DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Discussion on the "Border Poll"
Pages:  
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 164, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/09/2004 01:00:19 PM · #76
Originally posted by EddyG:
...over 47% of the poll respondents have voted against a "simple" border rule.


Not necessarily. As in my case, many might agree with the principle, but not the wording of the proposed change. BTW- given the nature of this site and the fact that people from all over the world participate, I'd say we are already more interested in photography than borders. ;-)
 11/09/2004 01:03:08 PM · #77
Originally posted by EddyG:
The point of my 'guidance' post was that it would remove one common source of "low votes" and "comment complaints". Voters would have to focus on other aspects of the actual photograph (like the things you mentioned)... and this site is supposed to be focused on photography not borders, right?


We are forever saying two things: This site is about learning and the presentation of the photo matters. I think that learning how to present your photography properly is just as much about photography as what you do with the camera. Making the system fail-proof so that photographers don't have to learn and won't have to deal with low votes is doing them a disservice, not helping them out.

11/09/2004 01:03:22 PM · #78
EddyG, please post a tutorial on your zip-zaggy border.
 11/09/2004 01:06:49 PM · #79
The Drawn in pink zig zaggy border doesn't seem legal in basic to me because what then would prevent someone from drawing in some face paint around a kids eye. They could say that it was the 'border'.
doesn't this "Additionally, the use of any type of selection tool is prohibited except to select a non-feathered, non-anti-aliased rectangular area for cropping."
Keep "drawn in" borders from being legal in basic?
 11/09/2004 01:07:12 PM · #80
Originally posted by scalvert:
EddyG, please post a tutorial on your zip-zaggy border.


Please don't make me snort coffee. I'll have to send you a cleaning bill now.
 11/09/2004 01:19:35 PM · #81
Originally posted by Gordon:
Please don't make me snort coffee. I'll have to send you a cleaning bill now.


Dang! Now I've made YOU oversaturated. ;-)
 11/09/2004 01:22:30 PM · #82
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Please don't make me snort coffee. I'll have to send you a cleaning bill now.


Dang! Now I've made YOU oversaturated. ;-)


Better than burning him... but we're dodging the issue.
 11/09/2004 01:22:41 PM · #83
I don't understand why we have a poll about this when a photo using a creative border was just voted into third place.


11/09/2004 01:23:55 PM · #84
Originally posted by Azrifel:
I don't understand why we have a poll about this when a photo using a creative border was just voted into third place.


That's why we have the poll. Some people dont like it.
 11/09/2004 01:26:44 PM · #85
Originally posted by kirbic:
Better than burning him... but we're dodging the issue.


Ah, yes... unless he dodged the coffee, he might be burned AND oversaturated!
 11/09/2004 01:27:29 PM · #86
Originally posted by moodville:
Originally posted by Azrifel:
I don't understand why we have a poll about this when a photo using a creative border was just voted into third place.


That's why we have the poll. Some people dont like it.


When something gets voted into third place I'd assume that it was ok by the majority of voters. To start a poll about such things only two days later is just stupid imho.

Edit: Whem to When

Message edited by author 2004-11-09 13:29:36.
 11/09/2004 01:28:08 PM · #87
I voted NO because I think this is an overreaction (and I agree with the comments on the wording).

BradP found a good use of triptich. I don't think we can expect excessive use of it since not many images are suitable for it and voters will start to vote it down if used unappropriately (like they do with selective desaturation).

If there is a concern about photographic integrity, I would rather want to see a poll on heavy burning of skies in landscapes (but realise this will never happen since the limit cannot be defined, it's all or nothing).

Message edited by author 2004-11-09 13:35:32.
 11/09/2004 01:35:15 PM · #88
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Since the real issue behind this discussion is the triptych, why not discuss eliminating that rather than defining what types of borders will be allowed. I voted no on the poll. I would have been more likely to vote YES if the wording of the rule proposal was as follows:

You may use borders on your photographs as long as they do not divide the photo into segments that make a single photograph look like a multi-image composition.


While this wording would of course be much less restrictive, I'm very curious as to why, with all the previous discussion in the forums regarding borders adding or not adding to an image, when we get an example where someone has clearly found a creative way to really add to an image's impact with a border, we immediately react to try and ban it. I'll reiterate...

IMO, we should retain a rule set that allows for maximum creativity, and let the voters decide what they will accept. The more that SC is tasked with, the less power is in the hands of the voters. It's that simple. If you vote, and you want your voice to be heard, vote "NO" on this type of limitation.


I'm not for or against anything here. I voted no on the proposed rule change. I think the rule is fine as is. I said I would have been 'more likely' to vote yes... I did not say I would vote yes to a different rule. I like creativity as well and I'm not complaining one bit about the photo in question.
 11/09/2004 01:35:48 PM · #89
Originally posted by willem:

If there is a concern about photographic integrity, I would rather want to see a poll on heavy burning of skies in landscapes (but realise this will never happen since the limit cannot be defined, it's all or nothing).


There are at least some legal restrictions on heavy burning in landscapes...
 11/09/2004 01:46:24 PM · #90
Originally posted by Azrifel:
I don't understand why we have a poll about this when a photo using a creative border was just voted into third place.


That may be my fault...
 11/09/2004 01:57:11 PM · #91
With those new rules this would then not be legal:


Personnally I think that the current rule should stay. It would be a bad thing to repress creativity. The bad borders are already regulated by voting anyway.
 11/09/2004 02:22:44 PM · #92
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by willem:

If there is a concern about photographic integrity, I would rather want to see a poll on heavy burning of skies in landscapes (but realise this will never happen since the limit cannot be defined, it's all or nothing).


There are at least some legal restrictions on heavy burning in landscapes...


ROTFLMAO!
 11/09/2004 02:27:11 PM · #93
Originally posted by Azrifel:
I don't understand why we have a poll about this when a photo using a creative border was just voted into third place.


I DID NOT like the border yet I still gave it a 7. I don't vote down enormously for borders, but I must say that it was improved by it. Without the border it would have probably gotten a 6 because there's nothing really "wow" about it.

However: I voted YES on the poll because I could care less what type of border you have as long as the photo is well done. Yet I'm more for simple is better. I don't see a reason to limit the ones that come inside of the image though, but I still feel that I should vote YES because I prefer limiting it to letting it get out of hand.

Let me reiterate what Ben said because even though I voted YES I feel that this is the better solution:
Originally posted by Konador:
How about putting this in the "borders" section of the rules instead of changing the rules completely:

Borders: It is suggested that if you decide to use a border, you should only use one or two solid colours around the outside of your photo. However, alternative borders are allowed, as long as they do not contain any text, clip art, photographs, or other artwork.

 11/09/2004 02:31:40 PM · #94
Originally posted by scalvert:
EddyG, please post a tutorial on your zip-zaggy border.

Check out this ultra-sweet mega-cool legal border:

Should I do them both in one tutorial?
 11/09/2004 02:34:43 PM · #95
Oooooooh! Can you do one in paisley?
 11/09/2004 02:36:42 PM · #96
First I voted in favor of borders, then I voted against borders.
 11/09/2004 02:45:36 PM · #97
I am not going to vote on this because this is more an after the fact query to justify another variation of which more will be forthcoming since there is no desire to fix the core of the problem.

But a word on borders. Do not make the mistake of comparing a matted border from an exhibition print with a border produced in PS. The PS is considered tacky by many much like the polaroid corner curled efforts.
Yes, I have used borders and have received a lot of flak.

I understand both sides. Side "A" says, a border is merely the imitation of a mat and a very bad one. The real matted have the dimension to create a separation from the work itself. The border is just another two dimensional incorporated and made a property of the image.

Side "B" argues that the border helps the print, yet, they do not realize that by adding this element they can literally kill the image. Of course, there are many that can make the right decision, but a border is like adding another factor to be judged above and beyond your image. It takes a lot of talent to add a border because now you are expressing the application od an art for which most people are not suited for. I know very fine artist and fine photographers who never take the matting of their prints upon themselves. Consider also, that we all have difference tolerance levels along with different aesthetic values and our effort may please some viewers but turn as many off.

In short, borders simply place on the table another consideration for voters to comtemplate. Since I joined this site I have stopped them completely.

Message edited by author 2004-11-09 16:26:48.
 11/09/2004 02:58:55 PM · #98
Originally posted by EddyG:
Originally posted by scalvert:
EddyG, please post a tutorial on your zip-zaggy border.

Check out this ultra-sweet mega-cool legal border:

Should I do them both in one tutorial?


While you are obviously free to express your creativity any way you feel fit, I don't quite get the problem with these. Yes they are legal under the current rules. (though may meander in to artwork and clip art for this new one)

But - so what ? I might think they are hideous, and vote your whole picture low. I might love it and want to buy one. I've seen worse for sale as borders around real photo greeting cards.

You don't need a new rule to arbitrate taste or lack of it. So I don't quite get the point of these.
 11/09/2004 03:04:06 PM · #99
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
... a border is like adding another factor to be judged above and beyond your image. It takes a lot of talent to add a border because now you are expressing the application od an art for which most people are not suiyed for. I know very fine artist and fine photographers who never take the matting of their prints upon themselves. Consider also, that we all have difference tolerance levels along with different aesthetic values and our effort may please some viewers but turn as many off.

So tell me:
A: Why people here shouldn't learn the "proper" use of borders, as they must learn other skills to present their photos most effectively

B: You want the decision left to me instead of reserving for yourself the right to disapprove of the photo.

Sounds like what people really want is for the SC to pre-screen all the photos and weed out all the "bad" ones so they (the voters) don't have to waste their time looking at such obvious offenses against the photographic arts.

Sorry, but if you think it looks bad, you vote and comment on it. I use borders a lot, and see nothing wrong with attempting to use them to create the best-looking presentation I can. If you think it ends up looking like s*** then just hit the flush button (on the left of the scale) and move on.

Message edited by author 2004-11-09 15:05:00.
 11/09/2004 03:10:16 PM · #100
I vote no.

The site will not benefit by making the rules more complex by allowing or restricting special cases; only by clarifying the underlying (and often ignored) ambiguity will the site benefit. There are too many special cases in the rules as it is -- none of which would be needed if the issue was actually handled.

The issue that brought this about is not about borders -- that is just its current incarnation, and Brad's image is just the current instance that brought it back to the forums. It is about using post-processing to create an effect in the image rather than enhance an existing effect. Clarify, for the purposes of the challenges, what a photograph is and when an entry is no longer a photograph, and the issue is moved much closer to resolution.

***

BTW: the wording as written would also eliminate vignetting -- it is a gradient, rather than solid color.

David
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/05/2025 11:45:39 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 08/05/2025 11:45:39 PM EDT.