I can't believe it!!! - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

10/21/2003 03:22:19 PM · #26

Originally posted by Gordon:

We had a vote - remember ? Many people were very vocal about keeping things just the way they are. I believe that the vote was pretty much evenly split - hence things remain how they are.

Yeah but that was at least 4 months ago and I think some of us who were vocal then,might have different opinions now. I think it should be either all editing or no editing and solve the dq issues all together.

StevePax

Canon PowerShot S50

10/21/2003 03:29:38 PM · #27

I think the DQ issues have been solved - if you get a request, send in your original, then they validate it. Solved. Done. The editing decision has been made - if you do it within the rules, you're fine. If you break the rules, you edited too much, you're DQ'd. Solved. Done.

OSS: Everyone gets DQ requests. Lots of people are surprised and a little scared. Only you have been downright indignant about it. Just send in your proof and let it go.

Message edited by author 2003-10-21 15:30:04.

BobsterLobster

Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro

10/21/2003 03:30:06 PM · #28

When I first joined, I was very vocal about keeping things as they were. I guess I was scared that if extensive Photoshopping was allowed, any chance of me getting a ribbon would totally fly out of the window as I was learning both Photography and Photoshop.
Then I won my first blue ribbon in a Photoshop challenge, and I changed my mind ;-)
I think that people who are new to Photography and this site need to be reassured that allowing spot editing will not mean they will be left behind.
And the voters are strong enough in scoring low people who do not submit pictures within the challenge topic... I think we can rely on the voters to make sure people don't go too far with the Photoshop effects and filters. I think we've seen that we can already do pretty extreme things with Photoshop legally here.

10/21/2003 03:40:26 PM · #29

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

What changed ?

A Weaver

Sony DSLR-A100

10/21/2003 03:40:36 PM · #30

Keep your heads up. I have had DQ request in the past and sent in my orginal and that was that, No DQ. If you are legal, your good. If you did somthing to break the rules, so be it. No one will ever know what photo you had if it gets a DQ. Unless you won a ribbon and get it stripped from you (that would be embaressing). Dont worry about it if you know you are in the right. Aubrey

People see things diffrent than others... Thats what keeps this site REAL!!!

Message edited by author 2003-10-21 15:41:31.

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

10/21/2003 03:43:46 PM · #31

Originally posted by StevePax:

If you had read the entire thread you would have known that was done right away. As for being indignant about it, well if that is what you call being even more upset about Gordon making sure he pointed out which photo then indignant it is.

As for the rules I think they do need to correct the problem once and for all either allow all editing or no editing and stop the petty squabbling over should this be dqed or not.

Of course those who are happy about requesting one dq after another maybe should first try letting a simple comment asking how it was done and wait a day before requesting the dq. They might actually learn how to do something within the limits of the challenge rather than offend someone who did nothing wrong.

Message edited by author 2003-10-21 15:45:40.

StevePax

Canon PowerShot S50

10/21/2003 04:02:53 PM · #32

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

Originally posted by StevePax:
I think the DQ issues have been solved - if you get a request, send in your original, then they validate it. Solved. Done. The editing decision has been made - if you do it within the rules, you're fine. If you break the rules, you edited too much, you're DQ'd. Solved. Done.

OSS: Everyone gets DQ requests. Lots of people are surprised and a little scared. Only you have been downright indignant about it. Just send in your proof and let it go.

If you had read the entire thread you would have known that was done right away. As for being indignant about it, well if that is what you call being even more upset about Gordon making sure he pointed out which photo then indignant it is.

As for the rules I think they do need to correct the problem once and for all either allow all editing or no editing and stop the petty squabbling over should this be dqed or not.

Of course those who are happy about requesting one dq after another maybe should first try letting a simple comment asking how it was done and wait a day before requesting the dq. They might actually learn how to do something within the limits of the challenge rather than offend someone who did nothing wrong.

If you are truly offended by that, then maybe it's time you spent some time away from DPC to find out what's really important in life. I need a big sign to carry around - GET OVER IT!

nards656

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

10/21/2003 04:07:59 PM · #33

What if the photographer knew it was illegal and chose to lie to the person who asked how it was done???? Only site admins/council have the power to really decide if the photo was illegal, by requiring the original and determining if the effect can be accomplished legally by following the photogs steps.

Your personal experience and frustration with this does not need to be the determining factor about editing, I'm sorry. ANYONE can request a DQ. It's the way the system works. There are rules. Work with them. Enjoy the fact that you have the same rights to request DQ on a picture that someone else does. It doesn't mean you cheated. It just means someone thinks you did, and that person is not empowered, by the rules of the site, to make the final decision. He/she is NOT supposed to contact you, because then there would be a knowledge of who you are. Ever think about that? I would much rather explain myself to a site council member than to a troll who wants to know how I made that skunk pink. Or whatever.

And, seriously, lighten up. You're taking this a little too hard.

A Weaver

Sony DSLR-A100

10/21/2003 04:10:46 PM · #34

I dont see anywhere where Gordon gave away witch photo has a DQ request??????

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

10/21/2003 04:13:49 PM · #35

Originally posted by A Weaver:

I dont see anywhere where Gordon gave away witch photo has a DQ request??????

I removed the comments that mentioned the particular effect under discussion, due to the obvious distress of the submitter. Though there are other features of the image that make it more apparent who took it than anything mentioned here.

vonautsch

Nikon Coolpix B500

10/21/2003 04:15:27 PM · #36

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

Of course those who are happy about requesting one dq after another maybe should first try letting a simple comment asking how it was done and wait a day before requesting the dq.

Here's a scenario for you. 10 voters of the 200 see your photo to be illegal. If things were done they way you suggest, all ten of them would be asking you at different times how you did your photo, meaning you would have to explain your process 10 different times. Perhaps you have time in your day to do this. But what if things were done just how they are currently set up? Those same 10 people would hit the DQ request button, leaving it up to the Site Council to ask you just once to explain your process, not 10 times. This seems a little less time consuming on your part. And if you want to tell people how you did it so they can learn, then put the process in your description of the photo for all to see after voting is done.

As for Gordon 'revealing' your photo, you should re-read what you've been writing through this thread. Your continuous pushing of the issue forced his hand, so to speak.

And you might also want to notice that sslickk, who started the thread, has admitted in another thread that he did enter an illegal picture because he accidentally entered the wrong one, so the process worked.

coolhar

10/21/2003 04:38:12 PM · #37

I'm still not afraid of photo editing programs, and I think I have moved beyound the novice stages in maniulating images. IMHO, the reason it is important to keep the rules the way they are is because that is what makes this site different from the dozens of others on the internet. If you don't like the rules here, you have many other places to submit images that display your editing skills. But if you are able to whine your way into getting DPC's rules changed, then there will be no alternative for those of us (the majority the last time it was measured) who prefer to do their creative work with the camera instead of with software.

BTW, for an example of an image I improved with software, compare this:

with this:

Comments welcome.

If you don't understand the point I am making I suggest you go to California and start working to recall Arnold.

10/21/2003 04:40:30 PM · #38

Originally posted by vonautsch:

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
Of course those who are happy about requesting one dq after another maybe should first try letting a simple comment asking how it was done and wait a day before requesting the dq.

Here's a scenario for you. 10 voters of the 200 see your photo to be illegal. If things were done they way you suggest, all ten of them would be asking you at different times how you did your photo, meaning you would have to explain your process 10 different times. Perhaps you have time in your day to do this. But what if things were done just how they are currently set up? Those same 10 people would hit the DQ request button, leaving it up to the Site Council to ask you just once to explain your process, not 10 times. This seems a little less time consuming on your part. And if you want to tell people how you did it so they can learn, then put the process in your description of the photo for all to see after voting is done.

As for Gordon 'revealing' your photo, you should re-read what you've been writing through this thread. Your continuous pushing of the issue forced his hand, so to speak.

And you might also want to notice that sslickk, who started the thread, has admitted in another thread that he did enter an illegal picture because he accidentally entered the wrong one, so the process worked.

If you know how to copy and paste then your first response can be sent out to the next 9 requests.

Yes but back in July I did submit the wrong photo and after someone commented on the spot in the photo I personally requested the dq. So there the other way does work also. Of course not everyone would request there own dq. But at the same time I couldn't answer how the spot got onto the photo so the person commenting could have easily given me a day to answer then request the dq. Again giving the photographer the chance to explain the process had it been legal.

But the photo in question was one that the effect has been done over and over in challenges so should I stop giving everyone the benefit and request a dq the next time I see it being done? Sure hope not cause this was the first time I did the effect in a challenge, but it won't be the last. I will however submit in my comments how it was acheived then if the site council still requests proof I will have some major issues.

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

10/21/2003 04:45:35 PM · #39

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

Yeah but that was at least 4 months ago and I think some of us who were vocal then,might have different opinions now. I think it should be either all editing or no editing and solve the dq issues all together.

What changed ?

Let me direct that answer to BobsterLobster, he says it well. We grew!

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

Morgan

Nikon D800

10/21/2003 04:49:59 PM · #40

Guys, this thread is getting to be a bit silly and is really rather embarrassing.

Gordon, you are being bit too arrogant, I think. If you are a member of the site council, then I suggest that you have an obligation to set the standard and demonstrate leadership, not engage in this sort of public conflict with another member.

OneSweetSin, I suggest that you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Let's get through the process and see what happens. I can appreciate that you are offended that your honesty and integrity are being questioned, once again. But, those of us who have dealt with you in the past fully appreciate these qualities in you, regardless of the outcome of the DQ.

This DQ thing is becoming rather silly after all. I am beginning to feel that a few members are using it as a tool to show off their own expertise. Folks, this is suppose to be a fun place and a learning place. We should not add political nonsense here, we all get enough of it at work and elsewhere in our lives.

Let's all play nice, OK?

10/21/2003 04:52:18 PM · #41

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

But the photo in question was one that the effect has been done over and over in challenges so should I stop giving everyone the benefit and request a dq the next time I see it being done? Sure hope not cause this was the first time I did the effect in a challenge, but it won't be the last. I will however submit in my comments how it was acheived then if the site council still requests proof I will have some major issues.

As was explained previously, and removed because you complained about it, the way you used the particular effect was only part of the changes you did. You made subsequent changes that have the effect of making it look potentially in violation of the rules, hence the request for you to demonstrate how it was achieved. The comments you provide are not sufficient to evaluate if it is valid or not - only the original image is. This is simply why you were asked to provide it. Nobody removed your image, nobody accused you have cheating. You were asked to provide proof, the image was validated, and in a whole lot less time than this bickering about it has continued for.

Any similar images, with similar changes will also no doubt require proof to be provided, if similar changes are made after the basic editing is done.

You are, of course, perfectly at liberty to have as many major issues as you like.

10/21/2003 04:55:02 PM · #42

Originally posted by Morgan:

Guys, this thread is getting to be a bit silly and is really rather embarrassing.

This DQ thing is becoming rather silly after all. I am beginning to feel that a few members are using it as a tool to show off their own expertise. Folks, this is suppose to be a fun place and a learning place. We should not add political nonsense here, we all get enough of it at work and elsewhere in our lives.

Let's all play nice, OK?

Isn't that the point of the rant forum ? Though I don't quite understand your point about the DQ thing being silly. Of the two pictures originally brought up in this thread, one was DQed due to illegal editing ( a mistake over which picture was entered) and the other was a validated within about 5 minutes. In both cases the editing was certainly potentially beyond what was valid. The process works, so I don't quite get what is silly about it.

Message edited by author 2003-10-21 16:57:26.

10/21/2003 04:56:44 PM · #43

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

But the photo in question was one that the effect has been done over and over in challenges so should I stop giving everyone the benefit and request a dq the next time I see it being done? Sure hope not cause this was the first time I did the effect in a challenge, but it won't be the last. I will however submit in my comments how it was acheived then if the site council still requests proof I will have some major issues.

As was explained previously, and removed because you complained about it, the way you used the particular effect was only part of the changes you did. You made subsequent changes that have the effect of making it look potentially in violation of the rules, hence the request for you to demonstrate how it was achieved. The comments you provide are not sufficient to evaluate if it is valid or not - only the original image is. This is simply why you were asked to provide it. Nobody removed your image, nobody accused you have cheating. You were asked to provide proof, the image was validated, and in a whole lot less time than this bickering about it has continued for.

Any similar images, with similar changes will also no doubt require proof to be provided, if similar changes are made after the basic editing is done.

You are, of course, perfectly at liberty to have as many major issues as you like.

Gordon I sent you an email you know what challenge I am using the same effect for if you read your email. Would you like right now for me to upload you the photo and you can validate it now? Before the next dq request? Oh come on I might just start using this effect on every photo for a while just so you can get tired of requesting the orginal and get the point.

10/21/2003 05:01:53 PM · #44

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

sigh. As I posted about 2 hours ago, your picture has already been validated. I removed that post because you effectively asked me to.

I don't get dpchallenge email here so haven't seen your email. I've only responded to the proof that you provided and an admin note was added several hours ago.

It isn't me requesting the original, it was voters raising the question about the picture, and several other site council members also indicating that they also could not decide if the image was valid or not. The request was made so that it could be cleared up quickly. and it was, other than all of this. If it happens again, the request will get made again if enough people are unconvinced that its legal. In some cases its obvious that the DQ request is specious and it gets ignored. In this particular case it is not obvious without the original.

Future cases would also be evaluated on merit.

Message edited by author 2003-10-21 17:02:15.

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

10/21/2003 05:06:23 PM · #45

In other words no one wants to validate another entry until the request is made for a dq. Well just know I used the exact same thing on another photo in another challenge and I will provide the proof and we will again be doing this here as I will then be totally feeling violated as I spent the time to post in the comments exactly how it was done.

vonautsch

Nikon Coolpix B500

10/21/2003 05:06:54 PM · #46

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

Am I the only one seeing how childish this is becoming? Who needs to go home to the kids when all they need to do is read this thread?!?! ;)

Morgan

Nikon D800

10/21/2003 05:10:42 PM · #47

Originally posted by vonautsch:

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
Gordon I sent you an email you know what challenge I am using the same effect for if you read your email. Would you like right now for me to upload you the photo and you can validate it now? Before the next dq request? Oh come on I might just start using this effect on every photo for a while just so you can get tired of requesting the orginal and get the point.

Am I the only one seeing how childish this is becoming? Who needs to go home to the kids when all they need to do is read this thread?!?! ;)

I agree - let's all move on.

MikeO

Fujifilm x100

10/21/2003 05:17:57 PM · #48

This is turning out to be a slanging match betwen Gordon and Anna - use the PM or email cos i think most of us are getting a bit bored now.

chill out people..

timj351

Sony DSC-F707

10/21/2003 05:26:25 PM · #49

Originally posted by OneSweetSin:

...Oh come on I might just start using this effect on every photo for a while just so you can get tired of requesting the orginal and get the point.

In other words no one wants to validate another entry until the request is made for a dq. Well just know I used the exact same thing on another photo in another challenge and I will provide the proof and we will again be doing this here as I will then be totally feeling violated as I spent the time to post in the comments exactly how it was done.

Users only see the title and the photo during the voting. Anything you write in the comments section won't be seen until the challenge has ended.

Maybe it would be more worthwhile to just take interesting photos for the challenges or for yourself and not to make extra efforts to try to prove a point.

T