| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/26/2004 08:45:48 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
It is my understanding that images are NOT DQd for failing to meet the challenge - that is something that is dealt with by the voters who will generally ensure the entry ranks as it deserves.
DQs are for breaking the rules on submitting such as editing, dates and so on. |
Yup, Kavey is right. |
|
|
|
03/26/2004 08:59:28 AM · #27 |
| I motion that we permit EUTHANASIA DQs. That is, we the kind, caring people of this site should submit DQ's for people who clearly didn't understand the rules and are no doubt getting slammed for it. To use a example of a closed challenge, the money challenge. Some people made a mistake and included money--an honest mistake, no worse or better than those who didn't follow the editing rules. |
|
|
|
03/26/2004 10:12:07 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by Are_62:
I voted for one photo to be DQ'ed in the portrait challenge. It was a picture of a plain coffee mug. While I liked the coffee mug I didn't think it would qualify as a portrait. |
I actually found that photo to not only meet the challenge, but to do so in a unique and creative way. What better submission for a portrait challenge than a true to the word "mug shot".
Then again, I am a sucker for pathetic puns.
|
|
|
|
03/26/2004 10:50:14 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
I motion that we permit EUTHANASIA DQs. That is, we the kind, caring people of this site should submit DQ's for people who clearly didn't understand the rules and are no doubt getting slammed for it. |
Great idea! Someone could euthanize their own image and post it in the forums with a few apologies. Then just sit back and watch all the comments roll in.
"So sorry you got DQ'ed"
"that was the my fav pic in the challenge"
"great photo, I gave it a 10"
etcetera, etcetera, etcetera..... |
|
|
|
03/26/2004 12:14:57 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
I actually notified DPC and asked this picture to be DQ'ed because of the reasons mentioned and a couple threads I read after it was submitted. It was never DQ'ed.
So I am not really sure where that line is drawn. |
Speaking for myself as a Site Council member, let me offer thoughts on this... Because it wasn't a "literal photographic representation" (i.e., it wasn't a straight on shot, it didn't have flat lighting, it had multiple elements in the picture that showed "composition", etc.) it didn't qualify for violating the "literal photographic representation" rule.
That rule is typically only enforced when the existing "art" is the only thing in the photo and there is no attempt at lighting and/or composing the photo in a creative fashion.
I agree that this is somewhat tricky to explain, but rest assured that an entry is only DQ'd for violating the "literal photographic representation" rule after a fair number of the SC's or admins vote that it should be DQ'd (it is never up to just one or two people to decide). If there is a "split vote", then a discussion takes place until a concensus is reached, and if one can't be reached, then the photo is not DQ'd.
Hope that helps... |
|
|
|
03/26/2004 01:43:54 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by justine:
Maybe because it says PIZZA-
Marco's, Manny's, Mildred's, Mary's Pizza. :)
 |
[/quote]
It is a copyright violation to reproduce a copyrighted image/logo/pic/even buildings can be copyrighted for designand architecture without permission. The only exception is for 'educational or research' purposes.
I see pics of artwork submitted at least once a challenge. I have not asked for a DQ (will now though) but I do harshly comment the entrant for the above reasons and for extreme lack of original thought.
chris |
|
|
|
03/26/2004 01:54:52 PM · #32 |
Yup - you should certainly try and get any pictures of new buildings DQed - most of them are copyrighted if built in the last 20 years or so.
But why enter them then ? Harsh commenting and DQ requests, somewhat like charity, should probably best begin at home.
Message edited by author 2004-03-26 13:56:17.
|
|
|
|
03/26/2004 02:09:48 PM · #33 |
Alright, have been DQ'd. But I now know what I did wrong. Don't mind so much, was getting low scores, and as I said be fore, it was a last minute scramble for an entry. I am sure I could've done better having not been rushing myself, and wouldn't have gotten DQ'd. I am greatful to DQ judges for explaining the violation of the rules. Thanks all for keeping my spirits up during the DQ process.
Spreading the love in DP... :) :) :) |
|
|
|
03/26/2004 02:47:05 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
It is a copyright violation to reproduce a copyrighted image/logo/pic/even buildings can be copyrighted for designand architecture without permission. The only exception is for 'educational or research' purposes.
I see pics of artwork submitted at least once a challenge. I have not asked for a DQ (will now though) but I do harshly comment the entrant for the above reasons and for extreme lack of original thought.
chris |
What we do here in the contests qualifies as "fair use" for research or educational purposes within both the letter and spirit of the copyright law. Deriving a commercial benefit from the image, like selling prints or postcards, might be a violation of the law unless it is done for journalistic or satirical purposes. But, if we are just talking about use as challenge entries, the use of copyrighted images or objects should be perfectly legal. Whether the way they are used is consistent with DPC rules is a separate question. |
|
|
|
03/26/2004 02:56:04 PM · #35 |
I'm all for my pic being used for educational purposes, will that un-dq it?
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by bestagents:
It is a copyright violation to reproduce a copyrighted image/logo/pic/even buildings can be copyrighted for designand architecture without permission. The only exception is for 'educational or research' purposes.
I see pics of artwork submitted at least once a challenge. I have not asked for a DQ (will now though) but I do harshly comment the entrant for the above reasons and for extreme lack of original thought.
chris |
What we do here in the contests qualifies as "fair use" for research or educational purposes within both the letter and spirit of the copyright law. Deriving a commercial benefit from the image, like selling prints or postcards, might be a violation of the law unless it is done for journalistic or satirical purposes. But, if we are just talking about use as challenge entries, the use of copyrighted images or objects should be perfectly legal. Whether the way they are used is consistent with DPC rules is a separate question. |
|
|
|
|
03/26/2004 03:02:31 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by dtouch1:
I'm all for my pic being used for educational purposes, will that un-dq it?
Originally posted by GeneralE:
... if we are just talking about use as challenge entries, the use of copyrighted images or objects should be perfectly legal. Whether the way they are used is consistent with DPC rules is a separate question. |
|
It's that last part I think that got your picture. I personally disagree with that decision, but I guess I'm in the minority. If it's any consolation, your photo gets high marks for exactly hitting the dividing line between what people think it OK and what isn't ... too bad there isn't a challenge for that! |
|
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: 11/13/2025 01:09:26 AM EST.
