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

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> Best of All Worlds?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 69, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/08/2003 02:03:08 AM · #1
Dear DPC members and registered users,

I want to start out by saying that I have a lot of respect for John, Tim, and Gordon, even though I disagree with their proposed change. None of this is intended to reflect directly on them; just to address issues that I would like the community to think about before jumping in behind the proposed changes.

First, I think the idea of supporting a change simply because John, Gordon and Tim are in favor of it is foolish. If you are going to support a change to the site, especially a fundamental change to the rules, you should have good solid reasons behind it, and you should believe that those reasons outweigh any potential drawbacks. Blindly following in the footsteps of others is rarely an effective way to make a decision.

Make no mistake: A rule change of the type being proposed by Gordon, Tim and John would represent a fundamental change to the focus of the site. No longer would this site address the needs of the photographer who is just beginnig to delve into the realm of photography as art. The gap between the existing population's knowledge, and the knowledge of a newcomer, would be so great that most newcomers would be too intimidated to register and enter. There is a reason that we all came to DPChallenge instead of the various other photography contests sites. For many of us, it's because we felt the amount of learning we needed to do to compete effectively was enough to be worth the time and effort, but not so great that we were scared away. Removing editing restrictions would add an additional dimension to the competition, one that is far more complex than the photography that is at the heart of it. For many, this would be enough to scare them off.

This begs the question, why would some of the top photographers on the site support such a fundamental change? The answer lies in the quesion: they are top photographers. As such, they have neared the practical limits of what they can accomplish with the current challenge format. There is a small group; perhaps the top 1% of the population, that for all practical purposes cannot learn anything new under the current rules.

This change is not about making the site better for everyone, it's about putting back the challenge for the top 1%. There is a real danger, though, in catering to the top 1% at the expense of a much larger segment of the present and future population (not the whole other 99%, but some subset of it and virtually all potential new users). First, with a reduction in the number of incoming users, we can expect a corresponding reduction in constructive feedback. Second, a reduction in incoming users means a reduction in paying members, and potentially a corresponding impact on the financial viability of the site. While the second may sound like an issue that should only concern Drew and Langdon, we need to remember that if the site ceases to be able to cover its costs, we should probably expect that it would cease to exist.

This dilemma underscores a need to create learning opportunities for the more experienced (and accomplished) among us, without jeapordizing the needs and interest of the majority of the population. Since the problem stems from a need for learning, it makes sense to look at educational systems as a model for what we need to accomplish.

It is important to note that our schools do not group elementary school students with high schoolers. Colleges and universities have separate introductory and advanced classes. Why? Without these, the needs of everyone would be jeapordized. The learning of advanced students would be at a standstill, and beginning students would be so intimidated by the advanced students, that they would not know where to even begin. No learning would take place, and the situation would be detrimental to everyone. Likewise, to expect that a simple expansion of the rules to support more advanced learning will be productive is foolish.

Ultimately, a viable solution which separately deals with the needs of the more advanced and less advanced participants presents the best opportunity for everyone. For this reason, I maintain that separate challenges should be held, one which maintains the current editing rules, and another which is open to unlimited editing. That way, photographers who are not yet comfortable with the complexities of [insert the name of your favorite editing software here] can continue to learn in stages, mastering their camera before embarking on digital darkroom techniques. They will learn to create and finish good photographs rather than trying to save bad ones.

I firmly agree we have reached a point at which we must make changes to meet the needs of more advanced photographers; however I am convinced that serious danger lies in meeting those needs at the expense of the less advanced majority. The solution of regular, separate challenges under both the current rules and under unlimited or relaxed editing rules meets the specified needs without the risks associated with a wholesale change of site policy.

Respecfully submitted,
Terry Auspitz

Message edited by author 2003-06-08 02:23:19.
 06/08/2003 02:24:38 AM · #2
Maybe more complex and challenging challenge topics should be given each week to cater for those "bored" professional photographers in DPC?
 06/08/2003 02:30:18 AM · #3
Originally posted by shadow:
Maybe more complex and challenging challenge topics should be given each week to cater for those "bored" professional photographers in DPC?


Possibly, but the catch there is that different topics are challenging to different people. I think the key lies in the format. By having one of the challenges have less restrictive (or no) editing rules, the more advanced photographers (and for that matter anyone else who wants to) get to explore and compete in new areas, while the rest of us still have our current-format challenge.

-Terry
 06/08/2003 04:03:04 AM · #4
I think that, if we're going to work with seperate challenges, the majority will finally 'move' to the challenge that is the less restricted (human nature?), no mather at what skill level they are.

In the other thread, I voted pro editing, but I have to admit that is just an opportunistic gut feeling, because I'm confortable with most Photoshop functions, and I just love post-processing. So for me it's ok, but I dó think that, eventually, it will turn this site into a Digital Editing Contest.

Imho the problem is that you cannot make a slight rule-change. When you deside to admit some dodge/burn techniques for instance, you better legalize the rest of the spot editing tools too, because there isn't a way to tell if an image is legally altered or not. (Exif data do not contain such info)

Anyway, I suppose it's ok to have some dabate here. I hope we can come to a smart, balanced consensus.

Marco


06/08/2003 09:50:24 AM · #5
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Dear DPC members and registered users,

I want to start out by saying that I have a lot of respect for John, Tim, and Gordon, even though I disagree with their proposed change.............................................................
The solution of regular, separate challenges under both the current rules and under unlimited or relaxed editing rules meets the specified needs without the risks associated with a wholesale change of site policy.

Respecfully submitted,
Terry Auspitz


Terry, I agree fully with your assesment and support this proposal. Perhaps the challenge topic could be the same for each group. I think the majority will enter where they are most likely to score well. Those of us who are lite in PS will also be able to pick up a few things along the way. David Ey
 06/08/2003 10:28:18 AM · #6
Terry,
I support your views on this subject, Hell! I am still trying to TAKE a good picture.
Dick
 06/08/2003 10:44:20 AM · #7
Count me in with Terry's view of this.
 06/08/2003 10:53:50 AM · #8
I understand the needs of the better photogtaphers to want to be pushed to higher limits again, but I think that this is going to lead to getting away from "photography" and more into the realm of "digital art".

I am not opposed to digital art, however I joind DPC as a photography site.

Perhaps an open challenge, a members challenge and a digital art challenge format would be the answer.

Just my opinion.
 06/08/2003 11:09:24 AM · #9
I like the idea of a seperate challenges in digital art and photography. As a new digital photographer I am just begining to explore the unlimited artistic freedom of editing.

Mark

Originally posted by rickhd13:
I understand the needs of the better photogtaphers to want to be pushed to higher limits again, but I think that this is going to lead to getting away from "photography" and more into the realm of "digital art".

I am not opposed to digital art, however I joind DPC as a photography site.

Perhaps an open challenge, a members challenge and a digital art challenge format would be the answer.

Just my opinion.
 06/08/2003 11:17:40 AM · #10
I also would like to voice my support for Terry's views. I strongly agree that change is necessary, however the editing restrictions have driven me to be a better PHOTOGRAPHER, and that is what it's all about.
Not that I haven't learned a few Photoshop tricks from DPC... who sez you can't teach an old dog new tricks?
I very much like the idea of challenges where advanced editing is allowed, but this is definitely a completely different challenge than the current format and so should be run separately.

My 2¢

Fritz
06/08/2003 11:25:55 AM · #11
Many (myself included) would argue that it's MORE challenging without the editing, therefore the top 1% should prefer it.

doesn't editing fix what we did wrong in the first place?

having said that, I edit everything I print...quite a conundrum.
 06/08/2003 11:30:41 AM · #12
Terry, well said.

Rule changes have always worried me too, though not for the same issues that you address. In fact, I have had a hard time pinning down exactly what it is about changing the rules that bugs me. You have certainly made some points that I have considered, but still, there is something missing.

The rules have already changed once since I started with this site a year ago. It was not a big change, though. If I remember correctly we gained the ability to use a few filters that had previously been restricted, the use of NeatImage was approved, and some of the wording was clarified... thats pretty much it. The idea of no spot editing was still very much in vogue.

My thoughts on supporting that change were simple: The changes didn't waver from the 'no spot editing' idea, and they allowed users with "lessor" equipment the chance to compete on a more even footing.

Now, if I have the current thoughts straight, we are discussing the idea of easing up on the spot editing rule to allow the use of certain techniques and tools. Most notably, dodging and burning, and possibly even limited use of the clone tool.

Hmm. Seems fair enough, but why? Slowly allowing the use of this tool or that tool just seems silly to me. I feel we should either open up the editing all together or leave well enough alone.

My reasoning is one of simplicity.

I don't want to delve through pages and pages of rules to determine what I can and cannot do. Besides, if we change the spot editing rule (especially on a limited basis) I'm afraid it would open up a can of moan and woe unlike any we have ever witnessed. We work on the honor system as it is. No one is required to submit their original unless there are questions. And right now this doesn't happen that often.

Try to limit spot editing and I think there will be lots of questions. Lots of questions each and every week. So many that they could make the administration of this site an impossible mess. So, unless we are prepared to make submission of an original file mandatory, I really don't think this is a good idea.

It's for these reasons that I will be voting 'no' to any proposed rules changes.

Also, I understand that the reasoning behind wanting to use these tools is to allow folks to explore their abilities and create the best work possible. I'm all for that. I'm just not sure it's necessary to do this for work that is submitted to this site.

Michael

Message edited by author 2003-06-08 11:36:04.
 06/08/2003 11:37:29 AM · #13
PLEASE READ:

Terry, you're my bud, but I truly believe that your assessment of the effects of/rationale behind the proposed rule change is inaccurate.

I don't see it as self-serving at all, as much as trying to move the overall work on this site towards a higher esthetic level, a change that could only benefit anyone and EVERYONE who truly cares about their photography and getting the most from their imaging :).

What is with the irrational idea around here that as soon as a photographer is allowed to access all the tools in his/her box, they will suddenly morph into this long-horned maniacal digital artist, grafting wings onto pigs, and causing dolphins to fly through rainbows in outer space??? It's hilarious!

.........

I work on photoshop every day in my job; I think I qualify as a semi-advanced pshop user, and I'm definitely decent at doing composites. But I personally almost NEVER feel the desire to put wings on pigs. Honest. I really and truly swear :-D. If you don't believe me, you can look through my galleries below.

(BTW, since you ID'd J, G, and T by name, you should also go through their galleries and discover how much 'digital art' they have in there that they are waiting to spring on you unsuspecting peeps ;) )>..

Please please please look around the net. Look at ALL the sites that don't DISALLOW editing - phtosig, photoblink, bestphoto, dpcontest, fredmiranda, etc . Besides the dedicated DigiArt categories, is not the VAST majority of work out there photographic and not digital art? How many pigs with wings win dpcontest? :) Do not most people come down on stuff for looking too post-processed - unless it has somehow been done subtly and tastefully enough to be an enhancement, not an eyesore? Yes! :)

I think the biggest problem is that people just arent experienced about how much post-processing goes into making the good pics look good. I think it would blow EVERYONE'S MIND, if they actually saw the finished winners side by side with their original files. From drab to ZING! It's already done all the time.

People ALREADY don't take advantage of levels, curves, color control. Does that mean that the people that DO should stop ? Just because it confers upon them an unfair advantage?? That's exactly the same thing as saying don't add more tools, or in the case of d/b, more nuanced control of existing tools. Because someone might use them?

See how the argument is just a bugbear? :)

HOWEVER, I do like, have always liked, and have always supported, the idea of skill levels. I think it wouldn't be TOO difficult to come up with a workable way to implement this.

Thanks for reading this far.

Kollin

Message edited by author 2003-06-08 11:52:52.
 06/08/2003 11:50:33 AM · #14
I have remained silent through most of this, but it is at this time that I feel that I must at least express my point of view. Although Terry writes a very effective case, I don't however agree with it.

When I took up photography in September, I new nothing about Aperture, Shutter Speed or any number of other things. I came across DPC while surfing the 'net and entered my first challenge in October. I suffered terribly. I started to try to analize my work and find out what it was that I was missing. 2 months later I converted from CorelPaint to Photoshop. Neither program was I strong in, but I have spent time learning the programs so that I was able to enhance my images within DPC rules. As a combine result of my learning my camera and learning my image processing software I have been able to now score in 6' instead of the 4's. Nobody told me how to take a better picture, or how to use the software, I've had tips and pointers, but it was my desire to better myself and my skills that has allowed me to progress.

Will the inclusion of new tools or rules adjust my desire to continue to submit images here? No. These new proposed rules aren't always necessary on every image, but on those rare occassions that they are needed, it would be nice to use them. I am not a professional photographer, and there is a lot I still have to learn, but remember, 9 months ago I hadn't touch a camera with as many features as mine, but it was my internal desire to learn that has pushed me forward, not DPC.

Rules changes, I feel, will not scare of the new users, or leave current ones out of the pack. It's a matter of how badly do you want to improve your own skill sets. I for one am not happy with just taking pictures of family gatherings and snapshots around town. I want to use all the resources available to me so that I can create images that move people.

Thanks for your time in reading this,
-danny
 06/08/2003 12:24:35 PM · #15
I agree with Terry. When you graduate 6th grade, you go on to 7th. You don't ask the teacher to change the lesson plan just because you've learned everything you could in 6th. You simply move on.
I would be very sad to see things change to what has been proposed. This would no longer be the DPC I love to spend my time with.
 06/08/2003 12:26:58 PM · #16
We are talking about maintaining restricted editing on TWO, maybe THREE shots per week. That's all. (And even these are only temporary until the contest ends). Every single other shot you ever take can be morphed to the nth degree and no-one will say "boo" about it. In no way can this be considered holding anyone back.
 06/08/2003 12:35:09 PM · #17
:)

Message edited by author 2003-06-08 12:42:47.
 06/08/2003 01:04:34 PM · #18
Originally posted by Jak:
We are talking about maintaining restricted editing on TWO, maybe THREE shots per week. That's all. (And even these are only temporary until the contest ends). Every single other shot you ever take can be morphed to the nth degree and no-one will say "boo" about it. In no way can this be considered holding anyone back.


No one wants to morph...

I have to put more thought into this whole issue..but I tend to like Terry's proposal for a separate challenge that maybe could be twice per month. I will come back to this.

Message edited by author 2003-06-08 13:06:01.
 06/08/2003 01:25:26 PM · #19
Hi guys!

When I discovered the site I thought that this site was really funny... When I started to submit pictures to the different challenges, I really enjoy take pictures and submit... and I am all the week wishing that the next challenge starts... because it´s the funniest site of the net...

In my country, people says when a thing it´s ok, it´s better don´t change anything... so I am really disagree with the rule´s change.....

It´s only a opinion...

Alexis
 06/08/2003 03:16:43 PM · #20
I`m with Terry in the no camp.

I came to this site to get the most out of my camera, not photoshop.
The strict rules on time and editing are what makes dpchallenge special.
I was against the use of borders also. I would rather stick to basic photography that sat at the computer trying to fix my mistakes or add things that don`t exist.

Mark.......

VOTE NO
 06/08/2003 03:25:15 PM · #21
First off, There are really a lot of good writers on here, like Terry, that really know how to make persuasive statements : ) I may not agree with all of it but it is enjoyable to read such well thought out and articulate posts.

Now for my, less articulate, rebuttle. If you are ever blindly following anything I do, you aren't very smart and it would probably be the first time that happened with me.

Throughout the course of my involvement with DPC I have raved to many of my friends about how well I liked this site and about how it works. Most people enjoyed the fact that it's primary purpose is to keep photographs true to the original image but were very surprised and confused about the limits of the editing tools. It seems to always take some explanation to get them to understand about spot editing and global editing. Most just assumed you could use whatever tools you wanted and didn't question that it was still a photo. My point is that while most of my friends are not photography or PS wizards they would like to know that they could use all of the tools available once they learned them. My question to all of you then is this: Had all of the editing tools been available right from the beginning along with a clear explanation of intent to maintain the integrity of the original photo, how would you have felt then? Would it have simply seemed normal or would you have try to remove the use of many of the tools?

Throughout these fine debates I have stated several times that I felt, that even now, there is a need to better accomodate the new users. I even provided some examples of this. I think it is entirely possible for beginners to compete head to head with all other participants if they try hard and we help provide them with easy to find and follow tips and tutorials. This has already occured repeatedly because the challenge topics challenge everyone from beginners to the advanced. So I disagree that it is a matter of advanced users getting bored or that they they only want to benefit themselves. Speaking for myself. I truly only want the best for everyone on this site and as I have said many times, whatever is decided on I will still enjoy this site. I know this may appear to be a big push for change but it really has been in response to John's original inquiry and the statements from all those involved. Whatever tools are allowed or disallowed this site will always be about photography and not digital art.

T
06/08/2003 03:30:16 PM · #22
Originally posted by magnetic9999:

I don't see it as self-serving at all,....What is with the irrational idea around here....long-horned maniacal digital artist....
It's hilarious!

I work on photoshop every day in my job;....
I think I qualify as a semi-advanced pshop user,....
and I'm definitely decent at doing composites....

Look at ALL the sites that don't DISALLOW editing - phtosig, photoblink, bestphoto, dpcontest, fredmiranda, etc .

It's already done all the time.

People ALREADY don't take advantage of levels, curves, color control. See how the argument is just a bugbear? :)
Kollin



sites that don't DISALLOW editing - phtosig, photoblink, bestphoto, dpcontest, fredmiranda

Do those who want the changes compete in these other contests?
Do you recieve the respect you deserve?
Will they let you carry the ball?
Can you close the threads?
Would you be able to petition to change the site?

I truly hope the founders EXPAND the site rather than CHANGE it.

People ALREADY don't take advantage of:
sites that don't DISALLOW editing - phtosig, photoblink, bestphoto, dpcontest, fredmiranda
sites that don't DISALLOW editing - phtosig, photoblink, bestphoto, dpcontest, fredmiranda

And In Case You Missed It.......

sites that don't DISALLOW editing - phtosig, photoblink, bestphoto, dpcontest, fredmiranda

Message edited by author 2003-06-08 15:35:57.
 06/08/2003 04:24:09 PM · #23
Originally posted by David Ey:

Will they let you carry the ball?
Can you close the threads?
Would you be able to petition to change the site?

I truly hope the founders EXPAND the site rather than CHANGE it.



No one in these threads are 'carrying the ball'. They are opening up a topic for discussion regarding photography.

Closing threads? Yes if they get beligerent, or off topic, or are cross-posted. The original intent upon opening this subject this week was for discussion.

We have a unique situation here at DPC where we can certainly discuss changes. The end and final decision has and will always rest with the administrators. There is nothing wrong with talking about ways which might improve the site. Therefore, let's stop the comparison to other sites.

In order to EXPAND, CHANGE must come. What those changes will be are discussed; large, small or otherwise. Look, adding borders was a change.. and people have begun to steer away from them because they see that over doing it detracts from their photo.

I don't understand the pointing of fingers. A knowledgable person opened a discussion.. and the whole world fell around people's ears. Interesting that the Discover Freedom thread went on, and on, and on, etc. Yet, a topic of dicovering photography gets "let's move on" comments, and this is a photography site!

Now, moving away from exasperation: It would be nice to continue towards a poll, and continue towards discussing ideas pro/anti whatever while keeping it to the topic of how it effects photography and not how this will or will not effect a certain 1%. That is hogwash.

If you are tired of reading/posting about this, then certainly entertain yourself with something else on dpc.

06/08/2003 04:29:19 PM · #24
Surely any additional processing could be included for specific challenges in the rules, thus keeping the current rules intact but giving the odd challenge a different take by allowing certain processing techniques that could enhance the challenge.
 06/08/2003 04:35:59 PM · #25
I`m all in favour of a poll. It`s the only way to sort this out.
Everyone has a different view on this.
I think the result will be.

//www.dpartchallenge.com
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 06/17/2025 07:52:48 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: 06/17/2025 07:52:48 PM EDT.