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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> 'Off-Centered Subject II' Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 243, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/08/2006 10:37:08 AM · #51
Say you have a street in your city that is pretty isolated. The city council decides that they will raise the speed limit from 30 mph to 60. They change the law and they put a notice in the paper and people start to drive at 60mph. Then something comes up and they decide to lower the limit back down to 45mph. They write an article for the paper to let everyone know that that is what they are PLANNING to do, but the official laws are not revised so the official law still says 60. I get a ticket for speeding at 53mph. Don't I have every right to fight the ticket?
This is what the sc is doing. The previous pictures are the evidence that in certain cases it is ok to blur a picture. Once approved, it isn't fair to say it's not ok to use the filter to the extent that it was used in a previous picture unless the rule set is updated. The entire whimsical application from picture to picture leads to a feeling of inconsistancy. When one feels that there is inconsistancy, one begins to wonder if it is because of favortism. It underminds all the good work the sc is capable of doing.
02/08/2006 11:05:00 AM · #52
Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by nsbca7:

SC gets awful quiet.

02/08/2006 11:06:19 AM · #53
Well said, I hope someone is listening.

Originally posted by pcody:

Say you have a street in your city that is pretty isolated. The city council decides that they will raise the speed limit from 30 mph to 60. They change the law and they put a notice in the paper and people start to drive at 60mph. Then something comes up and they decide to lower the limit back down to 45mph. They write an article for the paper to let everyone know that that is what they are PLANNING to do, but the official laws are not revised so the official law still says 60. I get a ticket for speeding at 53mph. Don't I have every right to fight the ticket?
This is what the sc is doing. The previous pictures are the evidence that in certain cases it is ok to blur a picture. Once approved, it isn't fair to say it's not ok to use the filter to the extent that it was used in a previous picture unless the rule set is updated. The entire whimsical application from picture to picture leads to a feeling of inconsistancy. When one feels that there is inconsistancy, one begins to wonder if it is because of favortism. It underminds all the good work the sc is capable of doing.
02/08/2006 11:09:26 AM · #54
nsbca7,
I find your signature offensive. To me, it is equivalent to a personal attack. Surely you don't need to resort to such juvenile expressions to aid your discussion of an important topic.
02/08/2006 11:13:03 AM · #55
I don't see favoritism at play in decisions regarding DQs. Those of you who know me well will verify that I would not hesitate to point it out, loudly, if I saw it.

What I do see is SC trying to evenly apply rules to various images. People are expecting perfectly symetrical enforcement when the subjects of the decisions are not the same. Even though the same rule(s) are cited in the explanations for DQs from different challenges, and even different rulesets, no two images are that similiar that we should expect the results to be consistent to an exacting level. Aren't we, in the end, discussing a group (whose makeup can change from time to time) of human beings making subjective decisions?

Some of the examples cited in the forums in questioning the consistency of recent SC decisions are not really very close. They are nearly irrelevant for the purposes people are trying to use them for.

Also keep in mind that for the vast majority of DQs only the SC members have the benefit of seeing both the original file and the entry when making their judgements. Most forum posters are, comparatively speaking, taking a stab in the dark when they voice an opinion on these images.

02/08/2006 11:16:13 AM · #56
Originally posted by KaDi:

nsbca7,
I find your signature offensive. To me, it is equivalent to a personal attack. Surely you don't need to resort to such juvenile expressions to aid your discussion of an important topic.


I'm glad you see it for what it is. I take the DQ of this image as a personal attack.
02/08/2006 11:21:45 AM · #57
Originally posted by nsbca7:

[quote=Di] Read the forums, Mark.. no it didn't start today...this isnt the first time that someone got hit up for a major element and Joey's photo got put inthe thread because of the DQ.

So instead of me having to read the contents of the site for the past several months cue me in. What other images that you may know of were DQ'd in an advanced editing challenge for added blur?

I received a dq on my user name entry, because I used a zoom blur. I guess that it does definitely seem a major element was changed, but if I had entered this several months ago it probably wouldn't have been dq'd.' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/424/thumb/272133.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/424/thumb/272133.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 11:22:36.
02/08/2006 11:25:02 AM · #58
Now I am concerned about this blur rule. What denotes major element? I am looking at entering an image where in reducing the noise of the background, it appears now to be blurred. I spot edited the background, but the original image has a much more defined background. The rule states that you can spot edit in advanced editing to enhance your image. The editing enhances the image by making the background less noticable. Now I am thinking it might be dq'd.
02/08/2006 11:28:31 AM · #59
Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by nsbca7:

SC gets awful quiet.


Message edited by author 2006-02-08 11:28:43.
02/08/2006 11:30:12 AM · #60
SC may be tired of arguing this same topic week in and week out - they've said new, more consise rules are in the works, not sure what else they can do at this point.
02/08/2006 11:34:14 AM · #61
Originally posted by idnic:

... not sure what else they can do at this point.


Be consistent?

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 11:34:24.
02/08/2006 11:38:21 AM · #62
I'm glad someone brought up the makeup of sc from one decision to the next. I don't think that is a valid reason for one picture to get a dq and the next to get approved. The sc should be accountable for their work "as a whole". They should review past decisions and compare if more or less of the same thing was done. If they absolutly can't live with someone using a certain filter or removing a background, they should make every effort, at the first application of that process, to stop people from using it. If they fail to convince a majority of their peers, they should live with it.
There should be a folder that has each of the benchmark pictures placed in it so they are easy to find and compare for both members and sc. The benchmark pictures are pretty easy to identify. They are the ones that are included in each thread that this subject is discussed. Everyone will have something to compare their picture to and the sc will have pictures to refresh their memory as to what they, as a whole, allowed.
02/08/2006 11:38:58 AM · #63
If this decision had stripped you of a ribbon or top 10 finish I would understand why your so upset, but it is one of your more average shots anyway nsbca7.

Perhaps you could do with a break from DPChallenge for a while, you seem to be getting very stressed out lately. From the tone of some of your recent posts you don't get much enjoyment from the community anyway these days.
02/08/2006 11:40:33 AM · #64
I cant believe you are this serious! its JUST A PHOTO for gods sake, SURELY you have better things to do, than get so upset about a photo scoring in the 5's - that great a loss?

You sig is way over the top.
02/08/2006 11:46:09 AM · #65
Originally posted by LoveSpuds:

If this decision had stripped you of a ribbon or top 10 finish I would understand why your so upset, but it is one of your more average shots anyway nsbca7.



It's not the fact of the DQ or how high it was rated. It's how it was done. There was no challenge to the image while the voting was underway. It was only after that my name was attached to the image that it was challenged and that challenge came not from a member (members seem not to miss much here) but from a member of the SC. I'd say somebody I pissed off the other day. Otherwise explain the DQ. That has not been done satisfactorily at this point.

As far as taking a break from DPC, I think I will let SC do that for me. Until then deal with it or don't read my posts, whichever suits you.

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 11:47:29.
02/08/2006 11:46:23 AM · #66
oh gosh. here we go again...
02/08/2006 11:47:43 AM · #67
Originally posted by nsbca7:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/440/thumb/283627.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/440/thumb/283627.jpg', '/') + 1) . '' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16241/thumb/288748.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16241/thumb/288748.jpg', '/') + 1) . '


How is this legal?
I'd love to hear how this was legal and the shot of the girl next to the couch who brightened the couch out of the shot was not legal?

SC? PLEASE explain that one?

I'm with nsbca on this one - and I do believe if that's not the 1st time I've ever said that, it's close...

This is ... just explain how goodman's ribbon passes and the girl by the couch (high key - I'm sure you SC remember it) doesn't pass?

M

(edit: and I bumped this when scalvert, mk, hbunch, ursula were all online so let's see)

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 11:50:15.
02/08/2006 11:49:06 AM · #68
Originally posted by ladymonarda:

Now I am concerned about this blur rule. What denotes major element? I am looking at entering an image where in reducing the noise of the background, it appears now to be blurred. I spot edited the background, but the original image has a much more defined background. The rule states that you can spot edit in advanced editing to enhance your image. The editing enhances the image by making the background less noticable. Now I am thinking it might be dq'd.

This sounds like the perfect example of a case where the photog should check with the SC before entering. They have suggested that we do that several times recently if we are wondering about the legality of an entry.
02/08/2006 11:51:21 AM · #69
Originally posted by mavrik:


This is ... just explain how goodman's ribbon passes and the girl by the couch (high key - I'm sure you SC remember it) doesn't pass?


i don't remember this one. was it before my time on SC? do you know the challenge or approximately when it was?
02/08/2006 11:52:54 AM · #70
Pretty sure he means this one-

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/306/thumb/143042.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/306/thumb/143042.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
02/08/2006 11:54:51 AM · #71
ah, that WAS before our SC stint.
02/08/2006 11:55:10 AM · #72
Originally posted by LoveSpuds:

If this decision had stripped you of a ribbon or top 10 finish I would understand why your so upset, but it is one of your more average shots anyway nsbca7.


That makes no sense at all. An image and the application of the rules is only valid if it's a ribbon winner or top 10? If this had been your photograph wouldn't you raise these issues? I disagree with his points of view usually, but it seems like an unfair DQ. The fact that the photo didn't do well has absolutely nothing to do with the argument.

Personally I think it's humorous how many of the winning photos or photos that do extremely well look almost nothing LIKE a photograph anymore, after all the filters, layers, etc have been added, yet his photo gets DQ'd for something that fits 100% into the rules as they are written TODAY. It does not MATTER if they are working on new rules and they are GOING to publish them soon. They haven't yet, so the rules you follow are the ones TODAY. Major element? Nah, not even close.
02/08/2006 11:57:43 AM · #73
Originally posted by scalvert:


KDO's final entry could be reasonably described as a woman on a white background, right? Is that how you would describe her original?


Goodman's final entry could reasonably be described as a man on a black background, right? Is that how you would describe her original, Shannon?


02/08/2006 11:59:29 AM · #74
Originally posted by mavrik:

Originally posted by nsbca7:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/440/thumb/283627.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/440/thumb/283627.jpg', '/') + 1) . '' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16241/thumb/288748.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/16241/thumb/288748.jpg', '/') + 1) . '


How is this legal?
I'd love to hear how this was legal and the shot of the girl next to the couch who brightened the couch out of the shot was not legal?

SC? PLEASE explain that one?

I'm with nsbca on this one - and I do believe if that's not the 1st time I've ever said that, it's close...

This is ... just explain how goodman's ribbon passes and the girl by the couch (high key - I'm sure you SC remember it) doesn't pass?

M

(edit: and I bumped this when scalvert, mk, hbunch, ursula were all online so let's see)


One thing that you should consider is that in comparing an entry to an original, the comparison is done at the same crop as the entry (the finished version). In other words, in comparing Lesley's finished image to her original, you need to first crop the original the same as the finished version. You'll notice that when you do so there will be verylittle identifyable background left, a bit of shirt on both sides, a bit of a zipper on the right side. Without the bit of zipper you wouldn't know hardly that it is shirts - it could be anything. So another way to think about this is: "is eliminating this little bit of background elimination of a major element?", or "is the blurred bit of zipper a major element?"

I think for many the answer would be no.

PS - I have a meeting to attend in just a minute, so if I don't answer please don't go around saying I'm ignoring you. I have a life outside of DPC.

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 12:00:46.
02/08/2006 11:59:53 AM · #75
Originally posted by scalvert:

Pretty sure he means this one-

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/306/thumb/143042.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/306/thumb/143042.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Quite a fuss that time around. Thread (locked) here.

Unfortunately, the original that was posted alongside the DQ'd challenge entry is gone now. Some other examples in there still...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/26/2020 07:14:13 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 © 2001-2020 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: 05/26/2020 07:14:13 AM EDT.