| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/22/2010 06:52:51 PM · #126 |
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by bvy:
These sorts of hijinks are not the behavior I've come to expect from a serious website of mature photographers. I'm profoundly offended. |
Hey! Don't bury me. I'm serious! I'm thinking of leaving DPC over this... |
Not sure I understand. Are you offended by the abstracts, or the attacks on the abstracts? |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:54:37 PM · #127 |
Let me preface this by saying I have NOT read this thread, my computer is crapping out on a continual basis.
However, seeing that I have some years of experience in the nasty ol' Advertising world...I would call a large percentage of these shots magazine/lifestyle ads, and a few I would think of as better suited for billboard.
Very few seem to meet the traditional version of a catalogue shot - which is normally little more than a stock shot of the item.
Just my .02 CDN worth. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:56:04 PM · #128 |
Look, here's what I'm seeing:
There's some people here saying "This is OUR website, this is the way it is, these are the rules, our way of seeing it is the only valid way, and if you don't want to play by our rules, well, just leave, OK? You don't belong here. You're disruptive."
This bothers me a whole lot more than any putative disruption of the predictable, day-to-day sameness of the site.
R.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:56:44 PM · #129 |
Originally posted by hojop25:
YES! love product shots, i made a thread a couple of weeks ago for this challenge to happen, either, a coinsedence or they acctually saw it :) any way im happy |
It's happened with me a couple of times, so yes, I would say they did see your suggestion and it twigged. Vey gratifying, innit? :-) |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:56:56 PM · #130 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
For the love of God, won't someone please think of the children! |
LOL! I actually LOL'd.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:57:59 PM · #131 |
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by bvy:
These sorts of hijinks are not the behavior I've come to expect from a serious website of mature photographers. I'm profoundly offended. |
Hey! Don't bury me. I'm serious! I'm thinking of leaving DPC over this... |
Please don't. :) Don't let their shenanigans get to you to that point. Tell them what you think by commenting on their images.
If this site turns into what they want, Langdon will declare a big drop in his revenues for 2010 on his income tax forms next year. This site grows because of what it is today, not what it could be tomorrow. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:59:23 PM · #132 |
| What, the hell are you lot on about... |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:59:27 PM · #133 |
Originally posted by hihosilver:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
I agree but what concerns me more is this discussion about Quiche |
I'm sorry...I don't know what they say about Quiche and  GeneralE answered my question in full on that topic. So, I really don't need any further eduction.
So, thank you for the lesson in valuing my own silence.
I wish you all a happy afternoon! |
:) |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:59:32 PM · #134 |
Can we please just VOTE on the images?
There are very few votes, IMHO, compared to how many there usually are by this time. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 06:59:46 PM · #135 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Hmm... I don't recall any artists getting this upset about the unartistic photos in the Fine Arts Challenge. |
I'll try one more time.
No one is upset over using abstract photos in a Product challenge. Enter what you want and let the voters decide.
What's wrong here is that several people decided to get together as a group and agree on what type of subject matter to enter. And then decided to title them in a similar fashion.
This is at least disrespectful to the other members, at most a violation of the rules.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:01:28 PM · #136 |
Men don't eat real quiche.
I am discombobulated by the mature and serious.
Mine's a few points under four at present. It's the one without the pie. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:05:22 PM · #137 |
| Mine is currently at 4.3. It is a product shot that may appear in a catalogue. Nuff said. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:08:24 PM · #138 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Hmm... I don't recall any artists getting this upset about the unartistic photos in the Fine Arts Challenge. |
I'll try one more time.
No one is upset over using abstract photos in a Product challenge. Enter what you want and let the voters decide.
What's wrong here is that several people decided to get together as a group and agree on what type of subject matter to enter. And then decided to title them in a similar fashion.
This is at least disrespectful to the other members, at most a violation of the rules. |
So you won't be happy with DPL when it arrives. That is exactly what the teams do to improve. The only difference is the voting is locked out instead of using integrity, which almost all folks on this site have. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:08:42 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Hmm... I don't recall any artists getting this upset about the unartistic photos in the Fine Arts Challenge. |
I'll try one more time.
No one is upset over using abstract photos in a Product challenge. Enter what you want and let the voters decide.
What's wrong here is that several people decided to get together as a group and agree on what type of subject matter to enter. And then decided to title them in a similar fashion.
This is at least disrespectful to the other members, at most a violation of the rules. |
Hum, i don't know scarbird, thats certainly what you are most upset about but i'm not sure you can speak for everyone else. Some people do seem to see the abstracts as the problem, or maybe some perceived idea that the 10% are mocking the Product people in some way.
As to your other point, as has been stated, people getting into groups before hand to discuss what to enter, and to enter similar shots, has happened before with no problem so i guess its the similar titles that tips it for you. I'm not really sure why that upsets you so much but i don't think it's a violation of the rules. Perhaps someone should check.
Message edited by author 2010-03-22 19:09:42. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:12:48 PM · #140 |
Just a thought...OOB has and always will be a norm for any Challenge here at DPC... there should be no argument there...I think that what should be discussed is the amount of discussion among 12 entrants planning to enter like images with almost exact titles.
Even with the promise of not voting on the images...there is an uneasy feeling of a secret agreement between a number of people...that sort of cheapens the authenticity of
of the Challenge. For those of you that draw a correlation between this instance and lets say a "Team Oriented" thing such as the DPL...there are "programs" put into place to almost guarantee the Challenge is on the up and up...also the team concept there is 7 people...and everyone in the league knows that everyone is abiding by the same rules.(the team concept is set up that way).So now we have 12 individuals...trying to make a point..or let's just say have a little fun...but no one else is in the know...it is the opportunity for suspicion and that not everyone KNOWS..that makes for the split between the two factions here. Next time it could be 24 people...where do 12...24...36 people go to to discuss this type of interaction? That is another fly in the ointment...
I know that it has been said that some people take these Challenges to seriously...others do it for fun..and some participate just to disrupt...all I know is that DPC has striven to be a place where the Challenges have been for the most part on the up and up...(and a good place to get feedback and learn).
I would hate to think that it has evolved to just a popularity contest driven by conversations among numerous sects within the community.
I have stayed here because I always found DPC different than any other online experience. My wish and hope is it stays that way.
Sometimes I wonder if the stall in the restart of the DPL might have to do with this exact reason...the struggle to keep the authenticity of the Challenges is utmost concern to me.
Message edited by author 2010-03-22 19:19:36. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:13:46 PM · #141 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Look, here's what I'm seeing:
There's some people here saying "This is OUR website, this is the way it is, these are the rules, our way of seeing it is the only valid way, and if you don't want to play by our rules, well, just leave, OK? You don't belong here. You're disruptive."
This bothers me a whole lot more than any putative disruption of the predictable, day-to-day sameness of the site.
R. |
Hopefully it's less than some...maybe 10% of those entered in the challenge? |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:14:47 PM · #142 |
~~Haven't really gone over the whole thread so I could be repeating stuff.
While I don't think something like this is intended to be harmful it is in a way putting a neon sign over the entries taking away a bit of anonymity. These entries could be getting higher scores than they could be getting if they were good ole oobies we see every challenge because people might get carried away with the 'oh, look at the vision and the creativity' bit while ignoring actual content of image. These entries are getting judged as a group whether you like it or not. A person who hates the idea(and perhaps not the image, just the idea) might be giving out 1s to each and everyone of them.
As a one time experiment it's okay but I can see other less mature versions of this cropping up. Allusions to users, collaborations could pop up in titles from this and I'm cringing at the idea.
|
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:17:07 PM · #143 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
This is at least disrespectful to the other members, at most a violation of the rules. |
Mind pointing out the challenge rule this violates?
What is in fact disrespectful is the inference that any rules were broken willingly, that deceit is the object of the exercise, or that collusion to drive down the votes of entrants was intended. (That collusive vote thing works in both directions, by the way.) Also disrespectful is when one member tells another to leave the website, particularly over a manufactured dispute like this. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:17:59 PM · #144 |
Originally posted by tfarrell23:
For those of you that draw a correlation between this instance and lets say a "Team Oriented" thing such as the DPL...there are "programs" put into place to almost guarantee the Challenge is on the up and up...also the team concept there is 7 people...and everyone in the league knows that everyone is abiding by the same rules.(the team concept is set up that way). |
Not everyone in the challenges are on a team, and there are always posts about how the scores are lower during the DPCO. I would imagine the same voting checks and balances are in effect during every challenge regardless of team participation. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:23:59 PM · #145 |
All I know for a fact is this: I knew exactly how I would shoot my product, no matter what it was, because it's meant to be for a catalogue. Make my pie tourtiere, by the way.
Message edited by author 2010-03-22 19:28:13. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:24:28 PM · #146 |
Originally posted by UrfaTheGreat:
p. Allusions to users, collaborations could pop up in titles from this and I'm cringing at the idea. |
Yes, i totally agree with you there. As it is, whilst, for me, this has been a fun and worthwhile thing to do i don't think it's something that will be regular, or even happen again really, apart from some interesting side challenge ideas that have sprung up.
Message edited by author 2010-03-22 19:25:08. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:26:43 PM · #147 |
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
Originally posted by tfarrell23:
For those of you that draw a correlation between this instance and lets say a "Team Oriented" thing such as the DPL...there are "programs" put into place to almost guarantee the Challenge is on the up and up...also the team concept there is 7 people...and everyone in the league knows that everyone is abiding by the same rules.(the team concept is set up that way). |
Not everyone in the challenges are on a team, and there are always posts about how the scores are lower during the DPCO. I would imagine the same voting checks and balances are in effect during every challenge regardless of team participation. |
That is the reason why the team concept shouldn't be used in a challenge where every one is involved (hense this "Artful" instance) and maybe why the DPL should have it's own Challenge apart from the normal ones. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:31:41 PM · #148 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by posthumous:
Hmm... I don't recall any artists getting this upset about the unartistic photos in the Fine Arts Challenge. |
I'll try one more time.
No one is upset over using abstract photos in a Product challenge. Enter what you want and let the voters decide.
What's wrong here is that several people decided to get together as a group and agree on what type of subject matter to enter. And then decided to title them in a similar fashion.
This is at least disrespectful to the other members, at most a violation of the rules. |
Hum, i don't know scarbird, thats certainly what you are most upset about but i'm not sure you can speak for everyone else. Some people do seem to see the abstracts as the problem, or maybe some perceived idea that the 10% are mocking the Product people in some way.
As to your other point, as has been stated, people getting into groups before hand to discuss what to enter, and to enter similar shots, has happened before with no problem so i guess its the similar titles that tips it for you. I'm not really sure why that upsets you so much but i don't think it's a violation of the rules. Perhaps someone should check. |
Well, Clive, I do not recall there ever being a situation where a group of members got together and decided to enter a certain type of subject matter. I could be wrong, I've only been here for 4 years and only entered around 300 challenges.
As for the rules, one could see this as vote manipulation, eventhough they said they wouldn't vote in the challenge, the group had to know that these entries would score low, so as a group they are manipulating the vote.
What is most disheartening to me is that several of these entries are by people who have been on this site for a long long time, some considered leaders on this site and many of which I admired and respected. It saddens me that they have fallen a notch or 2 in my eyes because of this stunt. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:33:05 PM · #149 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
This is at least disrespectful to the other members, at most a violation of the rules. |
Mind pointing out the challenge rule this violates?
What is in fact disrespectful is the inference that any rules were broken willingly, that deceit is the object of the exercise, or that collusion to drive down the votes of entrants was intended. (That collusive vote thing works in both directions, by the way.) Also disrespectful is when one member tells another to leave the website, particularly over a manufactured dispute like this. |
I never told anyone to leave. |
|
|
|
03/22/2010 07:37:36 PM · #150 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Well, Clive, I do not recall there ever being a situation where a group of members got together and decided to enter a certain type of subject matter. I could be wrong, I've only been here for 4 years and only entered around 300 challenges. |
Well, there was a challenge recently where the same little stuffed toy was used in a number of shots. That was in a FS though, and i seem to recall it was for a very good cause and i thought it was a lovely idea really although i didn't like the look of the little guy. I guess that doesn't really count though as it was a FS but i don't really see the problem with other challenges. People often look at others shots and give advice without voting. |
|
