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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> Abstract Macro II Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 123, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/10/2006 11:18:59 AM · #26
Originally posted by Pano:
IMHO a monitor is a subject to photograph specially in Abstract macro as it is showing the monitor and not the imaged displayed


Most of the SC probably agrees with you, which is one of the reasons we're discussing the rule. However, we've DQ'd similar images before and we tend to get yelled at for inconsistency, y'know? ;-)

10/10/2006 11:32:58 AM · #27
Originally posted by Falc:
I have to say I don't agree with the SC decision in these cases. The artwork is not represented in total and therefore has at least some of the photographers 'interpretation' associated with it.


There's nothing in the rules about showing ALL of the artwork, and cropping alone isn't a photographic interpretation IMO. You can do that with a print and a pair of scissors. My own interpretation of the current rule is whether we're looking at a straight reproduction of an existing image without any new photographic contribution (interesting lighting or shadows, DOF, added elements, etc.). If it looks like an already-2D image simply reproduced with a flatbed scanner, then there's not much actual photography involved and it runs afoul of the rule (post-processing doesn't count). That doesn't mean that I like the rule or even agree with it, but that's how I believe it's been interpreted in the past. The rule will likely be revised to deal with these issues in the future.
 10/10/2006 11:35:25 AM · #28
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Pano:
IMHO a monitor is a subject to photograph specially in Abstract macro as it is showing the monitor and not the imaged displayed


Most of the SC probably agrees with you, which is one of the reasons we're discussing the rule. However, we've DQ'd similar images before and we tend to get yelled at for inconsistency, y'know? ;-)



Yah, but these ARE quite literal; the impact is largely generated from WHAT is displayed on the monitor screen. The image under discussion here is more properly viewed as an image OF the monitor, its matrix, as opposed to an image of WHAT the monitor is displaying. Let me put it this way: if I wanted to take a photograph OF the matrix in a television monitor, how the heck else am I gonna do it than by having that monitor display some image?

R.
 10/10/2006 11:42:48 AM · #29
ok....how is this


different to these:

example 1
example 2
example 3

which are all valid in the tutorial here?

IMHO I don't believe it should be DQ.

edit to change large images for links

Message edited by author 2006-10-10 11:44:18.
 10/10/2006 11:47:35 AM · #30
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Falc:
I have to say I don't agree with the SC decision in these cases. The artwork is not represented in total and therefore has at least some of the photographers 'interpretation' associated with it.


There's nothing in the rules about showing ALL of the artwork, and cropping alone isn't a photographic interpretation IMO. You can do that with a print and a pair of scissors. My own interpretation of the current rule is whether we're looking at a straight reproduction of an existing image without any new photographic contribution (interesting lighting or shadows, DOF, added elements, etc.). If it looks like an already-2D image simply reproduced with a flatbed scanner, then there's not much actual photography involved and it runs afoul of the rule (post-processing doesn't count). That doesn't mean that I like the rule or even agree with it, but that's how I believe it's been interpreted in the past. The rule will likely be revised to deal with these issues in the future.


By using a macro lens to narrow the field of view the photograher has of course made a decision about which area to select. That is his/her selection and therefore his/her new photographic contribution.

I don't like the wording of the rule either, but this SC interpretation feels a little harsh to me.
 10/10/2006 11:51:40 AM · #31
Originally posted by Falc:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Falc:
I have to say I don't agree with the SC decision in these cases. The artwork is not represented in total and therefore has at least some of the photographers 'interpretation' associated with it.


There's nothing in the rules about showing ALL of the artwork, and cropping alone isn't a photographic interpretation IMO. You can do that with a print and a pair of scissors. My own interpretation of the current rule is whether we're looking at a straight reproduction of an existing image without any new photographic contribution (interesting lighting or shadows, DOF, added elements, etc.). If it looks like an already-2D image simply reproduced with a flatbed scanner, then there's not much actual photography involved and it runs afoul of the rule (post-processing doesn't count). That doesn't mean that I like the rule or even agree with it, but that's how I believe it's been interpreted in the past. The rule will likely be revised to deal with these issues in the future.


By using a macro lens to narrow the field of view the photograher has of course made a decision about which area to select. That is his/her selection and therefore his/her new photographic contribution.

I don't like the wording of the rule either, but this SC interpretation feels a little harsh to me.


It's a bit harsh to say that SC's interpretation is a little harsh :)

We argued about it endlessly, still are arguing about it. But, as Shannon pointed out, it's good to be consistent, and these kinds of images have been disqualified in the past so it sort of makes sense to DQ them now, regardless of how individual SC member might feel about it. It's good to be consistent within the rules we have now.
 10/10/2006 01:11:04 PM · #32
How is a DQ reached? Simple majority? Just curious. I would hope it would have to be at least a super majority, if not unanimous to DQ an image and that ANY benefit of doubt is given. I think the voters handle the literal art rule better than the SC in most cases - I only see the need to DQ an image if it is clear that the voters did not realize the entry was a literal image of an image.

just my 2 cents - seems silly to go through all this stuff over the bottom 10 or 20% of the challenge results.
 10/10/2006 01:38:39 PM · #33
Okay, so gets DQ'd for a literal interpretation...

What about mine?

Different, yes... but both are pictures of our monitors. (am I volunteering for DQ? Sure, why not...) :-)

10/10/2006 01:42:17 PM · #34
Originally posted by dwterry:
What about mine?


You shot a blank gray screen, so there was no artwork to reproduce.
 10/10/2006 01:48:34 PM · #35
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
I would hope it would have to be at least a super majority, if not unanimous to DQ an image and that ANY benefit of doubt is given.


Close votes are discussed in SC forum posts for days. We try to rationalize and reach a consensus, but questionable calls rarely become unanimous. We try more rationalization, posting examples, bribery, shouting, name calling, threatening to quit, etc. If the vote is still a tie (or very close), we'll either leave it unresolved or go by precedent and vow to fix it for next time with a rules revision.
 10/10/2006 01:53:57 PM · #36
Scalvert, not to stir up more trouble, but you said he shot a blank gray screen so it was legal. Can you tell me what dwterry took a picture of? Which tv show? Which commercial? I feel that he made a photographic decision by not taking a literal picture of the image on the screen, but instead took a picture of the minute workings of the screen.

I agree with all of the other complainers that this is definitlely too harsh and too strict of a rule that I don't feel covers this.
 10/10/2006 02:02:09 PM · #37
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dwterry:
What about mine?


You shot a blank gray screen, so there was no artwork to reproduce.


Oh wait, I have seen single color painted canvases being displayed as art...lol

Message edited by author 2006-10-10 14:03:51.
 10/10/2006 02:03:26 PM · #38
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
I would hope it would have to be at least a super majority, if not unanimous to DQ an image and that ANY benefit of doubt is given.


Close votes are discussed in SC forum posts for days. We try to rationalize and reach a consensus, but questionable calls rarely become unanimous. We try more rationalization, posting examples, bribery, shouting, name calling, threatening to quit, etc. If the vote is still a tie (or very close), we'll either leave it unresolved or go by precedent and vow to fix it for next time with a rules revision.


Sending chocolate always works for me, but Shannon keeps refusing to do so.
 10/10/2006 02:05:14 PM · #39
I think the philosophy should be to let the voters decide whenever possible. If the voters think the photographers are shooting the artwork too "literally," then vote low. I certainly do on most sculpture shots. If there is a deceptive element to the artwork, like a photo of a photo, than the artwork should be displayed with the photo so the voter can be decide. Yes, that would be tough to implement... maybe have an additional comments box and it would be the photographer's responsibility. DQs would be given to photographers who do not provide this information.
 10/10/2006 02:09:30 PM · #40
Originally posted by butch81385:
Can you tell me what dwterry took a picture of?


Sure, he took a picture of a blank gray screen. ;-)

Assuming you meant the other guy, he clearly took a photo of an image on the screen. If the entire screen was shown, there would be no discussion. At what point should the crop be considered legal or illegal?
 10/10/2006 02:09:45 PM · #41
On the "photo of a photo" subject:

Does it matter equally when you see that it is a photo
(example:)
or when it is not so obvious?
(example:

Or, is your remark limited to a photo of a photo without additional elements added to the photo?

Edit: silly forum codes

Message edited by author 2006-10-10 14:10:14.
 10/10/2006 02:13:46 PM · #42
Originally posted by srdanz:
is your remark limited to a photo of a photo without additional elements added to the photo?


My point was to dispute the generalization that the background artwork is doing all the work, while the added elements are insignificant. The background artwork alone on Arabian Flights wouldn't have mustered a 4 in that challenge.
 10/10/2006 02:18:45 PM · #43
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by srdanz:
is your remark limited to a photo of a photo without additional elements added to the photo?


My point was to dispute the generalization that the background artwork is doing all the work, while the added elements are insignificant. The background artwork alone on Arabian Flights wouldn't have mustered a 4 in that challenge.


Shannon, please don't get too excited - I voted arabian nights 10 :-)

I was referring to posthumous' remark but you injected your post in between so it looked like it is a comment directed to you.
 10/10/2006 02:54:01 PM · #44
Any time a photo is used as a "major element" it should be included and credited.

My true ideal would be to abandon all editing rules, and have the photographer provide an out-of-the-camera version and credit any other artworks he is using. If the voters decide he has done too much editing, they can condemn him/her with their votes. If a photographer takes a picture of his own photograph or uses it in another layer, or even uses his own painting, that doesn't have to be reported. Just tell us when you are using someone else's work.
 10/10/2006 02:56:15 PM · #45
Originally posted by posthumous:
Any time a photo is used as a "major element" it should be included and credited.

My true ideal would be to abandon all editing rules, and have the photographer provide an out-of-the-camera version and credit any other artworks he is using. If the voters decide he has done too much editing, they can condemn him/her with their votes. If a photographer takes a picture of his own photograph or uses it in another layer, or even uses his own painting, that doesn't have to be reported. Just tell us when you are using someone else's work.


I'm in dire need of sleep right now, so the answer to my question may be obvious, but how would we do this during voting?
 10/10/2006 03:04:03 PM · #46
Originally posted by posthumous:
If a photographer takes a picture of his own photograph or uses it in another layer, or even uses his own painting, that doesn't have to be reported.


Why bother having challenge dates or editng rules then? I could just shoot a print of one of my own photos from any time or a sceeen shot edited any way I like and just enter that.
 10/10/2006 03:08:57 PM · #47
Originally posted by karmat:
I'm in dire need of sleep right now, so the answer to my question may be obvious, but how would we do this during voting?


the photographer has to provide this information with his challenge entry, or risk being dq'd. DQing would only be for not providing information.

Originally posted by scalvert:
I could just shoot a print of one of my own photos from any time or a sceeen shot edited any way I like and just enter that.


Good point. Okay, you have to provide separately any of your own photos as well. I realize this is cumbersome, but only for photographers who want to do this.


10/10/2006 03:19:37 PM · #48
Originally posted by posthumous:
... My true ideal would be to abandon all editing rules, and have the photographer provide an out-of-the-camera version and credit any other artworks he is using. If the voters decide he has done too much editing, they can condemn him/her with their votes. If a photographer takes a picture of his own photograph or uses it in another layer, or even uses his own painting, that doesn't have to be reported. Just tell us when you are using someone else's work.

Might as well sign up over here (Worth1000.com) then...no need for DPC if we go down the path you've laid out.

We've had similar discussions to this in the past in the forums. I, for one, like having some rules in place to keep this primarily a photography based site rather than a photoshop one.
 10/10/2006 03:29:04 PM · #49
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by karmat:
I'm in dire need of sleep right now, so the answer to my question may be obvious, but how would we do this during voting?


the photographer has to provide this information with his challenge entry, or risk being dq'd. DQing would only be for not providing information.



I think what is confusing me is would the voters see this? And if so, wouldn't it then be more judging the processing rather than the end result? Or would everyone provide an original and final for voting?
 10/10/2006 03:42:45 PM · #50
*toasts* Site Council...

Cheers to you all, it's not easy dealing with all of us hemmorroids.

;)

From what I can tell, there are some subtle differences. In my own composition I staged it to capture a moire pattern. Furthermore, mine was not a straight on composition but rather a taken from an angle so as to alter the perception of the object entailed.

Gives some insight into the decision. And these are probably some of the toughest ones you in the SC must deal with. (ie: had the coke can macro been done with a fish-eye, would that be literal representation. I would think no...personally.)

So does a mere front on magnification of a literal subject constitute art, (or rather a valid entry). It's a tough call. I never thought "White on White" was a valid piece of art. But I am sure some schmo paid good money for it.

And I understand the attempt at consistency. I think it's hard for some when the approach is very similar and the outcome goes two different directions. It's likely, the difference is merely that one photograph never had a DQ request where as another did. Therefore one gets judged by the SC and deemed borderline and slightly over the edge where as the other is not reviewed.

I haggled and expressed my opinions. But I just wanted to chime in to say that I also really really support you guys in the SC. (I'm a DPC patriot, that means I may be vocal and point out things I feel amiss about. But I am 100% supportive of the overall and believe the intentions are well directed regardless of the outcomes.)

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/30/2025 06:01:38 AM

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: 07/30/2025 06:01:38 AM EDT.