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 26 - 50 of 64, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 01/22/2011 12:39:59 PM · #26
Originally posted by gyaban:
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.


Oh man, I thought we were in this place to learn from each other, I guess I was so totally wrong.

Also, I just read all of the comments posted for your 'Always with Style' picture, I did not see a single one that could be construed as 'hateful' or 'attacking'. Man, you got a heck of a thin skin. I didn't see anybody suggesting you were a cheater either.

Thank you for letting us know that your techniques are so above the undeserving rest of us. Personally, I am very hurt, that's it, I am going to cry and stop photography for 3 months.
 01/22/2011 01:12:48 PM · #27
double post

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 13:21:53.
 01/22/2011 01:19:22 PM · #28
I'm not sure I blame gyaban for his reaction. This thread was just meant to acknowledge that the place standings in the challenge have been revised and then it turned into wether or not he had "broken" the rules in some of his other entries. If there was a question of legality in any of his past entries then they should have been brought up during the challenge with a request for validation and not months later. As far as not wanting his original shots to be shown, again I don't blame him. I recall not long ago that Yo_Spiff got a bit of backlash for showing his original and the questions of legality came up even though it was validated. I am all for learning how things were done but it seems those that step out to show that get a bunch of crap for it.
 01/22/2011 01:21:08 PM · #29
I'm with jminso. Enough already. This site is primarily a place to have fun, with the added asset of learning a lot while having said fun. This sort of quasi-character assassination is the proverbial wet blanket on the party. We should rejoice when someone wants to share how they do what they do, and respect the wishes of those who don't. And please, if you really have an issue with someone, PLEASE resolve it with a PM.
 01/22/2011 01:24:33 PM · #30
Originally posted by tanguera:
I'm with jminso. Enough already. This site is primarily a place to have fun, with the added asset of learning a lot while having said fun. This sort of quasi-character assassination is the proverbial wet blanket on the party. We should rejoice when someone wants to share how they do what they do, and respect the wishes of those who don't. And please, if you really have an issue with someone, PLEASE resolve it with a PM.


Well said you two - I totally agree.
 01/22/2011 01:25:49 PM · #31
I really feel for gyaban here, firstly for how his images have fallen into question through this thread and then again by how people reacted to his post.

Personally I think it is great that he pushes the envelope - that is where innovation and creativity live. Good for DPC and good for him.

I don't think he needs to get a thicker skin, I think some people should develop a little more tact.
 01/22/2011 01:26:39 PM · #32
Originally posted by jminso:
I'm not sure I blame gyaban for his reaction. This thread was just meant to acknowledge that the place standings in the challenge have been revised and then it turned into wether or not he had "broken" the rules in some of his other entries. If there was a question of legality in any of his past entries then they should have been brought up during the challenge with a request for validation and not months later. As far as not wanting his original shots to be shown, again I don't blame him. I recall not long ago that Yo_Spiff got a bit of backlash for showing his original and the questions of legality came up even though it was validated. I am all for learning how things were done but it seems those that step out to show that get a bunch of crap for it.


Agreed.
I believe the line was overstepped when other previously validated entries were brought into the discussion.
There is a fine line between asking between two entries and creating a witchhunt. Seems silly but is true.
 01/22/2011 01:37:22 PM · #33
I must be blind or not reading something incorrectly, I do not see a witch hunt at all. I see people asking for clarification and trying to understand why it was wrong, I see people defending G. I also see a lot of admiration for him and his work. I also see no problem with him not wanting to show his original.

But then again, I do not see where anyone has called him a cheat or has hated him or attacked him, on this thread or comments on his photos, as he has said is happening. Maybe I am missing a connection somewhere.

Edited to add:: Ohhhhh I can see a bit more now from Fiora's post about earlier entry's. I still don't think it was a witch hunt though, I think it was questioning as to how the affect was made and how it was possible. I personally didn't read it read it as attacks though. Especially after it was pointed out that SC was borderline on it all. I think it could have all be cleared up with a note saying, Hey, borderline, this is why.

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 13:40:26.
 01/22/2011 01:40:50 PM · #34
Originally posted by jminso:
I'm not sure I blame gyaban for his reaction. This thread was just meant to acknowledge that the place standings in the challenge have been revised and then it turned into wether or not he had "broken" the rules in some of his other entries. If there was a question of legality in any of his past entries then they should have been brought up during the challenge with a request for validation and not months later. As far as not wanting his original shots to be shown, again I don't blame him. I recall not long ago that Yo_Spiff got a bit of backlash for showing his original and the questions of legality came up even though it was validated. I am all for learning how things were done but it seems those that step out to show that get a bunch of crap for it.


Originally posted by tanguera:
I'm with jminso. Enough already. This site is primarily a place to have fun, with the added asset of learning a lot while having said fun. This sort of quasi-character assassination is the proverbial wet blanket on the party. We should rejoice when someone wants to share how they do what they do, and respect the wishes of those who don't. And please, if you really have an issue with someone, PLEASE resolve it with a PM.


Totally agree! I've really enjoyed Christophe's creativity and expertise and am looking forward to more of his entries!
 01/22/2011 01:46:04 PM · #35
Originally posted by senor_kasper:

Thank you for letting us know that your techniques are so above the undeserving rest of us. Personally, I am very hurt, that's it, I am going to cry and stop photography for 3 months.

I hope you thought twice before posting this. That was intended to be hurtful. Not nice at all. :(
 01/22/2011 01:47:41 PM · #36

Kettle black

ROFLMFAO

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 17:09:22.
 01/22/2011 02:32:38 PM · #37
Originally posted by marnet:
Originally posted by senor_kasper:

Thank you for letting us know that your techniques are so above the undeserving rest of us. Personally, I am very hurt, that's it, I am going to cry and stop photography for 3 months.

I hope you thought twice before posting this. That was intended to be hurtful. Not nice at all. :(


You are right, that is mean, sorry, I'll reduce it to 2 months.
 01/22/2011 04:27:48 PM · #38
Originally posted by Fiora:
Agreed.
I believe the line was overstepped when other previously validated entries were brought into the discussion.
There is a fine line between asking between two entries and creating a witchhunt. Seems silly but is true.


Just to point out. There was no way to know his other entry was previously validated. People need to take it down a notch when everybody views everything as a personal attack. We had an entry that was disqualified. We had another entry that appeared to use the same technique that fell outside the Top 5 (thus not usually validated). It is perfectly reasonable, and far from a personal attack to ask, "hmm, is that photo legit?" (Unless you think SC'd DQ counts as a personal attack in and of itself.)

By asking these questions we have learned that such techniques are walking the line and apt to run into trouble, but sometimes are deemed acceptable. That is more information that we would have garnered from the original post.

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 16:29:50.
 01/22/2011 04:48:57 PM · #39
Time for the ignore button... There are some folks here I really respect, going places I wish they wouldn't.
 01/22/2011 05:03:25 PM · #40
Originally posted by ambaker:
Time for the ignore button... There are some folks here I really respect, going places I wish they wouldn't.


Amen to that :-(

R.
 01/22/2011 06:23:29 PM · #41
Well, some are here for themselves and could not care less about helping others learn new techniques.

Others are more than willing to help others. Jeers to the former. Cheers to the latter.
 01/22/2011 07:09:04 PM · #42
I'm going to be honest here, while I agree with some of Gyabans reaction and I can understand it must be annoying to have your photos under scrutiny all the time, saying that your photo was 'under attack' and that you were being called a 'cheater' was wrong. Not one comment on there was abusive or implying anything like you described.

Saying that you quit photography for a month and blaming it on the peoples comments - when nobody said anything bad at all is ridiculous. Almost everyone that commented offered praise and you repay them like this.

I've not lost any respect for you as a photographer but your response has annoyed me.

Message edited by author 2011-01-22 19:11:09.
 01/22/2011 07:13:42 PM · #43
Originally posted by adamelliott111:
I'm going to be honest here, while I agree with some of Gyabans reaction and I can understand it must be annoying to have your photos under scrutiny all the time, saying that your photo was 'under attack' and that you were being called a 'cheater' was wrong. Not one comment on there was abusive or implying anything like you described.

Saying that you quit photography for a month and blaming it on the peoples comments - when nobody said anything bad at all is ridiculous. Almost everyone that commented offered praise and you repay them like this.

I've not lost any respect for you as a photographer but your response has annoyed me.


ummm... I think you're all assuming that nasty comments can only be made through the comment system. Perhaps they were in PMs, instead.

I think it's time to stop picking things apart. It's not being productive. Perhaps it's time to move this to rant?
 01/22/2011 07:16:44 PM · #44
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by adamelliott111:
I'm going to be honest here, while I agree with some of Gyabans reaction and I can understand it must be annoying to have your photos under scrutiny all the time, saying that your photo was 'under attack' and that you were being called a 'cheater' was wrong. Not one comment on there was abusive or implying anything like you described.

Saying that you quit photography for a month and blaming it on the peoples comments - when nobody said anything bad at all is ridiculous. Almost everyone that commented offered praise and you repay them like this.

I've not lost any respect for you as a photographer but your response has annoyed me.


ummm... I think you're all assuming that nasty comments can only be made through the comment system. Perhaps they were in PMs, instead.

I think it's time to stop picking things apart. It's not being productive. Perhaps it's time to move this to rant?


Why anyone would feel so strongly about a photo to PM the guy and accuse him of cheating I don't know, but if that's the case I apologise.
 01/22/2011 07:54:48 PM · #45
Originally posted by David Ey:
Well, some are here for themselves and could not care less about helping others learn new techniques.

Others are more than willing to help others. Jeers to the former. Cheers to the latter.

Amen to that :-)
 01/22/2011 08:52:34 PM · #46
Originally posted by gyaban:
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.


That is exactly what I learned, in exactly this way, Christophe.

I forgot a few times, but ... was reminded quite quickly. *grin*

People think they want to know things... but when they know them, the magic is gone.

I like to share my knowledge that I've learned from here and other places. I'm just wary. And I hate to be.

Let us all not judge, lest we be judged. It ain't purdy when it happens to you.

Anyway, carry on, One and All!

Life is good, even when it's not.

01/23/2011 01:49:10 AM · #47
Back to the original subject, sort of... does anyone else remember this thread about backgrounds, and Dr. Achoo's example? So the problem with gyaban's DQ'd entry was that the background was gradient?
01/23/2011 02:21:19 AM · #48
Originally posted by jminso:
As far as not wanting his original shots to be shown, again I don't blame him. I recall not long ago that Yo_Spiff got a bit of backlash for showing his original and the questions of legality came up even though it was validated. I am all for learning how things were done but it seems those that step out to show that get a bunch of crap for it.

And that reaction will probably make me think twice next time. However, I expect that after thinking twice, I will probably do it again. I did get some grief, but many others were supportive, even some whom I know don't care for that style and probably low voted it. Interestingly, I've seen a fair amount of similar looking orange treatments in recent challenges.
 01/24/2011 11:15:50 AM · #49
Originally posted by citymars:
Back to the original subject, sort of... does anyone else remember this thread about backgrounds, and Dr. Achoo's example? So the problem with gyaban's DQ'd entry was that the background was gradient?

It would be instructive to see gyaban's original, that's all. I'd still like to know (even without seeing gyaban's original)... Was the problem with gyaban's entry that the background was gradient? Or has the permitted amount of background processing changed over the last few years? Thanks.
 01/24/2011 02:21:57 PM · #50
I'm curious about this as well. I'm new to the site and I've been nervous about the level of editing we're allowed at the different levels. After seeing DrAchoo's example from that thread I feel a lot better about my unprofessional sheet background. I hope the standard in that thread is still accurate. It gives me a lot more freedom to create some nice entries without having to worry about getting the background perfect.

Would it be possible/reasonable to add examples or links to threads such as that? I've read the rule page many many times, but never got the level of understanding that I got from the example thread. I realize (now) that there are threads in the forums that give examples, but it would be nice (and more official) to have some sort of reference on the rules page. I know that it's subjective from the SC's point of view, but speaking as a new member to the site, it was really intimidating to see that list of rules and not fully understand what is meant by this:
"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 or crop), even if the tool is otherwise legal, and regardless of whether you intended the change when the photograph was taken."

Finding out that "white background" is the level of description meant by this statement is a welcome relief.

- Justin
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 08:09:50 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: 04/19/2024 08:09:50 PM EDT.