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 151 - 175 of 243, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/08/2006 03:52:56 PM · #151
Originally posted by kiwiness:

Originally posted by mavrik:

Original discussion on the same thing over a month ago:
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=324077


Thanks Mav, I never saw that one!


I'm rapidly remembering why I didn't renew my membership :)
02/08/2006 03:53:21 PM · #152
Originally posted by muckpond:

ok, here's a question.

... putting the ruleset entirely aside: do you think that it's fair for someone to use photoshop to simulate motion where no motion existed before?

you can capture motion in-camera. sure, it's harder, but shouldn't you be rewarded more for it? say we had a motion blur challenge and you spent 2 hours trying to get the exact look you wanted while the guy next to you spent 30 seconds snapping a shot and then 30 seconds applying a blur in photoshop. would you feel cheated? should that be allowed on dpc?

i'm really looking for a debate here. the ruleset now is structured to force people to use photographic techniques more than editing techniques. do you really think the two photos i described above are equally valid? i would like to hear your opinions.

So what do you consider 'photographic techniques'? You haven't defined anything, just changed the words used to indicate the confusion. So, is 'photography' ... in camera? ...digital duplication of darkroom technique? ... or something else.

By your arguement here, the photographer that takes the time with exposure to 'get it right' in-camera should be rewarded and anyone intentionally underexposing to preserve the highlights (knowing they can bring the exposure back up later) should be punished? ...the same for intentionally overexposing to capture as much clean detail as possible (again, knowing they can bring the exposure back later); they should also be punished?

The rules will never be clear until some definitions are created. period. Definitions for the basic terms of the craft, such as 'photography', 'exposure' and so many others. Nothing can be said about 'photographic integrity' or 'photographic technique' until the term 'photography' is clearly defined.

And to same some confusion afterwards, should some definitions actually be made; the definitions will have to meet a few requirements for them to actually remove confusion instead of adding to it. Such as...

- a definition should be in terms of tangibles. That is, things that can be seen, felt or experienced in some way. Definitions that rely on intagibles, such as a concept like 'average person', will mean different things for everyone reading it.

- a definition should be in terms relative to the audience. We are digital photographers, using terms relevant to the film world is only going to continue to add confusion.

- a definition should be written in simple language. This is an international site, and while many of those I have met with english as a second language have a better grasp of it than I do ... simple clear words are easiest to understand for all concerned.

- Definitions should, as much as possible, not rely on other definitions. That is, each should stand on it's own. There are a few terms that mean nothing in isolation (such as hot and cold) but they are in the minority.

There are probably other 'requirements' that I haven't thought of, but the point is defining the terms is not just a matter of academic interest -- it is vital for the understanding of all involved. The terms used represent a means of communiting thoughts from one to another -- only confusion exists when the terms do not represent the same thoughts for everyone.

David
02/08/2006 03:53:24 PM · #153
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by muckpond:

ok, here's a question.

you can capture motion in-camera. sure, it's harder, but shouldn't you be rewarded more for it?


Here's my question to you muckpond. How, as SC, do you reward something more? It seems to me you can either reward something (allow it) or penalize something (DQ it).


i apologize for not clarifying. my thinking was: do you think you deserve the same or possibly a higher score for doing a photo "the hard way."

i'm not talking about the DQ discussion. this is probably the wrong thread.
02/08/2006 03:56:52 PM · #154
Originally posted by David.C:


The rules will never be clear until some definitions are created. period. Definitions for the basic terms of the craft, such as 'photography', 'exposure' and so many others. Nothing can be said about 'photographic integrity' or 'photographic technique' until the term 'photography' is clearly defined.


Urm, what he said. Though they are well defined already. It is just they are being redefined by some to mean things like 'photography is everything up to pressing the button and everything after that is just cheating'

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 15:59:14.
02/08/2006 03:58:32 PM · #155
Originally posted by muckpond:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by muckpond:

ok, here's a question.

you can capture motion in-camera. sure, it's harder, but shouldn't you be rewarded more for it?


Here's my question to you muckpond. How, as SC, do you reward something more? It seems to me you can either reward something (allow it) or penalize something (DQ it).


i apologize for not clarifying. my thinking was: do you think you deserve the same or possibly a higher score for doing a photo "the hard way."

i'm not talking about the DQ discussion. this is probably the wrong thread.


I think your biases are showing, given that you assume doing it in camera is 'harder' when often it is actually a whole lot easier and quicker to do it in camera than in photoshop, if you want it to look good.

Harder to control perhaps, in camera.
Harder to undo and play with, certainly, in camera.

Much easier to have it look realistic and to do it well, in camera.
02/08/2006 03:59:42 PM · #156
Originally posted by muckpond:

[quote=DrAchoo] [
i apologize for not clarifying. my thinking was: do you think you deserve the same or possibly a higher score for doing a photo "the hard way."

i'm not talking about the DQ discussion. this is probably the wrong thread.


If I may wade in, the problem is we, as voters, have no means of ascertaining whether an effect was accomplished the "hard" way or the "easy" way. We have on several occasions seen evidence of backlash where voters "assumed" something was done in post-processing that was actually accomplished in-camera. This is a natural offshoot of the mentality being fostered by so many, that something done in-camera shows a higher level of "integrity" than something done in post-processing.

IMO it ought not matter; the result is what ought to matter. Does it work for you, as a voter, or not?

R.
02/08/2006 04:05:34 PM · #157
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

IMO it ought not matter; the result is what ought to matter. Does it work for you, as a voter, or not?

R.


In which case, what some consider digital art will not be given good scores and it sorts itself out in the end. I would be willing to bet the same pictures would win as have been
The up-side.. less of these discussions!!!!
02/08/2006 04:07:43 PM · #158
Originally posted by Bear_Music:


IMO it ought not matter; the result is what ought to matter. Does it work for you, as a voter, or not?


But it flips back to the fact that the voters are actually all students of photography, of one kind or another. We are nearlyt all technique obsessed camera junkies - so we care about how it is done, probably more than we care about what the picture looks like.

A panel of non-photographers voting on images would no doubt pick a completely different set of winners in many challenges.

Particularly if they didn't know about the Byzantine rules and restrictions placed on dpchallenge photography compared to say standard advertising photography. Things that are 'amazing' here (because we know what you are and aren't 'allowed' to do, score really high, artificially, just due to their 'wow, how did you bend the rules and get this one' value.

I know I've exploited that way to win ribbons in the past. Kiwiness has done that on several occasions too. I can think of many ribbon winners that seem to have understood that particular way to play the game.

Does that make us better photographers, or better at playing the DPC rule game ? ;)

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 16:11:00.
02/08/2006 04:09:26 PM · #159
This still does little to clarify why the Red Dawn shot was singled out to begin with. I'm about to have two other shots DQ'd in protest and until there is a level playing field here at DPC I don't think I will be entering any more challenges. I was simply using these as a sounding board anyway. I'm sure I can find that in another medium if I need it.
02/08/2006 04:12:38 PM · #160
Originally posted by nsbca7:

This still does little to clarify why the Red Dawn shot was singled out to begin with. I'm about to have two other shots DQ'd in protest and until there is a level playing field here at DPC I don't think I will be entering any more challenges. I was simply using these as a sounding board anyway. I'm sure I can find that in another medium if I need it.


I think you should enter some challenges with your Barbie camera if you are going to act like a pouty child ;)

FWIW, I don't see why your picture got DQed when the obviously non-moving, motion blurred jet plane was left in, but I'm not on the SC.
02/08/2006 04:13:32 PM · #161
Originally posted by Gordon:

but I'm not on the SC.


There are reasons why you were and should be.
02/08/2006 04:15:08 PM · #162
Originally posted by Ombra_foto:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

IMO it ought not matter; the result is what ought to matter. Does it work for you, as a voter, or not?

R.


In which case, what some consider digital art will not be given good scores and it sorts itself out in the end. I would be willing to bet the same pictures would win as have been
The up-side.. less of these discussions!!!!


That may be true up to a point, but the recently-disqualified image of gulls against a radial-blurred BG was receiving a very high score before it was DQ'd. And I'd submit that a lot of low votes directed at perceived post-processing effects are low BECAUSE the voters believe that in DPC this is not allowed, not because they are so "against" it in the first place.

But I can't prove any of this...

R.
02/08/2006 04:17:41 PM · #163
Ah, the DPC 'discussion'. The main problem with these arguments is that there are no agreed upon terms. We're making arguments based on a different set of assumptions, and the argument goes around in circles.

This whole problem could be finished by the elimination of all restrictions in the challenges. The good photographs will surface regardless of the process used to get there.

This is a contest environment. It's about rules, not integrity. Integrity is irrelevant, regardless of definition. Arbirtary restrictions are fine as long as they're clearly defined and well policed. DPCs are neither. If there are problems, get rid of them. It seems to me that, whatever people value in an image, it will surface. Imposing restrictions on process is, to me, very odd. It is the rough equivalent of a boss saying that a report typed with a left hand isn't as good as one typed with both hands. Or, the video you got at Blockbuster won't be as good because you walked there backwards.

Process isn't important.

Message edited by author 2006-02-08 16:20:06.
02/08/2006 04:41:29 PM · #164
Originally posted by jimmythefish:



Process isn't important.


Unless it is modern art.

Where process seems often to be more important than the final result.

Which is also why I find a lot of modern art self-important navel gazing.

I don't care if you burned off your pubic hair to make the paint for your finger painting, while you froze in an artic tundra.

If the painting is crap, then the painting is crap.

But if it was modern art, it might well sell for millions.
02/08/2006 04:58:59 PM · #165
Originally posted by Falc:

This gets stricter by the challenge !!
Its about time we had a definitive rule on this.


No kidding. I really don't understand why motion/radial blurs are against the rules even though they usually leave the background somewhat discernable but a dodge and burn which does MORE to remove the background or other unwanted elements is ok. Makes zero sense.
02/08/2006 05:02:59 PM · #166
Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by jimmythefish:



Process isn't important.


Unless it is modern art.

Where process seems often to be more important than the final result.

Which is also why I find a lot of modern art self-important navel gazing.

I don't care if you burned off your pubic hair to make the paint for your finger painting, while you froze in an artic tundra.

If the painting is crap, then the painting is crap.

But if it was modern art, it might well sell for millions.


lol - Get me a bank cheque for 1.anythingM and I can arrange to get you a painting like that :-))
02/08/2006 05:07:08 PM · #167
Originally posted by Gordon:

FWIW, I don't see why your picture got DQed when the obviously non-moving, motion blurred jet plane was left in, but I'm not on the SC.


Me neither, and I am. :-/
02/08/2006 05:17:09 PM · #168
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Gordon:

FWIW, I don't see why your picture got DQed when the obviously non-moving, motion blurred jet plane was left in, but I'm not on the SC.


Me neither, and I am. :-/


Bold statement Shannon :)

It's been over two years since I left the SC, I'd love to come back, I am missing some abuse lately :)
02/08/2006 05:18:05 PM · #169
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Ombra_foto:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

IMO it ought not matter; the result is what ought to matter. Does it work for you, as a voter, or not?

R.


In which case, what some consider digital art will not be given good scores and it sorts itself out in the end. I would be willing to bet the same pictures would win as have been
The up-side.. less of these discussions!!!!


That may be true up to a point, but the recently-disqualified image of gulls against a radial-blurred BG was receiving a very high score before it was DQ'd. And I'd submit that a lot of low votes directed at perceived post-processing effects are low BECAUSE the voters believe that in DPC this is not allowed, not because they are so "against" it in the first place.

But I can't prove any of this...

R.

I feel this is very true, I know on my Tribute photo I got hammered by the voters, heck even a comment saying a major element was added in post processing. It wasn't till it said on the screen that my score took a dramatic change for the better. But it makes ya wonder, its kinda of a lynch-mob mentality if the photo is questionable for DQ.
02/08/2006 05:37:16 PM · #170
Personally, I think I'm done submitting photos...this is just ridiculous that this entry was DQ'd and the others mentioned weren't...

If you want to re-write the rules, then RE-WRITE THE RULES...but until that's done, there shouldn't have been a question on nsbca's entry.

It's like when you're in court, you have to bring up previous cases and their outcomes to see ... which is what should be done here.
02/08/2006 06:00:15 PM · #171
Originally posted by deapee:

Personally, I think I'm done submitting photos...this is just ridiculous that this entry was DQ'd and the others mentioned weren't...

If you want to re-write the rules, then RE-WRITE THE RULES...but until that's done, there shouldn't have been a question on nsbca's entry.

It's like when you're in court, you have to bring up previous cases and their outcomes to see ... which is what should be done here.


Ah, tort reform. Where's a fine, upstanding representative like Tom DeLay when you need one.
02/08/2006 06:09:38 PM · #172
Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by deapee:

If you want to re-write the rules, then RE-WRITE THE RULES...but until that's done, there shouldn't have been a question on nsbca's entry.

It's like when you're in court, you have to bring up previous cases and their outcomes to see ... which is what should be done here.


Ah, tort reform. Where's a fine, upstanding representative like Tom DeLay when you need one.


Oh, he's here. The rules revision is frequently subject to DeLay. ;-)
02/08/2006 06:51:56 PM · #173
I have yet to see Manic or Blemt or any of the other SC who participated in this judgment come forth and properly explain their decision.

I would also like to know how and why it was singled out when it had not been considered while the challenge was active. In fact it wasn't considered for DQ until one SC member or another saw the image with my name next to it. This I am sure of.

Why don't you all be big about this? I may be abrasive in my manner at times, but I've never been afraid to step forward and defend my convictions.
02/08/2006 06:58:48 PM · #174
i would guess clara is still at work. and i would also guess that your signature doesn't inspire much participation from manic in this matter.
02/08/2006 07:04:45 PM · #175
Originally posted by muckpond:

i would guess clara is still at work. and i would also guess that your signature doesn't inspire much participation from manic in this matter.


I guess I could put a bag back on his head. But it would still be him. He doesn't believe in voodoo does he? His hair is probably a little wet right now if he does.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/26/2020 09:47:19 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 09:47:19 AM EDT.