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

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> 'Distorting Houses' is NOT 'Lliberty and Justice'
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 19 of 19, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/19/2002 09:43:58 AM · #1
Nor was it meant to be and nor was it knowingly influenced by it.

What I really wanted to submit for that challenge was the dew drop here 'Dawn on the grass'. However that was taken outside of the challenge timeframe (before L&J in fact). At the time I was thinking about this, it was raining outside. So thought why not do it with a raindrop instead of dew. Hence my submission.

As for the shape of the raindrops, I specifically shot a section of glass where the drips were non-uniform. It looked much more interesting than just plain round drops. Hence the title of 'Distorting Houses' rather than 'Refracted Houses'.

So, hopefully you will see that my picture was not a no-imagination copy of a previous work that I couldn't quite pull off because I didn't wash my window first! It may be similar to other works but then, how many pictures of flowers, kids and pets get entered here? Is over half the National Gallery pointless because they are all just portraits of people? IMHO, DH and L&J are very different works each with their own merits.

If you still think I'm a plagerist then, fine that is your look out not mine. I like my picture. I pretty much captured what I was trying to acheive and did so in an aesthetically pleasing (to me) manner. That in itself is rare enough to make me happy. It is also my highest scoring work so far on DPC. So evidently some others though so too.

Rant over. I'll shut up again now.
11/19/2002 09:51:37 AM · #2
I wouldn't worry too much about it. It's a really good shot that stands up on it's own. I find the irregular nature of the drops more interesting.
11/19/2002 10:22:34 AM · #3
It's a wonderful image. If some have a problem with it, just remember it's really THEIR problem, not yours. Also, when Setzler submitted his Liberty and Justice, he got similar criticism. So what! Both are still excellent pictures.
11/19/2002 11:28:54 AM · #4
Hendrik,

I read through your comments on this photo... It's unfortunate that certain people can't handle seeing variations on themes... Several users spoke of 'originality' issues. I looked at their own photos and didnt' see much originality in them either.

When one spends a lot of time looking at photography, 'original' ideas are few and far between.

TO EVERYONE WHO CRITICIZED THIS PHOTO FOR NOT BEING 'ORIGINAL':

You need to give it a break... there is nothing wrong with duplicating ideas. Maybe if YOU would spend more time duplicating ideas of things you like, you would become a better photographer.

I saw this photo, and never thought for one moment, that it was a 'ripoff' of anything I have done. As a matter of fact, my "Liberty and Justice" photo is MUCH MORE of a ripoff that this one is. I had seen numerous shots similar to "Liberty and Justice" before I shot that one... Downgrading someone's score because their idea is not original is purely childish... I have learned to not expect more than that out of most of you here though.


11/19/2002 11:30:43 AM · #5
I initially criticized setzler for his Liberty and Justice shot because I had seen such similar shots before. As my fellow DPC'ers chastised me and made good points, I rescinded my criticism and rethought the issue (i.e. pulled my head out of my pretentious *ss).

Just because a similar photo technique has been done before is no reason not to do it yourself. Although it's easy to find beautiful well executed photos in the world, it's harder to find themes or techniques in them that have never been tackled before. Where would we be if no aspect of a anyone's photo could ever be attempted by anyone else, especially unknowingly.

Bottom line is that your shot is beautiful and deserves to be admired or judged on its own merits. I hope others who may have criticized your photo will wisen up like I did and appreciate it for what it is.
11/19/2002 11:51:02 AM · #6
There is nothing about your photo that shows plagerism. The whole idea of plagerism in photography is crazy. Unless you take the identical shot and use the same name and take credit for it it is not plagerism. Learning a technique is just that. Are all panned shots copied? I learned the technique(refracting with water droplets on glass)from John, and did several photos of my own. I don't consider that plagerism. But I also got criticism at photosig for it. John in turn had learned the technique somewhere also.
'Distorting houses' does not even use the technique but rather a natural situation, so those comments are SO out of line...give me a break!
11/19/2002 11:53:42 AM · #7
I think voters chose to exercise the 'excuse' method on Hendrik's photo... any excuse to rate it lower is valid... lol... At least it scored over 6.2... that's a great showing no matter what is said...
11/19/2002 11:55:30 AM · #8
White Christmas
White Christmas II

Some more of my blatant attempts at photographic plagiarism...



* This message has been edited by the author on 11/19/2002 11:53:16 AM.
11/19/2002 11:58:47 AM · #9
I read the comments and although quite a few referenced Setzler's photo, they also said that it was a good variation, etc... Only a couple of narrow-minded folk actually left narrow-minded comments. The pic did score well imo, and so I think the majority liked the picture, and saw it on it's own merit.
11/19/2002 12:31:49 PM · #10
Here's my copy of John's 'Liberty and Justice'
Stars and Stripes
But mine is actually done with a tissue with a stars and stripes pattern not a flag.
11/19/2002 12:50:32 PM · #11
Dont let them get to you. You tried a technique that doesn't BELONG to someone. Just because Liberty and Justice was the winner of the transparency challenge and many people really really loved it... that doesn't make it HIS technique. If you look closely enough you'll see that someone else in that very same challenge used the same technique.

The people/person in question who made rude comments about plagiarism should be ashamed of yourselves. We're here to grow as photographers and condemning someone for trying something new is WRONG. I commend you for being brave enough to try this technique and submit it here so the savages can rip it apart.

And there's nothing wrong with wobbly droplets neither
11/19/2002 01:30:09 PM · #12
Wow TerryGee that is really good. I have been trying to do this and can't seem to get the focus right. How big do the water drops have to be?


b]Originally posted by TerryGee:[/b]
Here's my copy of John's 'Liberty and Justice'
Stars and Stripes
But mine is actually done with a tissue with a stars and stripes pattern not a flag.


11/19/2002 02:24:35 PM · #13
Originally posted by BigSmiles:
Dont let them get to you. You tried a technique that doesn't BELONG to someone. Just because Liberty and Justice was the winner of the transparency challenge and many people really really loved it... that doesn't make it HIS technique. If you look closely enough you'll see that someone else in that very same challenge used the same technique.


Actually there is an almost exact duplicate of John's shot in American
Photo's top 100 pictures of the year feature. Dunno who saw it first,
though quite possibly with the attention given to the American flag,
that the idea came about twice.

11/19/2002 02:30:09 PM · #14
Anyone got a 'setup' picture of one of these being taken ?
I never did get the hang of it ;)
11/19/2002 02:35:29 PM · #15
Originally posted by Gordon:
Anyone got a 'setup' picture of one of these being taken ?
I never did get the hang of it ;)


I did some setup shots for mine on the 'how'd they do that' article...


11/19/2002 02:41:37 PM · #16
If you really want to break it down. Pointing a camera at something (dog, cat, butt....), and taking a picture is no longer an original idea. Welcome to Digital Plagerism Challenge.
11/19/2002 05:46:50 PM · #17
Hendrik, I have to admit to, and apologise for thinking that you had based your shot on John's (I can hardly deny it - it's in my comment!). However, having just read the rest of the comments I have to say don't sweat it. Only a couple were negative, and of those that mentioned 'Liberty & Justice' I'm sure very few marked you down for it (I certainly didn't).
I've learnt my lesson anyway - I won't be pointing out anybody's influences again ... people know what their influences are and don't need me to point them out (especially when I'm wrong)!

Hope all the support in here makes you feel better :)
Paul

PS. I fully intend to try that shot one day, 100% influenced by yourself & John.
11/20/2002 12:55:29 AM · #18
Imitation is the greatest form of flattery there is. Also each new shot gets better and better. Each one adds so new aspect to it to improve on the subject. How do you think technology got to where it is today. How do you think we ever got to digital photography. Someone took someone else's idea and added their own ideas. Kwitchyerbellyaching and admit he had a good shot and you are just jealous you didn't think of "Distoring Houses" yourself. That's what I would have said and am saying to all who critized your photo.

They are just jealous becaue it was a wonderful photo. Their made because if they submit theirs now they will really be accused of plegerism. Don't loose any sleep over their small minds. Look at how much support you have and go on with your wonderful photography. You did a good job. I'm anxiously awaiting your next one. Figure I scored it as high as I did this one, if not higher. You have talent and an eye for photography and it shows in your work. Keep it up and keep your chin up and head high.

11/20/2002 09:17:43 AM · #19
I agree that the lame contingent was fairly small. It's just that I thought I had this really neat photo that would have a good chance of being pretty different to most everything else in the challenge. And then suddenly I get a slew of 'nice variaton on...', 'a good attempt at replicating...' etc. and it just annoyed me that everyone was assuming I had copied, whether successfully or not.

Anyway, as I said, I'm happy with the picture. And 40th place out of 302 tends to imply that a fair few others liked it as well. So my spleen is vented and my argument put forward. People can choose to think what they like and like whatever they want.

I only wish my current submission was doing as well as that one did. At least this time I agree with the comments left so far!


Originally posted by Gekker:
I read the comments and although quite a few referenced Setzler's photo, they also said that it was a good variation, etc... Only a couple of narrow-minded folk actually left narrow-minded comments. The pic did score well imo, and so I think the majority liked the picture, and saw it on it's own merit.

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/08/2020 07:14:43 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: 04/08/2020 07:14:43 PM EDT.