| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/18/2004 01:13:14 AM · #1 |
If the 'advanced rules' would have been in place for my former 'PI' challenge entry (shown below) I probably wouldn't have won the 'blue' ribbon.
As I recall, as soon as the voting opened I received a administration request to send the original image w/exif data because of some DQ requests. The image was then validated and voting proceeded. The reason the image won (I feel) was because of the fact that it was achieved without editing. (Almost every other comment I received contained a "how did you do that?" statement in it.)
I contend that if the same challenge were held today (with the advanced editing rules) it would have been assumed that the PI symbol was simply 'edited' into place, thus losing it's WOW factor - and probably 1st place.
Now.... this begs me to ask this question. Should a 'member' who decides to enter an image that was achieved without needing 'advanced editing' have it indicated as such? Maybe a simple check box indicating "Voluntarily Used Basic Editing Rules".
This suggestion is not intended to 'segregate' the EDITORS from the NON-EDITORS, but rather to prevent those images that can stand on their own from being assumed 'advanced edited'.
(Thanks for listening, I have to get some sleep now....zzzzzzzzzz)
Message edited by author 2004-01-18 01:15:10.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2004 01:20:03 AM · #2 |
Interesting question, although I think someone already begged it here.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2004 02:07:18 AM · #3 |
Even under the new rules, the photo would have been DQed if the pi was added in post editing.
"The only thing you may not do to your photograph during post-shot editing is add text (including copyright statements.)" |
|
|
|
01/18/2004 02:29:09 AM · #4 |
Adding images to, from what I understand, is not legal.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2004 05:20:21 AM · #5 |
Why should there exist an extra privilege to promote pictures whoâs sole interest might be their âWow! How did they do that¨â aspect?
This type of picture has a large and generous audience already.
Plenty of pictures, worthy of praise, go, every week, perfectly unnoticed.
Maybe a simple check box indicating: This picture was taken with no intent to bluntly amaze you but its artistic and emotional values could deserve an extra five seconds of your time.
|
|
|
|
01/18/2004 08:59:05 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by jjbeguin:
Why should there exist an extra privilege to promote pictures whoâs sole interest might be their âWow! How did they do that¨â aspect?
This type of picture has a large and generous audience already.
Plenty of pictures, worthy of praise, go, every week, perfectly unnoticed.
Maybe a simple check box indicating: This picture was taken with no intent to bluntly amaze you but its artistic and emotional values could deserve an extra five seconds of your time. |
well said
|
|
|
|
01/18/2004 12:18:28 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Trinch:
Even under the new rules, the photo would have been DQed if the pi was added in post editing.
"The only thing you may not do to your photograph during post-shot editing is add text (including copyright statements.)" |
Depends on what is meant by adding text. If you paint/dodge/burn something that looks like text is it text? You didn't type it in or use the text tool. What about the custom shapes? Seems like there are plenty of ways around it with the advanced editing rules depending on how one defines text. |
|
|
|
01/18/2004 12:50:46 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Depends on what is meant by adding text. If you paint/dodge/burn something that looks like text is it text? You didn't type it in or use the text tool. What about the custom shapes? Seems like there are plenty of ways around it with the advanced editing rules depending on how one defines text. |
You'd probably be legal if you used a paintbrush, although I'm sure a lot of people would consider it a violation of the spirit of the rule if not the letter (pun intended). It's clearly illegal to use the text tool to create the shapes (virtually the same as using clip art). |
|
|
|
01/18/2004 01:05:14 PM · #9 |
My personal interpretation of this rule is:
"Text that is photographed is of course OK, text added any other way is not."
If I were to use a paintbrush to "sign" my photo for instance, I would certainly regard this as a violation of the text rule. While I certainly can't speak for other voters, infringements here would not go over well with me.
I believe that the text rule is a good one, I'd hate to see it diluted. And I think that it could certainly be clarified so that there is far less room for misinterpretation.
|
|
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: 06/09/2025 12:40:19 PM EDT.
