DQ adviszce - Where to draw the line?

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

10/22/2008 01:46:07 PM · #26

Thank you everybody for their opinion, clarification and thoughts. Especially the council members, since they are the ones that guide us through DPC. I apologize for brining "Scalvert" picture into the discussion, especially since it was taken during a time of different rules. I was trying to illustrate a point about how a reproduction of a picture can create a totally different effect on the overall look of the image. I still do not understand or agree with some of the interpretations of the DQ rule that was in effect here, but it is what it is.
I think that in essence because I was not trying to fool or cheat editing rules and clearly described how I took this picture ended up being the reason that the image was DQ, since with out that description it would have been harder to figure out if the image that the viewer was seeing through the mask was a reproduction or a live image.(plus at the time of the DQ the score was around 5.25 and this shoot would have stayed clear of most peoples radar in post challenge review)
In the end I thing the wording or even general meaning of the applicable rule should be simpler (maybe for basic only) and just state that you can not use photographic reproductions in the image. This would be clear cut. IMHO
As to the other pictures discussed in this thread, I'm sure they all have their unique issues and interpretations.
At the cost of creativity I will stay away form using any photographic reproductions in the future, since what good for the Goose, is not always good for the gander.

alanfreed

Nikon Z9

10/22/2008 01:59:02 PM · #27

Just a couple quick notes on your post...

Originally posted by tjmueller:

(plus at the time of the DQ the score was around 5.25 and this shoot would have stayed clear of most peoples radar in post challenge review)

I think it's good to note that it doesn't matter what kind of score a shot was generating in terms of whether it is called into question. We do request proof on all shots that ultimately finish in the top 5 of each challenge, but any shot is fair game when it comes to requesting validation. We often get notes from people saying things like, "I don't see why my shot is being questioned -- it's not even scoring a 5!"

Originally posted by tjmueller:

In the end I thing the wording or even general meaning of the applicable rule should be simpler (maybe for basic only) and just state that you can not use photographic reproductions in the image.

No, that wouldn't make things more simple at all. Oftentimes there are shots of cities, for example, where billboards are within the photograph. That kind of wording would eliminate shots that include incidental billboards, or people reading magazines, etc. etc. That's not what the rule is intended to prohibit. The rule is meant to keep people from misrepresenting existing artwork.

Message edited by author 2008-10-22 14:01:09.

10/22/2008 01:59:54 PM · #28

Originally posted by tjmueller:

I think that in essence because I was not trying to fool or cheat editing rules and clearly described how I took this picture ended up being the reason that the image was DQ, since with out that description it would have been harder to figure out if the image that the viewer was seeing through the mask was a reproduction or a live image.(plus at the time of the DQ the score was around 5.25 and this shoot would have stayed clear of most peoples radar in post challenge review)

Honesty is the best policy, and staying under the radar would not excuse a failure to follow the rules. There have been cases where people don't divulge critical details when asked, and when that omission looks like attempt to avoid a DQ, it moves from an honest misunderstanding into intentional cheating territory IMO (and could result in additional penalties). A DQ is not necessarily an indication of cheating, but trying to cover it up would be.

Originally posted by tjmueller:

In the end I thing the wording or even general meaning of the applicable rule should be simpler (maybe for basic only) and just state that you can not use photographic reproductions in the image. This would be clear cut. IMHO

Yes, but also terribly restrictive.

10/22/2008 02:22:21 PM · #29

Thanks scalvert & alanfreed - Just venting - I know rules are rules and scoring is irrelevant to following rules. This was the first time in 60+ submissions that I was trying to think outside my normal box and I referenced shoots in my head that where taking during different rules. I do stand by my suggestion that there should be a more clearly defined wording of this rule (maybe an image reproduction can not take up more that 25% of the overall image or such).

KarenNfld

10/22/2008 02:36:30 PM · #30

Originally posted by scalvert:

The cat and goldfish entry is borderline IMO and still under discussion.

Really? Wow, to me the fact that they are cutouts is very obvious.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

10/22/2008 02:39:30 PM · #31

Originally posted by KarenNfld:

Originally posted by scalvert:
The cat and goldfish entry is borderline IMO and still under discussion.

Really? Wow, to me the fact that they are cutouts is very obvious.

Originally posted by scalvert:

You might be surprised at the number of comments and validations requests from people who didn't think it was so obvious.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

10/22/2008 02:42:34 PM · #32

For the love of god, correct the spelling error in the thread title already.

Manic

DJI Mini 3 Pro

Kamlan 28mm F1.4 MF for APS-C

10/22/2008 02:43:45 PM · #33

Originally posted by violinist123:

For the love of god, correct the spelling error in the thread title already.

Better now? ;)

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

10/22/2008 02:44:41 PM · #34

Originally posted by Manic:

Originally posted by violinist123:
For the love of god, correct the spelling error in the thread title already.

Better now? ;)

Actually, it's still wrong. ;o)

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

10/22/2008 02:44:55 PM · #35

Originally posted by KarenNfld:

Originally posted by scalvert:
The cat and goldfish entry is borderline IMO and still under discussion.

Really? Wow, to me the fact that they are cutouts is very obvious.

Whoa, I agree. The cutouts are only about 50% of the composition of this image. And they sure didn't fool anyone - most people that commented thought they were PS'd in.

Incidentally, here is one I "got away with" awhile back:

I don't see it as any different than the OP's - except that my setup was much, much simpler.

10/22/2008 02:54:39 PM · #36

Art Roflmao - That was actually one of the shoots that I remembered (The male brain rarely forgets pictures of naked ladies - mine anyway) and I thought it was very creative.

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

Olympus 7-14mm f/4.0 Zuiko Digital Zoom

10/22/2008 02:56:01 PM · #37

Originally posted by tjmueller:

Art Roflmao - That was actually one of the shoots that I remembered (The male brain rarely forgets pictures of naked ladies - mine anyway) and I thought it was very creative.

Then it's my fault you were DQ'd and forced to wear the pink badge of shame. Sorry bout that. :)

one2one

Olympus E-5

10/22/2008 03:14:45 PM · #38

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by tjmueller:
I think that in essence because I was not trying to fool or cheat editing rules and clearly described how I took this picture ended up being the reason that the image was DQ, since with out that description it would have been harder to figure out if the image that the viewer was seeing through the mask was a reproduction or a live image.(plus at the time of the DQ the score was around 5.25 and this shoot would have stayed clear of most peoples radar in post challenge review)

Honesty is the best policy, and staying under the radar would not excuse a failure to follow the rules. There have been cases where people don't divulge critical details when asked, and when that omission looks like attempt to avoid a DQ, it moves from an honest misunderstanding into intentional cheating territory IMO (and could result in additional penalties). A DQ is not necessarily an indication of cheating, but trying to cover it up would be.

Originally posted by tjmueller:
In the end I thing the wording or even general meaning of the applicable rule should be simpler (maybe for basic only) and just state that you can not use photographic reproductions in the image. This would be clear cut. IMHO

Yes, but also terribly restrictive.

Wow! This scored a seven and is on the third page of the results for the challenge. Freaky.

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

10/22/2008 04:21:06 PM · #39

Originally posted by Jac:

Wow! This scored a seven and is on the third page of the results for the challenge. Freaky.

Only 5 entries in that challenge scored below 6 (and I came uncomfortably close to being one of them).

alanfreed

Nikon Z9

10/22/2008 04:28:49 PM · #40

Originally posted by scalvert:

Only 5 entries in that challenge scored below 6 (and I came uncomfortably close to being one of them).

I, unfortunately, nearly scored the brown :)

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

10/22/2008 04:51:01 PM · #41

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by tjmueller:
Art Roflmao - That was actually one of the shoots that I remembered (The male brain rarely forgets pictures of naked ladies - mine anyway) and I thought it was very creative.

Then it's my fault you were DQ'd and forced to wear the pink badge of shame. Sorry bout that. :)

Not your fault, just your inspiration, we all weave our own webs.

Techo

Canon EOS-7D

10/22/2008 04:56:21 PM · #42

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Maybe it's because I have goldfish. I immediately saw there was no dorsal fin.

I had a goldfish without a dorsal fin. Certain types don't have it.

mchalmers

Nikon D90

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

10/22/2008 05:02:43 PM · #43

Originally posted by Techo:

I had a goldfish without a dorsal fin. Certain types don't have it.

Nothing was cut off of this fish that I was aware of.

To be honest, I was really relying on the 'two second rule' for DPC viewing. Even in the viewfinder, I saw the sharp lines of the cat and fish and realised that it wasn't a very good illusion. I was hoping that people would score me more on the idea than the execution.. It was just too difficult given my time constraints and Basic editting.

I'm really enjoying all of the discussion over it though! :)

Mick

Canon EOS-5D

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

10/22/2008 05:17:36 PM · #44

Why would this photo be disqualified...

...when this one wasn't?

Was there a rule change, or is this another one of those notorious judgment calls?

10/22/2008 05:21:15 PM · #45

Originally posted by Mick:

Why would this photo be disqualified...

...when this one wasn't?

Was there a rule change, or is this another one of those notorious judgment calls?

Different rules. In the latter case, it was only necessary to include something real so the voters would rate the overall composition rather than just the artwork.

Mark-A

10/22/2008 05:24:53 PM · #46

Originally posted by Mick:

Why would this photo be disqualified...

...when this one wasn't?

Was there a rule change, or is this another one of those notorious judgment calls?

Tell me I've got this wrong but I don't believe

has actually been DQ'd has it ???

yanko