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

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Photo DQ'd - We all can learn something!
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 50, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 04/25/2005 10:57:42 PM · #26
Originally posted by coolhar:
Please read my post again before you climb all over my back. In fact, read the whole thread again, and carefully. Then take another guess about who posted a stupid remark.

I find your last sentence unnecessarily inflammatory. No one, until now, has referred to anyone or anything as "stupid" and I don't think we need to start now. Let's all get back to talking about the photograph ... the "real question" probably is do people agree that the starburst constitutes a "major element" deserving of DQ? I don't think we need to discuss the DQ process here ...
 04/25/2005 11:12:41 PM · #27
I just want to make sure everyone is clear on my intensions of putting the starburst in. I didn't realize that if I Dodged in a sparkle that it was wrong in anyway - since Dodging is allowed. It never even crossed my mind about creating a major element - if I had even thought that I would have had no problems submitting the prestar version or doing a reshoot with the sparkle more in mind. What I did learn is that a little more pre - insparation like that will go a long way as the photo was sitting at about a 7.3 So I think we can all learn from that. It's being very careful about the setup to create the final outcome of your photo. I have half a notion to try the shoot again and see if I can get the "sparkle" I absentmindedly added in the final few minutes of post processing.

I am curious though on how the acceptable version would have placed. Any thoughts?
 04/25/2005 11:14:26 PM · #28
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by coolhar:
Please read my post again before you climb all over my back. In fact, read the whole thread again, and carefully. Then take another guess about who posted a stupid remark.

I find your last sentence unnecessarily inflammatory. No one, until now, has referred to anyone or anything as "stupid" and I don't think we need to start now. Let's all get back to talking about the photograph ... the "real question" probably is do people agree that the starburst constitutes a "major element" deserving of DQ? I don't think we need to discuss the DQ process here ...


I find "grab the torches and burn his village!" and "Shall I bring the tar and feathers and join in the festivities Ken... sounds like a good time could be had by all" to be unnecessarily inflamatory.

Undoubedly the added starburst was a major element, perhaps not in the number of pixels added, but for sure in the impact it added. And I think that is why it was added, to add impact beyond what was achieved in camera and within the editing rules.

But the "real question" that I was trying to address is that it is not a shame when an illegal entry is DQ'ed. And that's what I think is sutpid - saying it's a shame.


04/25/2005 11:22:05 PM · #29
The original photo looked great. You did a great job on the lighting.
I didn't enter this one. The only thing I could get right was the sparkle using a crosspoint filter. The rest of my lighting was crappy.
Sorry about your dq but another lesson for all of us to learn from...
Good luck to everyone else. A tough challenge, imo.
 04/25/2005 11:23:37 PM · #30
I am not ashamed that the photo was DQ'd - I think it was a good thing now that I know it wasn't allowed - that is no way to win a challenge. I am not ashamed of me either - It would be a hole different story if I had known that it was even a possilbe violation. Thus the reason for this thread - I would rather be the one "burned at the stake" than not share this information with everyone. It's only fair - I wish I would have seen a post like this - so....
 04/25/2005 11:24:25 PM · #31
Originally posted by coolhar:
But the "real question" that I was trying to address is that it is not a shame when an illegal entry is DQ'ed. And that's what I think is sutpid - saying it's a shame.

I think you're making too much of an idiomatic expression ... the way it's being used (in empathy with the photographer) really has little to do with their feelings about the situation as a rules-enforement matter ... I think you can both be "right" in this case.

I think lighting the torches could be inflammatory (literally), but I think it was clearly said in an attempt at humor. I think you just out-and-out said someone else had made a "stupid" remark. That is not considered constructive criticism under any system I'm familiar with.
 04/25/2005 11:41:51 PM · #32
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by coolhar:
But the "real question" that I was trying to address is that it is not a shame when an illegal entry is DQ'ed. And that's what I think is sutpid - saying it's a shame.

I think you're making too much of an idiomatic expression ... the way it's being used (in empathy with the photographer) really has little to do with their feelings about the situation as a rules-enforement matter ... I think you can both be "right" in this case.

I think lighting the torches could be inflammatory (literally), but I think it was clearly said in an attempt at humor. I think you just out-and-out said someone else had made a "stupid" remark. That is not considered constructive criticism under any system I'm familiar with.


Would it have been better if I had said it was a silly remark? or an unclear remark? Or should I just put some smilies behind it so I can claim it was an attempt at humor?

The same remark comes up almost every time there is a thread about an image that was DQ'ed. Along with remarks like "what a great photo". People need to stop and think about what they are saying when they post those remarks.

Is it a "shame" when the SC does their job correctly and the rules are enforced? No. And for people to say so is counterproductive.

Are the images that are DQ'ed for violating the editing rules ones that would score high, and have many admirers? Yes. If the photog has the skills to use the techniques, of course it's going to look better than the ones that didn't use the extra-legal techniques. Newbies don't usually use those kind of tools. Should we heap praise on an image for being head and shoulders above the pack when it had that advantage? I think it is a very silly thing to do.

:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
04/25/2005 11:55:25 PM · #33
Originally posted by coolhar:
Would it have been better if I had said it was a silly remark? or an unclear remark? Or should I just put some smilies behind it so I can claim it was an attempt at humor?


:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

Thanks coolhar - the smileys do help.

Ok was simply a jest. I do see your point in general and I think I have seen threads like that, but this case seems unique - maybe not. Anyway, I think everyone understood what you were saying, but you did come off a bit inflammatory.

Originally posted by coolhar:
If you think I was saying "Shame on ebertdj" - please read my post again.
...Please read my post again before you climb all over my back. In fact, read the whole thread again, and carefully. Then take another guess about who posted a stupid remark.

I did go back and read your comment several times and I am having a hard time NOT interpreting it to mean shame on ebertdj:
Originally posted by coolhar:
If there is any shame to it, it should fall on the photographer who entered it.


Anyway, I'll cop to my remark being "stupid" and I should have realized this was a hot button issue for you, so I apologize.
 04/25/2005 11:59:10 PM · #34
Left a comment

-Lisa
 04/25/2005 11:59:58 PM · #35
Originally posted by coolhar:

The same remark comes up almost every time there is a thread about an image that was DQ'ed. Along with remarks like "what a great photo". People need to stop and think about what they are saying when they post those remarks.


I for one made a comment like that Harvey:
"That's a shame.
It was one I voted highly and think I reflected that in my comments on it."
Did I think about it?
Yes I did.
In my opinion, it was a great shot when I viewed it in the voting process. It was a reasonable assumption that in that level of quality, the effect could have been, and had assumed it to be legal. Guess I give benefit of the doubt more often than not.
Now why should it be offensive to make a statement like that?
I think it was a great photo personally. It's a shame it wasn't edited legally and a great lesson can and should be learned by many on this site regarding an illegal edit, be it by mistake or otherwise.

The penalty is the same, but still doesn't make it a bad photograph. In this case, the photographer was able to walk away with a lesson learned and has demonstrated no hard feelings about the line that was crossed and was willing to share the mistake so others can learn. An honorable way to go out in my book.

Message edited by author 2005-04-26 02:30:27.
 04/26/2005 12:14:42 AM · #36
Originally posted by coolhar:
If there is any shame to it, it should fall on the photographer who entered it.

The only way that sentence could be read as saying shame on the photog in question would be for you, the reader, to determine that shame was proper. I did not make that determination. And that post was before three SC members enlightened us about how cooperative the photog was. I did not say shame on him, you infered that.

Originally posted by kpriest:
Anyway, I'll cop to my remark being "stupid" and I should have realized this was a hot button issue for you, so I apologize.

You are not the one who made the remark that I thought was :) silly :), but thanks for being man enough to apologize.
04/26/2005 02:25:58 AM · #37
I really like that picutre, however on just a personal prefereance I think the starburst was just a tad too large. Maybe if it was smaller it would have been overlooked. Sorry about the DQ though.
 04/26/2005 04:23:49 AM · #38
SC: what happened to that site feature where DQ'd images would remain listed at the end of the official challenge results and hence preserving some of its comments acquired during the challenge.

I did have this one at 9, with a comment I think, but the comment is lost now.
 04/26/2005 04:41:20 AM · #39
Originally posted by srdanz:
SC: what happened to that site feature where DQ'd images would remain listed at the end of the official challenge results and hence preserving some of its comments acquired during the challenge.

I did have this one at 9, with a comment I think, but the comment is lost now.

Changes necessary to do that haven't been coded yet. You're not the only one reminding the admins about this : )
 04/26/2005 04:56:16 AM · #40
Originally posted by kirbic:
FWIW, unless it was extremely small, the starburst is an attention-getter, and as such is crying out to be considered a major element. It's creating image data that did not exist, which grates against the spirit of the editing rules.
There are relatively easy ways to do this in camera, and that of course is always perfectly legal.
This example is a good learning tool; a tip of the hat to David for posting and sharing the learning experience.


I was under the impression that anything added besides borders was illegal?
If this is the case why is it a concern about the size of the starburst if it has been added in post process not by filter shouldn't it be illegal?
Just a bit confused at this stage anyone who can clarify.
 04/26/2005 05:11:37 AM · #41
Originally posted by keegbow:
Originally posted by kirbic:
FWIW, unless it was extremely small, the starburst is an attention-getter, and as such is crying out to be considered a major element. It's creating image data that did not exist, which grates against the spirit of the editing rules.
There are relatively easy ways to do this in camera, and that of course is always perfectly legal.
This example is a good learning tool; a tip of the hat to David for posting and sharing the learning experience.


I was under the impression that anything added besides borders was illegal?
If this is the case why is it a concern about the size of the starburst if it has been added in post process not by filter shouldn't it be illegal?
Just a bit confused at this stage anyone who can clarify.


I think he's saying it may have been overlooked - in other words, still illegal, but might have gotten away with it. Not likely though.
 04/26/2005 06:36:44 AM · #42
I put up my hand to say that I recommended this photo for DQ. Reason: I was tempted myself to add a starburst, but quickly decided this would have been against the rules. I do own several starburst filters, and should have just used them creatively at the time instead of adding it as an afterthought. I have to say though that I wasn't sure whether it would be a DQ as this is a fine line, and I can understand people thinking it would be within the rules.
 04/26/2005 06:45:02 AM · #43
I gave you a great rating, and I am in shock about the DQ. I was pretty sure you had a top winner there. AJFI
 04/26/2005 06:45:47 AM · #44
Intresting post
How sensitive we can be to written words.. and how the lack of expression in faces can lead to misinterpretations or irritations, That̢۪s when the smiles come in handy :))))
04/26/2005 06:50:15 AM · #45
hmmm i've seen a few starbursts.....

call the starbusters!!!
 04/26/2005 12:11:58 PM · #46
I will post some of my outtakes (after the challenge is all voted on) and show you how you can achieve those out of camera. I had some good flares, and some bad ones. It is the same piece, so I can't do it now.
Use a cross-screen or a star filter, depending if you want 4 or 6 (or any other number) of flares.
 04/26/2005 12:12:22 PM · #47
Here are the comments for those who are interested:

Great shine and shimmer....... love the image!

I can see a photoshop fan from here. Great job.

Nicely done !

This is excellent very well done

Lovely clean image, complete with starburst! 9

love the twinkle, the bottom ring looks a little blurry.

returning for comments:
beautiful image I really like the colors and the dark tone. bumping up.

I can see this in my Cosmo! This is the best I've seen on here!

The best..a 10

Perfect

simply beautiful!!!!

Simply perfect! Just what I was looking for! :)

Very nice detailed shot. good subject matter. Nice lighting. sparkle is maybe a little on the large side, but nice.

That would look awsome with a very light gaussian blur on the fonts. Nice work!

very professional touch You have more luck with your image than I have with mine I found it a very difficult challenge
So well done very sharp and a nice composition

Ahhh..
A professionally done shot.
Very well composed and shot and suspect I will be seeing this one in at least the top ten. Good luck!

Very nice details. Classic shot. Was the sparkle added in post process? Well done. Not a fan of the font, nor its size.

very nice...9

yup contrast in selling silver and diamonds is needed and you got it. Super.

Amazing!!

brilliant!

simply gorgeous!!! 10

Perfect! Looks just like out of a magazine! 10
04/26/2005 12:18:05 PM · #48
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I put up my hand to say that I recommended this photo for DQ.


Villagers quickly grab their torches and head for Bobster's cottage.

;-) :) LOL hehehe jejeje - j/k bwahahaha

ps: you did a fair thing. ...but the villagers will still burn your cottage. :)
 04/26/2005 12:46:25 PM · #49
Originally posted by kpriest:
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I put up my hand to say that I recommended this photo for DQ.


Villagers quickly grab their torches and head for Bobster's cottage.

;-) :) LOL hehehe jejeje - j/k bwahahaha

ps: you did a fair thing. ...but the villagers will still burn your cottage. :)


I think that Bobster deserves the same level of praise for raising his hand as ebertdj got for cooperating with the SC. And also he should be commended for requesting a DQ when he saw a questionable image. Many people are reluctant to do that, but it is an essential part of enforcing the rules. We depend on the users that have the keen eye for those things to spot potential violations and report them. Thanks Bobster.

How can we expect people to do the right thing if Ken keeps burnin' `em out. You really like burning people's cottages Ken? Are you some kind of closet arsonist?
j/k j/k :) :) :)
04/26/2005 01:13:48 PM · #50
Originally posted by coolhar:
You really like burning people's cottages Ken? Are you some kind of closet arsonist?
j/k j/k :) :) :)

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/02/2025 04:54:56 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: 08/02/2025 04:54:56 PM EDT.