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

DPChallenge Forums >> Administrator Announcements >> MODIFICATIONS TO THE ARTWORK RULE
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 67, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/12/2014 06:49:29 PM · #26
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by stevieian:

OK I get it. You are really squelching people's creativity here, but whatever ;)


With respect, I don't think they are. There need to be limits on how we present preexisting artwork or I cold simply photograph a photograph and submit it. Since the EXIF would pass validation there would be no way to tell that I used a photo that was outside the dates, and quite possible wasn't even take by me!
No artwork rule is going to be perfect, IMO. The one we have may not be the best possible one, but it has functioned fairly well over the years, and actually allows for a *lot* of creativity. IMO of course.

That's the basic conundrum, yes. The classic example I present is that it ought NOT be possible for me to enter a landscape challenge by printing a large copy of an Ansel Adams image, pasting it on the inside of my window, and titling it "View from my Window". I also shouldn't be able to do the same thing with a print from my 2011 Yosemite trip, either.

The problem is, where do we draw the line? I'm sympathetic, actually: I can imagine people creating photographic dioramas and inserting real objects in them (which is essentially what the Toad image was about, though it was a monitor display) and doing it very creatively, but if we don't have restrictions on this sort of thing then we'll end up rewarding assemblage, not photography.
09/12/2014 07:11:27 PM · #27
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

...
The problem is, where do we draw the line? I'm sympathetic, actually: I can imagine people creating photographic dioramas and inserting real objects in them (which is essentially what the Toad image was about, though it was a monitor display) and doing it very creatively, but if we don't have restrictions on this sort of thing then we'll end up rewarding assemblage, not photography.


It was an actual cardboard background (not a monitor display). I do see your point, but... I would have thought a background was fine... since the reason my Feast image was DQ'd was because it was the "feast" part. I think I remember SC saying that if it were a wineglass challenge... then it would have been legal.

Since this was a Bicycle challenge, I wouldn't consider the background to be "the primary impact of the entry" (the bike and toad are), so... I would have thought it would be legal.

*sigh*

"You may include existing artwork in your entry, but photo-realistic artwork such as printed photos, monitor images or realistic illustrations must either be clearly presented as artwork or used only as a minor supporting element. Using photo-realistic artwork to simulate physical objects or backgrounds that provide the primary impact of an entry [emphasis mine] will be grounds for disqualification."

09/12/2014 07:17:14 PM · #28
Oh... Here's the Feast DQ:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

And... the only reason SC knew it was a computer display of my family dining, was because I told them it was. I doubt that they would have known that I'd cheated (but not on purpose, or I wouldn't have TOLD them about it. Ha!) otherwise.

So... I hope the Honor System is in everyone's Book of Rules. How does SC intend to enforce a rule if they don't know what they're seeing? I COULD put a printed out photo of my Yosemite trip (IF I'd ever been... which I haven't) behind my window and present it as my entry. If I did it well enough, then I'd skate through ... free to live and cheat again. *grin*

So... to me, all we're doing with this rule is making us want to "be excellent at breaking it".

Your thoughts?





Message edited by author 2014-09-12 19:25:32.
09/12/2014 07:21:22 PM · #29
Originally posted by stevieian:

OK I get it. You are really squelching people's creativity here, but whatever ;)

Creativity is impressing the audience while working within the rules.

Originally posted by Lydia:

"You may include existing artwork in your entry, but photo-realistic artwork such as printed photos, monitor images or realistic illustrations must either be clearly presented as artwork or used only as a minor supporting element. Using photo-realistic artwork to simulate physical objects or backgrounds that provide the primary impact of an entry [emphasis mine] will be grounds for disqualification."

The rules are not topic-dependent, and your emphasis skipped right past some key parts. "You may include existing artwork in your entry, but photo-realistic artwork such as printed photos, monitor images or realistic illustrations must either be clearly presented as artwork or used only as a minor supporting element. Using photo-realistic artwork to simulate physical objects or backgrounds that provide the primary impact of an entry will be grounds for disqualification." Note that detailed backgrounds are ALWAYS considered major, impactful elements, which is why removing such context is illegal in Advanced.
09/12/2014 07:24:04 PM · #30
Originally posted by Lydia:

Oh... Here's the Feast DQ:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Same issue. Hard to claim THAT background as a minor supporting element regardless of the topic.
09/12/2014 07:37:23 PM · #31
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Lydia:

Oh... Here's the Feast DQ:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Same issue. Hard to claim THAT background as a minor supporting element regardless of the topic.


Yeah... I know that this one wouldn't pass with the current wording. My point was that at the time, SC had said it was the challenge topic that did me in... since the "feast" part was "artwork".

Originally posted by scalvert:

The rules are not topic-dependent, and your emphasis skipped right past some key parts. "You may include existing artwork in your entry, but photo-realistic artwork such as printed photos, monitor images or realistic illustrations must either be clearly presented as artwork or used only as a minor supporting element. Using photo-realistic artwork to simulate physical objects or backgrounds that provide the primary impact of an entry will be grounds for disqualification." Note that detailed backgrounds are ALWAYS considered major, impactful elements, which is why removing such context is illegal in Advanced.


I'm not making myself clear. I'm trying to determine WHAT makes a background a minor supporting element instead of the primary impact of an entry.

To me, I always see the SUBJECT of the image (meaning what the image is about) as the "primary impact of an entry". In the toad case, I'd say that the toad and the bike are the "primary impact" of the image.

The background is a "supporting feature" of the image.

09/12/2014 07:54:25 PM · #32
Originally posted by scalvert:

Note that detailed backgrounds are ALWAYS considered major, impactful elements, which is why removing such context is illegal in Advanced.

Advanced allows for removing imperfections and minor details. Cloning out anything major, including detailed background removal, gets a DQ. There are, of course, some backgrounds that CAN be removed. For example wrinkles in an otherwise plain muslin backdrop, faint clouds in a sky, or a nearly black forest. Those are minor, and the entry is not significantly changed by their removal. Now the artwork rule has a lot of the same wording, and a detailed background that provides critical context is often as much a primary feature as the subject itself. In the case of that toad, the cityscape and motion blur are essential to the action of the scene, and it's a completely different photo without them. That rules out "minor supporting element."

Message edited by author 2014-09-12 20:17:02.
09/12/2014 08:09:34 PM · #33
Originally posted by Lydia:

To me, I always see the SUBJECT of the image (meaning what the image is about) as the "primary impact of an entry". In the toad case, I'd say that the toad and the bike are the "primary impact" of the image.

The background is a "supporting feature" of the image.


As I see it, Lydia, yes, the toad is the "primary" subject, but the impact of the image rests largely on the context of it on the bike "in the street". It would simply not have had the same impact on say, a basic, gradient background.

This is very similar to that Lego recreation of the workers on a high-rise, which was also DQ'd because the background was pre-existing art, and the Lego's on the beam would have been mostly meaningless without it.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1431/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_965477.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/1000-1999/1431/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_965477.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
09/12/2014 09:00:36 PM · #34
Ok... As long as I know the rules...

Originally posted by Lydia:

Oh... Here's the Feast DQ:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/958/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_742750.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

And... the only reason SC knew it was a computer display of my family dining, was because I told them it was. I doubt that they would have known that I'd cheated (but not on purpose, or I wouldn't have TOLD them about it. Ha!) otherwise.

So... I hope the Honor System is in everyone's Book of Rules. How does SC intend to enforce a rule if they don't know what they're seeing? I COULD put a printed out photo of my Yosemite trip (IF I'd ever been... which I haven't) behind my window and present it as my entry. If I did it well enough, then I'd skate through ... free to live and cheat again. *grin*

So... to me, all we're doing with this rule is making us want to "be excellent at breaking it".

Your thoughts?


I added the last part in an edit and you might not have seen it. What do you think about this, folks?
09/12/2014 09:13:07 PM · #35
I'm waiting on "Art" to comment on this thread. It should be interesting.
How do we know if "Art" is real or not, and is he a major element?

Anyway, I'm happy to see the S C with the new members at work on clearing up the mysteries of what is "fair game" in editing and shooting.
09/12/2014 09:13:31 PM · #36
Originally posted by Lydia:

What do you think about this, folks?

I think you'd be surprised at what we can catch, and intentional cheating like that would result in a ban for life. Worth it?
09/12/2014 09:52:10 PM · #37
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Lydia:

What do you think about this, folks?

I think you'd be surprised at what we can catch, and intentional cheating like that would result in a ban for life. Worth it?


That's a bit harsh toward me, isn't it, Shannon? I did say that I'd admitted it myself before...

09/12/2014 10:07:02 PM · #38
Originally posted by Lydia:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Lydia:

What do you think about this, folks?

I think you'd be surprised at what we can catch, and intentional cheating like that would result in a ban for life. Worth it?


That's a bit harsh toward me, isn't it, Shannon? I did say that I'd admitted it myself before...

I'm pretty sure that Shannon's comment was directed to all of us, not aimed at you mate. :)
09/12/2014 10:20:56 PM · #39
Originally posted by pamb:

I'm pretty sure that Shannon's comment was directed to all of us, not aimed at you mate. :)

Right. Lydia asked what we thought of a hypothetical situation. It's basically the same thing we think about EXIF tampering: we trust that people wouldn't be foolish enough to try it over a virtual ribbon, but we have caught and banned several for doing so.
09/12/2014 11:57:10 PM · #40
In Advanced editing, would removing the letters and numbers from a car's license plate be okay? I don't really want my license plate number online if I enter it in the challenge.
What I did was make a selection and run an 'add noise' filter and then colorize it to look like the background color of the license plate - the image is a bit grainy overall and it blends in well.

If I were to clone each number out, it would look very fake and in my opinion be very distracting and lower the voter's view of the photo overall.

Message edited by author 2014-09-12 23:57:55.
09/13/2014 01:16:12 AM · #41
Hard to tell without seeing the photo. In general that's probably fine, but a photo OF a license plate would be a different story.
09/13/2014 10:03:36 AM · #42
I can send it to you if you don't mind. Or if you have the ability to view it I submitted it for the free study for now, in case I don't shoot anything better for the rest of the month.
09/13/2014 11:47:00 AM · #43
Originally posted by MadMan2k:

I can send it to you if you don't mind. Or if you have the ability to view it I submitted it for the free study for now, in case I don't shoot anything better for the rest of the month.

Looks fine to me.
09/13/2014 01:34:06 PM · #44
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by MadMan2k:

I can send it to you if you don't mind. Or if you have the ability to view it I submitted it for the free study for now, in case I don't shoot anything better for the rest of the month.

Looks fine to me.

Ditto. You're good to go, I'd say.
09/13/2014 02:07:49 PM · #45

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.

◾ use ANY editing technique to create new image area, objects or features (such as lens flare or motion) that didn't already exist in your original capture(s).

Why the licence plate colorizing would be allowed?
I guess the plate can be removed before taking the shot.

09/13/2014 02:17:40 PM · #46
Originally posted by GeorgesBogaert:

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

This modification isn't changing a viewer's description. The license plate is an insignificant portion of the image. If the license plate were a lot more prominent, THEN it might be a problem. There's actually been some thought given to exempting license plates from this rule, I remember discussions from quite a while ago. Might be a good idea, I donno...
09/13/2014 07:36:58 PM · #47
Thanks, scalvert and Bear_Music.

I would think a rule tweak to allow covering up potentially sensitive things like license plates, addresses, etc. might be good, but I don't know how often the question comes up. Might not be worth the trouble.
09/13/2014 08:24:44 PM · #48
i did this in basic editing.

it scored poorly. maybe too obvious...

but i shot it within the challenge dates - blurred the image in PS - printed it - and used it for the background of my entered final image.

DQ it.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/618/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_454109.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/618/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_454109.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
09/13/2014 09:00:43 PM · #49
Originally posted by soup:

DQ it.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/618/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_454109.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/618/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_454109.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

That was a different set of rules... and seven years ago.
09/19/2014 07:10:59 PM · #50
i understand. the principle of it is under discussion.

here is a more recent one of mine. if it weren't for the background i made. it really wouldn't be an image.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/474/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_316337.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/474/120/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_316337.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

i'm using very simple examples for a reason. the glass that makes the image - is acting as a lens of sorts. yet it's the background that IS the image. i created printed and positioned that printed non-photograph to make the impact for the final photo.

Message edited by author 2014-09-19 19:15:23.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 01/22/2020 12:46:46 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 © 2001-2020 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: 01/22/2020 12:46:46 PM EST.