Back to School ribbon winners - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

09/17/2009 09:36:36 AM · #51

When this is resolved, will we see an "image validated" tag?

Thanks

vawendy

Sony Alpha 1

Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS

09/17/2009 09:49:04 AM · #52

Originally posted by kenskid:

When this is resolved, will we see an "image validated" tag?

Thanks

nope. I think Irene would need to tell us that it's been validated.

SandyP

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 USM

09/17/2009 10:06:04 AM · #53

Well. . .either way. . .Pooooor Irene! Having been the subject of one of these horrid threads in the past where you feel like you are being hung up in the center of Town Square for a public meeting on whether or not you deserve the hanging, I don't wish it on anyone. And I agree that it wasn't right for a non-site council member to start a speculative thread accusing her and site council of inappropriateness. Irene is above reproach, and for that matter, about Site Council playing favorites, they are above reproach as well! If something did slip by Irene and her photo gets dq'd, she really doesn't deserve the hanging.

End of my rant.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

09/17/2009 10:30:42 AM · #54

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:

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.

Generally speaking, obvious DQs (date violations, added text, composites, etc.) get priority. Split decisions take longer due to discussion, but perfectly legal entries can also take a while simply because it's not urgent.

Originally posted by SandyP:

Pooooor Irene! ...she really doesn't deserve the hanging.

There's really only one person and his friend questioning the edit (not exactly a public hanging). It's extremely unlikely that Irene's entry would be DQ'd for cloning out a small detail in Advanced.

kenskid

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

09/17/2009 11:31:36 AM · #55

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
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.

Generally speaking, obvious DQs (date violations, added text, composites, etc.) get priority. Split decisions take longer due to discussion, but perfectly legal entries can also take a while simply because it's not urgent.

Originally posted by SandyP:
Pooooor Irene! ...she really doesn't deserve the hanging.

There's really only one person and his friend questioning the edit (not exactly a public hanging). It's extremely unlikely that Irene's entry would be DQ'd for cloning out a small detail in Advanced.

One person and his friend questioning the edit? So what? And now you, an SC person says that it is unlikely that it will be a DQ...for cloning out a small detail ! Small detail? A big ugly blob of a logo positioned on the main subject of the photo is a small detail? Let Irene post the uncloned version. I have a feeling that that logo would have surely messed up this photo's final status. The "pristine" clean aspect of this photo would have been ruined by the black logo. That logo would have dragged your eyeballs directly to it. As the photo is now, your eye flows throughout the scene landing back on the protractor. That blob would have been a big giant black stop sign for your eye and made this photo a stagnant mucky pond. IMO of course.

scarbrd

Leica M10

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

09/17/2009 11:42:55 AM · #56

Originally posted by kenskid:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
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.

Generally speaking, obvious DQs (date violations, added text, composites, etc.) get priority. Split decisions take longer due to discussion, but perfectly legal entries can also take a while simply because it's not urgent.

Originally posted by SandyP:
Pooooor Irene! ...she really doesn't deserve the hanging.

There's really only one person and his friend questioning the edit (not exactly a public hanging). It's extremely unlikely that Irene's entry would be DQ'd for cloning out a small detail in Advanced.

One person and his friend questioning the edit? So what? And now you, an SC person says that it is unlikely that it will be a DQ...for cloning out a small detail ! Small detail? A big ugly blob of a logo positioned on the main subject of the photo is a small detail? Let Irene post the uncloned version. I have a feeling that that logo would have surely messed up this photo's final status. The "pristine" clean aspect of this photo would have been ruined by the black logo. That logo would have dragged your eyeballs directly to it. As the photo is now, your eye flows throughout the scene landing back on the protractor. That blob would have been a big giant black stop sign for your eye and made this photo a stagnant mucky pond. IMO of course.

Same with power lines running thorugh a photo, right? And those are explicitly allowed to be removed under advanced.

If I was a betting man, I'd bet the entry in question passes the "major element" standard.

Message edited by author 2009-09-17 11:43:17.

kenskid

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

09/17/2009 11:55:17 AM · #57

Come on...power lines running through a photo. To equate the two photos the power line entry would have to be on the order of having power lines running right over the face in a portrait....and then being cloned out.

Originally posted by scarbrd:

Originally posted by kenskid:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
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.

Generally speaking, obvious DQs (date violations, added text, composites, etc.) get priority. Split decisions take longer due to discussion, but perfectly legal entries can also take a while simply because it's not urgent.

Originally posted by SandyP:
Pooooor Irene! ...she really doesn't deserve the hanging.

There's really only one person and his friend questioning the edit (not exactly a public hanging). It's extremely unlikely that Irene's entry would be DQ'd for cloning out a small detail in Advanced.

One person and his friend questioning the edit? So what? And now you, an SC person says that it is unlikely that it will be a DQ...for cloning out a small detail ! Small detail? A big ugly blob of a logo positioned on the main subject of the photo is a small detail? Let Irene post the uncloned version. I have a feeling that that logo would have surely messed up this photo's final status. The "pristine" clean aspect of this photo would have been ruined by the black logo. That logo would have dragged your eyeballs directly to it. As the photo is now, your eye flows throughout the scene landing back on the protractor. That blob would have been a big giant black stop sign for your eye and made this photo a stagnant mucky pond. IMO of course.

Same with power lines running thorugh a photo, right? And those are explicitly allowed to be removed under advanced.

If I was a betting man, I'd bet the entry in question passes the "major element" standard.

SandyP

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 USM

09/17/2009 12:10:19 PM · #58

Originally posted by scalvert:

There's really only one person and his friend questioning the edit (not exactly a public hanging). It's extremely unlikely that Irene's entry would be DQ'd for cloning out a small detail in Advanced.

You're right! I know the public isn't hanging her, and they wouldn't no matter what happened, but I was thinking she might be feeling "hanged" just by the nature of the one person (or two) calling out her photo as needing to be dq'd and accusing her of being Site Coucil's pet :( I'm just sorry that the OP decided to do this.

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

09/17/2009 12:14:05 PM · #59

Jason cloned out a car once. :-)

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

09/17/2009 12:36:41 PM · #60

Originally posted by SandyP:

I was thinking she might be feeling "hanged" just by the nature of the one person (or two) calling out her photo as needing to be dq'd and accusing her of being Site Coucil's pet :(

Irene knows the rules well enough by now that I doubt she's the least bit concerned about one or two divergent opinions. Maybe she'll print out the thread and shoot a ribbon winner for a slightly different definition of "Missed Focus." ;-)

frisca

Nikon D70

09/17/2009 12:42:26 PM · #61

why is it so hard for some members of this community to believe that we have no pets and no whipping boys? Its fun for some, I suppose, to run these conspiracy theories and make martyrs of themselves and others, but it is pure fiction.

JulietNN

Canon EOS R7

Tamron 16-300mm Di II VC PZD MACRO w/Canon Nikon mount

09/17/2009 12:55:30 PM · #62

Was it Slippy that clones out a whole tractor once??

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

09/17/2009 12:55:43 PM · #63

Originally posted by frisca:

why is it so hard for some members of this community to believe that we have no pets...

Psst... Frisca, you forgot to change

stupidcat's litter box. I'd do it, but I have to walk the

dogz.

LadyK

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

09/17/2009 01:07:41 PM · #64

Originally posted by JulietNN:

Was it Slippy that clones out a whole tractor once??

i wouldnt be surprised lol

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

09/17/2009 01:13:16 PM · #65

Originally posted by frisca:

If I may answer this seriously? (Bear in mind that I think SC is AOK, that they do a good job across the board, and that I don't believe they play favorites.)

Nevertheless, just a couple posts ago, Shannon gave us the following:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Irene knows the rules well enough by now that I doubt she's the least bit concerned about one or two divergent opinions.

If you look at that statement objectively, it's not surprising that some of our more conspiracy-theory-prone members might see it as placing Irene in a privileged category of "DPCers who know the rules well enough we can give them the benefit of the doubt."

I'm NOT claiming that's the case, seriously, but it's not, IMO, a very politic thing to insert into the discussion... I'm just sayin'...

R.

Lutchenko

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro for Nikon

09/17/2009 01:24:30 PM · #66

Just for those who were wondering what was cloned out

frisca

Nikon D70

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

09/17/2009 01:26:53 PM · #67

I actually took that statement by scalvert very differently. I took from his comment that she is a person who has been around long enough that she probably has a good grasp of the rules and a couple of doubters shouldn't shake her confidence in her knowledge.

Whether he should have said it or not..I'll leave that for him to decide for himself. I personally didn't take anything from it other than what I have described above.

Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM

09/17/2009 01:29:49 PM · #68

Sounds like no one likes to hear about one of the site favs doing something against the rules, knowingly or not. Why not bring it to anyones attention? You only say this when it is one of the site favs.

Originally posted by BeefnCheez:

If the second place ribbon just got dq'd dont you think the next one to look at would be the third place ribbon? Which is the one you're talking about. They haven't even posted that they recalculated the the scores, chill. We don't need to know about this, submit a ticket to SC to bring it to their attention. If tomorrow or so after they SC posts it isn't resolved then you can start a thread whining and moaning. You are making a lot of unjust accusations.

Steef

Canon EOS-40D

09/17/2009 01:30:50 PM · #69

Originally posted by Lutchenko:

Just for those who were wondering what was cloned out

rofl!

is it acceptable to clone out clones?

09/17/2009 01:31:17 PM · #70

Why take longer? I pointed out the infraction. All they have to do is look at it. And no, it ios never a slow day at work. I make time for things I am passionate about, and being fair is one. If I wanted to just stir things, you would know.

Originally posted by mpeters:

The second place photo was a no-brainer DQ vote. Surely you understand why it might take the the SC longer to decide on Irene's photo.

***
of course you are just stirring things up. Slow day at work...

09/17/2009 01:34:44 PM · #71

Really? So you mean to tell me if I take a pic of a Ford F150, and cloned out the Ford and the F150 logos, then all of a sudden this would be ok? I don't think so, being that the logo is part of the vehicle, just as it is with anything else with a logo. Don't try to play that with me.

Originally posted by Judi:

Originally posted by rugman1969:
It doesn't matter to me whether you think what I said was fair or not. SC has obviously been checking some photos, as the second place photo was dq'd already. I assume they would be going in the order of best to worst photo. Being that this one was in 3rd, I figured it would have been handled already. If it is not dq'd for a rule violation, I can only assume it is because of playing favorites, where that is covered in SC having the right to dq or not to justify it. It is blatant, and I feel it should be dq'd. And no, I did not enter this challenge.

Originally posted by moriadelacroix:
I don't think it is fair to call the photo out in the forum. The SC should be reviewing the original and they need time to make a decision. The SC does not play 'favorites' from what I have seen in the past.

Be patient - if there truely is a rule violation, it will be DQed after the SC has had time to review it. If there isn't a rule violation, then it isn't fair to pubicly accuse her for something she did not do.

The top 5 finishers all have to submit their originals. Sometimes this takes longer to validate. The photographer has 48 hours to submit their original...but depending on the work load of the SC this can take longer than the allocated time to validate. I have had some validations take up to 3 weeks.

They don't go through checking every entry in the challenge.

I find it very difficult to believe that Irene would have done some cloning in a Basic challenge.

Edit to add...I noticed this is an Advanced Editing challenge. Her cloning would be legal as it isn't a major element. When you look at the original, what do you see. Some maths equipment on a maths board with reflection.....NOT a collection of maths equipment with a maths board and reflection...oh and a logo...that is not how it works. If, however, she had cloned out the ruler...yes that would be a major element.

It is not a matter of favourites...it is a matter of rules. Read them.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

09/17/2009 01:35:21 PM · #72

If it was a non-issue, then why did she clone it out?

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.

frisca

Nikon D70

09/17/2009 01:35:52 PM · #73

because, rugman, that's not the only image we have to review. Hard to believe, I know. But there are more than a dozen images that need looking at, as well a good handful of tickets. We also have dayjobs and families and we try to be as fast as we can, but we have set standards for ourselves when dealing with DQs so that there are no mistakes or nothing is done in haste. why does this picture bother you so? I can tell you that its on track to be validated so it isn't going to leave the front page and there will be no recalculation.

ETA: if the logos were small and not a prominent part of the composition, then yes, cloning out Ford and F150 wouldn't be a big deal and your image would be legal. Hard to believe, eh!

Message edited by author 2009-09-17 13:37:15.

09/17/2009 01:36:58 PM · #74

It wouldn't have changed my view had she cloned it out of the reflection also. But because it was still in the reflection, yes it did change my view.

Originally posted by BJamy:

The only rule violation that I see is that she didn't remove the text she cloned out from the reflection. That's a serious bummer for any photographer ;)

My understanding of the rule you mentioned is that you CAN do cloning to that extent if it not "changes the typical viewers" view on the picture. Did it change your typical view? Had she cloned out the entire "degree math curved tool_thing" it would've been something completely different.

My suggestions is that you leave this thread be, and her picture, and let SC do it when they have time. It has NOTHING to do with names. Some of the most "respected" members of DPC have been DQ'd, and some of them have even pushed the rules a bit more than allowed while being aware of it.