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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> 'Best of 2012' Challenge Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 91, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/12/2013 12:27:31 PM · #51
Originally posted by bohemka:



It's all subjective anyway, and I'm sure the SC is tired of having their decisions analyzed time and time again.


how many SC members typically vote on a DQ?
02/12/2013 02:04:00 PM · #52
The answer is clear. No more borders.
02/12/2013 02:09:00 PM · #53
The question is: Are borders like this legal?



And have they been used in challenges before?

(ok -- yes, it's really ugly, but I needed an example to start the conversation.
02/12/2013 02:59:17 PM · #54
Originally posted by vawendy:

The question is: Are borders like this legal?


Originally posted by Advanced Rules:


You May:
- add a border to the outside edge of your entry. Your border must be distinct and clearly recognizable as a border.

You May Not:
- add graphics, clip art, computer-rendered images or parts of other photographs to your entry or its border during editing (except for combining photos as allowed by the multiple capture rules above).
- add text to your entry or its border during editing. This includes copyright statements.


So, is it a border, or is it a vignette? If it's a vignette, it's legal. I suspect that the SC would call it a border. I would too. So is it legal? My guess is that the SC might say no, since there are "graphics" in the border. Even though it's part of the one originally-captured, continuous scene. But that's a guess.
Now, should it be legal? In Advanced editing? IMO, yes. But again, my opinion of what *should* be legal isn't worth a hill of beans.
02/12/2013 03:13:25 PM · #55
Originally posted by vawendy:

The question is: Are borders like this legal?



And have they been used in challenges before?

(ok -- yes, it's really ugly, but I needed an example to start the conversation.


Yes and in basic editing.


And in Advanced.


Message edited by author 2013-02-12 15:27:44.
02/12/2013 03:14:59 PM · #56
Originally posted by Spork99:

The answer is clear. No more borders.


Yes. Or single colour at the outside of the picture.

Message edited by author 2013-02-12 15:15:52.
02/12/2013 05:24:25 PM · #57
I believe that after the examples that Judi posted, everything is clear.
The decision of the SC for the DQ is dissapointing.
02/12/2013 05:33:07 PM · #58
Originally posted by Pascal:

I believe that after the examples that Judi posted, everything is clear.
The decision of the SC for the DQ is dissapointing.


So how many SC vote on a DQ and how many SC total are there? when an image is this close to the boundaries (no pun intended) are other SC consulted or do they just DQ and move on?
02/12/2013 05:33:33 PM · #59
Originally posted by Judi:

Originally posted by vawendy:

The question is: Are borders like this legal?



And have they been used in challenges before?

(ok -- yes, it's really ugly, but I needed an example to start the conversation.


Yes and in basic editing.


And in Advanced.


oh, dang. the smoking gun.

TieOneHandBehindYourBackAndWellStillDQYouBecauseYouUsedColorfulStringChallenge.com
02/12/2013 05:34:46 PM · #60
Originally posted by Judi:

Originally posted by vawendy:

The question is: Are borders like this legal?



And have they been used in challenges before?

(ok -- yes, it's really ugly, but I needed an example to start the conversation.


Yes and in basic editing.


And in Advanced.


I guess then it looks like the canvas was extended. How can the SC tell the difference when the original photo was used so that the background matched? Where do you draw the line for an extension of canvas vs a border? Definitely an argument can be made for both cases.

I assume the intent was to make it look like the crop wasn't such a harsh crop, so to create a border that gave the illusion of the inline border?
02/12/2013 06:34:42 PM · #61


Message edited by author 2013-02-12 18:35:14.
02/12/2013 08:23:34 PM · #62
Maybe the SC should get a replay booth, might be time to go under the hood! I am usual in support of SC decisions but not sure how this one got the ax when similar images have been approved, seems to be a very blurred line of interpretation.
02/12/2013 10:44:26 PM · #63
You know, for ME the bottom line, the takeaway, is "Why should we CARE?" We see so much bickering over whether this border or that border is legal, and to what end? In Advanced editing at least, just ignore everything that happens in the border area, is my thought :-)
02/12/2013 10:54:22 PM · #64
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

You know, for ME the bottom line, the takeaway, is "Why should we CARE?" We see so much bickering over whether this border or that border is legal, and to what end? In Advanced editing at least, just ignore everything that happens in the border area, is my thought :-)


+1

I've had two border dq's in the past. Now I stick to the plain and obvious. I've seen it's gotten much more lenient than it was back then, but I'd still like to see the borders no longer be an issue.
02/12/2013 11:23:10 PM · #65
Photographes Sans Frontières
02/12/2013 11:38:42 PM · #66
d'accord.
02/12/2013 11:44:06 PM · #67
moi non plus
02/13/2013 05:27:36 AM · #68
... and here I told my friends in Québec that there was a thriving Francophone community in Australia and they did not believe me... I now have proof. :O)

Ray
02/13/2013 08:50:29 AM · #69
Originally posted by RayEthier:

... and here I told my friends in Québec that there was a thriving Francophone community in Australia and they did not believe me... I now have proof. :O)

Ray

Francophone? Je ne parle pas français.
02/13/2013 11:33:27 AM · #70
I don't know that there was any bickering. I think everyone pretty much agreed that this one was bizarre. We're just trying to figure out what can and can't be done.

I liked the option of doing away with borders. (unless, of course I want to use them, then they're legal. :)
02/13/2013 10:25:45 PM · #71
bump
02/13/2013 11:34:19 PM · #72
Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by Judi:

Originally posted by vawendy:

The question is: Are borders like this legal?



And have they been used in challenges before?

(ok -- yes, it's really ugly, but I needed an example to start the conversation.


Yes and in basic editing.


And in Advanced.


I guess then it looks like the canvas was extended. How can the SC tell the difference when the original photo was used so that the background matched? Where do you draw the line for an extension of canvas vs a border? Definitely an argument can be made for both cases.

I assume the intent was to make it look like the crop wasn't such a harsh crop, so to create a border that gave the illusion of the inline border?


Well I don't have time for all the back and forth questions that commenting here will generate, which is one reason I've stayed out, but I'll jump in quickly and leave you with this.

You cannot selectively take parts of your picture, and copy them to your border. I think everyone would see that as illegal.

Likewise, you cannot copy your picture, enlarge it, or move it around, then paste that on a layer and make it your border. Even if it sort of looks like it matches.

This was exactly what was done in the photo in question. Manic said it way earlier in the thread.

Originally posted by Manic:

Yes, it's the border that was the issue.

Originally posted by Image notes:

Add border - produced by blurring a copy of the image, resize it and put it at the background

Originally posted by DQ Reason:

You may not use ANY editing tool to move, remove or duplicate any element of your photograph that would change a typical viewer's description of the photograph (aside from color), even if the tool is otherwise legal, and regardless of whether you intended the change when the photograph was taken.


There are other aspects of it that I think are illegal, like the border extension. But there's no need to get into that in my opinion.

Per that, Roz's second image, if it went through validation (which it didn't, and it's old anyway), would be DQd because it looks like she did the same thing with her border.

Wendy's "ugly" border example, would be legal (at least on these grounds), because hers is basically an inset border on an original image (like putting a simple inset line on the photo).

Here's an example that's illegal, and was in fact DQ'd; it's less subtle, but it's not about subtlety.



DQ Reason: You may not use ANY editing tool to move, remove or duplicate any element of your photograph that would change a typical viewer's description of the photograph (aside from color), even if the tool is otherwise legal, and regardless of whether you intended the change when the photograph was taken.

Message edited by author 2013-02-13 23:36:10.
02/14/2013 12:25:16 AM · #73
If he had not mentioned using the photo for the border, and instead used a gradient (with which you can easily create the identical effect), would it have been considered legal? This seems important to know for future borders, as well as for understanding that we may be penalized for actions that don't result in illegal effects.
02/14/2013 12:58:46 AM · #74
Originally posted by skewsme:

If he had not mentioned using the photo for the border, and instead used a gradient (with which you can easily create the identical effect), would it have been considered legal?

A gradient in the border would have been legal (if it didn't look like added image area and wasn't pasted in from a photo). Note that purposefully failing to mention an illegal edit to avoid the consequences is a REALLY bad idea that can result in additional penalty or even banishment.

FWIW, the background on the entry in question was likely a DQ as well. Creating a gradient that suggests sky and water in a previously "blank" background isn't allowed. You could change the color of the background or add a vignette to the entire entry, but if the original sky is blank, then the end result can only be a different color of blank.
02/14/2013 01:05:05 AM · #75
Originally posted by Neil:

Yes and in basic editing.


Per that, Roz's second image, if it went through validation (which it didn't, and it's old anyway), would be DQd because it looks like she did the same thing with her border.



It was a blue ribbon winning image from three years ago....surely it would have been validated. We can only assume that the rules are stricter now and the current SC team would have DQed it too.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 04:23:44 PM

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: 03/28/2024 04:23:44 PM EDT.