DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> 'Out of Balance' Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 64, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 01/21/2011 10:33:18 AM · #1
The results of the 'Out of Balance' challenge have been recalculated, due to the disqualification of the former 2nd place image for removing major elements of the original image, namely the entire background. Congrats to our new ribbon winners!
 01/21/2011 11:25:19 AM · #2
I hate to say it, but doesn't that background look strikingly similar to gyaban's 14th place finish in the Posthumous Ribbons challenge? I always though the shadow at the corner was unlikely to have been generated from the light source presented. My guess is it is a replaced background as well...



Message edited by author 2011-01-21 11:25:38.
 01/21/2011 11:52:13 AM · #3
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I hate to say it, but doesn't that background look strikingly similar to gyaban's 14th place finish in the Posthumous Ribbons challenge? I always though the shadow at the corner was unlikely to have been generated from the light source presented. My guess is it is a replaced background as well...



Nearly identical. I thought that rug in the new one looked like it had to be cut out.. Bit of a shame really.
 01/21/2011 11:56:08 AM · #4
Regardless, the man has talent I only wish I had with both a camera and a computer. His shots are amazing.
 01/21/2011 12:34:41 PM · #5
Oh, I'm not saying he isn't great and wonderfully creative. I like his stuff too. I'm only speaking to the little bizarro world of DPC where there are rules one must follow.
 01/21/2011 12:49:01 PM · #6
Originally posted by chazoe:
Regardless, the man has talent I only wish I had with both a camera and a computer. His shots are amazing.


Absolutely!
 01/21/2011 12:56:01 PM · #7
Not sure I get the DQ. He's used that bg in at least 4 other shots.
 01/21/2011 01:11:10 PM · #8
...

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 18:42:33.
 01/21/2011 01:46:20 PM · #9
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
My guess is it is a replaced background as well...

I think this is a horrible way to look at it. The guy wins, places or shows in nearly every challenge he enters, and he's submitted more samples for validation than Wilt Chamberlain. He clearly is a master of lighting. Just look through his ribbon winners. The lighting is nearly identical (perfect) and they've all been validated. Every image on DPC has to be taken at face value if it hasn't been validated. Period. Otherwise it all crumbles.
 01/21/2011 02:06:32 PM · #10
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
My guess is it is a replaced background as well...

I think this is a horrible way to look at it. The guy wins, places or shows in nearly every challenge he enters, and he's submitted more samples for validation than Wilt Chamberlain. He clearly is a master of lighting. Just look through his ribbon winners. The lighting is nearly identical (perfect) and they've all been validated. Every image on DPC has to be taken at face value if it hasn't been validated. Period. Otherwise it all crumbles.


The problem is I have yet to figure out how the lighting in this particular shot is accomplished. Remember, he is lying on the ground. There is no room for backlighting, so how do you accomplish that silky smooth gradient or even lighting? And how does the gradient shadow at the corner work? Where would you place a light to get a gradient like that? Where is the shadow for the table? I don't make those accusations lightly. I think about things for a while, but they just didn't make sense. Knowing now that he has officially replace a background just makes it even more worrisome, doesn't it?
 01/21/2011 02:25:49 PM · #11
Jason, I presumed the shadow from the table was cloned out.
 01/21/2011 02:28:53 PM · #12
Originally posted by bspurgeon:
Jason, I presumed the shadow from the table was cloned out.


Quite probably. Well, I am neither the judge nor the jury, so I'll leave it in SC's hands. It's possible that the photo has already been validated because someone I know already requested validation for it when it was in voting for similar reasons. Maybe they will come out and say it's already been validated.

Before and afters would always be helpful. I always enjoy those.

Message edited by author 2011-01-21 14:44:06.
 01/21/2011 06:59:34 PM · #13
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I hate to say it, but doesn't that background look strikingly similar to gyaban's 14th place finish in the Posthumous Ribbons challenge? I always though the shadow at the corner was unlikely to have been generated from the light source presented. My guess is it is a replaced background as well...



I missed seeing this photo before. I am not accusing anybody of doing anything, just trying to figure out how to light this scene and come up with the same results. Where do I put my lights so that my wall ('floor' in this case) ends up looking black, my floor ('wall' in this case) ends up looking smooth brown without any texture whatsoever (notice the neck tie is in focus all the way to the end, so, lack of texture cannot be due to shallow dof), and, I end up with no shadows of any kind anywhere, especially when there is a fairly hard shadow of his left forearm projecting onto his pants but no body shadow on the 'wall' (floor). I hope to see the original and hopefuly a lighting diagram so we can all learn something from this great image.
 01/21/2011 07:43:18 PM · #14
The problem is that gyaban's background editing has been borderline "acceptable" in past decisions; the problem with working on the border of DQ and Validation is that sooner or later you are going to find yourself on the wrong side of the line. This one was also borderline but we felt it was over the line.
 01/21/2011 07:55:02 PM · #15
Maybe a solution here is simple.

When a photo gets called into question for validation, and it passes by the skin of it's teeth, we should be told, that way we do not (or do) carry on doing the same thing over again
 01/22/2011 01:19:06 AM · #16
Originally posted by nshapiro:
The problem is that gyaban's background editing has been borderline "acceptable" in past decisions; the problem with working on the border of DQ and Validation is that sooner or later you are going to find yourself on the wrong side of the line. This one was also borderline but we felt it was over the line.


Did he know that he was on the edge with prior validations? If not, why would he change his method?
 01/22/2011 02:48:28 AM · #17
Hypothetical explanation for the gradation- maybe the whole background is actually the color of the background where the table/his head is and the shading is accomplished through dodging or even just a gradient?
It's obviously lit using two sources, and if you use the right materials, you get no shadows because the surface uniformly swallows light... meaning it all looks like shadow.
If the background is in fact that color normally, then separation isn't a question anymore either. You just need something that swallows light. I shot this one, lying on the ground (in grass no less) with two light sources. The only adjustment was curves.
01/22/2011 06:30:57 AM · #18
...

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 18:40:34.
 01/22/2011 07:42:13 AM · #19
In gyaban's posthumous challenge photo, there was a floor for the table (a wall)...he darkened the wall portion...however, since there was a backdrop on the wall and the floor, the thing most questionably is how clean the edge of the darkening is, effectively, sharpening and making more distinct the edge that was there, but was not sharp and as distinct. Anyway, since there was an edge being enhanced, and it was a matter of degree, it too was borderline, but the vote was in favor of validation.

In the newer photo, the background was edited in a similar way, but it's farther removed from the original background, and there's a heck of a lot more of it in the picture. While it was borderline for many of us, this it was enough for us to decide to DQ.

I agree it would be a nice idea to let people know when something is borderline, but there are pitfalls there--it's still a subjective judgement when legal editing is "too much". It's not always easy to communicate...the system is currently a judge/jury decision. The jury makes its best decision, trying to achieve consensus. If you pass, you pass because the majority didn't find enough evidence to disqualify. Doesn't mean you aren't guilty ;) But I would love to see more categories added: Validated/Split Decision DQ/Split Decision Valid/DQ. But there would still be a heck of a lot more work involved if we had to write up a "brief" describing why each time and trying to quantify the decision.
And what about the "stamp" you get if the photo's still in validation?

And remember, no judge/jury is perfect...

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 07:45:49.
 01/22/2011 12:03:06 PM · #20
Originally posted by nshapiro:
In gyaban's posthumous challenge photo, there was a floor for the table (a wall)...he darkened the wall portion...however, since there was a backdrop on the wall and the floor, the thing most questionably is how clean the edge of the darkening is, effectively, sharpening and making more distinct the edge that was there, but was not sharp and as distinct. Anyway, since there was an edge being enhanced, and it was a matter of degree, it too was borderline, but the vote was in favor of validation.

In the newer photo, the background was edited in a similar way, but it's farther removed from the original background, and there's a heck of a lot more of it in the picture. While it was borderline for many of us, this it was enough for us to decide to DQ.

.........


Would it be against the rules to show us both originals? I think we can all learn a lot from this.
01/22/2011 12:12:21 PM · #21
I have to say that I'm bit frustrated for Christophe. His images do not typically fall in line with my tast, by I truly admire his ability to see and create these scenes. I don't expect personal explanations for each validation, but I strongly encourage SC to take the extra time to notify the photographer when an image created controversy during the validation process.

Neil, how many SC vote on a given image during validation?
 01/22/2011 12:17:59 PM · #22
Originally posted by senor_kasper:

Would it be against the rules to show us both originals? I think we can all learn a lot from this.


I'm not aware of any DPC rule on that, however, it would be against my will: I do not want my originals to be publicly shown, period.

As for the other issues that have been raised here:
1) I've been using a similar studio background technique in many entries, and I think 6 or 7 of them have been validated. Therefore, I had no clue about being on the rules' edge. A simple word from the council in the last 6 months would have been enough for me to create a new technique, less "borderline". That's no big deal, I will do it now. I already have several ideas I need to test.

2) I am very proud of "Always with style", despite the incredible amount of attack and hate this entry got. I must say DPC's reaction on it made me simply stop photography for a full month. I really regret that I gave some technical explanations about it, such as "I was lying on the floor", because all I got from it was some more attacks implying I'm just a cheater. Lesson learned, from now on, I won't provide any technical explanation about my entries (except to the Council when/if needed, of course).

That will be all from me on these subjects. Have a nice day.
 01/22/2011 12:20:15 PM · #23
I was wondering when the man himself would chime in....
 01/22/2011 12:35:02 PM · #24
gyaban,

seriously 'incredible amount of attack and hate"

All I have seen is people defending you, trying to help you, trying to understand how you did something, not understanding.

All your comments on the photos and on this thread, are hardly hating and attacking.

I personally think , that this thread and the comments that people have expressed show just how much you are admired for your work.



Message edited by author 2011-01-22 13:34:11.
 01/22/2011 12:36:57 PM · #25
Originally posted by nshapiro:
In gyaban's posthumous challenge photo, there was a floor for the table (a wall)...he darkened the wall portion...however, since there was a backdrop on the wall and the floor, the thing most questionably is how clean the edge of the darkening is, effectively, sharpening and making more distinct the edge that was there, but was not sharp and as distinct. Anyway, since there was an edge being enhanced, and it was a matter of degree, it too was borderline, but the vote was in favor of validation.

In the newer photo, the background was edited in a similar way, but it's farther removed from the original background, and there's a heck of a lot more of it in the picture. While it was borderline for many of us, this it was enough for us to decide to DQ.

I agree it would be a nice idea to let people know when something is borderline, but there are pitfalls there--it's still a subjective judgement when legal editing is "too much". It's not always easy to communicate...the system is currently a judge/jury decision. The jury makes its best decision, trying to achieve consensus. If you pass, you pass because the majority didn't find enough evidence to disqualify. Doesn't mean you aren't guilty ;) But I would love to see more categories added: Validated/Split Decision DQ/Split Decision Valid/DQ. But there would still be a heck of a lot more work involved if we had to write up a "brief" describing why each time and trying to quantify the decision.
And what about the "stamp" you get if the photo's still in validation?

And remember, no judge/jury is perfect...


NS, great explanation,
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 11:36:11 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 11:36:11 AM EDT.