| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/04/2003 01:10:17 PM · #26 |
| Please send a link to the photo. I was not able to view it before it was removed. |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 01:13:30 PM · #27 |
This is the photo, as it was uploaded to DPC. I would also be interested in seeing a non dodged/burnt version. If you decide to put it up, please share the link :)
Message edited by author 2003-06-04 13:14:41.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2003 01:16:42 PM · #28 |
Morning Mist
By Jerred Zegelis |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 01:17:08 PM · #29 |
| So, what was the clue that it had been dodged/burned? This is from the ignorant masses who don't know enough about traditional photography to know exactly what that is. I'm gonna search on it, but I'm curious, like some others, how you could tell... (I also don't want to accidentally do something that might get me DQed some day!) |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 01:17:29 PM · #30 |
| I never did see a dq request on this pic and there was no discussion on it like there is in a normal disqualification. who made the dq request? |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 01:18:55 PM · #31 |
Look at heathers link, it says:
About: Taken at 6 in the morning in Nebraska. Some dodging and burning only.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2003 01:20:43 PM · #32 |
| I was just curious... this DQ didn't go through the normal dq process.. |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 01:21:38 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
(I also don't want to accidentally do something that might get me DQed some day!) |
If you do NOT select a specific area of the image -- as you do with dodging and burning -- you should be OK with most things you are likely to do to an image.
|
|
|
|
06/04/2003 02:22:27 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Jak:
If you do NOT select a specific area of the image -- as you do with dodging and burning -- you should be OK with most things you are likely to do to an image. |
I looked it up, so now I get it.
Looks like you did yourself in with your description, Ninerfan! :-( Bummer. |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 05:56:28 PM · #35 |
Guys - I never tried to hide anything! This was my first post, and it honestly never crossed my mind that dodging and burning would be considered "spot editing" although now I understand - the rules are that nothing can be manipulated unless it's to the whole image - and even then, filters are a no-no unless it's to get rid of dust and scratches. Although I understand the rule now, I don't necessarily agree with it, and dodging and burning is a big part of any type of photography I've ever dealt with. But hey... a rule is a rule, and now I know. Not a big deal, eh? It's sad - because the original image looked great too - I just dodged the grass a bit and burned a fence post... I might have to post it, but for now I'm going to focus on the next challenge - and this time I know what's up. :)
|
|
|
|
06/04/2003 06:02:16 PM · #36 |
ninerfan~that's a very good attitude!! I can't wait to see your other shots. :-)
Sonja
|
|
|
|
06/04/2003 06:07:56 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by ScottK:
Looks like you did yourself in with your description, Ninerfan! :-( Bummer. |
And if it's any consolation, this is definitely not the first time the "violation" was discovered this way.
And no one here actually enjoys a photo (especially a winner) being disqualified, with the possible exception of the fourth-place finisher .... |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 06:47:11 PM · #38 |
yeah! Let's dq another one so I can get a ribbon too ;P
Any volunteers? |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 07:05:37 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by ninerfan:
But hey... a rule is a rule, and now I know. Not a big deal, eh? It's sad - because the original image looked great too - I just dodged the grass a bit and burned a fence post... I might have to post it, but for now I'm going to focus on the next challenge - and this time I know what's up. :) |
Excellent! And with a grand entrance like your first entry, I personally can't wait to see what's next. :) |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 11:20:12 PM · #40 |
| This might even be another argument for allowing certain kinds of editing. Seems perfectionistic to not allow ANY spot editing. Here is an example of how a person who has always done film photography is telling us how normal it is to "spot edit", especially in film photography. Why should we stick to NO spot editing? Why not allow certain types of editing such as dodging and burning? Exclude certain types of more radical editing, like digitally inserting a background or other elements of the photo. What do you think, site council, can we vote on it? (again) |
|
|
|
06/04/2003 11:41:50 PM · #41 |
This may seem harsh, but how could anyone not think that dodging and burning a photo is not spot editing? LOL, what am I missing here? The rules are crystal clear.
Well it's too bad your pic was DQ'd I liked it a lot. |
|
|
|
06/05/2003 12:09:13 AM · #42 |
Hey ninerfan, that was one of my favorite photos...sorry to hear about the DQ...don't give up! Can't wait to see your next entry...
JB |
|
|
|
06/05/2003 02:23:42 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by ScottK:
Looks like you did yourself in with your description, Ninerfan! :-( Bummer. |
And if it's any consolation, this is definitely not the first time the "violation" was discovered this way.
And no one here actually enjoys a photo (especially a winner) being disqualified, with the possible exception of the fourth-place finisher .... |
Hopefully my comment didn't have the wrong tone... I don't envision you guys gleefully scrutinizing every detail just looking for who you can pounce on; and Ninerfan, I didn't mean for it to sound like I thought you "slipped up" in trying to break the rules. Just a little light sarcasm/irony.
And, you gotta think, even the 4th place winner might have mixed feelings - I know I would. Wouldn't feel like it was a totally deserved ribbon - although for me, at this stage, a top 20 would be a huge victory!
FWIW, I just barely missed breaking this rule my first submission - I had selected out a portion of the shot to try to apply differnt levels of sharpening. Got my shot all done and was in the process of submitting, checked the "I've read the rules" box - then went and read the rules and realized I had broken them! Fortunately I had time to go back and fix it.
Ninerfan, glad to hear your gonna stick around. I'm betting your shots are going to be regular site favorites. |
|
|
|
06/06/2003 11:49:06 PM · #44 |
| Ninerfan - I can relate to your situation. I also had a 1st. place DQ'd (Weather Challenge). Same situation with me, only it was not understanding the rules about submission dates... I did not realize (at that time)that the photo must be TAKEN during the dates defined. Tough lessons, but this is a great site, and I have already learned a lot! |
|
|
|
06/12/2003 10:24:36 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Drake:
Ninerfan - I can relate to your situation. I also had a 1st. place DQ'd (Weather Challenge). Same situation with me, only it was not understanding the rules about submission dates... I did not realize (at that time)that the photo must be TAKEN during the dates defined. Tough lessons, but this is a great site, and I have already learned a lot! |
That brings up my question, how can you tell what date the photo was taken? Also why is this a rule? Why cant we use a photo that was taken previously?
Mark |
|
|
|
06/12/2003 10:29:09 PM · #46 |
it's to not give an edge on someone who's been photographing for 10 years and has a huge collection of photos. He/she could just submit an appropriate photo every week, without needing to lift a finger. This site is to push us to go out and take pics :)
|
|
|
|
06/12/2003 10:37:46 PM · #47 |
That makes sense. And I'm glad the rule is there since i have been digital for only a few months. My main question remains; however, how can we tell when the picture was taken? I personally never use the date on my camera because it needs to be reset every time I change the batteries.
mark |
|
|
|
06/12/2003 10:40:44 PM · #48 |
that would be to your demise if ever the officials needed to check your "original" .. the date is usually saved in the exif info, and for almost all cameras, this can be kept up to date without any modification.. some pertty low-end cameras dont even have exif, and some, like your, need to be reset every time.. it's not the best solution, but for most cases, it can solve the problem pretty directly. if i were you, i'd start setting up that date before going out shooting for DPC related stuff...just in case
|
|
|
|
06/12/2003 10:43:33 PM · #49 |
Thank you now I'm really glad that I asked the question. I will reset that date!
Mark |
|
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: 06/22/2025 02:40:53 AM EDT.
