| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/11/2006 11:09:26 AM · #101 |
Originally posted by klstover:
It seems like you haven't had a whole lot of immersion into DPC so it probably would be a great idea to let yourself become more familiar with the site before you try to change the way that the owners and administrators have set DPC up to be.
And please, nobody yell at me. I said it "seems" - so I could be wrong. |
One thing that I see, over and over, is that no "community group" will survive without two things: the ability to attract new members and the ability to adapt to the goals/desires of its members. This is why I post comments in threads such as this, even though I have not been on DPC as long as some of you. If I am a member of this community, I feel that I have as much right to make suggestions on how DPC grows as any other DPC member.
The fact that I have only entered three images in challenges thus far is a reflection of how much time my life allows me to pursue my hobbies and not a reflection on my dedication and/or committment to the site. If the consensus is that, as a DPC newbie, I should just shut up and deal with the rules until I've got X number of photos submitted, fine, but beware that such attitudes will likely stifle membership growth, limiting both the size and diversity of the community as a whole.
I've been a photographer for over 15 years. At one point, I considered it as a career, but I recognized that certain aspects of my personality would severely limit my income, so I have left it as a hobby. While I don't necessarily shoot as much as some here, I do get out as much as job/family will allow. I started participating in DPC as a way to help me improve my skills. To that end, the rules both help and hinder.
On the one hand, as has been mentioned, restricting techniques and having topics for challenges makes things a bit easier, since it helps reduce the field of options. If I can't use most of the Alien Skin plugins for PS, there isn't much reason to learn them for a DPC challenge. That cuts both ways, though. From the shoot I did for the HCII challenge, I had several shots I would have preferred to enter, but couldn't because the techniques used to produce good images aren't allowed. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:16:41 AM · #102 |
Originally posted by fracman:
If I am a member of this community, I feel that I have as much right to make suggestions on how DPC grows as any other DPC member. |
Yes, you are probably right here...
But you are not a member - you are a registered user, and that's not the same thing :)
If you were a member you could enter your pictures in the "members only" challenges where advanced editing is allowed - and make use of your techniques...
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:17:31 AM · #103 |
Originally posted by fracman:
...but couldn't because the techniques used to produce good images aren't allowed. |
No offense to you personally and certainly not a comment on your skills, but I find this line of thinking disturbing and a perfect reflection of what I find to be wrong with the modern way of thinking about photography. Good images are created in the field or in the studio or on the street, with your camera, with good preperation or timing or patience...not with Photoshop. I will always believe that if you are relying upon that level of post work, then you've entered into the world of digital art and left photography behind.
That's just my take on it, and if it were up to me the editing rules would be rewritten in a much more strict and limiting fashion.
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 11:21:03. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:20:19 AM · #104 |
.
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 11:20:35. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:37:56 AM · #105 |
Originally posted by karmat:
To those of you claiming that the rules can be broken down into three or five sentences, I invite you to open a ticket and submit your proposed wording(s). |
nono i'm not a wordsmith
i belive i understand the rules as they are -
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:48:09 AM · #106 |
Originally posted by photoheathen:
No offense to you personally and certainly not a comment on your skills, but I find this line of thinking disturbing and a perfect reflection of what I find to be wrong with the modern way of thinking about photography. Good images are created in the field or in the studio or on the street, with your camera, with good preperation or timing or patience...not with Photoshop. I will always believe that if you are relying upon that level of post work, then you've entered into the world of digital art and left photography behind.
That's just my take on it, and if it were up to me the editing rules would be rewritten in a much more strict and limiting fashion. |
Besides the Jerry Uelsmann point I made earlier, post-proc helps to compensate for not having unlimited funds/time at my disposal. All I can afford to do at this point in my life is shoot with a digital SLR camera and a fixed set of lenses. If I want to take a picture of a vertical structure from across a narrow street, my only option is to shoot with a wide-angle lens, which distorts the vertical lines. I can PP the image to achieve the effect I would have gotten had I owned a rig where I can tilt/shift both the lens and film planes.
Similarly, since I don't do photography for a living, I don't have the option of spending as much time as it takes waiting for perfect lighting, perfect composition, etc. Everyone knows the old adage "when life hands you lemons, make lemonade". PP is the sugar that can help make the lemonade drinkable. Of course, PP doesn't replace the need for skill, practice, and an understanding of composition and lighting, but it is still a very useful tool.
Beyond that, I guess it comes down to a difference in opinion. When I go out to shoot, I am working towards producing art, but the images in the camera are only components of that art. Others, when they go out to shoot, are trying to capture a two-dimensional representation of a particular view of the world for a given duration of time. It's all good. If DPC doesn't change the rules, I will either conform or leave.
Anyway, I haven't seen any indication that paying $25 makes it any more or less likely that people will adopt my view. Well, not paying $25 to DPC ;-) |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:48:45 AM · #107 |
Originally posted by karmat:
To those of you claiming that the rules can be broken down into three or five sentences, I invite you to open a ticket and submit your proposed wording(s). |
OK here goes (you did ask!) ...
Submit an image on the topic of <>.
The image must be the copyright of the member and must be originally captured by digital photographic techniques within the period specified by the challenge dates. Digital manipulation is allowed, but it should be noted that there is a wide ranging community at DPC, some voters will tollerate more manipulation than others. You should be aware of this when submitting challenge entries.
Other than that I can't see any need for more rules.
OOOOPS did I just hear the sound of a can of worms being opened again !! hehehe ;-)
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:51:04 AM · #108 |
Originally posted by silverscreen:
Originally posted by fracman:
If I am a member of this community, I feel that I have as much right to make suggestions on how DPC grows as any other DPC member. |
Yes, you are probably right here...
But you are not a member - you are a registered user, and that's not the same thing :)
If you were a member you could enter your pictures in the "members only" challenges where advanced editing is allowed - and make use of your techniques... |
Originally posted by WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn:
]
member
n 1: one of the persons who compose a social group (especially
individuals who have joined and participates in a group
organization); "only members will be admitted"; "a
member of the faculty"; "she was introduced to all the
members of his family" [ant: {nonmember}]
|
Just because there are two classes of members, "registered users" and "paying members", doesn't make registered members not part of the DPC social group.
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 11:53:03. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:59:19 AM · #109 |
Originally posted by Falc:
Originally posted by karmat:
To those of you claiming that the rules can be broken down into three or five sentences, I invite you to open a ticket and submit your proposed wording(s). |
OK here goes (you did ask!) ...
Submit an image on the topic of <>.
The image must be the copyright of the member and must be originally captured by digital photographic techniques within the period specified by the challenge dates. Digital manipulation is allowed, but it should be noted that there is a wide ranging community at DPC, some voters will tollerate more manipulation than others. You should be aware of this when submitting challenge entries.
Other than that I can't see any need for more rules.
OOOOPS did I just hear the sound of a can of worms being opened again !! hehehe ;-) |
(If you want us to seriously consider this, please submit it via the ticket system)
So basically, anything goes?
I took a picture that is perfect for this week's challenge, but I took it 4 years ago with a film camera. I scan it in, then take a picture of it via the computer monitor using my digital camera. (Oh heck, I'll just take a picture of the nice 11x14 print I've got) I do minor tweaks. I submit the image I took with the digi cam.
It meets the topic. >check<
My copyright, and made with digital technology, within the time frame >check<
Very little manipulation, so I'm okay >check<
Good to go.
(edited to add -- this relates to the topic because this procedure would cause *my hypothetical* shot to be dq'ed under the current artwork clause)
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 12:01:35. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:00:10 PM · #110 |
good to go - but you feel bad in your heart don't you ;-)
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:00:51 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by m:
Originally posted by WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn:
]
member
n 1: one of the persons who compose a social group (especially
individuals who have joined and participates in a group
organization); "only members will be admitted"; "a
member of the faculty"; "she was introduced to all the
members of his family" [ant: {nonmember}]
|
Just because there are two classes of members, "registered users" and "paying members", doesn't make registered members not part of the DPC social group. |
As english/american is not my mother language, I apologize if my wording was misunderstood. It was never my intention to say that registered users are not part of the DPC social group - my point was that if  fracman was a paying member, he could enter all the member challenges where advanced editing is allowed - as this is what he seems to be looking for...
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:01:06 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by Falc:
Digital manipulation is allowed, but it should be noted that there is a wide ranging community at DPC, some voters will tolerate more manipulation than others. |
Voters can only take that into consideration if they know the photo has been manipulated, and they often won't know that until the ribbons are announced. The ensuing chaos would eclipse North Korea as an international crisis. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:02:46 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Falc:
Digital manipulation is allowed, but it should be noted that there is a wide ranging community at DPC, some voters will tolerate more manipulation than others. |
Voters can only take that into consideration if they know the photo has been manipulated, and they often won't know that until the ribbons are announced. The ensuing chaos would eclipse North Korea as an international crisis. |
You mean the North Koreans are entering the DPC challenges too - OMG !!
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:03:12 PM · #114 |
Originally posted by Falc:
good to go - but you feel bad in your heart don't you ;-) |
Why?
I followed the rules to the letter. There is nothing I did that is against any of the rules you posted.
Ohhhhhh, you mean that whole spirit of the rules thing. Yea. But not for long, because I won a ribbon with it, and it won't be dq'ed because it didn't break any written rules. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:13:56 PM · #115 |
Karma, Shannon, we have been round this loop so many times now, which is why put a smiley on the end of the can of worms sentence.
I know I am at the other end of the scale from you guys, but thats what keeps this place fresh, the range of views, the range of abilities.
I trust the voting population to self regulate, others need to have the boudaries fixed. I can and do live with these boundaries. I just believe that fewer rules are easier to enforce.
I was truly just poking you guys with a stick when I opened the can ;-)
Sorry ;-)
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 12:14:16.
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:15:05 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by Falc:
good to go - but you feel bad in your heart don't you ;-) |
I assume that by this point in your life, although I don't know how old you are, that you've learned that not everyone actually has a heart :)
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 12:16:04. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:21:08 PM · #117 |
I understand completely.
But, please also understand our frustration at being told our rules are too wordy, too long, too confusing, etc. etc.
Those of us who have been around any length of time would probably never enter something like I hypothetically entered above.
But, D&L formed this site on a basic premise of photography, not digital art. The larger portion of the users of the site want to maintain "photographic integrity" of the site and not become a digital art site. That alone would keep us within certain boundaries.
But, we get new users and members everyday that do not know the history or intent of the site. Also, even the line between digital photography and digital art is different for most people.
Our rules have to explain, clearly, what is and is not allowed. Fewer rules are easier to enforce, in theory, but there almost has to be a minimum or it is the equivalent of having no rules.
That is probably why it is taking us so long to do the mysterious rules revision. We have taken each of the rules, looked at it, determined its intent, rewritten it, poked holes in it, rewritten it again, poked more holes, rewritten, poked more holes. We are also trying to get everything as concise and "bulleted" as possible.
Trust me, we are as frustrated as many of you are.
But, in the real world of this virtual site, I honestly don't think a 3 to 5 sentence rule set will work.
And yes, I saw your smiley, and can appreciate the poke.
:) |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:31:59 PM · #118 |
Originally posted by karmat:
I
But, in the real world of this virtual site, I honestly don't think a 3 to 5 sentence rule set will work.
:) |
We can prohibit lawyers or anyone who acts like one on the site and maybe this could be a viable solution. Live, learn and move on.
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:53:16 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by silverscreen:
As english/american is not my mother language, I apologize if my wording was misunderstood. It was never my intention to say that registered users are not part of the DPC social group - my point was that if fracman was a paying member, he could enter all the member challenges where advanced editing is allowed - as this is what he seems to be looking for... |
My misunderstanding then; I apologise. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 12:59:40 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by fracman:
If I can't use most of the Alien Skin plugins for PS, there isn't much reason to learn them for a DPC challenge. That cuts both ways, though. From the shoot I did for the HCII challenge, I had several shots I would have preferred to enter, but couldn't because the techniques used to produce good images aren't allowed. |
I have both Alien Skins Exposure and nlk Color FX Pro and I can tell you that niehter of those filters do anything that you can't do manually with curves and other allowed filters/adjustments with a little practice.
I have those filter sets because they make my life easier as a photographer, but by no means are they neccesary to produce a good image.
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 02:09:49 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by karmat:
But, D&L formed this site on a basic premise of photography, not digital art. The larger portion of the users of the site want to maintain "photographic integrity" of the site and not become a digital art site. That alone would keep us within certain boundaries.
But, we get new users and members everyday that do not know the history or intent of the site. Also, even the line between digital photography and digital art is different for most people.
|
I think this gets at the crux of where I was coming from. Between the lack of historical knowledge and looking at the rules that say some PP is acceptable, the site seemed to me that it was digital art. It would be clearer if all challenges were straight-from-the-camera, since that clearly states that PP is not allowed. The confusion comes in from saying "this proc good, this proc bad". Once someone has made that first, necessarily arbitray, list of what PP techniques are allowed, it opens the door to discussions like this where each person vies to get their preferred PP technique on that list.
I feel for you, I really do. In my day job, I am trying to write up HR-type policies for a Fortune 100 company. Talk about necessary, arbitray, and contentious!
I do have a better understanding now, though. For here, I'll either stick with ancestoral photography methods and leave my other stuff for elsewhere. Or, find the key to my wallet and pony up for citizenship :-) |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 02:26:07 PM · #122 |
Originally posted by fracman:
I do have a better understanding now, though. For here, I'll either stick with ancestoral photography methods and leave my other stuff for elsewhere. Or, find the key to my wallet and pony up for citizenship :-) |
I think you can still try it (membership) for a month for only $5 -- you don't have to make a long-term commitment right away. You get to enter all the challenges, try out the Portfolio feature, post some prints for sale ... and there you post images edited however you want -- DPC rules apply only to challenge entries (the TOS apply to all photos), so you are welcome to post/sell photos edited as much or as little as you desire. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 02:57:28 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I think you can still try it (membership) for a month for only $5 -- you don't have to make a long-term commitment right away. You get to enter all the challenges, try out the Portfolio feature, post some prints for sale ... and there you post images edited however you want -- DPC rules apply only to challenge entries (the TOS apply to all photos), so you are welcome to post/sell photos edited as much or as little as you desire. |
No doubt, and to be honest, the membership fee isn't what's holding me back. Even though I've been shooting for years, I still am a rank amatuer. I am totally in awe of pictures like Coley's blue-ribbon image from the Unrelatedness challenge. I see pictures like that, and immediately break into a round of "I'm not worthy!!!!"
I probably will pay for membership at some point, but since I have my own website, the portfolio doesn't mean much to me, and I'd like to get at least a couple pictures into the top 20 before I think about selling anything here :-)
Edited to remove extra quote tag
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 14:58:07. |
|
