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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> "Wheels" challenge results recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 101 - 125 of 156, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/21/2014 04:15:34 PM · #101
I think the difficulty here is that if Art was to print the artwork directly on the side of his head it would be legal, but printing on paper and glue it is not legal. I can live with that difficulty.
07/21/2014 04:18:03 PM · #102
could this image also have been dq'd for the "blending"? I don't know what exactly this process included, but in his notes Art said he used blending; I assume this means something along the lines of erasing the edges of the taped picture to make it look like his head really had a window to the gear-contents. Would this in itself be legal? Changing the viewers description, etc?
07/21/2014 05:11:06 PM · #103
What he needed to do was buy a 3d printer, print out another art. Paint it, and voila!

Oh wait....

Two arts???

That would be a horror challenge, not wheels!
07/21/2014 05:21:52 PM · #104
Originally posted by scalvert:


Originally posted by bohemka:

Are those gears really photorealistic?

Yes, the artwork was intended to look like real gears.


That was my original point. In my opinion, those gears are not photorealistic, because they are clearly not a photo. I realize this is an opinion, but I want to explain why I fell off the flow chart at question 2.
07/21/2014 06:02:23 PM · #105
I fall away just at the term "photorealistic."

can we have a new challenge, as suggested by skewsme: "a picture of a bird that just flew out the window."
07/21/2014 07:47:10 PM · #106
for me it comes down to deception.

ken wasn't trying to deceive anyone, no one in their right mind believes that his image is real, where as Shannon's images and other dq's were use to make the viewer believe the image was plausible or real.

I'd just hate to see this place become such a stickler for rules that creativity is hindered.
07/21/2014 09:34:58 PM · #107
Deception and believability were never the issue, and creativity is not contigent upon the ability to cicumvent the rules.
07/21/2014 09:57:51 PM · #108
Ok. You continue to defend the SC admirably, but perhaps the frustration is that even though you explain it, (over and over, and point out where you have explained it before, to those who didnt take the time to memorize teh whole thread) it always seems out of the grasp of the common photographer, and not results driven
I am not arguing any point here, just noting that although Bear puts it well when he says, to paraphrase, that someone might say "what a cool picture of gears" - not one is judging the "photographic merit" of the cut and pasted item. No one is saying "wow" this guy took a great shot of gears- albeit they are taped to his head. no one is critically viewing the f-stop and exposure on the gears, etc.
they are a prop. they are the exact same thing as photorealistic scars drawn on a face, or zombie makeup. If you are saying this is a photography website and we "can't have people judging photos of photos"- fine- but that wasnt the case here at all.

Message edited by author 2014-07-21 21:58:55.
07/21/2014 10:22:13 PM · #109
Originally posted by blindjustice:

not one is judging the "photographic merit" of the cut and pasted item.

How do you know? Would a fuzzy cell photo pic have received the exact same votes? How about a photo of a single gear or maybe a blown out exposure? Of course not. The sharpness, arrangement, intricacy and even somewhat grungy feel of the original artwork play a big role in how people receive the image. You simply cannot divorce the primary point of visual interest from the technical and compositional qualities that make it interesting.

Originally posted by tnun:

I fall away just at the term "photorealistic."

Amusingly, this is what you get when you go to the author's full gallery: "My name is Mike Savad, I create one of a kind creations. Photo realistic is what people think of first."
07/21/2014 10:33:56 PM · #110
so is that where you got the idea to use the term?
07/22/2014 07:29:15 AM · #111
Originally posted by scalvert:

Deception and believability were never the issue, and creativity is not contigent upon the ability to cicumvent the rules.

]

that's bullshit Shannon.

the reason for this rule as as i interpret it is so that someone doesn't take a picture of a picture and try to pass it off as their own.

Like this well deserved DQ:



If you want to DQ Kens image on the basis that he took a picture of some elses artwork, I again, agree. but the fact that you keep insisting that he broke a clipart rule I have a major problem with.

the rule states, emphasis mine:

You may NOT add graphics, clip art, computer-rendered images or parts of other photographs to your entry or its border during editing

Kens image was created entirely in camera not a composite during editing. You keep using the "circumvent the rules argument". I really hope you guys get of that kick. The purpose of the editing rules is to restrict our editing options and concentrate on photographic technique, when you start infringing on our ability to create the scene in the physical world that adversely affects everyone.

and creativity is always about trying to circumvent rules and break norms.
07/22/2014 11:11:10 AM · #112
Uh... Mike, are you practicing for "Reasons why I shouldn't drink?" ;-)

Nobody said anything about clip art. This is the artwork rule, which is kind of hard to miss since it's the only clause in the rules that's underlined, and ownership of that artwork is irrelevant. Even the old artwork rule dating back to 2003 referred to artwork "including your own." Creating the scene in the physical world is wide open. It's only when you use the 2D world to do it that you have to be mindful of the artwork rule.

Message edited by author 2014-07-22 11:14:57.
07/22/2014 11:18:20 AM · #113
You yourself said this earlier...

Composites are not allowed outside of Expert Editing (and even there everything other than textures must be photos of actual objects taken by you during the submission dates). You can, however, take a photo of a phone or billboard.


maybe i should start drinking.. i may be less confused...
07/22/2014 11:19:58 AM · #114
Originally posted by tnun:

so is that where you got the idea to use the term?

You mean the term that appears 21 times in our discussion for this rule several years before that artist's gallery was posted? Absolutely. We have amazing foresight.
07/22/2014 11:21:38 AM · #115
Originally posted by Mike:

You yourself said this earlier...
Composites are not allowed outside of Expert Editing (and even there everything other than textures must be photos of actual objects taken by you during the submission dates). You can, however, take a photo of a phone or billboard.

And? What does that have to do with clip art?
07/22/2014 11:42:20 AM · #116
ok, explain to me... if i take a picture of real gears or wheels (not a pic of artwork), print them out and tape it to my head and them take a pic and submit that.

why is that a DQ???

unless its violating the:

combine captures of different scenes, move or change a feature between frames, or combine different captures to create a new scene

which is dumb because these are EDITING rules.. if you can't do it in post you have to do in the camera. if you take the picture yourself print it out and use it in your image it should be legal, you arent breaking an existing artwork rule..

Message edited by author 2014-07-22 11:47:34.
07/22/2014 12:01:48 PM · #117
Originally posted by Mike:

why is that a DQ??? ...these are EDITING rules.. if you can't do it in post you have to do in the camera. if you take the picture yourself print it out and use it in your image it should be legal, you arent breaking an existing artwork rule..

Entering a photo of a photo in a photography contest is like lip syncing a live voice competition (even if the recorded voice is your own). According to your post, I should be able to edit a 2009 photo from my archives in Photoshop without restriction, then take a photo of that and submit it in a challenge. It would be silly to have ANY editing rules if you could circumvent them so easily.

Originally posted by Mike:

if you take the picture yourself print it out and use it in your image... you arent breaking an existing artwork rule.

If the picture is used as the primary impact of your entry, that's exactly what you're doing... replicating a pre-existing photo (or photorealistic illustration).

Message edited by author 2014-07-22 12:06:56.
07/22/2014 12:36:26 PM · #118
This is the part that trips me up.

You must:
create your entry from 1-10 captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose composition/framing does not change). All captures used must be shot within the challenge submission dates.


You may:
combine up to the allowable number of captures either in-camera or in post-processing.


I take 2 pictures one of my head and one of gears.
I combine them using post-processing.
I get DQ'd.
07/22/2014 12:38:06 PM · #119
Mike, SERIOUSLY, c'mon. Really....

Hypothetical scenario: tonight's challenge is "waterfalls". I have some really cool waterfall shots from Yosemite, shot during the spring snowmelt of 2011. The best one has a lot of people in front of the falls, though, so I edited them out, making it illegal for advanced editing, and it never was entered in a challenge. I think I'll go up to Orleans Camera and have my guy Joe print me a poster-sized print of that one. I'll tape it to the outside of my multi-paned window then shoot the "view" from inside and enter it. I'll call it, "View From My Window".

SERIOUSLY, are you OK with that? Don't give me whether your interpretation of the current artwork rule PERMITS it (because a majority of your SC doesn't think so): tell me whether you think that sort of thing OUGHT to be allowed? Should I really be allowed to circumvent time/date and/or editing rules with impunity by submitting an image like that?

Message edited by author 2014-07-22 12:39:32.
07/22/2014 12:40:05 PM · #120
How can all this anaesthetising gibberish be relevant to contemporary digital photography?

Members regularly lament the diminishing participation here, but if you're so determined for it to remain 2002 forever at DPC, the continued drain is certain.

Real world digital photography is very different now. The current rule sets and their interpretations don't reflect that.

07/22/2014 12:40:31 PM · #121
Originally posted by nygold:

This is the part that trips me up.

You must:
create your entry from 1-10 captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose composition/framing does not change). All captures used must be shot within the challenge submission dates.


You may:
combine up to the allowable number of captures either in-camera or in post-processing.


I take 2 pictures one of my head and one of gears.
I combine them using post-processing.
I get DQ'd.

Those aren't pictures of a single scene. "The intent of allowing multiple captures is... not to permit a subject from one scene to be inserted into a different scene," which is exactly what you're suggesting. Expect a DQ.
07/22/2014 12:51:01 PM · #122
Originally posted by ubique:

How can all this anaesthetising gibberish be relevant to contemporary digital photography?

Every contest has rules. This particular one, if eliminated, would render most of the other rules moot. The biggest complaint of Expert editing (by far) is that it encourages composites, so it's unlikely that preventing "fake" composites, date circumvention or plagiarism is driving people away.
07/22/2014 12:52:23 PM · #123
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by nygold:

This is the part that trips me up.

You must:
create your entry from 1-10 captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose composition/framing does not change). All captures used must be shot within the challenge submission dates.


You may:
combine up to the allowable number of captures either in-camera or in post-processing.


I take 2 pictures one of my head and one of gears.
I combine them using post-processing.
I get DQ'd.

Those aren't pictures of a single scene. "The intent of allowing multiple captures is... not to permit a subject from one scene to be inserted into a different scene," which is exactly what you're suggesting. Expect a DQ.


Fair enough. Thanks
07/22/2014 01:28:19 PM · #124
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Mike, SERIOUSLY, c'mon. Really....

Hypothetical scenario: tonight's challenge is "waterfalls". I have some really cool waterfall shots from Yosemite, shot during the spring snowmelt of 2011. The best one has a lot of people in front of the falls, though, so I edited them out, making it illegal for advanced editing, and it never was entered in a challenge. I think I'll go up to Orleans Camera and have my guy Joe print me a poster-sized print of that one. I'll tape it to the outside of my multi-paned window then shoot the "view" from inside and enter it. I'll call it, "View From My Window".

SERIOUSLY, are you OK with that? Don't give me whether your interpretation of the current artwork rule PERMITS it (because a majority of your SC doesn't think so): tell me whether you think that sort of thing OUGHT to be allowed? Should I really be allowed to circumvent time/date and/or editing rules with impunity by submitting an image like that?


How much did Joe pay you for that plug?

; - )

Message edited by author 2014-07-22 13:28:32.
07/22/2014 02:03:37 PM · #125
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Mike:

why is that a DQ??? ...these are EDITING rules.. if you can't do it in post you have to do in the camera. if you take the picture yourself print it out and use it in your image it should be legal, you arent breaking an existing artwork rule..

Entering a photo of a photo in a photography contest is like lip syncing a live voice competition (even if the recorded voice is your own). According to your post, I should be able to edit a 2009 photo from my archives in Photoshop without restriction, then take a photo of that and submit it in a challenge. It would be silly to have ANY editing rules if you could circumvent them so easily.

Originally posted by Mike:

if you take the picture yourself print it out and use it in your image... you arent breaking an existing artwork rule.

If the picture is used as the primary impact of your entry, that's exactly what you're doing... replicating a pre-existing photo (or photorealistic illustration).


Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Mike, SERIOUSLY, c'mon. Really....

Hypothetical scenario: tonight's challenge is "waterfalls". I have some really cool waterfall shots from Yosemite, shot during the spring snowmelt of 2011. The best one has a lot of people in front of the falls, though, so I edited them out, making it illegal for advanced editing, and it never was entered in a challenge. I think I'll go up to Orleans Camera and have my guy Joe print me a poster-sized print of that one. I'll tape it to the outside of my multi-paned window then shoot the "view" from inside and enter it. I'll call it, "View From My Window".

SERIOUSLY, are you OK with that? Don't give me whether your interpretation of the current artwork rule PERMITS it (because a majority of your SC doesn't think so): tell me whether you think that sort of thing OUGHT to be allowed? Should I really be allowed to circumvent time/date and/or editing rules with impunity by submitting an image like that?


im sorry... at what point did i say take a picture of existing artwork? im taking about taking a picture of real stuff and printing it out.

Message edited by author 2014-07-22 14:07:53.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 01:02:04 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 01:02:04 PM EDT.