| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/11/2009 04:57:11 PM · #101 |
Originally posted by LoudDog:
So he is lying? |
He was DQ'd (unanimously) without contact because it was a no-brainer, but he had responses from several SC before he decided to take his ball and go home. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 04:59:48 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
So he is lying? |
He was DQ'd (unanimously) without contact because it was a no-brainer... |
kindly use brains next time
|
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:00:11 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
He did own the camera (I'm guessing it's her phone but he pays the bill?). Exposure was auto, so no set up. He asked for the photo so he picked the subject.... |
So to borrow Mark's example, if I owned a restaurant and scribbled 'dinner,' then whatever you cook makes me the chef? Sorry, not on this planet. Even if the photo was a request, she was the photographer, and whether he owned the camera or 'seasoned' her photo to taste in Photoshop afterwards is irrelevant. What we have here is equivalent to someone in a full body cast claiming he took a photo by asking someone else to. I don't buy it. |
If I told you what to buy, told you how to prepare it, told you the amounts to put in, told you how to set the oven and how long to leave it in would you say, check out this great food I created?
Originally posted by scalvert:
Michael Gross once bought me some Winsor & Newton brushes and asked me to paint something (really). I guess that makes him the painter now. |
If it were paint by numbers, yes
Originally posted by scalvert:
Ooooh... maybe I could buy a slot machine and ask friends to play it. It belongs to me, and the machine is fully automatic, so I'm sure they'd have no problem with me claiming the winnings. |
How the hell does that relate to anything I said?
Originally posted by scalvert:
Hey, maybe I could ask someone to ski for me in the Olympics? As long as I own the skis, scribble 'slalom' on a piece of paper and make some gestures, the medal is mine! |
How the hell does that relate to anything I said?
Originally posted by scalvert:
Oh, the possibilities are practically endless once you leave the reservation... :-/ |
Exactly! Take my posts out of context, create crazy strawman arguments to make me look foolish. Is this the offical position of SC. Good job, very adult like of you. Now I see how the phot got DQ'd.
Please re read my posts and respond to all my reasoning for why the DQ was BS, not just bits and pieces. And please knock off the stawman crap. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:00:47 PM · #104 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
So he is lying? |
He was DQ'd (unanimously) without contact because it was a no-brainer, but he had responses from several SC before he decided to take his ball and go home. |
Yes or no please |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:02:10 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Just because you asked someone to click does not make it yours than. is this what you are saying. |
Yes, that's what I'm saying, and that's what the rules already indicate. You can setup a photo and ask someone else to press the button, but merely asking someone to take a picture does not constitute setting up a shot. I tripod is not necessary- maybe you're panning an action shot, for example, but merely scribbling 'picture' on a piece of paper is not enough to make the copyright yours (a basic requirement of both the rules and the ToS). |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:02:12 PM · #106 |
For those who insist that it should be regarded as his photo, please do think a little bit about what the SC ruling thusly would have implied. In essence, as others have (quite brilliantly at times) illustrated, I could claim to be the photographer for pretty much any image shot by anyone if I just claimed to have suggested they take it. So much for the fairness of our competitions.
Although his departure is unfortunate, *he* chose that path. The DQ is entirely consistent with the rules. Had he given very specific guidance, reviewed shots, directed re-dos with specific instructions, well, I might be convinced to feel differently, since apparently the post-processing was in fact his own work. But that is not the case. He merely asked for her to take a photo. It's not his, it's hers.
The SC is bound to maintain the fairness of the competition, and they must consider how they interpret the rules such that they don't set precedents that blow holes in said fairness. This is a case where they absolutely had to do what they did. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:04:00 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by skewsme:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by LoudDog:
So he is lying? |
He was DQ'd (unanimously) without contact because it was a no-brainer... |
kindly use brains next time |
:-D |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:09:55 PM · #108 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
THe rules allow for someone else to press the shutter button on a shot you setup, |
Wow! what a contradictory statement/rule.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:10:19 PM · #109 |
OK, lets see, I will pick a photo from the site entirely at Random...
How about this one..
OK, here we have two motorcyclists in action, now loud-dog, I need a Yes or no on this one.. If one of those motorcyclists had said, hey man, get a picture of me on my bike with my buddy. I want you to capture us against a blue sky when we are jumping next to each other, I don`t want it all blurry, nice and sharp please., Here these settings on my camera should be fine..
Off they ride and do their thang leaving the guy with the camera to take the shot. The aforementioned guy nails the shots, the two dudes on the motorcycles ride back and say lets see the shot, they love it and go and show their friends the amazing shot they just took and take all the credit..
fair? would it be `their` photo.. or would the guy who actually took the shot be kinda robbed?
Message edited by author 2009-06-11 17:11:01. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:10:22 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
For those who insist that it should be regarded as his photo, please do think a little bit about what the SC ruling thusly would have implied. In essence, as others have (quite brilliantly at times) illustrated, I could claim to be the photographer for pretty much any image shot by anyone if I just claimed to have suggested they take it. So much for the fairness of our competitions.
Although his departure is unfortunate, *he* chose that path. The DQ is entirely consistent with the rules. Had he given very specific guidance, reviewed shots, directed re-dos with specific instructions, well, I might be convinced to feel differently, since apparently the post-processing was in fact his own work. But that is not the case. He merely asked for her to take a photo. It's not his, it's hers.
The SC is bound to maintain the fairness of the competition, and they must consider how they interpret the rules such that they don't set precedents that blow holes in said fairness. This is a case where they absolutely had to do what they did. |
i think what you said is pretty reasonable.
But given the circumstances, i would have given him benefit of doubt.
think that a person who has mouth has to scribble to someone to take photo. he must be in bad shape. He has a photo proof for that.
given his condition i would say he would be given positive decision. SC is there to do just that. SC has not taken every rule literally. (proof: there are many threads where it had been said that the ruling might have varied with different SC). |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:13:00 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by Simms:
OK, lets see, I will pick a photo from the site entirely at Random...
How about this one..
OK, here we have two motorcyclists in action, now loud-dog, I need a Yes or no on this one.. If one of those motorcyclists had said, hey man, get a picture of me on my bike with my buddy. I want you to capture us against a blue sky when we are jumping next to each other, I don`t want it all blurry, nice and sharp please., Here these settings on my camera should be fine..
Off they ride and do their thang leaving the guy with the camera to take the shot. The aforementioned guy nails the shots, the two dudes on the motorcycles ride back and say lets see the shot, they love it and go and show their friends the amazing shot they just took and take all the credit..
fair? would it be `their` photo.. or would the guy who actually took the shot be kinda robbed? |
according to dpc rules it is valid photo because photographer directed the shot. As have done many times i think and validated. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:16:03 PM · #112 |
| My husband is currently in Minnesota--and I'm 1200 miles away. I know the spot, I know what it looks like, I'll call him and tell him to take a shot of the lake with northern lights going on in the distance. Take the shot from the dock, I could even tell him what settings to use. I also could tell him to have Deb and her dogs silhouetted on the dock. he can send it to me and I can process it. This works for me--I was wondering what to enter for free study. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:17:09 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by Simms:
OK, lets see, I will pick a photo from the site entirely at Random...
How about this one..
OK, here we have two motorcyclists in action, now loud-dog, I need a Yes or no on this one.. If one of those motorcyclists had said, hey man, get a picture of me on my bike with my buddy. I want you to capture us against a blue sky when we are jumping next to each other, I don`t want it all blurry, nice and sharp please., Here these settings on my camera should be fine..
Off they ride and do their thang leaving the guy with the camera to take the shot. The aforementioned guy nails the shots, the two dudes on the motorcycles ride back and say lets see the shot, they love it and go and show their friends the amazing shot they just took and take all the credit..
fair? would it be `their` photo.. or would the guy who actually took the shot be kinda robbed? |
according to dpc rules it is valid photo because photographer directed the shot. As have done many times i think and validated. |
So, if I gave you my camera and said, Zxaar, I would like you to go to the Taj Mahal for me, use these settings, and take the classic shot of the Taj Mahal, but maybe from the left slightly.. Off you went and got the shot I just directed, something like this for example.
You sent it to me and I entered it. my photo, I told you what to do. so I guess it would be my shot. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:17:34 PM · #114 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
My husband is currently in Minnesota--and I'm 1200 miles away. I know the spot, I know what it looks like, I'll call him and tell him to take a shot of the lake with northern lights going on in the distance. Take the shot from the dock, I could even tell him what settings to use. I also could tell him to have Deb and her dogs silhouetted on the dock. he can send it to me and I can process it. This works for me--I was wondering what to enter for free study. |
Sounds great, a 10 from me! |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:18:31 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by Simms:
OK, lets see, I will pick a photo from the site entirely at Random...
How about this one..
OK, here we have two motorcyclists in action, now loud-dog, I need a Yes or no on this one.. If one of those motorcyclists had said, hey man, get a picture of me on my bike with my buddy. I want you to capture us against a blue sky when we are jumping next to each other, I don`t want it all blurry, nice and sharp please., Here these settings on my camera should be fine..
Off they ride and do their thang leaving the guy with the camera to take the shot. The aforementioned guy nails the shots, the two dudes on the motorcycles ride back and say lets see the shot, they love it and go and show their friends the amazing shot they just took and take all the credit..
fair? would it be `their` photo.. or would the guy who actually took the shot be kinda robbed? |
This is not even a logical analogy and furthermore goes to show how contradictory the rule is. If a guy walked up to me with a camera in his hand showing me a photo of himself in the air on a dirt bike and claimed he took it, I'd call him a liar.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:19:06 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
hink that a person who has mouth has to scribble to someone to take photo. he must be in bad shape. He has a photo proof for that. given his condition i would say he would be given positive decision. SC is there to do just that. |
SC is there to make sure everyone follows the rules, and an injury does not waive the ownership requirement. Imagine the forum reaction if we let someone enter another person's image just because his own camera was broken or he sprained his shutter finger. Methinks that wouldn't go over too well. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:19:47 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
Originally posted by Simms:
OK, lets see, I will pick a photo from the site entirely at Random...
How about this one..
OK, here we have two motorcyclists in action, now loud-dog, I need a Yes or no on this one.. If one of those motorcyclists had said, hey man, get a picture of me on my bike with my buddy. I want you to capture us against a blue sky when we are jumping next to each other, I don`t want it all blurry, nice and sharp please., Here these settings on my camera should be fine..
Off they ride and do their thang leaving the guy with the camera to take the shot. The aforementioned guy nails the shots, the two dudes on the motorcycles ride back and say lets see the shot, they love it and go and show their friends the amazing shot they just took and take all the credit..
fair? would it be `their` photo.. or would the guy who actually took the shot be kinda robbed? |
This is not even a logical analogy and furthermore goes to show how contradictory the rule is. If a guy walked up to me with a camera in his hand showing me a photo of himself in the air on a dirt bike and claimed he took it, I'd call him a liar. |
If a guy laid out on Morphine after a near death experience came up to me and show me a picture of him restrained in a hospital bed and said he took it then I would call him a liar.. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:19:50 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
... Had he given very specific guidance, reviewed shots, directed re-dos with specific instructions, well, I might be convinced to feel differently, since apparently the post-processing was in fact his own work. But that is not the case... |
Even if this is true, it was not known before the DQ was issued since photographer was not queried. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:20:32 PM · #119 |
| hmmm, thinking about it more, I'm not going to have my husband take the picture for me. I think Irene or Judi should... |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:23:03 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
If a guy walked up to me with a camera in his hand showing me a photo of himself in the air on a dirt bike and claimed he took it, I'd call him a liar. |
So if a guy shows you a photo of himself in a hospital bed, arms restrained, says his girlfriend took it at his request, then said he was the photographer--what would you say then? |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:24:50 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
If a guy walked up to me with a camera in his hand showing me a photo of himself in the air on a dirt bike and claimed he took it, I'd call him a liar. |
So if a guy shows you a photo of himself in a hospital bed, arms restrained, says his girlfriend took it at his request, then said he was the photographer--what would you say then? |
I say, no he wasnt. I would say she was..
-EDIT- oops, got carried away there..
Message edited by author 2009-06-11 17:25:36. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:26:09 PM · #122 |
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
If a guy walked up to me with a camera in his hand showing me a photo of himself in the air on a dirt bike and claimed he took it, I'd call him a liar. |
Yet you're OK with someone completely incapacitated in a hospital bed claiming ownership of a photo? Perhaps a more direct analogy would be one of the motorcyclists handing out point-and-shoot cameras to the crowd, holding up a "take pictures" sign and gesturing up in the air. After the jump, he collects the cameras and enters the best shot as his own work in a photography competition. That is NOT the same as setting up a shot and letting someone else press the shutter button, but it's EXACTLY what happened in this case. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:28:38 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by NstiG8tr:
If a guy walked up to me with a camera in his hand showing me a photo of himself in the air on a dirt bike and claimed he took it, I'd call him a liar. |
Yet you're OK with someone completely incapacitated in a hospital bed claiming ownership of a photo? Perhaps a more direct analogy would be one of the motorcyclists handing out point-and-shoot cameras to the crowd, holding up a "take pictures" sign and gesturing up in the air. After the jump, he collects the cameras and enters the best shot as his own work in a photography competition. That is NOT the same as setting up a shot and letting someone else press the shutter button, but it's EXACTLY what happened in this case. |
Done that one - keep up Shannon |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:29:45 PM · #124 |
I can see both sides to this argument, but seriously folks, ask yourself this:
The top winners for 2009 so far are:
Andrewt and IreneM
If I was in a hospital bed and asked IreneM to take a picture of me. Do you think her picture would look any different than my 10 year old son's picture? Even if they were both using a cell phone, they are still going to take different shots. Now, even if I say the backgrounds too busy, try again. I'm not directing the shot--I can't see the shot until they take it. I cannot get out of bed and check the angles--all I can do is say what I do and don't like AFTER the fact. I can pick my favorite shot from the ones they take. That's it. |
|
|
|
06/11/2009 05:32:27 PM · #125 |
| Poor guy, I expect he was seriously, seriously traumatised by his near death experience. He entered his photo as maybe a bit of therapy, his way of sharing what happened to him? Who knows, but maybe the DQ of an image of him lying in intensive care, an image he wanted to share with us, was a step too far, it was certainly a highly inappropriate action in my opinion, given the circumstances. There are times when rules don't apply, this was one of them. |
|
