My pic was DQ'd. Opinions please.....

Fujifilm XF 23mm f/2 R WR

11/11/2004 08:19:44 AM · #1

Here is my macro shot that was DQ'd.

FULL SIZE HERE

Now, is United States Currency considered artwork? And if so, then there are about 10 other pictures that should be DQ'd also, which include coins. And if this type of "art" is considered off limits, then I consider pictures of stamps illegal also. And there are a few of those.

The purpose of this shot was to show the fine details to which the US government puts into their currency. The purpose was to not to copy, plagiarize or exploit. What if I would have chosen the "20" of the currency as my subject? That was painted by someone.... would it have been DQ'd?

Sorry for venting, but I am PISSED OFF.

Chad

nova

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM

11/11/2004 08:24:01 AM · #2

Nice macro, Chad, and I would be ticked too. Did you receive an explanation? It sounds like you were told that it was artwork. If so, then other currency and stamp shots are probably also at risk. Let it go, bro, and jump into the next challenge.

aznym

Fujifilm X-T3

11/11/2004 08:25:37 AM · #3

You are right in saying there are about 10 more. And they should be DQ'd too, if it makes you feel any better. :)

edit: Very unlikely they would survive, anyway :D

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 08:27:05.

leaf

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

11/11/2004 08:25:47 AM · #4

i don't know the site council's position, but perhaps it has something to do with that it is a picture of a piece of paper basically.. take out the pictureand it is just a blank white (grey) paper... which then doesn't REALLY have much to do with photography.. it is not a picture of an object as such... just a picture of a picture... albeit a very close picture of a picture

peecee

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/11/2004 08:25:53 AM · #5

Whilst I sympathise Chad, it is a picture of someone elses artwork,if you had just used it along side something else in the photo you may have got away with it.
Like Ray says let it go and go for the next challenge,
Paul.

cpurser

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

11/11/2004 08:29:38 AM · #6

Yeah, I guess I should have put a stamp and a coin in the picture too. :-)

Yeah, I'm letting it go. Life is too short.....

Thanks for the replies.

Chad

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

11/11/2004 08:33:14 AM · #7

FWIW, I voted not to DQ this photo. It's my personal opinion, but *I* do not feel this is a straight, literal representation of artwork, nor does it represent the "entirety" of the work.
There are several in the challenge that should, and probably will, be DQd on that grounds, but IMO this was not one of them. So sorry.

11/11/2004 08:34:22 AM · #8

Originally posted by cpurser:

Yeah, I'm letting it go. Life is too short.....

Good for you. :)

Letting things go is the only way you won't be shouting at your computer screen. DPC is how it is..

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 08:35:23.

mrorange002

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

11/11/2004 08:39:02 AM · #9

Hmmm.... well, there are no bugs, and no flowers.
and it's obviously a macro.
and since you can see the grooved lines in the paper and the neat designs they make,
I don't understand how or why it was DQ'd.

Gauti

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/11/2004 08:41:12 AM · #10

Originally posted by cpurser:

Here is my macro shot that was DQ'd.
Now, is United States Currency considered artwork? And if so, then there are about 10 other pictures that should be DQ'd also, which include coins. And if this type of "art" is considered off limits, then I consider pictures of stamps illegal also. And there are a few of those.

The purpose of this shot was to show the fine details to which the US government puts into their currency. The purpose was to not to copy, plagiarize or exploit.
Chad

Hi Chad.
I'm in the same boat as you, my pic was DQ'ed for the same reason:

This image has been disqualified for the following reason:
Literal representations of existing artworks (including your own) are not permitted. Please review the challenge submission rules.

but mine was far more macroed in than yours.
I can live with that (I wasn't doing too well anyhow) but I'd say that all other pic of bills and coins should be DQ on the same grounds. Probably the same goes for stamps and cloes-ups of small statues.

Well, life is too short and I'm not gonna let this bug me too much.
Better luck next time

Cheers

edit: even if I don't consider my submission to be a literal representation

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 08:42:38.

colda

Nikon D800

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

11/11/2004 08:42:03 AM · #11

I remember a similar discussion regarding of of train's pics (of a child's feet).

It was deemed that it was DQ'd becuase it was a straight on literal pic of a piece of art, I also remember it being said that if the photo had depicted a section of the artwork, from a different perspective then it would be legal - by this definition it was wrong to DQ Chad's entry.

Conversely, if we are saying that any pic of existing artwork should be DQ'd then we are going to get in a bit of a mess with photos of buildings, statues etc etc.

It was clearly a mistake to DQ this pic.

Keith Maniac

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Canon

11/11/2004 08:48:53 AM · #12

The rule states that "Literal photographic representations of the entirety of existing works of art (including your own) are not considered acceptable submissions..."

Your entry does *not* have a literal photographic representation of the *entirety* of an existing work of art, and therefore IMO it should not have been disqualified.

If this entry is disqualified, then IMO the word "entirety" should be taken out of the rules.

(edited to add IMO)

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 08:50:17.

11/11/2004 08:51:03 AM · #13

Originally posted by cpurser:

Angle crop and composition - I see this as artistic interpretation.. It's not a replication of the original work (ie a straight-on uncropped bill).

mrorange002

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

11/11/2004 08:52:28 AM · #14

aren't these also

"Literal photographic representations of the entirety of existing works of art (including your own) are not considered acceptable submissions..."

the thing the dollar is lacking is "the entirety of existing artworks"

Koriyama

Nikon D200

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

11/11/2004 09:02:07 AM · #15

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Angle crop and composition - I see this as artistic interpretation.. It's not a replication of the original work (ie a straight-on uncropped bill).

I agree.

Taking the DQ logic further, we should expect to see any portion of any statue DQed, if it fills the frame entirely, too.

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

11/11/2004 09:03:08 AM · #16

I thought this had been addressed/corrected in a rules revision, but apparently not.

The word "entirety" should be referring to the photograph, not the piece of "art". So if the photo is nothing else but somebody else's "art", then it is potentially DQ'able, with this proviso (from the Advanced rules, but not in the Basic rules?):

A literal representation is one which is composed in such a way as to compel the voter to rate only the work of art represented and not the artistic decisions made by the photographer (i.e., lighting, composition, background elements, etc).

The primary reason for this rule is to prevent "a photograph of a photograph" (or a photograph of a computer monitor, etc.), but it applies to other situations as well. It is one of those subjective rules that is hard to define, and is the reason why DQ's are decided by more than person. 2D objects (such as paper money) are always much more likely to get DQ'd because there is no "lighting aspect", which saves a lot of other things from being DQ'd (because of "shadows", which almost all of the SC members, including myself, consider to be a "creative decision of the photographer").

Just my 2Â¢

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 09:11:06.

Gauti

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

11/11/2004 09:05:59 AM · #17

Hope you see this as well as an artistic interpretation:
hmm link not working properly. working on that....
Try this

Message edited by author 2004-11-11 09:13:50.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

11/11/2004 09:11:17 AM · #18

What about this shot?

Apart from the black space is this the same as the shot above?

(Sorry Setz. :) )

KaDi

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

11/11/2004 09:15:50 AM · #19

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

What about this shot?

Apart from the black space is this the same as the shot above?

(Sorry Setz. :) )

No.
From the photographer's comments: "This Buddha statues is about 8" tall and it is actually a crimson color, but I recolored it to a gold tone for use in this particular photo."
There is also clear evidence of creative lighting choices in the buddah shot.
(Note that I'm not saying that the currency shot should have been dq'd. Still forming my opinion on that.)

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

11/11/2004 09:19:29 AM · #20

was it scoring well?

11/11/2004 09:21:02 AM · #21

How about:

If we're citing creative lighting as being the distinguishing factor, had this had face-on completely level lighting (like the bank bill), would it then be against the rules?

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

11/11/2004 09:23:12 AM · #22

Despite the crop, there is no demonstration of photographic decision or skill in the photo. The only thing you can judge is the atwork itself. 3D objects, like the coinsand buddha statue, are almost never DQ'd because shadows and POV demonstrate deliberate photographic decisions when the photo was taken. The shot of paper money could just as easily have been cropped and rotated afterwards.

cpurser