| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/10/2007 07:11:27 AM · #1 |
After viewing a challenge entry, you decide in your own mind that, for whatever reason, a picture has a high probability of being in violation of some rule - any rule. The 'click here if you suspect a rules violation' link is right there. Yet you don't click it. Why not?
Since you didn't click it, does your suspicion influence your vote?
Would you leave a comment on the image voicing your suspicion? Is it 'ok' to leave such a comment? (especially considering you didn't request validation?) |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 07:14:56 AM · #2 |
My first question is, if you suspect a violation, why not click the button? It does really no harm and helps DPC members out in the long run. If the entry is on the up and up, it will be validated and then other voters will be amazed and astounded that the image is indeed authentic and vote it appropriately.
Originally posted by CEJ:
After viewing a challenge entry, you decide in your own mind that, for whatever reason, a picture has a high probability of being in violation of some rule - any rule. The 'click here if you suspect a rules violation' link is right there. Yet you don't click it. Why not?
Since you didn't click it, does your suspicion influence your vote?
Would you leave a comment on the image voicing your suspicion? Is it 'ok' to leave such a comment? (especially considering you didn't request validation?) |
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 07:17:05 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by bassbone:
My first question is, if you suspect a violation, why not click the button? |
Hmm...I believe that is what I am asking. This is rhetorical from my perspective. I really am curious why people would not click the button yet would comment that they suspect the picture is in violation. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 07:26:15 AM · #4 |
does every photo that gets a request get looked at? because i thought that when a photo was validated it said so at the bottom or something and i have requested a select few to be looked at though the statement "this photo has been validated" never showed up. i just figured the SC never looked into it.
Originally posted by CEJ:
Originally posted by bassbone:
My first question is, if you suspect a violation, why not click the button? |
Hmm...I believe that is what I am asking. This is rhetorical from my perspective. I really am curious why people would not click the button yet would comment that they suspect the picture is in violation. |
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 07:28:00 AM · #5 |
Yes, I believe every photo requested gets looked at and yes, not every photo gets the 'this photo has been validated' message.
Message edited by author 2007-08-10 07:28:16. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 07:39:25 AM · #6 |
When we get a request, a few different things can happen. What *always* happens, is we look at the entry and vote as to whether we feel a proof file is needed to make a decision. If so, proof is requested, if not we simply vote as to whether it is legal. If proof is requested, we will review the proof file, including EXIF, and in cases where the editing is being questioned, we'll try to reconstruct the steps and get the results the submitter got. If we can't it gets DQ'd.
If a shot is validated it may or may not get the stamp. We apply the stamp only when we feel that many will question the legality. The reason we don't always apply the stamp is that folks were requesting review on their own shots to get the stamp, thinking it would help their score.
Message edited by author 2007-08-10 07:39:59. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 08:49:08 AM · #7 |
I never ask for a DQ, nor do I vote down because I suspect one. Why should I do either? Different members of a society play different roles. I don't like a society where everybody plays police.
Message edited by author 2007-08-10 08:49:18. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 09:05:33 AM · #8 |
Is it still the top five that are automatically validated for each contest?
I might still like to see a little mini-mark for validation post-voting. Obviously with shots that get a few validation requests, it would still be nice to have a note during voting...
Recently, I came across a top ten shot which bothered me as I felt it was blatantly DNMC and I that I additionally felt was badly processed. I was surprised that it had come in so high, so I had a go at re-editing it with permission from the shooter. I was unable to obtain the same type of results with basic editing rules editing (although with advanced, I could have done it in about 30 seconds). I strongly considered pushing the validate button but chose not to. My processing goals were different, so in a way, I was also trying to have my cake and eat it too with the editing.
Why not push the button? Because in the end, it is disappointing to see shoehorned DNMC entries place high, but learning is a higher goal than placement in the contest. Therefore I don't feel that it is important enough to waste the time on validation for that pic. I didn't learn how the shooter managed to get those results from a basic editing process, but the shooter did apparently. Additional learning was posted on the pic for anyone else who cared to read further. Good 'nuff I figure.
Had I not bothered to take the time to play with the pic myself, I probably would have just moved on. Nothing in the contest pic suggested illegal processing.
Message edited by author 2007-08-10 09:11:38. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 09:27:34 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I never ask for a DQ, nor do I vote down because I suspect one. Why should I do either? Different members of a society play different roles. I don't like a society where everybody plays police. |
Doesn't surprise me to hear you say that, given your general approach on DPC.
But I disagree strongly. If I see someone I don't know entering a house of a neighbor who I know is out of town, I call the police. I'm not arresting them, I'm asking someone with authority to check into it. If it turns out it's my neighbor's brother coming over to feed the cat, then great. If not, I've just helped.
So yeah, I click the button. Then I vote assuming it's legal, like we're supposed to. In fact, many time it ends up being a high vote because I'm impressed with what someone pulled off.
Which pretty much sums up my attitude to being validated: I don't deliberately break editing rules, so I take it as a compliment that I managed to do something at least one person couldn't figure out. And if one person couldn't, I'd much rather answer their question than leave it hanging for many other people who are probably also wondering.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 09:35:48 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by CEJ:
Originally posted by bassbone:
My first question is, if you suspect a violation, why not click the button? |
Hmm...I believe that is what I am asking. This is rhetorical from my perspective. I really am curious why people would not click the button yet would comment that they suspect the picture is in violation. |
Do we get to see the comment when the current challenges are done voting? :P
BTW - I agree with the position Jeffrey ( levyj413) just stated. :D |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 09:46:53 AM · #11 |
Oh, to respond to the question about commenting, I might comment something like "Wow - that's amazing under basic rules." But I wouldn't accuse someone of something in a comment. Not that I'd mind terribly much if someone knew I'd requested validation, but because if it's legit, I wouldn't want them to have such an accusation sitting there.
But again, people need to relax a bit about the whole validation thing. I got a couple of comments on my July free study entry that they thought I'd enlarged the moon or maybe composited together two photos. I could certainly understand why they wondered, because one major reason for the photo's impact is how big the moon is, and it's rare to see it that large compared to objects on the ground.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 09:51:56 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Is it still the top five that are automatically validated for each contest?
I might still like to see a little mini-mark for validation post-voting. Obviously with shots that get a few validation requests, it would still be nice to have a note during voting...
Recently, I came across a top ten shot which bothered me as I felt it was blatantly DNMC and I that I additionally felt was badly processed. I was surprised that it had come in so high, so I had a go at re-editing it with permission from the shooter. I was unable to obtain the same type of results with basic editing rules editing (although with advanced, I could have done it in about 30 seconds). I strongly considered pushing the validate button but chose not to. My processing goals were different, so in a way, I was also trying to have my cake and eat it too with the editing.
Why not push the button? Because in the end, it is disappointing to see shoehorned DNMC entries place high, but learning is a higher goal than placement in the contest. Therefore I don't feel that it is important enough to waste the time on validation for that pic. I didn't learn how the shooter managed to get those results from a basic editing process, but the shooter did apparently. Additional learning was posted on the pic for anyone else who cared to read further. Good 'nuff I figure.
Had I not bothered to take the time to play with the pic myself, I probably would have just moved on. Nothing in the contest pic suggested illegal processing. |
Couldn't quite tell from your post, but just in case you don't know, DNMC will not get an entry DQ'd.
At times there are special rules in place for a given challenge (30 second exposure, for example) that if violated will get a DQ. But a blue shot in a Yellow challenge will not be DQ'd based soley on the challenge description. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 10:48:20 AM · #13 |
You are the biggest hypocrite I have ever seen. First of all that shot you are talking about was incredible and a very rare shot. Your argument was that a top 10 shot DNMC. Yet everyone else thought it was incredible, then you left nasty comments on the shot. You frankly didn't like the shot, it wasn't that you thought it was not basic editing. I read every comment you made and it was very rude to that person. Curves, USM, and Color Balance are ALL LEGAL in basic editing. Leaving a comment like you did on the picture and not emailing the person in my eyes makes you out to be [deleted]....
"I Originally posted by eschelar:
Is it still the top five that are automatically validated for each contest?
I might still like to see a little mini-mark for validation post-voting. Obviously with shots that get a few validation requests, it would still be nice to have a note during voting...
Recently, I came across a top ten shot which bothered me as I felt it was blatantly DNMC and I that I additionally felt was badly processed. I was surprised that it had come in so high, so I had a go at re-editing it with permission from the shooter. I was unable to obtain the same type of results with basic editing rules editing (although with advanced, I could have done it in about 30 seconds). I strongly considered pushing the validate button but chose not to. My processing goals were different, so in a way, I was also trying to have my cake and eat it too with the editing.
Why not push the button? Because in the end, it is disappointing to see shoehorned DNMC entries place high, but learning is a higher goal than placement in the contest. Therefore I don't feel that it is important enough to waste the time on validation for that pic. I didn't learn how the shooter managed to get those results from a basic editing process, but the shooter did apparently. Additional learning was posted on the pic for anyone else who cared to read further. Good 'nuff I figure.
Had I not bothered to take the time to play with the pic myself, I probably would have just moved on. Nothing in the contest pic suggested illegal processing. |
Message edited by frisca - no personal attacks please!. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 11:01:06 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Recently, I came across a top ten shot which bothered me as I felt it was blatantly DNMC and I that I additionally felt was badly processed. |
No where does it state in the rules the DNMC (Does Not Meet Challenge) equates to disqualification. Disqualification requires failing to follow the rules, not the challenge description.
If you think someone is not following the rules, hit the validation button and move on.
Edited to remove non-topic comments - thanks Jeff for the refocus!
Message edited by author 2007-08-10 12:02:08. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 11:25:53 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by JawnyRico:
You are the biggest ... |
Snipped because you really did get a little out of hand there. Please relax, and remember not to insult other people or personally attack them in the forums. It's not just a suggestion, it's in the forum rules.
And bassbone and others, could we please stick to the topic of whether and when it's appropriate or not to hit the validation request, leave a comment, etc.?
Eschelar's comments on one pic and his editing skills aren't relevant to those topics.
Message edited by author 2007-08-10 11:31:57.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 12:00:53 PM · #16 |
| Ok so you can't attack people on the forum's, but you can attack someones pictures in the comments section. It makes perfect sense. But in all seriousness, if you think a picture was not done in the rules, send a request, don't build up anger and then bad mouth it in the comments under the picture. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 12:12:40 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by JawnyRico:
... if you think a picture was not done in the rules, send a request, don't build up anger and then bad mouth it in the comments under the picture. |
So this would be your answer to the OP's question ==>
Originally posted by CEJ:
... Would you leave a comment on the image voicing your suspicion? Is it 'ok' to leave such a comment? (especially considering you didn't request validation?) |
In the FWIW column, the comments you reference appear to have been left after the challenge ended, not made during the time when a validation request is likely to be made (as this thread seems to be about). |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 12:15:25 PM · #18 |
Unless it's badly done or super obvious (such as text), I usually vote images I suspect of cheating highly then report it.
If it has broken the rules it will get DQ'd. If not, bravo for fooling me :-)
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 12:25:22 PM · #19 |
| I will not request a DQ because I am yet to be qualified enough to judge whether a picture is by the rules or not. Thus, I don't create an extra burden for the SC and agitate the entrant because of my lack of understanding. But if I knew there was a picture which violated a rule, then I will consider it. |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 12:45:02 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by JawnyRico:
Ok so you can't attack people on the forum's, but you can attack someones pictures in the comments section. It makes perfect sense. |
That's right, it does. This is a photograph exchange, comment, and voting site. Not a personal criticism site. You post a photo, you invite comments. Eschelar's thoughts were comments on the photo, nothing more. If you read criticism as an attack, then you're not going to be happy on DPC. Now, he could have phrased them a little more considerately and in a way that showed he understands they're his opinions, not absolute truths.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 12:57:04 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
But I disagree strongly. If I see someone I don't know entering a house of a neighbor who I know is out of town, I call the police. I'm not arresting them, I'm asking someone with authority to check into it. If it turns out it's my neighbor's brother coming over to feed the cat, then great. If not, I've just helped. |
If someone is breaking into my neighbor's house, then I feel a personal obligation to help my neighbor. In that sense, yes, we are all policemen, but policemen of our own principles, not society's laws. If I spend time worrying about whether a particular photo meets all the rules, then that time is spent away from considerations that are integral to my character (e.g., "do I like this photo? Why or why not?"). You will often find that oppressive societies encourage their citizens to act as police, to turn each other in. This not only terrorizes nonconformists, it also dissolves the informant's sense of himself and turns him into an agent of the state. Contrarily, open societies stress the importance of educating their populace.
It may very well be that operating within the rules of the challenge is an integral concern to you, but it is not an integral concern to me, so I do not distract myself with it.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 01:12:52 PM · #22 |
Not defending the "ass" comment, i'll keep those to myself but you dont know what was said on that image. It was very harsh and uncalled for. He was personally attcking her and her image.
Originally posted by levyj413:
That's right, it does. This is a photograph exchange, comment, and voting site. Not a personal criticism site. You post a photo, you invite comments. Eschelar's thoughts were comments on the photo, nothing more. If you read criticism as an attack, then you're not going to be happy on DPC. Now, he could have phrased them a little more considerately and in a way that showed he understands they're his opinions, not absolute truths. |
|
|
|
|
08/10/2007 01:31:55 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Chinabun:
... He was personally attcking her and her image.
Originally posted by levyj413:
That's right, it does. This is a photograph exchange, comment, and voting site. Not a personal criticism site. You post a photo, you invite comments. Eschelar's thoughts were comments on the photo, nothing more. If you read criticism as an attack, then you're not going to be happy on DPC. Now, he could have phrased them a little more considerately and in a way that showed he understands they're his opinions, not absolute truths. |
|
Ok. Here is it ==> 
Make your own conclusions. Now, can this thread get back on topic and drop the finger pointing? |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 01:33:13 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Now, he could have phrased them a little more considerately and in a way that showed he understands they're his opinions, not absolute truths. |
Actually, I've learned that whatever is said is an opinion, whether it is phrases as such or not. :) |
|
|
|
08/10/2007 01:44:02 PM · #25 |
When I was new, I reported a lot, mostly because I didn't know how much can be accomplished with photo editing. Now, I am much more hesitant to report because I recognize that I don't know that it can't be done. I will give the submitter the benefit of the doubt. But if it's very obvious to me, then yes, I report.
|
|
