| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/24/2006 04:49:24 PM · #401 |
I used a long shutter speed and nearly closed aperture, then by selectively firing the flash, was able to obtain a strobe motion effect. In the end, it was one exposure with the lighting used to highlight position. It wasn't DQ'ed, but would it be if the rules change?
Scott |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 04:54:58 PM · #402 |
Originally posted by scott180:
I used a long shutter speed and nearly closed aperture, then by selectively firing the flash, was able to obtain a strobe motion effect. In the end, it was one exposure with the lighting used to highlight position. It wasn't DQ'ed, but would it be if the rules change?
Scott |
Absolutely not. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 04:56:08 PM · #403 |
Originally posted by KiwiShotz:
In responding to the original question, what rule changes are needed? ...
Does Not Meet Challenge (DNMC)
It's pretty clear from some really blatant ignoring of the Challenge Description that some form of DNMC DQ has to be considered.
This is not a suggestion that DNMC is generally a DQ offence but that some blatant attempts, those that essentially discredit all honest atttempts to meet the challenge, be grounds for a DQ.
Before we're drowned in howls of protest about 'creativity' and 'freedom', may I say this. This is a Challenge site, not a picture contest site without restrictions. So, we have 'freedom' and 'creativity' as long as we answer the challenge.
In just the last 8 weeks some examples have brought the whole Challenge process into disrepute and the survival of DPC depends on us maintaining our difference.
- We have had a 4-5am challenge where a ribbon winner was shot at midday, despite the Challenge Description requiring you to "...Set your alarm, and take a picture between 4:00 and 5:00 AM. ..."
- We had the singled-out challenge where the description required photogs to "...Drop your fear of candids this week and single-out a person in a crowd as your source of composition....". What did we get? A picture of sheep in 56th place!
- There have been many other such examples
These things make a mockery of the site and the challenge process. They severely disadvantage those honest members who try their hardest and suffer the difficulties of properly following the Description requirements. They are not 'subjective', they are blatant. There are 19 members of SC and I for one trust them as grown people with a balanced intelligence to know the difference.
Brett |
This is a bump of an older post, but it just rang so true of my perception of my first month or two here and the challenges I have entered. I thought that was why there was a Free Challenge so that any/all could enter without worry of a challenge subject. As a voter The only way I have of enforcing those who don't want to enter a challenge criteria-based image is to automatically give the image a 1 if it blatantly didn't meet a challenge. But, it doesn't seem to stop those who don't look at the challenge criteria or heed its meaning before voting.
What's the point of having challenge criteria/subjects if the submissions aren't held to it?
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:08:06 PM · #404 |
Back in the day, dnmc was ground for dq. That was before my time on SC (maybe before SC even existed), but it was abolished simply because while there may appear to be times when a picture is absolutely not meeting the challenge at all, it is a very subjective call. (I remember maybe 5 pictures in my time that couldn't be rationalized at all).
What would happen is picture A would be dq'ed because it didn't meet the challenge. Then, the photog could get on the forum and say, "but it does because blah, blah, blah." and low and behold, they were right. There are only a handfull of us (SC), and I would hate think that we would have to police the dnmc. We get enough of those requests now. :)
As it is, the voters can choose if it meets the challenge and vote it accordingly. Yea, you may be called a dnmc nazi, but it in the end it is your opinion and right to do so. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:18:20 PM · #405 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Back in the day, dnmc was ground for dq. That was before my time on SC (maybe before SC even existed), but it was abolished simply because while there may appear to be times when a picture is absolutely not meeting the challenge at all, it is a very subjective call. (I remember maybe 5 pictures in my time that couldn't be rationalized at all).
What would happen is picture A would be dq'ed because it didn't meet the challenge. Then, the photog could get on the forum and say, "but it does because blah, blah, blah." and low and behold, they were right. There are only a handfull of us (SC), and I would hate think that we would have to police the dnmc. We get enough of those requests now. :)
As it is, the voters can choose if it meets the challenge and vote it accordingly. Yea, you may be called a dnmc nazi, but it in the end it is your opinion and right to do so. |
While this suggestion may not be realistic based on limited personnel or too many images to police, why not accept DNMC as a DQ offense, make the DNMC flag come up only if a voter flags it for disqualification, and then if the SC member(s) decide that it does appear to be DNMC, request an explanation from the submitter as to why it meets the challenge. Use the same amount of time for a response that you would typically use if you needed authentificaiton of the shot.
The site does require authentication of images at times when they feel a DQ offense may be in effect, is it really so different if it "appears" to be DNMC versus "appearing" to be a DQ editing/time issue?
In both scenarios, the owner has the ability to correct/justify the "perceived" problem
I really do hate that there may not be enough staff (SC members) to police it, but should we let people get away with what one might say is an "obvious" attempt to circumvent the rules (the whole purpose of the challenge)?
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 17:23:19.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:21:26 PM · #406 |
Originally posted by dallasdux:
What's the point of having challenge criteria/subjects if the submissions aren't held to it? |
Those entries invariably finish near the bottom of the scores anyway, so who cares? The challenge is to do your best, not to worry about other people who didn't get it. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:25:44 PM · #407 |
Originally posted by dallasdux:
why not accept DNMC as a DQ offense... |
The Site Council validates images because the voters don't see the originals. They often have no way of knowing if there was a violation of the rules. The voters CAN decide if an entry meets the challenge, though, so we leave that for the voters to decide. Failure to communicate isn't against the rules, but you can certainly give it a low score. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:26:19 PM · #408 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dallasdux:
What's the point of having challenge criteria/subjects if the submissions aren't held to it? |
Those entries invariably finish near the bottom of the scores anyway, so who cares? The challenge is to do your best, not to worry about other people who didn't get it. |
I guess as far as who cares, at least myself and the originator of the post that first brought it up. I have finished well behind people who have submitted DNMC entries (edit: IMO). While I would agree that some fall to the end, others don't because they submit a shot with a real WOW factor. Good for them. I don't deny the quality of the shot was better than mine. I do however say, why not call every challenge a Free Study as the "criteria" of the challenge is not being adhered to.
The issue to 'me' is "What is a Challenge"? Is it the best photo? or the best photo that meets the criteria/purpose of the challenge?
Edit: I agree about one should do their best for the challenge, and that is my intent. I want to get better. But, ultimatley this site gives out Ribbons for 1st-3rd place so it is a Competition (everyone is ranked against one another). I just find the Challenge Criteria to outline the what is acceptable competition.
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 17:32:24.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:30:44 PM · #409 |
Originally posted by dallasdux:
The issue to 'me' is "What is a Challenge"? |
The challenge is to take a great photo that communicates the topic, of course. That's two parts. Do both and you score high, do neither and you score low. Do one or the other and you score in between. We won't DQ for not meeting the challenge for the same reason we won't DQ for not taking a great photo. ;-) |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:33:56 PM · #410 |
What Karma said!
And, of course, my own interpretation. Let's take a statistical approach... we might wonder whether not meeting the challenge lowers an image's score at all, and if so by how much? If we look through the ribbon-winners, or perhpas the top 10 for each challenge, we see that the top images are in fact dominated by images that meet the challenge well. But some images that don't meet the challenge are technically and artistically very good, so they also score well. Even if "DNMC" images score much lower as a group, there will be a few that reach the top 10, or ribbon territory, based purely upon technical and artistic merit.
Each voter has their own interpretation of how to (or whether to) score down for DNMC, and each voter has their own interpretation of DNMC. My guess is that on average, an image takes a full 1-point hit in score for complete DNMC vs. the same image fitting the challenge very well. That's a stiff penalty indeed. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:34:21 PM · #411 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dallasdux:
The issue to 'me' is "What is a Challenge"? |
we won't DQ for not taking a great photo. ;-) |
Though you could if you put it in the Challenge Criteria ;) lol.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:40:35 PM · #412 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
What Karma said!
And, of course, my own interpretation. Let's take a statistical approach... we might wonder whether not meeting the challenge lowers an image's score at all, and if so by how much? If we look through the ribbon-winners, or perhpas the top 10 for each challenge, we see that the top images are in fact dominated by images that meet the challenge well. But some images that don't meet the challenge are technically and artistically very good, so they also score well. Even if "DNMC" images score much lower as a group, there will be a few that reach the top 10, or ribbon territory, based purely upon technical and artistic merit.
Each voter has their own interpretation of how to (or whether to) score down for DNMC, and each voter has their own interpretation of DNMC. My guess is that on average, an image takes a full 1-point hit in score for complete DNMC vs. the same image fitting the challenge very well. That's a stiff penalty indeed. |
Wow, only a point deduction, that's actually very generous in my book. But it is certainly to each their own and as voting has shown, everyone has an opinion. We'll just have to trust the voters (scary, scary) . ;-) lol.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:44:35 PM · #413 |
Originally posted by dallasdux:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dallasdux:
The issue to 'me' is "What is a Challenge"? |
we won't DQ for not taking a great photo. ;-) |
Though you could if you put it in the Challenge Criteria ;) lol. |
DQ for DNMC was done once (as far as I know) in the first Rubber Ducky Challenge with 16/110 DQ's. As I recall, many SC couldn't wait for the week to be over...what headaches they had from it all! Can you imagine how overtaxed these noble volunteers would be given 3 such challenges per week with multiple times the # of entries?!? (Use the 1 key...it's your perogative...excercise those numbers under 5!) |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:50:15 PM · #414 |
Originally posted by KaDi:
Originally posted by dallasdux:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dallasdux:
The issue to 'me' is "What is a Challenge"? |
we won't DQ for not taking a great photo. ;-) |
Though you could if you put it in the Challenge Criteria ;) lol. |
DQ for DNMC was done once (as far as I know) in the first Rubber Ducky Challenge with 16/110 DQ's. As I recall, many SC couldn't wait for the week to be over...what headaches they had from it all! Can you imagine how overtaxed these noble volunteers would be given 3 such challenges per week with multiple times the # of entries?!? (Use the 1 key...it's your perogative...excercise those numbers under 5!) |
Oh No, I have a pretty good idea it would be a LOT of work to police. I think the SC does a good job from what I have seen. I'm not finding fault with them in any way other than I disagree with choice to not have DNMC as a DQ offense. But, that's why everyone has an opinion and ultimately, it is theirs (in relation to this site) that counts.
Obviously DNMC is a big pet peeve of mine
(couldn't tell could ya?-- ;-) )
Believe me. DNMC's get hammered on my scale. Automatic 1. Only once have I given a DNMC anything higher and it was a 3 just because it was such an incredible image. I did comment on that one and let them know they were still DNMC IMO.
I'm certainly not afraid to use the scores under 5, and from my first couple of challenges, I can safely say neither are most of those voting ;-)(lol).
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 05:57:32 PM · #415 |
Well without the title telling me it is morning this to me is a DNMC.
And I see by your avg vote cast, 4.2, many have suffered the DNMC by your hand. Which I believe is the point of the SC that have answered you. The DNMC gets hammered by the voters (Such as you) and there is really no need for it to become a DQ offence.
My personal opinion of the DNMC is that it is just to subjective to be considered a DQ offence.
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 18:53:20. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 06:26:05 PM · #416 |
Here's something else to consider: as you all presumably are aware, I've long been griping about how PS CS2 shadow/highlight adjustment is legal in basic although its precursor, cntrl-alt-tilde, is not legal, because it involves multiply and screen layer modes. When they built CS2, they combined all this into a single dialogue box.
And as you may be aware, I've been doing a lot of experimenting with "tone mapping", using photomatix pro. What I've discovered is that you can take a single, 16-bit TIFF image and tone map it, adjusting the relationship of highlight and shadow luminosity, in a single dialogue box without any layers at all.
So my question is, "Is tone mapping on a single exposure legal in basic editing?" Based on the fact that CS2 shadow/highlight is legal, I can't see how it would be. But I haven't tested it in a basic challenge yet.
Robt. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 06:44:05 PM · #417 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
So my question is, "Is tone mapping on a single exposure legal in basic editing?" |
As long as it's a single original and you don't use any selections or illegal layers/modes, I suppose so.
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 18:45:49. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 08:55:48 PM · #418 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Well without the title telling me it is morning this to me is a DNMC.
And I see by your avg vote cast, 4.2, many have suffered the DNMC by your hand. Which I believe is the point of the SC that have answered you. The DNMC gets hammered by the voters (Such as you) and there is really no need for it to become a DQ offence.
My personal opinion of the DNMC is that it is just to subjective to be considered a DQ offence. |
The last point is what really counts is generally correct. It's subjective, that's fine. But its pretty darn hard to take only a shot of the moon (literally) with nothing else in the picture, and have it meet the challenge of "include a rubber ducky in your photo". That's the point I'm trying to make. Not the maybe's. I trust the SC has the basic instincts of when to quickly disregard a DQ request and when the benefit of the doubt applies. As I mentioned, there is a check/balance with the submitter's response.
Didn't realize I was "hammering the SC" but if that's what you want to call it so feel free. I'm merely participating in a debate on a thread asking for suggestions on the rules rewrite. If a DPC user has an issue they feel passionate about, it should be brought to light IMO. I'm knocking the lack of a rule, not the SC. I think I cleared up that I think the DC is doing a fine job in my previous post and that we probably (almost definitely from the responses) won't see eye to eye on it, but I assure you I'm not the only DPC user that feels the issue deserves a bit more attention or enforcement.
As far as the photo DNMC, if you "don't get it" (that lots of kids play soccer in the mornings) then click the DQ button, that's what it's there for. If they asked me to justify it, I would. The challenge is "what morning means to ME". That would be a really difficult one to DQ anyone as no one out there knows what something means to a particular person. It is those challenges which are very specific that the rule is "easily" enforced. Include a specific tangible object in the photo. If it is not there, it doesn't meet the challenge. It's pretty straight forward. There will be difficult ones for sure, so I think most would allow for a lot of leniency there. But not putting a rubber ducky in a challenge that says "include a rubber ducky in your photo" doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room IMO.
As I mentioned, I understand your final point, and it is a very good one. I think I make a pretty good one about the really specific challenges.
Edit:
Regarding 4.2 score, that is lower than I had hoped it would be. It only takes one challenge like the Oxymoron challenge that may have a lot of DNMC to really tank the score. I do make it a point to either vote on none or 100% of the entries and keep scores on a level playing field (parity amongst number of votes received).
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 21:14:12.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 09:06:06 PM · #419 |
Originally posted by dallasdux:
if you "don't get it"... then click the DQ button. If they asked me to justify it, I would. |
Your audience is the ultimate judge on such matters. If you have to justify it, then obviously it DNMC for at least some of the voters.
Entries that clearly don't fit the topic tend to be brown ribbon attempts, newbies who will quickly learn, or shots accidentally entered into the wrong challenge (I'm speaking from experience there). None of the three are attampts to break the rules, so there's no reason for oversight IMO. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 09:10:42 PM · #420 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dallasdux:
if you "don't get it"... then click the DQ button. If they asked me to justify it, I would. |
Your audience is the ultimate judge on such matters. If you have to justify it, then obviously it DNMC for at least some of the voters.
Entries that clearly don't fit the topic tend to be brown ribbon attempts, newbies who will quickly learn, or shots accidentally entered into the wrong challenge (I'm speaking from experience there). None of the three are attampts to break the rules, so there's no reason for oversight IMO. |
I agree with you. MOST fall to the bottom. It is those few that don't that is frustrating IMO. But as you state, it is up to the voters in leiu of any review board.
I appreciate the prompt and honest feedback btw.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 09:23:17 PM · #421 |
Just how I subjectively see it, no hard feelings. :-)
ETA: I was referring to hammering the images in a challenge not the SC.
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 21:30:48.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 09:46:18 PM · #422 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Just how I subjectively see it, no hard feelings. :-)
ETA: I was referring to hammering the images in a challenge not the SC. |
No problem, No hard feelings taken :)
Yes, I have been guilty of that which I am trying to get better and make sure I don't take my own images getting hammered too personally. I am quite a novice and am just trying to get pointers on what to do better. First challenge jaded me a little and I've had to put that aside and grow that famed DPC thick skin. Hopefully that avg score given will get better. There are a lot of good ones out there. So long as the Meet they challenge, they're safe ;) (lol)
It's tough having 5 comments on an image, all positive and then the image barely gets a 5 (average). Obviously there was room for improvement.
Thanks for the clarification.
PS: sorry if my reply came back as hostile. Was a little heated when I wrote it, but did not mean any ill will. :-)
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 21:49:14.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 09:57:52 PM · #423 |
Cool!
*Gives dallasdux a virtual handshake*
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 10:36:04 PM · #424 |
My suggestion is the simplist of them all.
It is so simple, it belies sanity, and sits on the envelope of obvious.
My suggestion could only be poetic, practicle, and poinient.
What say me is the greatest suggestion of all for DPC? Yes, you did ask this didn't you most worthy member.
My suggestion, which I am not an originator of, but simply a wanting user of is this....
....a cup holder.
Something so simple in producing, yet an everyday item we members could use when bitching about something on some thread, or uploading an image.
A place for our cold drinks, hard drinks, and hot drinks. A place for our bottles of pints, cups of tea, and the mocha cappacino double shot no whip vente.
A cup holder is what I suggest, and will hold my breath until I get one.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 11:48:31 PM · #425 |
Originally posted by American_Horse:
A cup holder is what I suggest, and will hold my breath until I get one.
Thanks in advance. |
Just use that plastic tray which extends out of and retracts into your computer ... |
|
