| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/17/2006 02:23:36 AM · #1 |
I've only been on this site for a short time, but I'm already completely hooked!
I'm leaving next week for a 2 month long backpacking trip through Southeast Asia. I will be taking thousands of photos, but I will not bring a laptop. Therefore, I will only have internet access at cafe's, and no access to photoshop. (I have a hard drive/memory card reader with 20gigs of space)
I would really like to enter challenges while I am traveling. Would it be okay for me to email original files to my friend, and have him do very basic editing and submit them to DPC under my name? What are the official rules concerning this? Would anyone be upset with this? |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 02:26:09 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by shaggy35:
I would really like to enter challenges while I am traveling. Would it be okay for me to email original files to my friend, and have him do very basic editing and submit them to DPC under my name? What are the official rules concerning this? Would anyone be upset with this? |
I think it's alright, but that's of course, is just my opinion.
The intention of yours is not to cheat, that's a 1st.
And secondly, it's just like having a lab process your shots, isnt it?
Thirdly, if you havent started this thread, who'd know? |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 11:18:33 AM · #3 |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 11:39:07 AM · #4 |
That is not allowed on this site. No one can do your processing for you and you are not allowed to share your account details with anyone.
June
Edit: here is the proof:
Taken from the Registered Users' Agreement:
3.3 When registering as a Registered User, you must choose a unique User Name and Password. You are solely responsible for protecting your User Name and Password with the same degree of care that a reasonable person uses to protect his or her other confidential information. You may not disclose your Password to any third party or share your Password with any third party without the prior written consent of DPChallenge.com. You may not use your User Name or Password for any unauthorized purpose. If there is a breach of confidentiality of your User Name or Password, or any breach of security through your account, you shall promptly notify DPChallenge.com of such breach and provide DPChallenge.com a full and complete description of the circumstances related to such breach.
You agree that DPChallenge.com and other users of the website may, and are entitled to, rely upon and solely attribute to you any action (including any message or posting on the Website) that is undertaken using your User Name or Password or using your computer systems or facilities. Therefore, you are solely liable for any loss or damages, in whatever form, arising from the misuse of your User Name or Password or your computer systems or facilities by any person or entity, whether or not such misuse is due to your fault or negligence. You agree that the provision set forth above (including without limitation the attribution to you of actions taken using your User Name or Password, computer systems or facilities) is commercially reasonable.
Taken from the Editing Rules:
* Ownership: The photograph you enter must be taken and post-processed by you. You may let someone else press the shutter if you are unable to, but you must be the one who set up the shot and configured the camera. If you wish to collaborate with others when creating your submission, you will need express permission from the administrators beforehand.
Message edited by author 2006-05-17 11:41:24.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 11:43:50 AM · #5 |
Here's what the rules say...
Originally posted by Rules:
Ownership: The photograph you enter must be taken and post-processed by you. You may let someone else press the shutter if you are unable to, but you must be the one who set up the shot and configured the camera. If you wish to collaborate with others when creating your submission, you will need express permission from the administrators beforehand. |
There are a few online photo editors, like pxn8.com that you could check out for basic edits. There are also a number of portable apps, like Portable GIMP that take limited amounts of space.
Message edited by author 2006-05-17 11:44:04. |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:24:24 PM · #6 |
Technicaly I guess no, it would be violating the rules. But I say go for it - your intentions are obviously pure.
Plus, you don't have to give your login details to your friend - just log in on their computer beforehand and ask it to "remember" you... so long as cookies aren't disabled that gets you round that bit
Unless of course they're a DPCer too - but c'mon guys, its all inconsequential so long as the intention is pure, editing is minimal, and no one will even know edit to clarify:
I never for the life of me wanted to say "cheatings ok if noone knows", I was meaning to say if the OP hadn't asked, no-one would have known and it would -imho- been inconsequential, for reasons explained in later posts. The fact he asked, at the risk of being told no, and not being able to find a way to enter, has to carry some weight in my books. I realise now that that bit came out wrong. I'm sorry.
Message edited by author 2006-05-17 15:11:42. |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:27:57 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by kirsty_mcn:
Technicaly I guess no, it would be violating the rules. But I say go for it - your intentions are obviously pure.
Plus, you don't have to give your login details to your friend - just log in on their computer beforehand and ask it to "remember" you... so long as cookies aren't disabled that gets you round that bit
Unless of course they're a DPCer too - but c'mon guys, its all inconsequential so long as the intention is pure, editing is minimal, and no one will even know |
Right. As long as no one ever knows that you're violating the rules, it's totally cool. |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:30:50 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by kirsty_mcn:
Technicaly I guess no, it would be violating the rules. But I say go for it - your intentions are obviously pure.
Plus, you don't have to give your login details to your friend - just log in on their computer beforehand and ask it to "remember" you... so long as cookies aren't disabled that gets you round that bit
Unless of course they're a DPCer too - but c'mon guys, its all inconsequential so long as the intention is pure, editing is minimal, and no one will even know |
I have to disagree. If it was all "inconsequential so long as the intentions were pure" then all those people who have been DQed for mistakenly applying illegal processing on a basic challenge thinking it was an advanced challenged deserve to have their DQ revoked, yes? Rules are rules and they are there for a reason. I think this comment you have made is unacceptable. Let's not condone this sort of behaviour.
June
edit: typo
Message edited by author 2006-05-17 12:32:04.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:37:23 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by kirsty_mcn:
Technicaly I guess no, it would be violating the rules. But I say go for it - your intentions are obviously pure.
Plus, you don't have to give your login details to your friend - just log in on their computer beforehand and ask it to "remember" you... so long as cookies aren't disabled that gets you round that bit
Unless of course they're a DPCer too - but c'mon guys, its all inconsequential so long as the intention is pure, editing is minimal, and no one will even know |
Right. As long as no one ever knows that you're violating the rules, it's totally cool. |
Of course I didn't mean it like that. I'm just saying that this guy could have just gone ahead with it without saying anything, and imho nothing bad would have come of it - he's just talking about very minimal editing, photo-lab style, and theres programs out there that would do that for you at the click of a button(auto levels, autocontrast, sharpen for web etc), its just that for a while he won't have access to them. His friend wouldn't be taking any creative control, much like the hypothetical friend that presses the shutter for you in a selfportrait. The fact that this guy has come out and said "is it ok if I do this?" at the risk of people saying No surely holds some weight.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:37:45 PM · #10 |
If I were in his shoes, the way I'd approach it is to contact SC explaining the situation and asking for an exemption from the "processing rule" for my special circumstances. I have no idea if they'd grant one, and I'd expect them to put certain conditions on it if they did, but that would be the way to handle it.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2006-05-17 12:38:20.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:43:19 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Chiqui:
I have to disagree. If it was all "inconsequential so long as the intentions were pure" then all those people who have been DQed for mistakenly applying illegal processing on a basic challenge thinking it was an advanced challenged deserve to have their DQ revoked, yes? Rules are rules and they are there for a reason. I think this comment you have made is unacceptable. Let's not condone this sort of behaviour.
June
edit: typo |
I never said that "cheating is inconsequential so long as the intentions are pure"; I'm talking about a particular context, where I truly believe (and just my humble opinion, by all means disagree) that there would be no difference between the OP clicking autolevels, sharpen for web etc, and the OP uploading the photo than someone else. To me thats no different to someone else clicking the sutter after you set up a shot. The only issue to me would be the account details.
But if my comment was truly that inappropriate it can be removed.
only my £0.02
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:43:27 PM · #12 |
Well since its ethically and technically against the rules, I'd say learn to deal with withdrawal. Honestly if you have entries in the timeframe that you just outlined, after the challenge is over you will almost assured to be ask for the original, and your editing steps, because someone is going to request that it be checked because of what you just stated. All of this is against the rules. Sorry but I think you will have to get used to not entering while your gone. Come back refreshed and ready to get busy.
Message edited by author 2006-05-17 12:45:46.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:45:14 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by kirsty_mcn:
Technicaly I guess no, it would be violating the rules. But I say go for it - your intentions are obviously pure.
Plus, you don't have to give your login details to your friend - just log in on their computer beforehand and ask it to "remember" you... so long as cookies aren't disabled that gets you round that bit
Unless of course they're a DPCer too - but c'mon guys, its all inconsequential so long as the intention is pure, editing is minimal, and no one will even know |
I can go along with that.
I plan to save the world several times over and find a cure for cancer so it's OK for me to cheat on all my college and med school exams and lie on the applications or do anything else really, because my motives are good.
OH PUHLEEZE! |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:45:23 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If I were in his shoes, the way I'd approach it is to contact SC explaining the situation and asking for an exemption from the "processing rule" for my special circumstances. I have no idea if they'd grant one, and I'd expect them to put certain conditions on it if they did, but that would be the way to handle it.
Robt. |
Seems this would be the way to go - its like the whole shared account business, I believe there's some group with special exceptions granted.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:48:51 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by kirsty_mcn:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If I were in his shoes, the way I'd approach it is to contact SC explaining the situation and asking for an exemption from the "processing rule" for my special circumstances. I have no idea if they'd grant one, and I'd expect them to put certain conditions on it if they did, but that would be the way to handle it.
Robt. |
Seems this would be the way to go - its like the whole shared account business, I believe there's some group with special exceptions granted. |
Correct. If SC saw their way to granting a travel exemption, I'd volunteer to auto-level and auto-color his files and enter them for him, for example. I don't think this would represent a problem in the grand scheme of things, IF it were done by an ethical fellow member.
R.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:49:04 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by The Rules:
3.3 When registering as a Registered User, you must choose a unique User Name and Password. You are solely responsible for protecting your User Name and Password with the same degree of care that a reasonable person uses to protect his or her other confidential information. You may not disclose your Password to any third party or share your Password with any third party without the prior written consent of DPChallenge.com. You may not use your User Name or Password for any unauthorized purpose. If there is a breach of confidentiality of your User Name or Password, or any breach of security through your account, you shall promptly notify DPChallenge.com of such breach and provide DPChallenge.com a full and complete description of the circumstances related to such breach.
* Ownership: The photograph you enter must be taken and post-processed by you. You may let someone else press the shutter if you are unable to, but you must be the one who set up the shot and configured the camera. If you wish to collaborate with others when creating your submission, you will need express permission from the administrators beforehand.
|
So all you need is for Langdon to give you his blessing. Right??? |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:51:24 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by kirsty_mcn:
Technicaly I guess no, it would be violating the rules. But I say go for it - your intentions are obviously pure.
Plus, you don't have to give your login details to your friend - just log in on their computer beforehand and ask it to "remember" you... so long as cookies aren't disabled that gets you round that bit
Unless of course they're a DPCer too - but c'mon guys, its all inconsequential so long as the intention is pure, editing is minimal, and no one will even know |
I can go along with that.
I plan to save the world several times over and find a cure for cancer so it's OK for me to cheat on all my college and med school exams and lie on the applications or do anything else really, because my motives are good.
OH PUHLEEZE! |
I've addressed mk's similar comment above, but it looks like I'm way out of line with everyone else. I shall withdraw now, just finally reiterate support for Bear's suggestion again.
Sorry to cause offence, like I said if it was so inappropriate I'm happy to remove my post, but personally I think the subsequent discussion was useful.
Regards
:)
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:52:08 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I plan to save the world several times over and find a cure for cancer so it's OK for me to cheat on all my college and med school exams and lie on the applications or do anything else really, because my motives are good.
OH PUHLEEZE! |
Ding ding ding!
Winner of today's Really Bad Analogy award.
It's like winning the pulitzer. |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:52:44 PM · #19 |
Kirsty,
I think we understand how you meant it now. Don't worry, your good name is intact. It's an interesting discussion.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 12:53:21 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by kirsty_mcn:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If I were in his shoes, the way I'd approach it is to contact SC explaining the situation and asking for an exemption from the "processing rule" for my special circumstances. I have no idea if they'd grant one, and I'd expect them to put certain conditions on it if they did, but that would be the way to handle it.
Robt. |
Seems this would be the way to go - its like the whole shared account business, I believe there's some group with special exceptions granted. |
Correct. If SC saw their way to granting a travel exemption, I'd volunteer to auto-level and auto-color his files and enter them for him, for example. I don't think this would represent a problem in the grand scheme of things, IF it were done by an ethical fellow member.
R. |
pfft damn bear, always keeps cool, helpful AND generous in his responses
gotta love ya man!
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 01:01:54 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by rswank:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I plan to save the world several times over and find a cure for cancer so it's OK for me to cheat on all my college and med school exams and lie on the applications or do anything else really, because my motives are good.
OH PUHLEEZE! |
Ding ding ding!
Winner of today's Really Bad Analogy award.
It's like winning the pulitzer. |
It's taking the concept further, but it's EXACTLY the same thing.
Just because someone's goals are good doesn't justify doing the wrong thing in pursuit of that goal. DUH. |
|
|
|
05/17/2006 01:06:10 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by rswank:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I plan to save the world several times over and find a cure for cancer so it's OK for me to cheat on all my college and med school exams and lie on the applications or do anything else really, because my motives are good.
OH PUHLEEZE! |
Ding ding ding!
Winner of today's Really Bad Analogy award.
It's like winning the pulitzer. |
It's taking the concept further, but it's EXACTLY the same thing.
Just because someone's goals are good doesn't justify doing the wrong thing in pursuit of that goal. DUH. |
His GOAL is to continue submitting images as he backpacks around the world. His APPROACH was to ask if it is allowed to have someone else auto-process and uplaod his images. I don't see anything wrong with either the goal or the question. I'm not in a position to determine, however, if the administrators would be willing to grant an exemption.
If they ARE willing to grant it, then that's cool. Right?
R.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 01:33:21 PM · #23 |
If you call it granting an exemption, or a waiver of the rules, it leaves the door open to all sorts of other requests to be excused from this rule or that one. Why not make a group with another dpc member, or two, and then ask for advance permission to collaborate. There is already a provision in the rules for this. I don't know if your request will be approved. I don't think travelling was the intention when the collaboration provision was put into the rules. I am sympathetic to someone who wants to enter while travelling but am also leary of opening a can of worms, or even a pandora's box, that we might regret later on.
Either way, it won't be the end of the world if you miss some challenges. That's a small sacriface to make in order to really see the world. The concept of backpacking does involve some trade-offs, even if it doesn't mean roughing it the way it used to when guys as old as me did it many moons ago. Even if you can't enter challenges you could still share some shots of your explorations & discoveries with us when you get to one of those internet cafes.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 01:38:22 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If they ARE willing to grant it, then that's cool. Right? |
No. It'd be legal but not cool.
|
|
|
|
05/17/2006 01:39:20 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
If you call it granting an exemption, or a waiver of the rules, it leaves the door open to all sorts of other requests to be excused from this rule or that one. Why not make a group with another dpc member, or two, and then ask for advance permission to collaborate. There is already a provision in the rules for this. I don't know if your request will be approved. I don't think travelling was the intention when the collaboration provision was put into the rules. I am sympathetic to someone who wants to enter while travelling but am also leary of opening a can of worms, or even a pandora's box, that we might regret later on. |
We're in the same camp here. The rule says "do it yourself" and "if you want to collaborate, you need prior permission": I call that "prior permission" an "exemption", which I think is what it is, literally. So I don't see anyc an of worms, since (as you pointed out) it's right there in the rules, there's a procedure to be followed and all.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2006-05-17 13:39:37.
|
|
