| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/14/2012 01:28:39 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Zigomar:
People,
my intention was not to get  AllenP's photograph disqualified. I've been away from the site and haven't submitted in a long time so I thought the rules might have changed and was confused when I saw this image.
Please let's not call out for a witch burning session. |
Zigomar - You make a very good point. I think Allen's work is amazing and am so glad he enters his work here. It is always a pleasure to view his work. I guess my confusion comes in when at least one of his entries that was 900 pixels long got validated in the first place....not in him intentionally breaking a rule. |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 01:32:16 PM · #27 |
| Ii am amazed that Allen, or any of the frequent ribbon winners, would even consider letting DPC resize their images! |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 01:38:30 PM · #28 |
| i wasn't even aware they re-sized. i thought it had to be 800px or it wouldn't get accepted. |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 01:41:10 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by MargaretN:
Ii am amazed that Allen, or any of the frequent ribbon winners, would even consider letting DPC resize their images! |
Well, not that I'm a frequent ribbon winner, but I'd prefer to control the resizing process myself, as it will involve resampling. That could affect sharpness and clarity. And, I don't know how much jpg compression is involved with the resizer engine. I will say that the test image looked fine. |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 02:10:33 PM · #30 |
Ah I must have uploaded it at 900 pixels because that is usually the size I choose to post my pictures on Facebook (900 or 950). In the past I was frequently reminded by the uploader that I could not exceed the 800 pixel mark so I had to go back and resize my pictures again. I guess the new uploader must not have reminded me recently. However during the voting it is resized back down to 800 pixels so it made no difference during the voting. It was the same as everybody else's. It is only after the challenge is over, it is shown as the original size it was uploaded at. Unless Langdon has already fixed the new uploader, you will see that regardles of the size your uploaded photo is in, it will be sized down to 800 pixels during the voting, so it makes no difference anyway. The voters all saw my image as an 800-pixel wide image so I was not at an advantage, rest assured.
Message edited by author 2012-02-14 18:24:44. |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 02:41:08 PM · #31 |
| Come on guys, where's the love? |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 03:59:23 PM · #32 |
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.
He submitted 900 pixel wide images. They got downsampled to 800 pixels during voting. They probably got some downsample artifacts from ImageMagic. I've done extensive amounts of work with ImageMagic and it's a great for automatic image manipulation, but it sucks compared to the quality and control you can get from Photoshop.
If anything Allen was at a disadvantage for submitting 900 pixel wide images, yet he still won ribbons. |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 04:02:57 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by bhuge:
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.
He submitted 900 pixel wide images. They got downsampled to 800 pixels during voting. |
At the time of the original post (and for most of the discussion) it was not known whether or not the photos had been downsized during the voting, only that they now appear in the challenge results at the larger size. |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 04:05:47 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by bhuge:
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about.
He submitted 900 pixel wide images. They got downsampled to 800 pixels during voting. |
At the time of the original post (and for most of the discussion) it was not known whether or not the photos had been downsized during the voting, only that they now appear in the challenge results at the larger size. |
That would explain why I didn't see what all the fuss was about, there isn't a fuss anymore :) |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 04:06:44 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by AllenP:
Ah I must have uploaded it at 900 pixels because that is usually the size I choose to post my pictures on Facebook (900 or 950). In the past I was frequently reminded by the uploader that I could not exceed the 800 pixel mark so I had to go back and resize my pictures again. I guess the new uploader must not have reminded me recently. However during the voting it is resized back down to 800 pixels so it made no difference during the voting. It was the same as everybody else's. It is only after the challenge is over, it is shown as the original size it was uploaded at. Unless Langdon has already fixed the new uploader, you will see that regardles of the size your uploaded photo is, it will be sized down to 800 pixels during the voting, so it makes no difference anyway. The voters all saw my image as an 800-wide pixel image so I was not at an advantage, rest assured. |
if that is indeed the case, you are forgiven. : ) |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 04:11:06 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by bhuge:
That would explain why I didn't see what all the fuss was about, there isn't a fuss anymore :) |
Exactly. :-)
Of course, assuming that Allen's explanation is what happened ... actually, I think the bigger trick was getting a 900px image under the 300KB limit! |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 05:14:05 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
Originally posted by AllenP:
Ah I must have uploaded it at 900 pixels because that is usually the size I choose to post my pictures on Facebook (900 or 950). In the past I was frequently reminded by the uploader that I could not exceed the 800 pixel mark so I had to go back and resize my pictures again. I guess the new uploader must not have reminded me recently. However during the voting it is resized back down to 800 pixels so it made no difference during the voting. It was the same as everybody else's. It is only after the challenge is over, it is shown as the original size it was uploaded at. Unless Langdon has already fixed the new uploader, you will see that regardles of the size your uploaded photo is, it will be sized down to 800 pixels during the voting, so it makes no difference anyway. The voters all saw my image as an 800-wide pixel image so I was not at an advantage, rest assured. |
if that is indeed the case, you are forgiven. : ) |
not clear that anything needs to be forgiven, except maybe the suggestion that something needs to be forgiven. what is with the righteousness? |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 05:35:18 PM · #38 |
| So what happens if I upload a 800px shot that is say, 600kb in size....? |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 05:36:45 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
So what happens if I upload a 800px shot that is say, 600kb in size....? |
It tells you to try again...
|
|
|
|
02/14/2012 05:50:10 PM · #40 |
What amuses me is that  langdon posted in this thread and he had no idea how it happened! LOL |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 07:03:35 PM · #41 |
I'm sorry, but it's pretty disheartening to see so many people grabbing pitch forks and running to light a stake on fire. First, if the photo was that big during voting I guarantee that someone would have have noticed it and looked to see what the size was. Even on my 24 inch monitor I can easily see the difference between a photo that has 900 pixels as the longest sized relative to one that is 800 px. When you throw in the fact that it's a square or near square crop that just amplifies just how much bigger that extra 100 pixels appear.
I, like many also do my resizing manually, but others don't. As Langdon said the old up-loader would reject anything to large, but the new one doesn't. It will take anything, and resize it down if necessary. So even if Allen did intentionally or unintentionally upload a larger file it's in his right to do so with the new up-loader despite any degradation in image quality that may or may not appear depending on the photo. If it was in fact a failure on the up-loaders part to resize the image I hardly consider that Allen's fault.
Again, as I look at the photo I surely would have known it was larger than normal if presented that way in a challenge, and a number of people out of the 335 that viewed it during the challenge would have noticed as well and said something.
Rule are rules, but HE didn't break any now did he? I don't even know what to say after reading some longtime members comments on the situation and making a mountain out of a mole hill. Especially since Allen himself hadn't even had a chance to comment. People please relax a little. I've seen many disqualifications for flagrant rule violations where people have said... "oh, sorry for the DQ, it's still a great image etc." and where MUCH kinder in their response. Just because Allen has won many well deserved ribbons shouldn't make him any more of a target than the next person. Shocking...really shocking.
Sorry, but that's my opinion and the way I see it. Of course no one has to see things my way either, but I just felt I needed to say something.
Back to your normal programming.....
Dave
Message edited by author 2012-02-14 19:03:54. |
|
|
|
02/14/2012 07:09:56 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by AllenP:
Ah I must have uploaded it at 900 pixels because that is usually the size I choose to post my pictures on Facebook (900 or 950). In the past I was frequently reminded by the uploader that I could not exceed the 800 pixel mark so I had to go back and resize my pictures again. I guess the new uploader must not have reminded me recently. However during the voting it is resized back down to 800 pixels so it made no difference during the voting. It was the same as everybody else's. It is only after the challenge is over, it is shown as the original size it was uploaded at. Unless Langdon has already fixed the new uploader, you will see that regardles of the size your uploaded photo is in, it will be sized down to 800 pixels during the voting, so it makes no difference anyway. The voters all saw my image as an 800-pixel wide image so I was not at an advantage, rest assured. |
this happened to me on the best of challenge. I normally size to 900 pixels(facebook/web) and the uploader accepted the picture without issue. After I realized it was the wrong size, I went back and uploaded the 800pix version because I figured the uploader would degrade the image if it resized.
Clearly not something to tar and feather Allen with and the implication that he was bending the rules to his benefit is rediculous.
|
|
|
|
02/14/2012 07:24:09 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by DCNUTTER:
I'm sorry, but it's pretty disheartening to see so many people grabbing pitch forks and running to light a stake on fire. First, if the photo was that big during voting I guarantee that someone would have have noticed it and looked to see what the size was. Even on my 24 inch monitor I can easily see the difference between a photo that has 900 pixels as the longest sized relative to one that is 800 px. When you throw in the fact that it's a square or near square crop that just amplifies just how much bigger that extra 100 pixels appear.
I, like many also do my resizing manually, but others don't. As Langdon said the old up-loader would reject anything to large, but the new one doesn't. It will take anything, and resize it down if necessary. So even if Allen did intentionally or unintentionally upload a larger file it's in his right to do so with the new up-loader despite any degradation in image quality that may or may not appear depending on the photo. If it was in fact a failure on the up-loaders part to resize the image I hardly consider that Allen's fault.
Again, as I look at the photo I surely would have known it was larger than normal if presented that way in a challenge, and a number of people out of the 335 that viewed it during the challenge would have noticed as well and said something.
Rule are rules, but HE didn't break any now did he? I don't even know what to say after reading some longtime members comments on the situation and making a mountain out of a mole hill. Especially since Allen himself hadn't even had a chance to comment. People please relax a little. I've seen many disqualifications for flagrant rule violations where people have said... "oh, sorry for the DQ, it's still a great image etc." and where MUCH kinder in their response. Just because Allen has won many well deserved ribbons shouldn't make him any more of a target than the next person. Shocking...really shocking.
Sorry, but that's my opinion and the way I see it. Of course no one has to see things my way either, but I just felt I needed to say something.
Back to your normal programming.....
Dave |
+900 |
|
|
|
02/15/2012 08:22:24 AM · #44 |
screw 900 pixels check this one out  |
|
|
|
02/15/2012 08:29:32 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:
screw 900 pixels check this one out |
Now that is large, and probably does prove that they are held at 800px during the challenge, because no way that wouldn't have been caught during voting. I'm glad to see that is the case and can be proven.
For those that think this is a "tragedy" that people are suggesting Allen get a DQ over this. I'm sorry but rules are rules. He (un)knowingly broke a rule of entering a photo that was bigger then 800px on the longest. Regardless if the uploader didn't warn him or allowed it. It's still a rule, just as using all legal tools, but making something disappear in a photo and getting a DQ for it. Or having an original that is altered unknown to the person by the software that brings it into your computer from your camera. These are as we would say dumb mistakes that we learn from. Rules are rules and should be followed. It's not a witch hunt it's wanting consistency on rules enforcement. Something that is constantly brought up when an image is borderline on whether people think it should be DQed or not. |
|
|
|
02/15/2012 09:39:40 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by bassbone:
Irregardless of the ability to do it due to the uploader, the challenge rules do state that the images must fit in the 800x box.... |
 |
|
|
|
02/15/2012 09:40:38 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by smardaz:
Originally posted by bassbone:
Irregardless of the ability to do it due to the uploader, the challenge rules do state that the images must fit in the 800x box.... |
|
Neither is smardaz, but smartass is. |
|
|
|
02/15/2012 12:11:33 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:
screw 900 pixels check this one out |
Now that is large, and probably does prove that they are held at 800px during the challenge, because no way that wouldn't have been caught during voting. I'm glad to see that is the case and can be proven.
For those that think this is a "tragedy" that people are suggesting Allen get a DQ over this. I'm sorry but rules are rules. He (un)knowingly broke a rule of entering a photo that was bigger then 800px on the longest. Regardless if the uploader didn't warn him or allowed it. It's still a rule, just as using all legal tools, but making something disappear in a photo and getting a DQ for it. Or having an original that is altered unknown to the person by the software that brings it into your computer from your camera. These are as we would say dumb mistakes that we learn from. Rules are rules and should be followed. It's not a witch hunt it's wanting consistency on rules enforcement. Something that is constantly brought up when an image is borderline on whether people think it should be DQed or not. |
It's a witch hunt when first responses imply the contestant was bending the rules to gain an advantage. I agree that rules should be followed and intent doesn't determine whether an image is DQ'd. |
|
|
|
02/15/2012 12:18:32 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by MattO:
For those that think this is a "tragedy" that people are suggesting Allen get a DQ over this. I'm sorry but rules are rules. He (un)knowingly broke a rule of entering a photo that was bigger then 800px on the longest. Regardless if the uploader didn't warn him or allowed it. It's still a rule, just as using all legal tools, but making something disappear in a photo and getting a DQ for it. Or having an original that is altered unknown to the person by the software that brings it into your computer from your camera. These are as we would say dumb mistakes that we learn from. Rules are rules and should be followed. It's not a witch hunt it's wanting consistency on rules enforcement. Something that is constantly brought up when an image is borderline on whether people think it should be DQed or not. |
Umm.....I'm kinda thinking this is a pretty grey area on this one. I *know* if I submit a picture that the file size, the date, or the pixel with exceeds the limit that it'll get kicked back and I'll have to fix it.
So......how am I supposed to know that's changed now?
Or is it as simple as you are not supposed to rely on the stopgap measures of the site?
|
|
|
|
02/15/2012 12:28:59 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by MinsoPhoto:
screw 900 pixels check this one out |
Now that is large, and probably does prove that they are held at 800px during the challenge, because no way that wouldn't have been caught during voting. I'm glad to see that is the case and can be proven.
For those that think this is a "tragedy" that people are suggesting Allen get a DQ over this. I'm sorry but rules are rules. He (un)knowingly broke a rule of entering a photo that was bigger then 800px on the longest. Regardless if the uploader didn't warn him or allowed it. It's still a rule, just as using all legal tools, but making something disappear in a photo and getting a DQ for it. Or having an original that is altered unknown to the person by the software that brings it into your computer from your camera. These are as we would say dumb mistakes that we learn from. Rules are rules and should be followed. It's not a witch hunt it's wanting consistency on rules enforcement. Something that is constantly brought up when an image is borderline on whether people think it should be DQed or not. |
Hypothetical-
In the Tour De France- they continue to test urine samples past the date of when they were collected, since diagnostic tools are evolving. Athletes receive DQ's if it is found that they have received a performance enhancing drug, but not if they were taking a profuse amount of garlic, for instance. If the 800 pix was upheld during voting, he obviously received no performance enhancement.
A possible objection to this is that a photo uses illegal editing but still scores bad. This is not the same, as it never competed under "legal" constraints, whereas Allen's photo did. During competition, Allen's photo met legal criteria for the competition taking place. It was presumably edited legally and of appropriate size for voters to view. |
|
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: 08/17/2025 04:52:33 PM EDT.
