| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/28/2012 03:05:05 PM · #101 |
every time I start to feel bad that my participation here has slacked off and that I deleted my non-challenge portfolio, i see something like this. What a dysfunctional online family. All we need is some drunk uncle that touches us inappropriately...oh wait, we got Slippy
Message edited by author 2012-03-28 15:05:25. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 03:06:49 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by ubique:
As a result of you and your, âYou can feel the frustration building over this decisionâ remarks, I suspect that juried challenges, genuinely independent and interesting juried challenges, are over. |
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo... I really hate to hear that. I've said it before, I have loved the juried challenges and I feel they add much to the experience here. I appreciate the hard work that it must be for the jury to coordinate things, come to a general consensus, and to compile and post the results. I can only say that I really enjoy and always learn so much from them. I would hate to see them go.
So, the the recent jury members: Thanks again. I thought you did a great job and sorry if all this crap has soured things for you. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 03:28:16 PM · #103 |
I see the value of juried contests as well as others; here are my thoughts on that going further.
If the juried contest has a different ruleset than the DPC challenge, they should not be rolled up into one. They are at that point just incompatible.
Further, in a separate contest, any rules need to be made explicit, so if necessary they can be enforced. When there are rules, DQs are inevitable; accidents happen, and bad things too.
FWIW: Even expert editing would not save such a match up from the issues of DQs in the base challenge (though it would have helped hesitant)...there are DQs in Expert as well.
|
|
|
|
03/28/2012 03:32:10 PM · #104 |
I don't know why this is turning into such a BFD. If you want to continue the occasional juried awards unencumbered (which I would like to see), just do it without having it officially sanctioned / connected to the challenge.
I've not seen anyone attacking the jury here, in fact I've seen nothing but expressed appreciation and recognition for their work. The only thing that was asked is that the juried award winner be held to the same qualification standard that the challenge called for because they were officially linked together. And that was eventually done. BFD. Why this has turned into such a whine-fest is beyond me.
eta: I should have known there would eventually be bloodshed.
Message edited by author 2012-03-28 15:37:43. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 03:46:42 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
I don't know why this is turning into such a BFD. If you want to continue the occasional juried awards unencumbered (which I would like to see), just do it without having it officially sanctioned / connected to the challenge.
I've not seen anyone attacking the jury here, in fact I've seen nothing but expressed appreciation and recognition for their work. The only thing that was asked is that the juried award winner be held to the same qualification standard that the challenge called for because they were officially linked together. And that was eventually done. BFD. Why this has turned into such a whine-fest is beyond me.
eta: I should have known there would eventually be bloodshed. |
The jury doesn't feel attacked. The jury just felt that they were engaged in a reasoned debate, in their jury room, as to how best to handle the situation, and that certain indviduals came in and fanned the flames and created a bonfire that had to be put out immediately.
Which we did.
In further news:
I've received word from SC that they've requested the originals on the 4 remaining juried-award winners, and they will run them through the validation process.
Hopefully, that puts paid to this whole kerfuffle and we can move on to more productive issues?
R.
Message edited by author 2012-03-28 15:47:14.
|
|
|
|
03/28/2012 03:50:16 PM · #106 |
| Dang, I never make it in time for the kerfluffle. And it was probably chocolate, too, right? With chocolate sauce? |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 03:52:02 PM · #107 |
| More like lemon meringue. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 03:53:52 PM · #108 |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 04:17:28 PM · #109 |
I'm still dying to see the original! |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 04:21:40 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by adigitalromance:
I'm still dying to see the original! |
Originally posted by jdannels:
I did find this original, to see what had been been changed. The changes were monstrous. |
|
|
|
|
03/28/2012 05:25:20 PM · #111 |
...
Message edited by author 2012-03-28 18:06:48. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 07:14:24 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by ubique:
I apologise in advance to everyone... |
...and well you should.
I usually look forward to reading your comments, even in those odd instances where I might not necessarily agree with them, but this submission was not one of your best efforts.
Terse comments I can live with... personal attacks, not so much.
Ray |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 08:01:07 PM · #113 |
| Paul, please do not include me in your everyone group for apologies. Although somewhat....ummmm...DIRECT, your post was well worth the read. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 08:15:10 PM · #114 |
Originally posted by ubique:
I apologise in advance to everyone... |
Paul, I enjoyed your post as well... no apologies necessary so far as I'm concerned. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 08:19:40 PM · #115 |
| Any chance we can see the actual original? It would be interesting to see how much he had to dumb down the image for DPC to like it. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 08:42:49 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Any chance we can see the actual original? It would be interesting to see how much he had to dumb down the image for DPC to like it. |
It's a fantastic image. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 10:53:58 PM · #117 |
I have just read through the DQ thread and I just can't believe some of what was said. To David - you have created an image with a true artist's vision and that's all that matters to me. The jury's mission was to look for the best Art, not for DPC specific technicalities. A well deserved award and you should have kept it as Don said early on in the thread. Congrats on a fine achievement! :)
Added:
I believe that the jury in an Art challenge should not be bound by any arbitrary DPC rules. The jury should be free to choose what they consider photographic art, be it a photo that passes the Minimal rules, or the photo that does not pass the Expert. The Art should transcend the process.
Message edited by author 2012-03-28 23:09:40. |
|
|
|
03/28/2012 11:23:49 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by KfirLevAri:
Originally posted by adigitalromance:
I'm still dying to see the original! |
Originally posted by jdannels:
I did find this original, to see what had been been changed. The changes were monstrous. |
|
I can't stop laughing! |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 12:26:42 AM · #119 |
I have collated Judi's input, then ubique's response. Was this response really necessary?
Judi:
⢠I agree...if you want to play that game and have a jury which is somewhat linked to the main challenge...especially as you get to choose your own judges...then play fair and stick to the rules!!
⢠I was referring to the DQ images. If an image wins a challenge and then violates the rules, then it is stripped of its ribbon and DQéd. So with the jury side of the challenge, why do they get to follow different rules....where an image has broken the site rules for the challenge and is DQéd...shouldn't it be stripped of it's juried award??? The jury is linked with the main part of the challenge...I do not see where they are allowed to follow their own set of rules....I was led to believe that you still had to follow the site rules for your image to be judged by the jury.
This so reminds me of a classroom situation...where they have a class competition and the teacher chooses a particular student to select the judging panel. That child chooses it's class friends and even though they all have their own opinion, when they are in a group situation they blindly follow each other....and make up their own rules as they go. Do you remember the frustration that you felt in that situation...well guess what...this is no different. You can feel the frustration building over this decision.
⢠If you don't need to follow the rules to be judged by the jury...then why don't they include all the images on this site....there are all sorts of images available that way..of all editing rules and rule breaks....! Why do you need to enter that particular challenge when the jury isn't going to follow that particular editing rule set!!!
⢠If a ribbon image is found to have broken the ruleset than it is stripped of its ribbon and DQéd. The jury claims to be following the site rules, therefore they should follow the site rules and strip the image of its award and DQ it! How difficult is that to understand?
⢠This isn't the first juried challenge...one would think (judging by the judges chosen) that you would all be smart enough to know that you need to follow the site rules....so to quell my frustration....follow the site rules and DQ the image from the juried side of the challenge.
⢠Thankyou Bear. That was all I was after! Fairness all around.
As for the image....I truly believe it is a fantastic and very moving image and I am very sorry for your DQ. Thankyou for coming forward and speaking as a true gentleman.
⢠I would just hate to see those who abide by the rules miss out because an image that didn't abide by the rules (intentionally or unintentionally) take the ribbon..DPC ribbon or jury ribbon!
Ubique:
I apologise in advance to everyone (not least my fellow jurors) whoâd prefer to not see this dismal thread resurrected. Sorry: some terns cannot remain unstoned.
Judi, the juryâs results and protocols belong to nobody but the jury. Not to Langdon, not to the SC, and most certainly not to you.
We were not unanimous about what to do regarding this situation, but we were discussing it. We had that right. Your sanctimonious performance in this thread is out of line. Itâs simply not your business, though I know thatâs a consideration that has never inhibited you in the past.
You succeeded in forcing a concession in this matter and no doubt now consider that you had a victory. You did not.
As a result of you and your, âYou can feel the frustration building over this decisionâ remarks, I suspect that juried challenges, genuinely independent and interesting juried challenges, are over. Robert has declared that heâs done with the process, and though I do not speak for the jury, I can tell you that he is not the only one. But even if this had affected Robert alone, his inestimable worth to DPC has now been limited for no good reason.
Your rabble-rousing demands for a needlessly hasty resolution in terms to your personal satisfaction have diminished this site.
You also demanded that the jury must, âquell my frustrationâ by unilaterally DQâing the image from our awards. And much to my dismay, we acquiesced. Well, I have wished to invite you to get thoroughly quelled for some years now, so please now consider yourself told to do so.
Thatâs all. Get thee to a nunnery, or at least return to your relentless programme of self-promotion.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2012 12:50:26 AM · #120 |
Actually a great deal of this thread was unnecessary. Especially the frustration.
Message edited by author 2012-03-29 00:51:04. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 01:29:10 AM · #121 |
| In the real world (?) art has no rules, that's why it persists and draws so many lost souls to it's doorstep. DPC is having that family reunion dinner where you have to put up with each other until the arse falls out an it's a free for all. Pass the sauce. |
|
|
|
03/29/2012 01:43:25 AM · #122 |
|
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: 09/01/2025 01:20:13 AM EDT.
