| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/31/2006 08:28:43 PM · #76 |
| here's a valid question - can you do a 2nd take on a triptych entry? That requires multiple photos, which is not specifically mentioned in the challenge details. |
|
|
|
05/31/2006 08:46:42 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by Nobody:
here's a valid question - can you do a 2nd take on a triptych entry? That requires multiple photos, which is not specifically mentioned in the challenge details. |
that challenge has extra rules. Since this challenge doesn't have those extra rules, you can't IMO |
|
|
|
05/31/2006 08:57:58 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:
I have a couple of ideas from earlier challenges but have been challenged to redo a shot where there are no comments suggesting improvement. I know I can improve the image but would this be dq'd after the challenge? |
IMO such an image would not be DQed. DNMC has never been cause for disqualification, I see no reason why it would become a reason to DQ now.
The extra rules for the challenge tell you to reshoot one of your own images, but there is nothing in the rules about comments. The part about improving the image based on comments is in the challenge description.
|
|
|
|
05/31/2006 08:59:27 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by Nobody:
here's a valid question - can you do a 2nd take on a triptych entry? That requires multiple photos, which is not specifically mentioned in the challenge details. |
As it is you can't reshoot the triptych entry. You need to pick one of your other entries (one picture only). |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 03:43:44 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by hopper:
it's gonna be a long week discussing this one :) |
...so... do you think people will punish entries that identify the original photo? I'm not sure about the best way to proceed. If the original isn't referenced, how can the voter decide if the comments were used to improve the new one? Or should the voters even consider that? hmm. help? |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 03:54:11 PM · #81 |
Nova, I don't think voters are motivated enough to search for a photo anyway. So, it probably doesn't matter one way or the other.
I do think that some might punish entries that are popular around this site. For instance, I don't think DrJones could get away with doing a reshoot of his big softbox incident (well, maybe HE could... LOL).
I know I won't be searching out original photos while voting.
|
|
|
|
06/01/2006 03:58:23 PM · #82 |
I think the photo should be judged on its merits not the original. someone may have hated the original but could love the new one, thier vote may be swayed, or by knowing the photographer. of course this may not be able to be helped but should be minimized. I would say that you may need to mention the original challenge on some photos.
This for example when not in the context of the original challenge looks like I murdered my wife and photographed it. I would say that if it can stand on its own then you should let it. there are many differing opinons so you won't be able to please everyone so I wouldn't worry too much about trying.
Message edited by author 2006-06-01 15:59:33. |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 04:05:09 PM · #83 |
I'm guessing that only those will a ton of time will try to find/view the originals. And perhaps the SC will verify that the winners were actually retakes.
So what does that leave us? Most voters will probably vote on the picture based on what it currently is. I also suspect that there will be a lot of really good entries and high scores. I'm just hoping that mine is one of them!
|
|
|
|
06/01/2006 04:52:18 PM · #84 |
Well, I just submitted mine- no ribbon winner but a vast improvement on the original version so I am very satisfied. :0)
I will not be going thru old challenge entries unless I think I recognize something which is highly unlikely. Still not sure how to title it tho. |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 04:57:56 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by ursula:
As it is you can't reshoot the triptych entry. You need to pick one of your other entries (one picture only). |
that's not entirely true... several of the triptych photos were single photos to begin with.
and in the case of ones like mine, you could always fake it by setting it up as one photo...
|
|
|
|
06/01/2006 05:01:31 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by oOWonderBreadOo:
Still not sure how to title it tho. |
I think any title you want to give it will work. You might go with the original title or you might think that another title would be an improvement.
|
|
|
|
06/01/2006 06:23:08 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by oOWonderBreadOo:
Still not sure how to title it tho. |
I think any title you want to give it will work. You might go with the original title or you might think that another title would be an improvement. |
the same title wouldn't really work with my Take two I think :)
|
|
|
|
06/01/2006 08:37:50 PM · #88 |
Let's say that I want to redo my candid. Do I have to have the same kind of shot? My original was two people splashing in a lake. Does my "take two" have to mimic the first one or just be a candid...
...I know it won't be DQd but I don't want to stomach the DNMC peeps.
Thanks,
Kenskid |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 08:46:11 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by kudzu:
Originally posted by ursula:
As it is you can't reshoot the triptych entry. You need to pick one of your other entries (one picture only). |
that's not entirely true... several of the triptych photos were single photos to begin with.
and in the case of ones like mine, you could always fake it by setting it up as one photo...
|
I guess you could (set it up like it is a triptych, yet it isn't). The point is though that your submission for "Take 2" has to come from one image.
I think that there are always loopholes and exceptions, but in my opinon at least it doesn't usually help much to concentrate on those, or to try to figure out how to get around stuff. Oh well. I guess I'm not helping much here.
|
|
|
|
06/01/2006 08:48:52 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Let's say that I want to redo my candid. Do I have to have the same kind of shot? My original was two people splashing in a lake. Does my "take two" have to mimic the first one or just be a candid...
...I know it won't be DQd but I don't want to stomach the DNMC peeps.
Thanks,
Kenskid |
IMO, it has to at least somewhat mimic your original. I mean, it has to have some sort of a connection to the original besides just the general categorisation. It is supposed to be a "retake", not just another image in the same general category.
Hope that helps. |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 08:50:49 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Originally posted by oOWonderBreadOo:
Still not sure how to title it tho. |
I think any title you want to give it will work. You might go with the original title or you might think that another title would be an improvement. |
I agree. You can use the same title or use a different one - it's up to you. Go with what works best for your image. |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 11:34:27 PM · #92 |
Just a thought, and not one to easily implement, but it would be nice if some sort of "Special" award - like the April Fools' award a year ago - was given to anyone who improves their score on their Take Two entry by a full point.
This would reward those who truly try to improve upon defects in their first attempt rather than marginally improve one that almost ribboned.
It would be a pain to implement though...
Just a thought from a Nobody. |
|
|
|
06/01/2006 11:36:04 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by Nobody:
Just a thought, and not one to easily implement, but it would be nice if some sort of "Special" award - like the April Fools' award a year ago - was given to anyone who improves their score on their Take Two entry by a full point.
This would reward those who truly try to improve upon defects in their first attempt rather than marginally improve one that almost ribboned.
It would be a pain to implement though...
Just a thought from a Nobody. |
Pretty good idea, Nobody :) |
|
|
|
06/02/2006 09:03:48 AM · #94 |
I think I have chosen the one I want to do. My question is, though I will stick with the general main subject and the main element will remain unchanged, I want to replace a secondary element with another one that might work better, and I also want to add an element that didn't exist in the original. Would this be considered a reshoot, or a totally different image? I mean, the image did poorly as it existed, so it would seem that you would have to make some changes if you want to redo it, otherwise it wouldn't have done so badly.
Message edited by author 2006-06-02 09:14:06. |
|
|
|
06/05/2006 03:24:20 PM · #95 |
Does the new image have to use the confines of the original's topic and description for that challenge?
|
|
|
|
06/05/2006 04:37:46 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by blemt:
You can see the original. Mind you, that means digging through 500+ challenges. ;) |
I am entering this one and wonder if it would be ok to include the image # of the original in the title of the reshoot? Do you think that would be frowned on by voters? I'm agreeing with scalvert (I think) who said that anonymity is out the window on this challenge anyway. Seems to me it would be easier to vote if you can see what the submitter is trying to improve upon. What do ya'll think? |
|
|
|
06/05/2006 05:37:04 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by nova:
Originally posted by blemt:
You can see the original. Mind you, that means digging through 500+ challenges. ;) |
I am entering this one and wonder if it would be ok to include the image # of the original in the title of the reshoot? Do you think that would be frowned on by voters? I'm agreeing with scalvert (I think) who said that anonymity is out the window on this challenge anyway. Seems to me it would be easier to vote if you can see what the submitter is trying to improve upon. What do ya'll think? |
If everyone put the image number up there it would work, but I've decided against it. My new shot is slightly different, even though I made some changes suggested by the comments. I'm not using the image number because I'm not going to make all changes made by commenters. I really don't want to get DNMC comments.
Now I just hope that I don't score lower than my original! |
|
|
|
06/05/2006 05:45:47 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by mad_brewer:
Now I just hope that I don't score lower than my original! |
I second that! Good luck. |
|
|
|
06/05/2006 10:33:45 PM · #99 |
Just put my entry in. I am pretty jazzed about this challenge. I suppose most entrants will choose one of their photos that did well originally, and then they will reshoot it and improve it. I am expecting essentially a free study with higher than normal number of exceptional photos. Probably take an 8+ average vote to win the blue. I'm prepared for some glorious eye candy. Can't wait to see them!
Good luck all.
Message edited by author 2006-06-05 22:35:28. |
|
|
|
06/05/2006 10:37:54 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by Digital Quixote:
Just put my entry in. I am pretty jazzed about this challenge. I suppose most entrants will choose one of their photos that did well originally, and then they will reshoot it and improve it. I am expecting essentially a free study with higher than normal number of exceptional photos. Probably take an 8+ average vote to win the blue. I'm prepared for some glorious eye candy. Can't wait to see them!
Good luck all. |
I guess I didnt go with the expected then. I chose to reshoot an image that wasn't even in my personal top 20. I really like the reshoot much better than the original and hope the voters like it too. Either way - the reshoot is one that I will enjoy hanging on my wall now. |
|
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: 08/06/2025 11:39:52 PM EDT.
