge which said

Originally posted by Time lapse description:

Extra Rules
Important Note: This challenge is running under NEW Advanced Editing rules. Please read the new rules thoroughly before submitting

Granted it doesn't say to read the forums but unless you read the rules and know exactly what they're about and what is allowed then the announcement thread or the current challenge threads are a good place to find the answers. I guess where I'm going wrong is that I expect that people will take responsibility for ensuring that their images are edited within the current rule set and will seek clarification themselves if they're unsure.

To use your sporting analogy if you were told there were new rules but you didn't clarify what they were, would you expect leniency from the ref because he didn't tell you to read the rulebook?

Message edited by author 2008-01-18 22:41:32.

01/18/2008 10:11:10 PM · #27

All I was getting at there with the sporting analogy was that I think that any discussion/decision/changes regarding the rules that were set at the beginning of submission and during the life of the submission timeframe should not be taken into account for the present challenge. Fair enough, continue to discuss, but do not let any decisions count until after the current challenge has completed voting. If for example there were another Time Lapse challenge, then the redefined rules should be used then.

Another possibility under the current conduct of amended challenges rules after the commencement......

If I was to enter the challenge we are discussing and I sit down and read the rules set, plan my attack and then head off into the wilderness to get that one (or several in this case) shot that will blow the challenge away (well probably not from me :) anyway). I think of a place that involves a bit of travel to get the shot I have in mind, and as you know (those in Australia) I pay a premium price for fuel. I get the shots I want, process them while I am on the road and get back home to upload. So I upload them just before the deadline and wait to see how my masterpiece is going to score. Low and behold, I am DQ'd for not removing my image for something that was discussed in a form thread while I was away to get my shots. I sit there shocked, wondering what went wrong, have I really wasted my time travelling and spending my hard earned coin on high priced fuel. I check the rules set again, and cannot for the life of me see where I have gone wrong. I decide to send a ticket to SC to get clarification on the DQ only to find that the rules or guidelines were amended during the submission phase of the challenge, and this decision was posted in a thread in the forums.

I know it sounds a bit far fetched, but I have in the past gone to some lengths to travel to a location to get a shot for a challenge, and thankfully a DQ did not follow.

Am I the only person that thinks that the submission guidelines/rules should not change after the challenge has commenced?

Wildcard

Tamron AF 55-200mm F4-5.6 LD Di-II for Canon

01/18/2008 10:38:29 PM · #28

emlbakerwe may need an SC to comment on that because as far as I am aware the rules weren't changed during the week it was more SC trying to clarify what they meant and what was a wasn't allowed. It wasn't until after the time lapse challenge rolled over that the rules were modified.

On your point about the time and effort put into entries, isn't that all the more reason to make sure you understand the rules before you head out to be robbed at the petrol station?

Message edited by author 2008-01-18 22:40:21.

01/18/2008 10:39:36 PM · #29

Look, everyone who says Time Lapse was a fiasco is right. Highnooner, we hated to DQ the but there was a conflict with what we'd said about the golfer shot. This DQ will not count towards any penalties or anything; unfortunately, to be fair to others who did contact us first and to those who were DQ'd during the challenge, this is the best we could do in a pretty difficult situation.

We know Time Lapse was a big mistake which is why it exists no longer. People shouldn't have to read the forums to figure out the rules, yes, we know, that's why it's gone now.

01/18/2008 10:41:06 PM · #30

Originally posted by emlbaker:

...Am I the only person that thinks that the submission guidelines/rules should not change after the challenge has commenced?

They did not change during the submission period; they changed on the next challenge rollover. Each challenge has the applicable ruleset within the description as a hyperlink.

01/18/2008 10:44:32 PM · #31

Originally posted by Wildcard:

My sentiments exactly

Wildcard I think that the SC need to sit and think of an appropriate way to communicate the rules for each challenge to cease the ongoing discussions and doubts each and every challenge. Why must it be so difficult.

My wording was incorrect and misleading by stating the rules were changed, rather they were clarified during the challenge, which has obviously caught people out. This in my mind should not happen, and I am glad to hear that the DQ's did not carry penalty.

Wildcard be happy you are from QLD as you guys dont pay the premium taxes on fuel that the rest of the country suffers. Lucky you.....

electrolost

Nikon AF Nikkor 28-85mm 1:3.5-4.5

01/18/2008 10:52:10 PM · #32

Originally posted by L2:

What is the diffrence from the "golfer shot" and say the blue ribbon bicycle shot??

cryingdragon

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

01/18/2008 10:52:44 PM · #33

Interestingly enough, time lapse has nothing to do with motion. I could take 1 picture a day from the exact same location and that's time lapse. God knows the same thing won't be taking place from one day to the next. If I were to do this in a city setting, different people wearing different things would be there. No way to keep "linear motion" in that.

Just my nickel's worth.

01/18/2008 10:56:50 PM · #34

Yep, linear motion and what it is or should be or could be - all a big mess. Big mistake to try to define time lapse that way, we couldn't do it fairly so we quit trying.

When time lapse was included, it was really meant for astrophotography and stuff like that.

There was no clean way to separate the linear motion/natural motion/directed action mess from digital composites, that's why it's gone.

You hated it, we wound up hating it, we are all very sorry - we meant to try to do something fun and it just went completely awry.

What else can I say? You guys are right- it was horrible.

But now it's over.

01/18/2008 11:01:56 PM · #35

Originally posted by electrolost:

Originally posted by L2:
Look, everyone who says Time Lapse was a fiasco is right. Highnooner, we hated to DQ the but there was a conflict with what we'd said about the golfer shot. This DQ will not count towards any penalties or anything; unfortunately, to be fair to others who did contact us first and to those who were DQ'd during the challenge, this is the best we could do in a pretty difficult situation.

We know Time Lapse was a big mistake which is why it exists no longer. People shouldn't have to read the forums to figure out the rules, yes, we know, that's why it's gone now.

What is the diffrence from the "golfer shot" and say the blue ribbon bicycle shot??

To the best of my recollection, there was something about an interim frame or a motion where it wasn't a clean line (stupid, yes, I know, I know). I wish I could remember better but it's late and I'm tired. It was the golfer shot where we first saw that this was going to be big trouble.

It was exactly this kind of wierdness and difficulty with being consistent that has made it go bye-bye.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/18/2008 11:07:26 PM · #36

Originally posted by L2:

Yep, linear motion and what it is or should be or could be - all a big mess. Big mistake to try to define time lapse that way, we couldn't do it fairly so we quit trying.

There was no clean way to separate the linear motion/natural motion/directed action mess from digital composites, that's why it's gone.

You hated it, we wound up hating it, we are all very sorry - we meant to try to do something fun and it just went completely awry.

What else can I say? You guys are right- it was horrible.

But now it's over.

Therefore should the entries that were DQ'd for this reason be overturned and included in the challenge results. Although it was a bad mistake and no penalties were included with the DQ it is still a red mark on the page of those who were DQ'd. I can understand and completely agree with the DQ's that were for adding graphics/clipart etc, but not the motion types

Message edited by author 2008-01-18 23:08:12.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

01/18/2008 11:09:50 PM · #37

Originally posted by electrolost:

This post I made in the Admin Announcement thread sums is up probably as well as any:

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
OK how about "natural motion of an inanimate object ~~or candid of human or animal in a linear natural motion".~~

Or what about just that? To me Roz' shot screams linear to me. It even produces a vanishing point effect with the subject. What is to determine a linear path when the subject has arms and legs that may go back and forth left to side?

I've been thinking about this for a good part of the day. I've also looked at some of the examples posted here, as well as the ones we've received privately via tickets.

I'll stress that this is just one person's opinion, but I think I can boil down most of the difference between legal and not legal to the word "stop." There are possibly exceptions, especially with non-human subjects, but I think this guideline might cover most cases, at least in my mind.

If your subject does (or would normally) come to a full stop between frames in your subject, the entry is likely to be illegal by virtue of representing multiple activities and not be considered a time-lapse representation of a single activity. If you are representing a single, continuous motion (linear or otherwise), it is likely to be legal.

A good example is Roz's shot. Going through the timeline represented in the shot, the golfer is likely to walk up and bend down to set the tee. As they are setting the tee, there will be a brief stop before they reverse direction and get back up. They will again stop as they line up their target, again as they set their stance before swinging, and most likely at the top of their backswing. In my mind, at least, the photo therefore represents multiple motions, and is more analogous to a "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" photo than to a traditional time lapse.

Just one person's view, for whatever it's worth.

~Terry

Wildcard

Tamron AF 55-200mm F4-5.6 LD Di-II for Canon

01/18/2008 11:12:17 PM · #38

Originally posted by emlbaker:

My sentiments exactly Wildcard I think that the SC need to sit and think of an appropriate way to communicate the rules for each challenge to cease the ongoing discussions and doubts each and every challenge. Why must it be so difficult.

I think as L2 has said it was just a particularly messy challenge. The usual weekly questions about rules tend to more about how far they can be pushed, from what I can, I could be wrong. But with the number of talented, creative and very competitive people here I think that's inevitable. I got involved in this thread because SC have admitted it was messy already, it was obviously difficult for them and I think we should cut them some slack on that challenge...as long as they don't do it again :P

Originally posted by emlbaker:

My wording was incorrect and misleading by stating the rules were changed, rather they were clarified during the challenge, which has obviously caught people out. This in my mind should not happen, and I am glad to hear that the DQ's did not carry penalty.

There's constantly threads asking for clarification on each rule set but mostly from, as I said, trying to get the best editing under the restraints.

Originally posted by emlbaker:

Wildcard be happy you are from QLD as you guys dont pay the premium taxes on fuel that the rest of the country suffers. Lucky you.....

Heh, very true and here prices are getting ridiculous, I feel for the rest of you.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/18/2008 11:13:01 PM · #39

Originally posted by emlbaker:

Therefore should the entries that were DQ'd for this reason be changed and included. Although it was a bad mistake and no penalties were included with the DQ it is still a red mark on the page of those who were DQ'd. I can understand and completely agree with the DQ's that were for adding graphics/clipart etc, but not the motion types

Except, that's not going to happen. There were umpteen tickets handled from users/members who asked us first and were told that they couldn't or shouldn't enter. To say "yes" to people who didn't ask first and "no" to the people who did ask isn't fair to the people who contacted us.

We don't want to create an environment where if you contact us first you get screwed out of entering while someone else sails through on a split decision.

Unfortunately, the best we can do is a DQ without penalty.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

01/18/2008 11:18:44 PM · #40

Originally posted by emlbaker:

Originally posted by L2:
Yep, linear motion and what it is or should be or could be - all a big mess. Big mistake to try to define time lapse that way, we couldn't do it fairly so we quit trying.

There was no clean way to separate the linear motion/natural motion/directed action mess from digital composites, that's why it's gone.

You hated it, we wound up hating it, we are all very sorry - we meant to try to do something fun and it just went completely awry.

What else can I say? You guys are right- it was horrible.

But now it's over.

Therefore should the entries that were DQ'd for this reason be overturned and included in the challenge results. Although it was a bad mistake and no penalties were included with the DQ it is still a red mark on the page of those who were DQ'd. I can understand and completely agree with the DQ's that were for adding graphics/clipart etc, but not the motion types

...but then that's not fair to the people who didn't enter similar entries in the first place because they checked with us first (as they should have, and as we encouraged them to in the Admin Announcement) and were told their entries weren't legal.

If there were no such entries, our job would have been easy.

If everyone read the Admin Announcements (which are considered official information), our job would have been easy.

We had a difficult situation to deal with, and made the best choices we could. Unfortunately, this is the real world, and our jobs aren't easy. To be frank, being told to "get off our high horses" and the like doesn't make it easier. Last I checked, we're all human, so how about cutting us a little slack? It's fine to disagree with us, but maybe let's not get personal?

~Terry

01/18/2008 11:38:47 PM · #41

Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

Fair enough Terry. I now understand that there were so many people who asked first along with those that just submitted.

As for my comment on High Horses, please allow me to take that back. I have gone away, taken a shower and calmed down. It was a bit personal and not justified to attack you guys that way.

Does it not make sense to have all the rules and requirements, clarifications, examples outlined clearly before submissions begin. There was a thread a while back where a member suggested that each ruleset have a separate PS menu created which inhibited illegal actions/functions within PS. This would stop some of the illegal edits and then the SC could concentrate on what is allowed within the image.

I participate in a number of site similar to this with challenges, and to be honest this is by far the most difficult to participate in.

apashack