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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Black on black DQ
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 71, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/18/2013 09:03:21 AM · #1
So I was looking through the archives just then, and I came across this image being DQ'd ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077431.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077431.jpg', '/') + 1) . 'first of all why was it DQ,'d I can see the head shape changed somewhat ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/130000-134999/130561/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1078346.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/130000-134999/130561/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1078346.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' has that got something to do with it?

Also why hasn't ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077305.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077305.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' Mark now received his well deserved ribbon?

Message edited by author 2013-08-18 09:04:37.
08/18/2013 09:31:35 AM · #2
Originally posted by Neat:

So I was looking through the archives just then, and I came across this image being DQ'd ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077431.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077431.jpg', '/') + 1) . 'first of all why was it DQ,'d I can see the head shape changed somewhat ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/130000-134999/130561/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1078346.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/130000-134999/130561/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1078346.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' has that got something to do with it?

Also why hasn't ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077305.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1786/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1077305.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' Mark now received his well deserved ribbon?


I would assume its because in the notes, it was stated that it was in the doorway of the stable. Perhaps you could see the stable in the original? I dunno
08/18/2013 10:04:56 AM · #3
It appears there was no recalculation announcement?
08/18/2013 10:36:02 AM · #4
Originally posted by Neat:

So I was looking through the archives just then, and I came across this image being DQ'd first of all why was it DQ,'d I can see the head shape changed somewhat has that got something to do with it?

Those are B/W and color versions of an edited file, Anita; the color version isn't showing us what the original file looked like. Based on the purity of the black around the horse's head, I'd guess the photographer completely obliterated a BG scene in processing.

Message edited by author 2013-08-18 10:41:48.
08/18/2013 11:07:37 AM · #5
The photographer did state they darkened the background, which probably eliminated parts of the BG, I'd assume
08/18/2013 11:23:26 AM · #6
A real pity. It was only his second entry!
08/18/2013 11:45:12 AM · #7
Originally posted by tanguera:

A real pity. It was only his second entry!


Indeed. And to add insult to injury, such darkening is legal in Basic!
08/18/2013 11:51:14 AM · #8
Originally posted by PennyStreet:

It appears there was no recalculation announcement?

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/user_id/749.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/user_id/749.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Manic must not be able to log in.
08/18/2013 04:27:38 PM · #9
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by tanguera:

A real pity. It was only his second entry!


Indeed. And to add insult to injury, such darkening is legal in Basic!


doubtful.

look at the entry again, that's burned selectively. I knew this would DQ as soon as I saw it, look carefully around the horses head.
08/18/2013 04:49:40 PM · #10
oh, damn. that's really unfortunate.

never a good way to get a ribbon.
08/18/2013 04:53:49 PM · #11
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by tanguera:

A real pity. It was only his second entry!


Indeed. And to add insult to injury, such darkening is legal in Basic!


doubtful.

look at the entry again, that's burned selectively. I knew this would DQ as soon as I saw it, look carefully around the horses head.


Yeh, I see it... what I was getting at is that the removal itself, which is what got him the DQ, would be legal in Basic, assuming it's done using Basic-legal tools. I should have been more clear.
08/18/2013 09:04:50 PM · #12
Originally posted by bohemka:

Originally posted by PennyStreet:

It appears there was no recalculation announcement?

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/user_id/749.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/user_id/749.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Manic must not be able to log in.

Only Langdon can perform any recalculation -- announcing it before it's done would only cause more confusion ...

BTW, I don't think complete removal of all detail in the BG is legal in Basic, even under the guise of "color-shifting" -- I always leave at least a hint of what's there, which the 5-second voter should not notice anyway ... :-)
08/18/2013 10:53:20 PM · #13
Originally posted by GeneralE:

BTW, I don't think complete removal of all detail in the BG is legal in Basic, even under the guise of "color-shifting" -- I always leave at least a hint of what's there, which the 5-second voter should not notice anyway ... :-)

That's why I'm a 5-second voter - I don't want to look around long enough to find anything that would hurt their score. ;-)
08/18/2013 11:19:51 PM · #14
Originally posted by GeneralE:

BTW, I don't think complete removal of all detail in the BG is legal in Basic, even under the guise of "color-shifting" -- I always leave at least a hint of what's there, which the 5-second voter should not notice anyway ... :-)


I certainly can't speak for interpretations in the past few years, but during my tenure on SC, there was no limit on how the allowed tools were applied.

ETA: After review,the Basic Rules say nothing about removal of objects, so I certainly hope there haven't been any DQs for that ;-)

Message edited by author 2013-08-18 23:23:13.
08/18/2013 11:31:00 PM · #15
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

BTW, I don't think complete removal of all detail in the BG is legal in Basic, even under the guise of "color-shifting" -- I always leave at least a hint of what's there, which the 5-second voter should not notice anyway ... :-)


I certainly can't speak for interpretations in the past few years, but during my tenure on SC, there was no limit on how the allowed tools were applied.

ETA: After review,the Basic Rules say nothing about removal of objects, so I certainly hope there haven't been any DQs for that ;-)

He's right, you know? It's the great anomaly of the DPC rulesets.
08/19/2013 10:00:39 AM · #16
I must be missing something because I can still see the door way and background stall?
08/19/2013 10:03:12 AM · #17
me too
08/19/2013 10:06:16 AM · #18
Originally posted by JulietNN:

I must be missing something because I can still see the door way and background stall?


Think about how brightly the horse's head is lit.

Now consider what must have been under the horse's head..

look at the horses chin and at the hair there.. Kinda bright dontcha think?

Message edited by author 2013-08-19 10:06:39.
08/19/2013 10:26:31 AM · #19
See this is where I have had a couple of DQ's. As far as I am concerned, nothing has been removed, in fact you can still see the original bars and stall, it may have been darkened, but, the elements are still visible. My DQ's for this has been you could never see the offending parts that where black out, even though they where still there.

I can still see all the offending parts, so they have not darkened it so much that it has been removed. Everything is still visible by the naked eye and not removed.
08/19/2013 10:30:23 AM · #20
Originally posted by JulietNN:

See this is where I have had a couple of DQ's. As far as I am concerned, nothing has been removed, in fact you can still see the original bars and stall, it may have been darkened, but, the elements are still visible. My DQ's for this has been you could never see the offending parts that where black out, even though they where still there.

I can still see all the offending parts, so they have not darkened it so much that it has been removed. Everything is still visible by the naked eye and not removed.


You can see detail under the horses head, and on the right side of the image?

I DO see the detail to the left of the image, but nothing under the horse or on the right, where there should be things.
08/19/2013 10:34:49 AM · #21
Originally posted by JulietNN:

... I can still see all the offending parts, so they have not darkened it so much that it has been removed. Everything is still visible by the naked eye and not removed.

Depends on monitor calibration I guess ... I can't see anything except the horse head here on my work monitor.

When I go to a voting page and look at the calibration bar the last 3 blacks are blocking together.
08/19/2013 10:35:37 AM · #22
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1513/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_993493.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1513/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_993493.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' this one was rightly so DQ'd, because I used a bunch of legal tools to get rid of her arm and cup (levels, curves, burning) But there was a huge discussion on it, as I had not physically removed the arm and cup. On the discussion, it was pretty much a 50/50 split on how the rule was read. ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_996140.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_996140.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

My reading was, if it is still in the picture and not been cropped, lassoed, or physically taken out and with lightening the picture you could still see the arm and cup, so it was not removed, you could still see it. Half the people agreed that , that was how they read the rule and the other half said it was incorrect.

Now I have a better understanding of how the SC rule on this particular rule set, I do not see that anything has been removed or darkened to the point of it not being there. I can still physically see it with my eyes on the computer screen.

Does that make sense?
08/19/2013 10:37:33 AM · #23
Originally posted by JulietNN:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1513/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_993493.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1513/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_993493.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' this one was rightly so DQ'd, because I used a bunch of legal tools to get rid of her arm and cup (levels, curves, burning) But there was a huge discussion on it, as I had not physically removed the arm and cup. On the discussion, it was pretty much a 50/50 split on how the rule was read. ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_996140.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_996140.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

My reading was, if it is still in the picture and not been cropped, lassoed, or physically taken out and with lightening the picture you could still see the arm and cup, so it was not removed, you could still see it. Half the people agreed that , that was how they read the rule and the other half said it was incorrect.

Now I have a better understanding of how the SC rule on this particular rule set, I do not see that anything has been removed or darkened to the point of it not being there. I can still physically see it with my eyes on the computer screen.

Does that make sense?


You're telling me that you can see the cup and her arm in the edited photo?

And can you see details under the horse's head, and to the right?
08/19/2013 10:42:06 AM · #24
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1080037.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1080037.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

So this is what I see when I see the picture, I did lighten it up in PS just now , so it was more visible, but everything is still there.

I can see the straw on the ground, 11 bars behind head, a door way, 2 white lumps of something on the ground.

I can see where it was burnt, so yes I can see that that was done, but nothing that I can see has been removed

Edited to add: on the colour version, now that would be a DQ as the background is competly black, not a mark to be seen, everything has been removed

Message edited by author 2013-08-19 10:50:35.
08/19/2013 10:47:03 AM · #25
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by JulietNN:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1513/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_993493.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1513/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_993493.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' this one was rightly so DQ'd, because I used a bunch of legal tools to get rid of her arm and cup (levels, curves, burning) But there was a huge discussion on it, as I had not physically removed the arm and cup. On the discussion, it was pretty much a 50/50 split on how the rule was read. ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_996140.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/85000-89999/87808/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_996140.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

My reading was, if it is still in the picture and not been cropped, lassoed, or physically taken out and with lightening the picture you could still see the arm and cup, so it was not removed, you could still see it. Half the people agreed that , that was how they read the rule and the other half said it was incorrect.

Now I have a better understanding of how the SC rule on this particular rule set, I do not see that anything has been removed or darkened to the point of it not being there. I can still physically see it with my eyes on the computer screen.

Does that make sense?


You're telling me that you can see the cup and her arm in the edited photo?

And can you see details under the horse's head, and to the right?


Yes you can, if you go through a bunch of steps of undesaturating lighting contrasts , curves etc etc etc, and here in lies the crux of the situation. the stuff is still in there, but there is NO way in holy heck you can actually even guess it was or is in there, so that is why it was DQ'd.

And I understand that totally, after seeing and understanding the rule set when it was explained to me in a completely different way, I believe it was Bear Music and the General that explained it to me, and there was a lot of people that suddenly saw and understood that rule set too on it , as they saw it the way I was reading it.

My shot did deserve to be DQ'd, totally, but before I understood how the rule could be read a different way and the way it was supposed to be read and applied, as far as I was concerned, it was not a DQ!. As I have physically not removed any object. I was wrong.

So back to the horse head, I can see the background and everything surrounding the head, so if I can see it, how is it a DQ???
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 10/16/2019 06:16:17 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 © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 10/16/2019 06:16:17 AM EDT.