First I Got DQ'ed from a ribbon, Now What?

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

06/18/2006 02:36:55 PM · #26

man, if I were you Hera, I would just be so stoked and excited that you won a ribbon on one of your first few entries. That shows that your photography must be pretty good and happens to match up with the majority of DPC voters' favorite type. Most newbies come on here complaining that their picture bombed and they have no idea why because they sell their photography everywhere else...

I think that if you want to make friends and learn and possibly grow here on this site, then please take this with a grain of salt, chin up, dust yourself off and enter your next shot so you can whoop (spelling?) all our butts again, lol

and I know that you are posting *smiles* all over the place and I understand how frustrated you must be, but I just wanted to assert that your tone still sounds a little harsh, and I also wanted to point out that it is much more frustrating for photographers on here that try and try and have really awesome portfolios (which is not me), but can never seem to win the DPC crowd.... so keep in mind whose toes you might step on

If you were looking for opinions on your photography, seems to me that you got 64 comments on your photo. And I don't think that you are anonymous anymore, lol, thank whoever that the voting is *smiles*

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

06/18/2006 02:39:57 PM · #27

Originally posted by Photopromo:

I never said I was above the RULES because I work as a photographer. You have a wonderful sense of humour ursula to make a point. (smiles)

Cheers,

Hera

Thank you. I'm glad you're able to appreciate it. (smiles)

HBunch

HP PhotoSmart 315

06/18/2006 02:40:10 PM · #28

For the record, you had submitted a file as proof on the 7th (the day proof was requested) upon review of that 'original' it was found that that was not an actual original. We (the SC) re requested proof to offer another chance at an original (since none of us likes DQing shots for not receiving an original), and received another file that was again not an original. (received on the 8th)
The photo was not DQed until the 10th, which actually gave you 3 days to submit the actual original. (or at least a note saying you were unable to submit an original)
As stated previously, you checked a button in order to submit that says that you can supply an original if asked within 48 hours. We assume that you weren't fibbing when you checked this, so we gave you the benefit of the doubt and even extended your time by 24 hours before DQing.
I'm a little confused though, In a ticket you sent us after you were DQed, you said you would be back on the 19th, yet here you said your vacation was only 7 days, which means you left on the 12th? 2 days after the DQ? Which is it?

Also, when you sent in the 2 (non original) originals on the 7th and 8th, did you not see the bright red line that says "Important: If you cannot submit proof immediately for any reason, please Contact Us. Failure to do so may result in disqualification. "
So far, we have 2 very obvious sections of the site reveling the importance of submitting an original when asked. 3 if you read the rules.

I get a little irritated when a photo is DQed and people make it out to be OUR fault. Especially when we went out of our way to try to get the original, to try to AVOID DQ.

On the image you state "If this is the DP ways & rules, please credit me back for my $25.00 membership fee."

The check box you marked when you submitted your photos for the challenges says that you read the rules, so this shouldn't have been a surprise at all.
If you expect a refund, you must not have read the TOS that you checked the box for stating that you read when you signed up either. Cause that's all covered there as well.

Yup, it's all our fault. Stupid Site Council. We are truely horrible people who do not care about people or their images at all.

Yes, I'm a little offended. Yes, I lost my patience. Yes, I truely apologize if I seem offended and irritated, but I am sick and tired of being treated like we are bad people expecially when we go out of our way to try to validate your images.

This is the reason that I've been considering joining MK. I need a new outfit anyway. If this doesn't push me over the edge...I swear if one more person bitches about SC or the way we handle things, I'm done.

P.S. Don't think I'm the ONLY SC that feels this way, I'm just at the end of my rope and simply don't care about publicly stating it. What are they gonna do? Fire me? Might be a blessing in disguise at this point. What ever happened to the 'Hey SC, thanks for all you do' threads?

06/18/2006 02:42:40 PM · #29

It's cool and breezy on my side, come on over. :)

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

06/18/2006 02:52:25 PM · #30

Originally posted by theSaj:

4) It seems at odds to DQ a 'ribbon' photo for no cause. 48 hours does nto seem an adequate time.

The 48 hour rule isn't just there to expedite the process. If we waited 4 days instead of two and had to DQ the shot anyway, then the next person wouldn't have much time to enjoy the spotlight- and that's not fair to those who DO abide by the rules!

In this case, though, the photographer has still not provided the requested original for ANY of her entries regardless of the amount of time allowed. Every "original" submitted has been modified rather than straight from the camera. She also seems surprised at requirements that are clearly stated in the rules (which you must acknowledge in order to submit). If you don't read and understand the rules for a competition, you're simply not going to have a good experience.

Riponlady

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35

06/18/2006 02:52:42 PM · #31

Well said, Hbunch! I am quite happy to say a big thank you for all the SC for giving up their own time to help make this site useful and interesting. Without the rules that they implement to the best of their ability, we would have no honest challenges and a hell of a lot of arguments and angst!

P

alfresco

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

06/18/2006 02:54:59 PM · #32

Originally posted by mk:

It's cool and breezy on my side, come on over. :)

The siren sings her song ... :)

What I would hate to have happen is a whole new crop of sc come in and we start to see a bend here, a bend there ... I for one think SC does a fabulous job in their VOLUNTEER role.

Rules are rules, this is one of the few places left where that actually means something and is enforced. Hear hear to the job being done.

Photopromo

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 28-105mm f/4-5.6

06/18/2006 02:55:06 PM · #33

I did send twice the original proof that I was asked twice in 2 seperate automated e-mails from the site before I left to New York. No one told me in any shape or way that the original shot's file name should stay as is when you e-mail proofs. Without knowing that the proof had to be under its original file name given by the camera, and not my given file name.

Then I was left for New York. I said it in my image's comment box. I felt helpess not to be able explain my end. In New York few days later when I got an e-mail from Ursula, I tried to answer her and explain my situiation, that e-mail bounced back from my mail box. I took that e-mail and uploaded my answer to her to start a communication and explain my end of the story.

I could not be on the Internet every day during my trip. The next day after I got Ursula's e-mail I got another e-mail from DP telling me that it got DQ'ed.

I respect your rules. I am not there to debate them. You don't need to justify why they are there. I hope that you don't feel attacked personally as a consul as much as I don't think that this entire issue was a personal attack to me.

I hope that everyone continues to have fun shooting and competing.

Cheers,

Hera

PS: I type bad, English isn't my first language. Sorry.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 28-105mm f/4-5.6

06/18/2006 02:55:33 PM · #34

Originally posted by mk:

It's cool and breezy on my side, come on over. :)

*scalvert kicks mk...*

Message edited by author 2006-06-18 14:55:44.

Photopromo

Canon EOS-10D

06/18/2006 02:57:45 PM · #35

I left Montreal the 9th and returned Saturday late 17th.

theSaj

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

06/18/2006 03:02:47 PM · #36

Originally posted by ursula:

@theSaj, what do you propose as an different rule to validate that the images are taken within the allowed dates?

I posted in a seperate thread not to derail any specific discussion on this particular issue here.

Message edited by author 2006-06-18 15:02:55.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

06/18/2006 03:03:13 PM · #37

Originally posted by Photopromo:

Hera, I'm glad you're not taking this personal. English isn't my first language either. I did feel personally attacked, but I'm getting over it.

Just for clarification, it's not the file NAME as assigned by the camera that makes a file an original. The name can be different than the name assigned by the camera, but the file has to be as it was when it came out of the camera (or from the memory card to your computer). For example, if you take a RAW file and convert it to a JPG and resize it, then it's not an original anymore, even though it looks just like the original. The original would be the RAW file.

At one point you wondered why we would need a RAW file. It is simply to check the dates. We are not after your files per se, what we wanted was the shooting data contained within the file.

I really hope this helps.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6D ED

06/18/2006 03:04:24 PM · #38

Originally posted by Photopromo:

No one told me in any shape or way that the original shot's file name should stay as is when you e-mail proofs.

Um... that would be those pesky rules again:

Originally posted by Rules:

If the validity of your submitted photograph comes into question, you may be asked to submit your original, unmodified photograph and steps to recreate your submitted photograph from your original photograph. This original photograph must contain valid, unaltered EXIF data.

Changing your file name wasn't the problem (that doesn't alter the EXIF data). Submitting a JPEG processed from a RAW file instead of the UNMODIFIED RAW file itself is the problem.

HBunch

HP PhotoSmart 315

06/18/2006 03:04:37 PM · #39

Originally posted by Photopromo:

May I direct you toward this tutorial in the LEARN section of DPC...
Preparing your Images for DPC

inspir8tion

Nikon D90

06/18/2006 03:37:49 PM · #40

I just wanted to say thank you to the SC for all your efforts. I have had to send my original photographs in before to validate my entries and I had no problem doing that.

Rules are in place so that everyone is dealt with fairly.

No one is above the rules, especially people who do not even bother to read them. I appreciate that about this site.

I am not even SC and am ticked off by Hera. It is hard to believe she is a professional as she states. Just like it is hard to believe that she would check off that she understood the rules (when joining and with each entry) and then turn around and complain that she is bound by those rules! It is outrageous.

kyebosh

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

06/18/2006 03:58:50 PM · #41

"Now what?"

Try to win another one.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

06/18/2006 04:11:30 PM · #42

Originally posted by kirbic:

If you're going away on vacation or business, you've got three good options:

- Take original files with you for any current entries
- Submit a ticket under Help/Contact and attach the original for your entry
- If your departure is after the start of voting, request validation on your image. You can attach the proof file at that point.

It's likely that none of these options were apparent to you, since you are new. If you have questions, though, a post here in the furums will usually get you more answers than you bargained for!

Why should it take a DQ or even a post in the forums to make these options apparent to a newcomer?

klstover

Panasonic DMC-FZ8

06/18/2006 04:13:19 PM · #43

Maybe people treat the rules like the legalese you get with software? (i.e. skip right over it)

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

06/18/2006 04:14:18 PM · #44

Originally posted by klstover:

Maybe people treat the rules like the legalese you get with software? (i.e. skip right over it)

I strongly suspect that is the case a lot of the time (don't know about here,e xactly).

no__1__here

06/18/2006 06:26:21 PM · #45

All I can say is this: you are responsible for your own actions. Too many today want to blame anyone and everyone but themselves for everything possible. You did not follow the rules. PERIOD. There is no discussion for that. The rules are posted for all to see. I am new here as well. I, however, actually read the rules, lurked in the forums for about a week, etc. before entering a contest.

Please don't take this (too) personally, but this is a perfect example of what's wrong with the world today. Blaming the SC is pointless and for me shows a total lack of respect and personal accountability.

That said... I loved the photo. ;)

Artifacts

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

06/18/2006 07:06:32 PM · #46

Rules???

What rules? This place has rules? Who started that? Why wasn't I informed?

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

06/18/2006 07:16:38 PM · #47

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Why should it take a DQ or even a post in the forums to make these options apparent to a newcomer?

It doesn't -- it's in the rules that people "swear" they've read when they submit. I don't care if people want to skip over the "fine print" but they have to accept the consquences of such actions when they do.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

06/18/2006 08:13:26 PM · #48

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Why should it take a DQ or even a post in the forums to make these options apparent to a newcomer?

It doesn't -- it's in the rules that people "swear" they've read when they submit. I don't care if people want to skip over the "fine print" but they have to accept the consquences of such actions when they do.

I understand the rules and have no quarrel with DQ'ing people who fail to provide an original. My point is that none of the options for what to do if someone will be temporarily unable to submit their original file are evident anywhere in the rules. They may be somehow implied, but it's far from clear.

I suggest that some small blurb be added to the rules about pre-submitting the original should the entrant will be unable to do so in the event there is a need to verify the entry.

amandalore

Canon EOS-40D