Would someone from site council please...

04/01/2005 11:48:25 AM · #1

elaborate on why my photo was disqualified? I do not agree with the explanation that was given to me as it is very vague...

04/01/2005 11:50:04 AM · #2

Man I noticed we were one shorter on the cemetary challenge today. was that you? Put it back in your portfolio.

Message edited by author 2005-04-01 11:50:15.

04/01/2005 11:51:24 AM · #3

I would prefer not to publicize it until I get some details from SC because I think it may not be right according to the reason they supplied. I would like to think it may get put back in...

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

04/01/2005 11:56:11 AM · #4

The majority of the SC felt that the amount that was removed in your photo constituted a major element.

04/01/2005 12:02:38 PM · #5

Originally posted by mk:

The majority of the SC felt that the amount that was removed in your photo constituted a major element.

You're kidding right? It's the exact same effect as a recent red ribbon winner...

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

04/01/2005 12:14:50 PM · #6

I have seen no recent ribbon winners whose originals looked like yours. Perhaps you know something that I don't.

04/01/2005 12:19:03 PM · #7

Originally posted by mk:

I have seen no recent ribbon winners whose originals looked like yours. Perhaps you know something that I don't.

Trying to stay vague here because (I know everyone with a dq believes this) I believe that it may not be right. Is there anyway to hold this discussion in a more private forum? I have to go to work for a bit and would like to hear in from other SC members...

Jacko

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

04/01/2005 12:19:23 PM · #8

Can we see a before and after?

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

04/01/2005 12:20:44 PM · #9

Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by mk:
I have seen no recent ribbon winners whose originals looked like yours. Perhaps you know something that I don't.

Trying to stay vague here because (I know everyone with a dq believes this) I believe that it may not be right. Is there anyway to hold this discussion in a more private forum? I have to go to work for a bit and would like to hear in from other SC members...

You are welcome to privately contact those SC members that you would like to hear from.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

04/01/2005 12:21:07 PM · #10

Originally posted by Jacko:

Can we see a before and after?

I will post them inna bit... :-)

Artifacts

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

04/01/2005 03:12:20 PM · #11

Originally posted by mk:

The majority of the SC felt that the amount that was removed in your photo constituted a major element.

When this gets resolved I would like to see the original and the DQed entry. The term "major element" strikes me as being a little vague and I would like to see an example.

It might be a good idea to publish some examples of what does and does not constitute a "major element" which could then be used for an editing guideline.

04/01/2005 08:09:55 PM · #12

Back from work... Before I go to the extent of PM'ing all the site council with my appeal, is there any precident for a shot getting reinstated into a challenge? Is there any appeal process at all? Or should I simply go ahead and put my argument here before the public for debate losing all possibility of getting a score in this challenge? I don't have a chance at winning, but don't believe that I violated any rule or spirit of the rules as shown by past validations.

Edited to add: In a previous post I stated that my shot used the same effect as a previous red ribbon winner, I was wrong in my example it was a previous blue ribbon winner...

Message edited by author 2005-04-01 20:11:18.

04/01/2005 08:15:10 PM · #13

I would say post it here and let the community have an opinion.

Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM

04/01/2005 08:19:36 PM · #14

Originally posted by rex07734:

I would say post it here and let the community have an opinion.

But then I have no chance at getting the score...

cloudsme

Canon EOS R5

04/01/2005 08:20:09 PM · #15

I agree with Rex. Post it. I've never seen them change their minds.

just-married

Canon EOS-10D

04/01/2005 08:41:37 PM · #16

Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by rex07734:
I would say post it here and let the community have an opinion.

But then I have no chance at getting the score...

I agree with you. Email or PM site council to see what your chances of reinstatement are before you give in to the curious minds.

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

04/01/2005 10:12:25 PM · #17

Well I've pm'ed every member of site council. If I don't hear from anyone by morning I'll post up before, after, and the blue ribbon winner that used the exact same effect as I did...

coolhar

04/01/2005 11:48:35 PM · #18

Good Luck with your appeal effort TC. I know you well enough to be certain you would never violate the rules intentionally. However we know that deciding what constitutes a major element is a judgement call on the part of SC. We allow them to be human and make mistakes occasionally. But worse than making a mistake is not being willing to correct one when possible.

taterbug

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

04/02/2005 12:16:56 AM · #19

Don't want to be more specific until TC goes public, but for what my humble opinion is worth (probly not a lot :-) ) , I've looked at the photos in question and have to admit that they both look like the same technique and/or especially the same end result to me.
Good luck Dude.

Message edited by author 2005-04-02 00:18:22.

HBunch

HP PhotoSmart 315

04/02/2005 12:57:50 AM · #20

Without being specific, the "blue ribbon winner that used the exact same effect" you mentioned in your email is not the 'exact same effect' at all. Yes, it is the same end result, but the means of getting there was quite a bit different. They did no cloning out of elements at all, you did. How is that the same?

Edit...This is not a desision on the issue, nor does it reflect my opinion or the opinions of the other site council members. We are still discussing the issue. I just wanted to clarify that the effects used were not the same.

Message edited by author 2005-04-02 01:05:43.

04/02/2005 01:12:10 AM · #21

Originally posted by hbunch7187:

How I AFFECTED the shot is different. The EFFECT that I achieved is the same. The shot that I have refered to used cropping and levels to achieve an effect. The shot that I submitted used cropping and levels and some cloning to achieve the same effect. Both shots removed elements from the shot ending up with the same appearance...

Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA

04/02/2005 01:15:30 AM · #22

Still waiting on you to post your before and after.

Dseale

Sony Alpha a7 III

04/02/2005 01:18:56 AM · #23

Originally posted by rex07734:

Still waiting on you to post your before and after.

Me too. I'm sleepy and about to pass out in the computer chair...

04/02/2005 01:19:56 AM · #24

Originally posted by hailstorm86:

Originally posted by rex07734:
Still waiting on you to post your before and after.

Me too. I'm sleepy and about to pass out in the computer chair...

You just reminded me I need to go to bed. Good night.

Message edited by author 2005-04-02 01:20:14.