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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> When is 2 seconds NOT?
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 383, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/27/2006 01:41:01 AM · #51
Originally posted by elsapo:

also NOT taken at 4-5am


And there was a HUGE stink over that as well when the truth came out, remember? The point in all this is when something is specifically specified in a challenge and that aspect is totally ignored then there will be outrage. You have a choice, keep fighting and bringing up past examples to justify your entry and all the while keeping the fight alive and people angry, DQ yourself for not doing what the challenge specified and learn from the experience or ignore it from here and just keep shooting and doing your best. It's your choice. Ask yourself what you can live with, not what others can.

Deannda
03/27/2006 01:41:08 AM · #52
I'd LOVE to have made my shot at 15 seconds or so. I was ACHING to do it. But I didn't even do one as an outtake; just stuck that ol' shutter at 2 seconds and did what I could. I'm a pretty phlegmatic guy, but it still irks me to see riggon winners that ignore a very specific, non-interpretable topic displace images that were shot "clean" and thus, IMO, deserved the ribbon.

It's sort of like the steroids issue. Sigh...

Robt.

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 01:42:26.
03/27/2006 01:41:28 AM · #53
I think ultimately it all boils down to having a ribbon in your possession for a "technical" challenge that was not met. Not meeting the challenge description is not grounds for DQ. However, as long as the ribbon is displayed on one's portfolio, it will always carry the stigma of "having not met the challenge".

Just imagine a few years from now when we have "2 Second Exposure II".

Rikki
03/27/2006 01:41:40 AM · #54
Originally posted by graphicfunk:

Originally posted by KingWampum:

I don't remember seeing a complaint thread when a cut out won the "your shadow II" blue ribbon(maybe there was one). I think the effort and creativity justly won the day.

El sapo made a great effort and the photo is beautiful.

Kudos to el sapo for facing the angry mob. He could easily ignore this thread or could have wrote in 2 seconds on shutter speed and only the council would have been the wiser.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

This is not a complaint against the talented Elsapo. This has more to do with the gist of a technical challenge which uses aperture or exposure time as its basis. Just how do all members interpret it. Some can forego a better images because it did not meet the technical spec. What do we say to these people? believe me, this has more to do with the question: can technical descriptions be ignored by one and all without consequence. Whatever, the answer is alright, but at least we know how to read a future challenge.


Kudos to you for the succient summary :)

Kari

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 03:09:46.
03/27/2006 01:45:00 AM · #55
Originally posted by mk:

Originally posted by graphicfunk:

First congratulations to the winners. I would never question the members but I would the s/c. Not as a form of complaint but merely to define what liberties we can take in future challenges. Many complaint about not being able to enter because their equipment could not negotiate a two sec exposure. When they realize that they were never really required to adhere to the challenge description they just wasted their breath complaining.

Now, the s.c. member above has stated that it this is acceptable, that is that the exposure time was not really the determining factor, this is fine but just how do we members interpret challenges which state a technical condition. Just a question whose answer will benefit all competing members. How much loosenes will be allowed with technical challenges such as aperture and exposure time. And if you state black can one use white?


Not meeting the challenge has never been grounds for disqualification (unless specially mentioned as in the ducky challenge).


But it should be. If not then what about in the future showing the camera settings on the voting page for all technical challenges such as this one? I think people know DNMC is not grounds for DQ but it is grounds for giving it a lower score something that voters didn't get the opportunity to do here. Normally this isn't an issue because the infractions are highly visible but here it wasn't.

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 01:45:34.
03/27/2006 01:45:37 AM · #56
I predict a beautiful and stunning blue photo is going to win the Yellow Challenge.

I mean technically it really doesn't have to be yellow.

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 01:46:10.
03/27/2006 01:48:47 AM · #57
I knew there should have been a flag on this challenge. Personally, if I had ribboned while disregarding the challenge descript, I'd be embarrassed and possibly just not provide proof and get myself DQ'd.
03/27/2006 01:49:48 AM · #58
I'm predicting it's gonna be a free study kind of month... (kidding darn it)
03/27/2006 01:52:16 AM · #59
I guess the bottom line here is when we vote on photos we take the benefit of a doubt that it was in guidelines, and vote it as if it was. But after the fact we find we have been deceived that it actually never was intented to meet the challenge just a pretty picture put in the mix because its close enough. The challenge gave a clear enough 2 second rule yet it was just as subjective during voting as anything else, yet at the end the truth came out it wasn't what the challenge description asked for.. But then again I am here to learn, not to get a ribbon or high score by anymeans possible if it requires tricking the viewer it fits the challenge.
03/27/2006 01:55:12 AM · #60
Originally posted by jbsmithana:

I predict a beautiful and stunning blue photo is going to win the Yellow Challenge.

I mean technically it really doesn't have to be yellow.


I bet you are wrong. =P

The only problem with techinical challenges is that the Site Council does not mandate the topic requirement. People voted high because it looked like it could've been 2 seconds, the only requirement was advanced editing rules adhere.

If we really want to solve these issues, graphicfunk is right, SC needs to make it clear ahead of time that the topic is indeed a requirement and verified otherwise there is only self guilt to blame. And that varies per person. ;)

I also get ticked when someone uses a monitor screen as part of their photo and I do not know it is! But they did nothing wrong except trick me. :o

Technically...Nothing Wrong. Go ahead, poor the guilt on him. But the Site Council is who you should be addressing.
03/27/2006 02:08:45 AM · #61
A bummer all the way around... Of course, when a photo is taken that DNMC, the photographer knows the risk they run. There may be no action by the site council, but the rage of public opinion may rise up against them.

Great photo. Clear rules. Everyone has an opinion.

Now, where my yellow filters?
03/27/2006 02:17:35 AM · #62
I'm happy in the knowledge that mine was 2 seconds, and also unique to the challenge.
03/27/2006 02:20:56 AM · #63
This is pretty ironic - through family events today I had the opportunity to teach my 4 and 6 year old about "sportsmanship" and "integrity". Then, after putting the kids to bed and feeling pretty good about the lessons I hoped they learned today, I logon to find out the results of this challenge and only one word comes to mind now, "sad". Maybe tomorrow, to make sure my kids grow up strong and make it to the top, I should teach them a new word, "loophole".

I'm sorry, maybe no "rules" were broken, but there is still right and wrong. This is just plain wrong. I can't imagine anyone feeling good about the outcome of this challenge, which is why I find it so sad.
03/27/2006 02:23:05 AM · #64
I did not participate in this challenge, but as it was fairly specific, I feel that only 2-second exposures should be allowed.

I believe that if the challenge states an exposure standard is should be met. Or why the hell should I give a crap about whether I take a photo within the "exposure dates". I mean, if they're simply a suggestion. I've had photos taken one day off that could have done great but could not submit because of exposure dates.

Many have expressed that they had much nicer photos NOT at 2 seconds. But did not enter for that reason.

IMHO, all non-2 second exposures should be DQ'd (but it should not count against their DQ penalty).

Rules should be clarified that if the challenge says "Take a photo using an f/11 aperture, or a 1/60th shutter speed. That said photo should in deed meet said requirements.

I understand the DNMC not being DQ'able in most "topic" cases. And I agree. However, things such as 2-second exposure or f/11 is an absolute. You either take a 2-second exposure or you don't.

*shrug*

Just my OpiNION as a non participant!
03/27/2006 02:31:12 AM · #65
IMHO - toss out challenge descriptions all together since people her dont feel the need to follow them. I thought the whole idea of these challenges was to learn - even if it means stepping out of a challenge when we cannot quite execute it. I took the 2 second challenge as a very specific technical challenge. had I not been able to pull off a 2 second exposure I would not have entered at all.

again - JMHO

I dont want people to think I am unhappy about finishing 5th. I appreciate the wonderful comments and votes that I received. Thank you all. The biggest rewards is an image that now hangs in my home that I can be proud of. The 5th place - another proud accomplishmenmt as I know I followed my understanding of why we even have these excercises. Thank you D&L for challenging us in yet another technical way.
03/27/2006 02:52:26 AM · #66
This was a very disappointing challenge from a personal standpoint, as those of us that did conform to the exact challenge description could have done better by making up our own rules, and see some did whatever they wanted anyway...
Why even bother - I'm done.


03/27/2006 03:03:38 AM · #67
Originally posted by mk:

Not meeting the challenge has never been grounds for disqualification (unless specially mentioned as in the ducky challenge).

As you say, not meeting Special Rules has been. It's just no good repeating the same old mantra in the hope that it is right. It's not. It's a fair point of view where the DNMC is a subjective one and I support it in that context. I do not support outright deception and cheating.

Technical challenges are so simple to enforce (where the rule is not a subjective one but an absolute one like this) should have the force of the Rules and images that don't conform need to be disqualified. In such challenges the EXIF is a quick and easy check (4-5am, shutter speed, aperture etc).

To not introduce some controls like this puts DPC in the extrememly difficult position of appearing to condone rip-off practices. I'm not sure that's how the owners would wish to be viewed. This is after all, a business which does bring some obligations with it.

I implore DPC to think very carefully about what is happening here and the damage that it could have on their business.

Brett
03/27/2006 03:10:22 AM · #68
Maybe I'm too old for this crowd. When I was elsapo's age, his stunt would have been considered cheating, and he would have been disqualified. The challenge said, "Take a photograph using a shutter speed of exactly 2 seconds". He didn't do it and admits it. He gets the ribbon jerked. What's so hard about that?

I'll now go eat some sour grapes. Love 'em.

03/27/2006 03:28:34 AM · #69
DPC has grown over the last two years. There have been many changes implemented over that time. And changes will continue to be made. People also grow. And they also make mistakes. The trick is to learn from those mistakes. Nobody could ask anything more of anyone.

The challenges have grown to accomodate many newcomers using a huge range of equipment and talent. Some challenges are technical challenges....some challenges are artistic challenges. Everybody loves a challenge. And nobody likes to feel cheated.

We have currently got 2 exclusive challenges but only one member challenge. Why not implement a second member challenge so people can choose to enter either a technical challenge or an artistic challenge.

We have seen in the past and obviously today where people have felt cheated by some of the entries. If somebody had taken a shot on the wrong day....or used the wrong PS tool....even by error...they would be disqualified. The time has come now to implement disqualifications on technical challenges. These disqualifications can not be the same as on artistic challenges as ones opinion on art is different to another.

We have learnt from this challenge....therefore why don't we learn from this. And maybe the site council can meet and discuss the introduction of technical challenges as the second member challenge where breaking the challenge subject/description (on a technical matter) will be disqualified.

So let's not get to heated about the current entries...as they had found a loophole...instead let's put our heads together....all of us....and find a way to prevent this from happening in the future.
03/27/2006 03:29:29 AM · #70
To me this is like athletes taking drugs in sport, playing outside the rules, or at least the spirit of the rules. It should have been required that EXIF data be produced to match the challenge. It's not fair on some people who try so hard to meet challenges and others who use loopholes. What is the use of having the challenges if at the end o the day people play it like sneaky drug taking athletes.

At least some of us can put our heads on the pillow at night...

Time to join Germaine and eat some tasty sour grapes.

Just for the record, I didn't enter this challenge.
03/27/2006 03:38:22 AM · #71
Group "A" followed the rules because they were specific. Group "B" said, "To hell with it, I'll make up my own rules". Group "B" won. Now group "A" is wondering how well they could have done if they made up their own rules. Maybe the results would be different?

It's not like the challenge description said "Take a photograph using a shutter speed of exactly 2 seconds ...mmmmm, give or take a second and a half ...or so. Ahh heck, do whatever you want".

Is integrity not a part of this game? Wonderful photograph by a very talented young man, but...
03/27/2006 04:26:12 AM · #72
When the winners submit their original photo, and the exif data does not say 2 seconds, then they should be dq'd.

I'm one of the ones who tried it at 2 seconds and it just wasn't working. Had I known that I could have set it at 1/2 sec. (or any other setting) I would have entered.

I would rather win by following the guidelines.
03/27/2006 04:34:13 AM · #73
Originally posted by lepidus:


I'm one of the ones who tried it at 2 seconds and it just wasn't working. Had I known that I could have set it at 1/2 sec. (or any other setting) I would have entered.


I know how THAT feels - it's sour, and it sucks.
I would have shot something else if I had thought about using a longer shutter speed than the imposed 2 seconds :S sigh
03/27/2006 04:36:08 AM · #74
oh. the rulez might be broken.
i would be worried ... :-)

j/k
03/27/2006 05:07:57 AM · #75
Im relatively new to this website and photography and im mistified as to how a 1/2 second shot can win a 2 second challenge.
My pic was of a small waterfall also and i took over 50 shots at 2 seconds before i got one i liked.
I also took lots at different shutter speeds and believe me when i say my 0.5 second and 1 second shots i took were 100 times better than my 2 second entry.
Im sorry to say this but the winner should be a man and withdraw his entry. In my eyes at this particular moment the credibility of DPChallenge is zero.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 11:16:51 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 © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 11:16:51 AM EDT.