| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/15/2004 12:17:00 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Any time you have a 3D object though, the photographer's choice of lighting and angle effects the appearence, so it is no longer a literal representation, it's an 'artistic interpretation'. The shot in question was a flat piece, taken flat on. That makes it a literal representation. |
Yes that pretty much raps it up. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 12:36:44 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Photos like this have always been DQd in the past. There is nothing new here. Even kiwiness himself has had a photo DQd for this rule! The way we decide whether to DQ is:
"Are we voting on the photograph, or the original artwork?"
|
Not always. I took a brown ribbon in the centered challenge for a macro of a hockey puck and it was validated by the SC. I was happy with the shot and it was dead nuts ceneterd. But, voters hated it. Even the commenters only gave it a 2. I also had one DQ'd in the purple challenge that shouldn't have been. So I feel for you.
But....don't ever stop sending in shots you like. Bottom line.....that's all that counts. And your golden feet shot was great! |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 12:48:49 PM · #53 |
Hey you are still my favorite photographer!
Very sweet picture, If you are proud of it nevermind what everyone else here thinks! But do go ahead and vent thats how we learn.
Cheer up
(As we walk long life's highway Every moment, every day We can't always do it "my way" It's not always as "we" say. But if we always have a dream And always strive for more, 'Though life's not what it seems There'll be better times in store. So as you look ahead, As you try to see the plan, Realize instead It's not only in your hands. Someone else is there beside you A shoulder you can cry on, All those friends that God supplied you, All the ones that you rely on. They'll be there for you each morning. They'll be there for you each night. And when your plans are forming They'll stand by you wrong or right. God doesn't let his children down He's there to see us through. His love is ever to be found In your dreams...your friends...and you!) --author unknown--
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 12:57:01 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by train:
I am a very demoralised member and I am really sad to say that photography is no longer a joy
|
This is the most important statement that you made. If you put your camera aside because of some results on this website, photography may not be your best choice of a hobby.
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 12:58:05 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by TommyMoe21:
Not always. I took a brown ribbon in the centered challenge for a macro of a hockey puck and it was validated by the SC. I was happy with the shot and it was dead nuts ceneterd. But, voters hated it. Even the commenters only gave it a 2. I also had one DQ'd in the purple challenge that shouldn't have been. So I feel for you.
But....don't ever stop sending in shots you like. Bottom line.....that's all that counts. And your golden feet shot was great! |
I looked at your Centered entry, just to see what you were talking about. Not being the SC's who made the decision, I don't know the reasoning why it wasn't DQ'd, but I DO have a theory, which relates to Artworks.
Legally, using a representation of a copyrighted artistic image COULD be the artistic version of Plagiarism, especially when using it in a contest. For a representation to be considered Distinct from its original subject, I believe the rule is that there needs to be 3 points of difference. For example, Take a picture of Mickey Mouse, Add horns, make his ears bigger, and give him 5-o'clock shadow, and you have a cartoon character distinct from Mickey, and can make your own cartoons, starring DevilMaus. In the case of the Hockey puck, in altering the background color from white to green, you also altered the color around the wolf head from whit to green (change 1). You also altered the coloring of the puck(change 2), and you cropped it so it was no longer round, making the shape no longer round (change 3). That MIGHT have been the factors that allowed the SC's to give that pic a pass. The same factors that would prevent the creator of that Hockey Puck logo from being able to sue DPChallenge for exhibiting HIS artwork.
Just a theory, mind you. And remember, I'm species N00bus Sapien. Don't put all your stock in my say-so, unless I seem to make sense. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 01:02:56 PM · #56 |
If you made the artwork just for this challenge, then to me it's fair game and should not be DQ'ed.
If however, you simply decided to submit an old piece of artwork that you had, then yes a DQ is fair.
In my book anyway.
which one applies to you?
Hope you do not get to despondent!
JP
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 01:17:49 PM · #57 |
Train, I'm sorry to see anyone get DQ'd here, I'm glad I am not on the site counsel for that reason alone. I think these are unpleasant situations to rule on.
I wonder if you had made this photo a "black and white" or a sepia if the site counsel would view the artistic change as no longer a literal example of the original, making it legal. These are fine line gray areas and I know from experience the site counsel spends time in debate when making these decisions.
Hang in there Train. Don't let things like this take the fun out of taking pictures for you. Your work is beautiful!
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 01:23:45 PM · #58 |
I'll try an summarize exactly how we try to apply this rule:
1.) Does the photo provide any context, other than just the artwork?
2.) Does the photo show the artwork in a new light, i.e. is there interpretation by the photographer?
If the answer to either of these questions is "yes" the photo will not be DQ'd. We are very liberal with what constitutes context or interpretation; in most cases a photo will be DQ'd only if it is literally a straight-on shot of the entirety of an artwork. It thus beets the "literal representation" rule. The fact that the footprint shot was disqualified represents the majoity SC opinion that it is a literal representation.
In all cases we do our level best to ensure that the rules are applied equitably. In this case that required us to DQ the shot. the same applies to other rules, and yes, that also applies to submission of invalid originals.
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 01:44:32 PM · #59 |
| What about a "black and white" or a sepia of the same shot Kirbic? would that have changed the site counsel decision on this shot? |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 01:56:25 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by Gringo:
What about a "black and white" or a sepia of the same shot Kirbic? would that have changed the site counsel decision on this shot? |
Dunno. I'm only one of 19 (17 SC + D&L). That type of treatment can certainly change the mood of a photo dramatically, and IMO does fall under the heading of "interpretation", that is, avoids a very literal presentation of the original work.
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 01:59:15 PM · #61 |
B&W or sepia would help their case, but in my opinion, it's not enough to stop the photo simply being a flat shot of another work of art. In my opinion the photo would have to have an extra element added, either in the form of showing some background such as the wall it is on, or by putting in a prop like a real foot.
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 02:35:33 PM · #62 |
Hey Sally,
Too bad your shot got DQed & too bad that you feel down & out about it all. I disagree with your comparison to kiwi's work tho & I think Konador mae some really excellent points about interpreted art vs. literal art. I think it sucks that your shot got DQed but I think it violated the rules. Perhpas not purposely but it certainly did give a literal representation on artwork.
I think more salient part of your post is being overlooked tho. When I first joined this site, I LOVED it (still do). I wanted to take fotos & submit them & submit them... I loved that a place like this existed for me & others.
As I improved my fotography, I realised that my scores were not low bc I sucked (or at least not wholly bc I sucked) but bc different people like different things. Despite this, I continue to shoot as I please & according to what I like not how things will be scored.
The point is, this is supposed to be fun! The purpose of being here, at least for me, is to be in a community where I can share & imporve my fotography. This gives me joy. It's not a place that should be bringing me down or making me feel bad or picked on.
So your shot got DQed... that bites but hey, you can still take fotos, you can still submit them to this community for feedback, you can still enter the next challenge. These are good things. Things to look forward to, things to do.
My wholehearted recommendation would be to forget about the DQ & get ready for the botany challenge! CHeers & good shooting my friend!
|
|
|
|
08/15/2004 05:01:52 PM · #63 |
Good morning, everyone, from here in wet, soggy, New Zealand
IF it's not raining at the moment it's because it has either just stopped or is just about to!
We are building a house at the moment and our foundations have been washed away 4 times so far!!!! in the last 6 weeks. Still things could be worse.
First of all I would like to thank everyone for contributing to this discussion positive and negative.
Secondly it has been DQ and that's that!
I will take you through the steps of my Footprints image once again and then I will drop it.
My daughter and I have been meaning to do Olivia (her 18 month old daughters) prints for ages
I saw the 'Feet challenge' and that inspired me to do it so we bought the gold paint and the blue card, she (my daughter brushed the non toxic paint on her feet and hands and I held Olivias feet and hands and printed them onto the card I took a few shots of them but Olivia got hold of my camera and deleted all my shots. Oh joy!
When I went out to their home the next day Tina had already framed it so I set up the framed image and took the shot not easy with glass in the front so dont talk to me about lighting although I will agree it was not a technical studio set up, hardly any of my images are
When I got home I cropped off the hands part and the wood frame darkened the tonal range and sharpened a little and downsized for uploading I think that was all I did
I DID NOT see that as doing anything wrong.
So I opologise and I will try not to do it again. I'll Take 3 lashings and be sent to my room LOL!
What a performance!
Thanks again to everyone for your support and for Gary to be humble and let me use his artwork as an example Your photography is awesome! (Not that I asked him)
The next time I take an image I guess its going to be very hard what is considered an art form in its entirity Only a part of a rose or image
Anyway I will accept defeat and carry on regardless! A new day and better thoughts I was however fed up yesterday! and I did feel like chucking it all in but there are some lovely people out there and I thank you for being there for me. Your support is very kind and most welcome
I still like my work and I still like the Footprints and to all you people that think its an easy shot to set up, try painting an 18 months old hands and feet and printing them on card they are not very easy to do and she was Awake!
Try it, then post the results, there is a challenge for you!From me
Regards
Sally
Message edited by author 2004-08-15 17:16:42. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 08:56:27 PM · #64 |
Quoting from the "Artwork" rule, it seems pretty clear to me how this rule is applied (emphasis mine):
Artwork. Literal photographic representations of the entirety of existing works of art (including your own) are not considered acceptable submissions, however creative depictions or interpretations of "art" are permissible. This includes, but is not limited to: paintings, sculptures, photographs, drawings, computer artwork, computer monitors, and televisions. A literal representation is one which is composed in such a way as to compel the voter to rate only the work of art represented and not the artistic decisions made by the photographer (i.e., lighting, composition, background elements, etc).
Imagine this scenario:
You have an awesome Vanishing Point picture that you took two weeks ago. To get around the "photo must be taken during the challenge" rule, you print out the photo you took two weeks ago, and then photograph the photo. You now technically have a photo that is valid for the challenge. This rule allows us to DQ images that try to do silly stuff like this.
In addition, it prevents photographers from using their camera like a "scanner". i.e., photographing a US dollar bill straight-on for a "Green" challenge.
Again, I think the rules pretty clearly state how we consider this rule. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 09:04:31 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Any time you have a 3D object though, the photographer's choice of lighting and angle effects the appearence, so it is no longer a literal representation, it's an 'artistic interpretation'. The shot in question was a flat piece, taken flat on. That makes it a literal representation. |
If merely having a background, or some aspect of lighting (such as an ordinary shadow or reflection) apparent in the image is enough to keep it from being a literal representation of art then it seems it would be impossible to DQ any photo of a three dimensional art work such as a statue, a sculpture, a vase, or a figurine. Isn't this a pretty straightforward picture of a work of art? Well done but not particularly original or creative.
Where is the photographer's interpretation in this one?
Sally's golden footprints did not strike me as a violation when I voted on it. Was the black and gold border on the version that was entered? It could be argued that her two-tone border makes her shot less literal than these two.
Apologies to the two photographers whose images I have posted. Both are very well done. |
|
|
|
08/15/2004 09:24:22 PM · #66 |
| A very interesting fourm... To me its very basic. Since we are photographing for ourselves and then to enter the competition it is up to us to "create a concept" for the competition then take the shot. If its already hanging on a wall or the "concept" was created prior to the competition then photographing it shouldnt be allowed. The photo should add an element that wasn't present in the original concept. It is a fine line but it is a line. text |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 02:36:29 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by train:
I am a very demoralised member and I am really sad to say that photography is no longer a joy
|
This is the most important statement that you made. If you put your camera aside because of some results on this website, photography may not be your best choice of a hobby. |
I wasn't gonna interject into this conversation as it seemed to be pretty much over before I got here. However, I gotta jump in for a sec.
John, when I first read this, I thought, 'Damn that's harsh!'. That was before I absorbed what you said.
Sally, (and anyone that gets discouraged by results from DPC) this site is NOT the be-all and end-all of our hobby, artform, reason to be. If you get a low score here from a shot you TRULY love, oh well. If you have a shot that you TRULY love and it get's DQ'ed, oh well. I've had both happen to me and it doesn't really matter anymore. What matters? Tomorrow, when I get up in the early afternoon, I get to go shoot some photographs....
And Sally, so do you!
Message edited by author 2004-08-16 02:38:33.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 03:09:01 AM · #68 |
This is my image of 'Feet' that all the fuss was about as you can see it was not in its entirity but part of an image
Just thought Id post this to show you
Thank you for all the support from some wonderful people and the emails
I will not give up thats not really my nature
I will put that part behind me now and move on.
Thanks again
Sally
Message edited by author 2004-08-16 03:24:57. |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 03:29:28 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Originally posted by train:
I am a very demoralised member and I am really sad to say that photography is no longer a joy
|
This is the most important statement that you made. If you put your camera aside because of some results on this website, photography may not be your best choice of a hobby. |
I wasn't gonna interject into this conversation as it seemed to be pretty much over before I got here. However, I gotta jump in for a sec.
John, when I first read this, I thought, 'Damn that's harsh!'. That was before I absorbed what you said.
Sally, (and anyone that gets discouraged by results from DPC) this site is NOT the be-all and end-all of our hobby, artform, reason to be. If you get a low score here from a shot you TRULY love, oh well. If you have a shot that you TRULY love and it get's DQ'ed, oh well. I've had both happen to me and it doesn't really matter anymore. What matters? Tomorrow, when I get up in the early afternoon, I get to go shoot some photographs....
And Sally, so do you! |
 This is another image I had dDQ back in June and I havent a clue why This is the car in my daughters home and so I think I set it up well and It got DQ
Sally
Message edited by author 2004-08-16 03:33:53. |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 03:50:07 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by train:
This is another image I had dDQ back in June and I havent a clue why |
You do know why. All DQs are accompanied with a DQ message. A number of SC members even tried to help you with the issue.
You must provide the unaltered original for your entry when requested. Please review the challenge submission rules.
This is only one of many cases where this has been the reason for us being forced to DQ you.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 04:04:53 AM · #71 |
Hi Sally.. Sorry to hear about your dq. So far I have remained on the side line with this thread, reading both sides and I can see valid points on both sides.
I think its a fine but fuzzy line and very difficult one for dpc to make decissions on. I'm sure that there is a lot of thought put in to every dq and a decission is made that not all would like but have to go with because of the rules.
That said, I believe that dpc has to be very carefull not to allow photo's that only have 2D art in them in the challenge because there would be more photos of flat artwork than true photographic works in the challenges.
To be perfectly honest I'm not sure there is any 1 answer as there are so many variables that need to be considered.
Ok my 2c worth. Hope I haven't offended anyone, I simply don't see this as an easy area to police. Bob
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 04:47:22 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by train:
This is another image I had dDQ back in June and I havent a clue why |
You do know why. All DQs are accompanied with a DQ message. A number of SC members even tried to help you with the issue.
You must provide the unaltered original for your entry when requested. Please review the challenge submission rules.
This is only one of many cases where this has been the reason for us being forced to DQ you. |
Sounds like you break rules a lot ;)
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 06:07:14 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by jonpink:
Originally posted by Konador:
Originally posted by train:
This is another image I had dDQ back in June and I havent a clue why |
You do know why. All DQs are accompanied with a DQ message. A number of SC members even tried to help you with the issue.
You must provide the unaltered original for your entry when requested. Please review the challenge submission rules.
This is only one of many cases where this has been the reason for us being forced to DQ you. |
Sounds like you break rules a lot ;) |
Excuse me but What did I say in my first post on this thread.?
****Since I received my new camera I had to use a different programme to upload and it is much more involved than the programme I used before
and I was doing it wrongly and not saving the original file so I have had several disqualified and even though a few site members have tried to help me which I do appreciate When I have taken the trouble to send the original before I have loaded the one for the challenge no one has acknowledged my originals when I have sent them so I have had a very frustrating time.
I accept that the problem is me but I have never cheated and would not wish to what would be the point? *
I have explained what the problem is and I know people have tried to help me but when I load my image onto the site in order to get it in a file I have to move it to a jpeg file or I cannot even open it.and see it
I really don't consider I broke any rules on my Footprints image and I think my photo above is proof it was only a part of an image created by me so I accept it was DQ but I dont think I should have been
I wonder how many more images on this site if under a microscope would pass this test
Ben I've only had trouble since my new camera and it is not fair of you to say other wise if I have been doing it wrong all along I accept that and you can wipe me off the site
as I said before the fun has gone out of it and apart from people telling me to move on and not to get uptight
I find your comments hurtful I have always been in contact with you and the site council about this and I cannot stress how this has changed my perception of the site
I love D P C and I have always tried to be honest
It was not DQ because I did not load the original up it was DQ becauuse someone thought it was a copy of someone else's work that was the message I had.
I can upload the original right now.but I will have to downsize it for posting
Sorry but I find this very stressful
Sally
Message edited by author 2004-08-16 06:13:27. |
|
|
|
08/16/2004 08:34:14 AM · #74 |
I went to the DQ history to check. The exact message we wrote on the DQ is this:
You must provide the unaltered original for your entry when requested. Please review the challenge submission rules.
It was you who requested an admin note on the photo in the first place. Nobody requested a DQ.
Sorry if my comment was 'hurtful' but I was only stating a fact. You have supplied invalid originals on a number of occasions. I realise its not you doing it on purpose but if the originals you send are invalid we have no choice but to DQ.
|
|
|
|
08/16/2004 09:39:37 AM · #75 |
The fact that it wasn't the "entire" work of art is not the point. Perhaps the wording isn't as clear as it could be, but the part about "entirety" is referring to the photograph itself, not the artwork. If the photograph, in its entirety is of an existing work of art, which in turn compels the viewer to rate only the art itself and not any photographic decisions made by the photographer (such as lighting, background, etc.) then the photo will likely be DQ'd for violating the artwork rule.
As I stated earlier, there are valid reasons for this rule. |
|
