| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/16/2009 07:52:19 PM · #26 |
| I have a feeling that this thread will be closed soon. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 07:54:01 PM · #27 |
It is not rediculous. The logo and "germany" are huge "objects" printed on the main subject of this photo. They were both removed because it obviously took away from the "allure" of the picture. Don't just dismiss it by saying it's rediculous and let's ban cloning al together.
I'm sure if we look around we will find many other DQs with a lot less cloning of the main subject than this one.
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by kenskid:
A few letters in a sea of letters? I think not...when the letters along with a BIG logo are removed from the SUBJECT of the photo, it should be a DQ. This would be a mockery of the rules if allowed to stand. In fact, if it stands, this picture will be the "ruler" to which every other "cloning" DQ would be measured against.
Originally posted by yanko:
Talk about a non-issue. I can see how a newbie might question this but anybody who has been here for a while should know by now how insignificant this cloning job was. We are talking about a few letters missing in a sea of letters. |
|
Oh well....let's ban cloning all together.....this is just ridiculous. |
|
|
|
|
09/16/2009 07:55:13 PM · #28 |
This thread should NOT be closed. It is a good discussion of the rules. If it is closed out, then it should be reopened as soon as the picture is validated and deemed legal or illegal.
Originally posted by pedrobop:
I have a feeling that this thread will be closed soon. |
|
|
|
|
09/16/2009 07:55:14 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
It is not rediculous. The logo and "germany" are huge "objects" printed on the main subject of this photo. They were both removed because it obviously took away from the "allure" of the picture. Don't just dismiss it by saying it's rediculous and let's ban cloning al together.
I'm sure if we look around we will find many other DQs with a lot less cloning of the main subject than this one.
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by kenskid:
A few letters in a sea of letters? I think not...when the letters along with a BIG logo are removed from the SUBJECT of the photo, it should be a DQ. This would be a mockery of the rules if allowed to stand. In fact, if it stands, this picture will be the "ruler" to which every other "cloning" DQ would be measured against.
Originally posted by yanko:
Talk about a non-issue. I can see how a newbie might question this but anybody who has been here for a while should know by now how insignificant this cloning job was. We are talking about a few letters missing in a sea of letters. |
|
Oh well....let's ban cloning all together.....this is just ridiculous. |
|
Well obviously your idea of HUGE is way different to many others on this site!!!!
|
|
|
|
09/16/2009 07:56:50 PM · #30 |
No way! I've cloned out "larger" things than that multiple times and been fine. There is no way a typical description of the photo by a typical person would include "...with the a logo and the word "Germany" on the protractor." They are incidental to the picture and if I were on SC I wouldn't give it a second though.
I'm not on SC though so whatever they think... |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:03:44 PM · #31 |
| I think the germany would be a really distracting thing in the shot. I just don't know if that's an excuse or a reason for dq. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:05:23 PM · #32 |
I have seen several other images in advanced editing that have removed much larger and more important elements than what you have accused Irene of doing. If you look at the second place finisher in Automobile Ad II, a signficant portion of the background was blanked out and this passed SC validation - and well it should!
Guys - relax! Let SC go through the entries and they will JUSTLY validate all the ribbon winners and honorable mentions.
And remember, dear ol'  scalvert got DQd as a member of SC for a shot he did some time back. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:06:25 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
This thread should NOT be closed. It is a good discussion of the rules. If it is closed out, then it should be reopened as soon as the picture is validated and deemed legal or illegal.
Originally posted by pedrobop:
I have a feeling that this thread will be closed soon. |
|
Ok i agree. But some people may start to fight! |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:07:31 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by pedrobop:
I think the germany would be a really distracting thing in the shot. I just don't know if that's an excuse or a reason for dq. |
It's definitely not a reason for DQ. One of the reasons cloning exists is to get rid of distracting elements and clean up our efforts.
Whether or not THIS is a major element will certainly be for the SC to decide, which they do by committee, and which is filled with people that can usually be counted on to fight amongst themselves, so for anyone to actually bleat out 'favoritism', is just amazingly naive and silly.
That's why this whole thread lacked credibility from the start. Not because someone wondered out loud if something should be DQ'd, but because they based that call-out on their own personal feeling on it and decided to try and stir the pot by accusations that would be completely unfounded. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:09:42 PM · #35 |
| My vote is legal... but my vote doesn't matter, so we'll see what SC has to say... I think they will go the same way though... |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:18:27 PM · #36 |
FWIW, I seem to remember being told that we couldn't blur our license plates on cars we photographed... I can't place the actual reference though, it's a long time ago... This is an interesting conundrum.
Why?
Because, on the one hand, it wouldn't seem to be a "major element" (which is in any case no longer apart of the rules), nor would it seem to "change a typical viewers description" of the image (since I didn't notice the reflection, and its incongruity, until it was pointed out), but nevertheless we have an anomalous reflection that acts as a signpost to a cloning job that *ought* to be invisible...
I don't know how I feel about this, frankly...
R. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:31:37 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by kenskid:
It is not rediculous. The logo and "germany" are huge "objects" printed on the main subject of this photo. They were both removed because it obviously took away from the "allure" of the picture. Don't just dismiss it by saying it's rediculous and let's ban cloning al together.
I'm sure if we look around we will find many other DQs with a lot less cloning of the main subject than this one.
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by kenskid:
A few letters in a sea of letters? I think not...when the letters along with a BIG logo are removed from the SUBJECT of the photo, it should be a DQ. This would be a mockery of the rules if allowed to stand. In fact, if it stands, this picture will be the "ruler" to which every other "cloning" DQ would be measured against.
Originally posted by yanko:
Talk about a non-issue. I can see how a newbie might question this but anybody who has been here for a while should know by now how insignificant this cloning job was. We are talking about a few letters missing in a sea of letters. |
|
Oh well....let's ban cloning all together.....this is just ridiculous. |
|
Well obviously your idea of HUGE is way different to many others on this site!!!! |
It usually is with men :) |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:32:39 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by LVicari:
Well obviously your idea of HUGE is way different to many others on this site!!!! |
It usually is with men :) [/quote]
UM....!
|
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:33:50 PM · #39 |
When I first started in January, I saw a picture that I absolutely loved. Unfortunately, I didn't fav it :(
I believe it was a man working on a piece of machinery, like a lathe or something... Anyway, it got dq'd and I didn't understand why. It was beautifully done with a very dark background. Does anyone remember the photo? I'm wondering if that was a similar situation.
My two cents: I don't think it should be dq'd. I'm guessing that she cloned it out in order to keep her anonymity. Having Germany on the protractor narrows the field quite a bit. I have no problem with that. Though I would love to have the rule clarified a tad more. The only thing I've cloned out is dust from on the lens, because I'm never sure what's going to be considered an element of the picture. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:38:31 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I'm guessing that she cloned it out in order to keep her anonymity. Having Germany on the protractor narrows the field quite a bit. |
Oh, come ON, Wendy! That's nonsense, if only because you can buy those very same protractors in any serious drafting store in America. Maybe it's OK for me to clone the skiff out of my favorite go-to location to preserve my anonymity?
R. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:39:45 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
When I first started in January, I saw a picture that I absolutely loved. Unfortunately, I didn't fav it :(
I believe it was a man working on a piece of machinery, like a lathe or something... Anyway, it got dq'd and I didn't understand why. It was beautifully done with a very dark background. Does anyone remember the photo? I'm wondering if that was a similar situation. |
 |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:40:20 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by vawendy:
I'm guessing that she cloned it out in order to keep her anonymity. Having Germany on the protractor narrows the field quite a bit. |
Oh, come ON, Wendy! That's nonsense, if only because you can buy those very same protractors in any serious drafting store in America. Maybe it's OK for me to clone the skiff out of my favorite go-to location to preserve my anonymity?
R. |
Mine are all made in China :D
It just doesn't seem like a major element. And I don't want a red. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:42:39 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Originally posted by vawendy:
When I first started in January, I saw a picture that I absolutely loved. Unfortunately, I didn't fav it :(
I believe it was a man working on a piece of machinery, like a lathe or something... Anyway, it got dq'd and I didn't understand why. It was beautifully done with a very dark background. Does anyone remember the photo? I'm wondering if that was a similar situation. |
|
that's it! What was cloned out? |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:47:20 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Originally posted by vawendy:
When I first started in January, I saw a picture that I absolutely loved. Unfortunately, I didn't fav it :(
I believe it was a man working on a piece of machinery, like a lathe or something... Anyway, it got dq'd and I didn't understand why. It was beautifully done with a very dark background. Does anyone remember the photo? I'm wondering if that was a similar situation. |
|
that's it! What was cloned out? |
From what I recall, the entire background was cloned out/ blacked out. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:50:15 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by bassbone:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Originally posted by vawendy:
When I first started in January, I saw a picture that I absolutely loved. Unfortunately, I didn't fav it :(
I believe it was a man working on a piece of machinery, like a lathe or something... Anyway, it got dq'd and I didn't understand why. It was beautifully done with a very dark background. Does anyone remember the photo? I'm wondering if that was a similar situation. |
|
that's it! What was cloned out? |
From what I recall, the entire background was cloned out/ blacked out. |
ah, that makes more sense. I had asked someone back then, and they thought it was a part of the machine, but it seemed like there wasn't anything important missing. Losing an entire background is not good. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:53:47 PM · #46 |
Editet to remove my post. Had already been answered =)
Message edited by author 2009-09-16 20:54:55. |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 08:53:49 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by bassbone:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Originally posted by vawendy:
When I first started in January, I saw a picture that I absolutely loved. Unfortunately, I didn't fav it :(
I believe it was a man working on a piece of machinery, like a lathe or something... Anyway, it got dq'd and I didn't understand why. It was beautifully done with a very dark background. Does anyone remember the photo? I'm wondering if that was a similar situation. |
|
that's it! What was cloned out? |
From what I recall, the entire background was cloned out/ blacked out. |
ah, that makes more sense. I had asked someone back then, and they thought it was a part of the machine, but it seemed like there wasn't anything important missing. Losing an entire background is not good. |
An entire background is a major element. A brand name is not when it is only a small part of the image.
|
|
|
|
09/16/2009 09:02:33 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by bassbone:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Originally posted by vawendy:
When I first started in January, I saw a picture that I absolutely loved. Unfortunately, I didn't fav it :(
I believe it was a man working on a piece of machinery, like a lathe or something... Anyway, it got dq'd and I didn't understand why. It was beautifully done with a very dark background. Does anyone remember the photo? I'm wondering if that was a similar situation. |
|
that's it! What was cloned out? |
From what I recall, the entire background was cloned out/ blacked out. |
ah, that makes more sense. I had asked someone back then, and they thought it was a part of the machine, but it seemed like there wasn't anything important missing. Losing an entire background is not good. |
An entire background is a major element. A brand name is not when it is only a small part of the image. |
agree (I think that's what I said) |
|
|
|
09/16/2009 09:09:29 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Whether or not THIS is a major element will certainly be for the SC to decide, which they do by committee, and which is filled with people that can usually be counted on to fight amongst themselves, so for anyone to actually bleat out 'favoritism', is just amazingly naive and silly. |
This points to why a DQ (if it happens) would take time on this particular image. Participants in this thread are divided in their opinion as to whether there should be a DQ or not. Site council are likely to have varying opinions too, and will have to vote on the issue before a decision is made. It is not as straight-forward as was the case with the original 2nd place image, where all the necessary information was there for an easy decision.
|
|
|
|
09/16/2009 10:31:42 PM · #50 |
The last I looked, the photo is stil under review.
+++++++
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
FWIW, I seem to remember being told that we couldn't blur our license plates on cars we photographed... I can't place the actual reference though, it's a long time ago... This is an interesting conundrum.
Why?
Because, on the one hand, it wouldn't seem to be a "major element" (which is in any case no longer apart of the rules), nor would it seem to "change a typical viewers description" of the image (since I didn't notice the reflection, and its incongruity, until it was pointed out), but nevertheless we have an anomalous reflection that acts as a signpost to a cloning job that *ought* to be invisible...
I don't know how I feel about this, frankly...
R. |
In advanced it would be perfectly alright to blur the tag.
The question we usually get asked is "Can I blur this in basic," to which we've always said, "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: 08/27/2025 03:49:52 PM EDT.
