Notes on the Artwork Rule - DPChallenge Forums

12/11/2008 06:27:35 PM · #626

Originally posted by Marc923:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Dang that's embarrassing. I wonder if SC can clean up this mess? Do they do windows?

R.

No biggie. I can admit I made a mistake.

Ok, glad we got that cleared up. LMAO.

Here is my best eagle shot, taken 100% in the wild.

and it scored 6.75, which is less then the 6.81 that the fake manatee shot received because of the voters being mislead.

by the way, if you had titled your manatee shot "Florida Manatee- Museum display" I would have had no issue with your shot, because then the voters could actually vote knowing that it was not real. :)

ETA: if you had of been part of the big "zoo vs real wildlife" debate caused by the last wildlife challenge you would have seen me get spanked around pretty good because I am against zoo shots being part of wildlife. My view on sancuary shots depends on if it is trained and on a trainer's arm or tethered to a post, like a lot of the head shots that I see around here (in which case I think it should be stated in the title that it is captive) or if it is at a sanctuary where they fly around over a huge couple acre area and have some semblence of freedom, in which case I am more at ease with it.

Message edited by author 2008-12-11 18:35:23.

12/11/2008 06:28:57 PM · #627

Originally posted by jhomrighaus:

Secondary to this discussion but is there any mechanism to appeal a decision of the SC?

I think you just contact them and tell them you do not agree and why, and beg them to reconsider because of xxxxx new facts in the case.

12/11/2008 06:29:44 PM · #628

Originally posted by violinist123:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by basssman7:

I could use a Guinness right now.

Or 10.

At first glance I thought the pacman on the right was salivating over the 580EX in the middle...

hahaha, no it would have been a nice SB900 anyways. ;)

scalvert

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/11/2008 07:14:27 PM · #629

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
A billboard or large poster (as often used in street photography) is not "live". How then, does that not get DQ'd?

If it's obviously a billboard (or a sign, painting, illustration, monitor) then it's exempt from the rule since the voters understand what they're judging.

The manatee image clearly fails your criteria.

The manatees aren't artwork, they're real objects, so they're not subject to that criteria.

Apple iPhone 5

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

12/11/2008 07:15:48 PM · #630

He's back for more.... :-D

scalvert

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/11/2008 07:40:18 PM · #631

Originally posted by JH:

He's back for more.... :-D

Actually I had the thread on ignore and only clicked it again from the community link out of morbid curiosity. Further responses are unlikely. ;-)

chromeydome

Nikon D7000

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

12/11/2008 07:43:33 PM · #632

Originally posted by chromeydome:

Another thing I might have missed in following this thread is a formal statement from any SC member that they (a) do agree that the rule needs to be rewritten and (b) they will do so.

Mostly what I have seen is one SC member defending an interpretation of the rule with posts that often seem designed to incite argument.

If we know that the SC WILL update the rule to be more clear, then this thread is lockable in my view. If, however, the position seems to be "our interpretation was obviously correct and you lot just don't understand or don't want to" then literally no progress has been made--probably should lock it for that reason, too, I suppose.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/11/2008 07:45:24 PM · #633

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by JH:
He's back for more.... :-D

Actually I had the thread on ignore and only clicked it again from the community link out of morbid curiosity. Further responses are unlikely. ;-)

Here have a peace beer. We will agree not to agree. ;)

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

12/11/2008 08:04:40 PM · #634

Originally posted by scalvert:

The manatees aren't artwork

I'll tell that to the person who sculpted them. :P

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

12/11/2008 08:38:13 PM · #635

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by scalvert:
The manatees aren't artwork

I'll tell that to the person who sculpted them. :P

Ditto.

J-Me

Sony DSLR-A200

Sony 75-300 mm f/4.5-5.6

12/11/2008 09:22:33 PM · #636

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
LOL...ok, so with hundreds of posts to follow and trying to keep up while working....I'm confused....can you blame me?! ;-)

Hundreds of posts? No. Just one or two before yours. :)

Ok Barry....shall I pass you a beer and some popcorn then while I clean my glasses...or, do I need to get the boxing gloves over this??? LOL ;-))

J-Me

Sony DSLR-A200

Sony 75-300 mm f/4.5-5.6

12/11/2008 09:25:00 PM · #637

Originally posted by CEJ:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by scalvert:
The manatees aren't artwork

I'll tell that to the person who sculpted them. :P

Ditto.

I'm ducking when I say this but, what if they are "stuffed"???? *grin*

Judi

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/11/2008 09:39:25 PM · #638

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

Originally posted by CEJ:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by scalvert:
The manatees aren't artwork

I'll tell that to the person who sculpted them. :P

Ditto.

I'm ducking when I say this but, what if they are "stuffed"???? *grin*

Stuffed, sculpted, painted, drawn, photographed....whatever. The fact still remains that what is art is up to the individual...and what can be perceived as art is up to the individual. The same goes for whether one persons use of 'art' within a photo can be seen as being deceptive to the viewer or not. Just as there are many entries that have either slipped through the cracks or been validated when others have been DQ'ed....under whatever Editing rules. There are too many grey lines.

The summary of this is that there is a definite crack in the system that can not be fixed easily...but definitely needs to be attended to.

Arguing won't get us anywhere...as there are so many varied opinions....the SC has proven that...they cannot even agree amongst themselves on this subject...so how do they expect members to agree on it also. SC has asked for a discussion on this...and that is what is happening. I admit there are some heated conversations...but that is to be expected on such a topic with a subject that is close to many peoples personal opinions.

So how about Langdon run a poll with more detailed questions to see what everybody thinks should happen with this topic and then some ideas are put forward from everybody and not swept under the rug as has happened many times in the past.

J-Me

Sony DSLR-A200

Sony 75-300 mm f/4.5-5.6

12/11/2008 09:48:20 PM · #639

Originally posted by Judi:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

Originally posted by CEJ:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by scalvert:
The manatees aren't artwork

I'll tell that to the person who sculpted them. :P

Ditto.

I'm ducking when I say this but, what if they are "stuffed"???? *grin*

Stuffed, sculpted, painted, drawn, photographed....whatever. The fact still remains that what is art is up to the individual...and what can be perceived as art is up to the individual. The same goes for whether one persons use of 'art' within a photo can be seen as being deceptive to the viewer or not. Just as there are many entries that have either slipped through the cracks or been validated when others have been DQ'ed....under whatever Editing rules. There are too many grey lines.

The summary of this is that there is a definite crack in the system that can not be fixed easily...but definitely needs to be attended to.

Arguing won't get us anywhere...as there are so many varied opinions....the SC has proven that...they cannot even agree amongst themselves on this subject...so how do they expect members to agree on it also. SC has asked for a discussion on this...and that is what is happening. I admit there are some heated conversations...but that is to be expected on such a topic with a subject that is close to many peoples personal opinions.

So how about Langdon run a poll with more detailed questions to see what everybody thinks should happen with this topic and then some ideas are put forward from everybody and not swept under the rug as has happened many times in the past.

Judi, I agree with what you've said here.

I think that the fact that the conversations got heated at times are proof that there are strong feelings about this issue and it does need to be cleared up. More than anything, through this entire long and tiring discussion, a LOT of issues, angles, thoughts, perspectives and a whole realm of other things have also come out of it as well that makes it a very insightful string of points that need to be really thought through and dealt with fully and giving rules more clarity.

If nothing else, all of this should prove that SC needs to re-work this and yet, I have yet to see anyone say that it will be. SIGH

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

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

12/11/2008 09:58:13 PM · #640

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

If nothing else, all of this should prove that SC needs to re-work this and yet, I have yet to see anyone say that it will be. SIGH

I've yet to see anyone offer a truly constructive suggestion as to what this amazing new version of the rule should say in order to be 100% clear to everyone and objectively enforcable; obviously six years of thinking and writing and revising by 20 or so SC members has been unsuccessful. :-(

MattO

Nikon D4

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

12/11/2008 10:02:54 PM · #641

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
A billboard or large poster (as often used in street photography) is not "live". How then, does that not get DQ'd?

If it's obviously a billboard (or a sign, painting, illustration, monitor) then it's exempt from the rule since the voters understand what they're judging.

The manatee image clearly fails your criteria.

The manatees aren't artwork, they're real objects, so they're not subject to that criteria.

I'd bet they arent real stuffed Manatee's, somehow I dont think they would really do that there.

Matt

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

12/11/2008 10:03:10 PM · #642

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
If nothing else, all of this should prove that SC needs to re-work this and yet, I have yet to see anyone say that it will be. SIGH

I've yet to see anyone offer a truly constructive suggestion as to what this amazing new version of the rule should say in order to be 100% clear to everyone and objectively enforcable; obviously six years of thinking and writing and revising by 20 or so SC members has been unsuccessful. :-(

We were pretty c;lose with the idea of tagging a note on saying "This rule is intended to..."

I think we can solve most of these problems with the rules basically as they are now but some additional materials to explicate the guiding principles. Thought, of course, FIRST y'all have to decide what we're after, LOL. There seems to be some dissension there.

R.

MattO

Nikon D4

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/11/2008 10:03:33 PM · #643

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Somewhere along page XX someone suggested something that many people thought would actually help with the confusion. I'll see if I can find it.

Matt

crayon

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

12/11/2008 10:06:52 PM · #644

Originally posted by GeneralE:

maybe instead of saying what is NOT allowed, the rules should just say what IS allowed. so anything not mentioned will be illegal ;)
i know it further restricts the freedom to shoot a legal photo for challenges, but it allow less room for accidental rule violations from submitters - also less misunderstandings and less of these discussions

//sarcasm off

togtog

Nikon D300

12/11/2008 10:10:53 PM · #645

I wonder, instead of the family background that prompted all this, fun. What if she had taken her photo to a print shop, had cutouts made of each family member, and set them around the table and an overlay of the food, and held up the glass, would that then be legal? Or not because it contained... flat things... what if she got a bunch of blow up sex dolls and taped pictures of her families heads to them... then the majority of the image would be 3d not flat...

...

12/11/2008 10:13:57 PM · #646

Originally posted by MilesW:

Add a field on the submission page where you can declare artwork in the image. That text is visible on the voting page. Declaring artwork this way gives immunity from DQ on the grounds of using that artwork, unless it is just a photo of a photo in the strictest sense.

i.e either declare and let the voters vote accordingly, or don't and submit to the SC's judgement.

Might even reduce the validation requests for hard-pressed SC members :-)

I thought this was interesting.

ETA: in this case entering a photo with "undeclared artwork" would be a dqable offence.

Message edited by author 2008-12-11 22:15:21.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

12/11/2008 10:14:49 PM · #647

Originally posted by Judi:

... not swept under the rug as has happened many times in the past.

I don't remember this particular part of the rules coming up for major debate, certainly not "many times". There have been some heated conversations before on removing an object from the original (i.e. - all white backgrounds) and other sporadic items now and then.

As for this specific topic...by the SC starting a thread such as this shows that they aren't hiding from this specific part of the ruleset.

...and, for things (rules, etc...) being changed on DPChallenge - that's TOTALLY up to Langdon (and possibly the elusive Drew) when everything is said and done.

Judi

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/11/2008 10:22:13 PM · #648

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by Judi:
... not swept under the rug as has happened many times in the past.

I don't remember this particular part of the rules coming up for major debate, certainly not "many times". There have been some heated conversations before on removing an object from the original (i.e. - all white backgrounds) and other sporadic items now and then.

As for this specific topic...by the SC starting a thread such as this shows that they aren't hiding from this specific part of the ruleset.

...and, for things (rules, etc...) being changed on DPChallenge - that's TOTALLY up to Langdon (and possibly the elusive Drew) when everything is said and done.

Maybe I should have worded my post better. The 'sweeping under the rug' was referring to the many polls and discussions we have had in the past that have amounted to know change at all. How many times do you see a request for a change of some form that seems to be backed by long discussions and suggestions...but nothing ever comes of it?