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 101 - 125 of 383, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/27/2006 07:43:37 AM · #101
Originally posted by hotpasta:

I guess what was missing was this:

Take a photograph using a shutter speed of exactly 2 seconds.
*Please note that photographs not taken with a 2 second exposure will be disqualified


SC...how can we make it so that photgraphs meant to be taken between 4 and 5 am, or of wildlife (not at the zoo), or exposures at 2 seconds or 1/1000 seconds are just what they are?


I think there are a couple of options for SC.

1. For challenges where there are specific requirements, enforce those requirements with disqualification for not meeting them.
As far as I'm concerned, this was an easy one in the 2 sec. challenge. It gets stickier where, if for example in the current challenge "yellow" and someone takes one of blue and converts it in PP. Then those who went to the effort to find yellow would feel cheated.

2. Never post challenges with specific requirements and eliminate this headache.
I don't feel this would be the best route to take. I think the best thing about this site is that there are specific themes. The enforcement of those themes is in question, that's all.

3. Do nothing.
Just let people piss and moan, let some leave, others will join and life will go on.
I don't like this option, but it is an option.

As for the discussion about the winner giving up the ribbon? Unless everyone is required to submit exifs for verification and the results retabulated based on that, I don't think so. I'll bet there are a lot of images that would fall out if proof was requested. Let's just learn from this one and close the loophole.

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 07:53:04.
03/27/2006 07:43:55 AM · #102
Burn the village at midnight! I'll bring the torches!
03/27/2006 07:44:40 AM · #103
Originally posted by hotpasta:

I guess what was missing was this:

Take a photograph using a shutter speed of exactly 2 seconds.
*Please note that photographs not taken with a 2 second exposure will be disqualified


SC...how can we make it so that photgraphs meant to be taken between 4 and 5 am, or of wildlife (not at the zoo), or exposures at 2 seconds or 1/1000 seconds are just what they are?


Here Here! The main thing here is that an answer be found to stop it happening in the future.
03/27/2006 07:44:48 AM · #104
I think it should be like this for these kinda challenge. Anybody should be allowed to enter whatever they feel. However, if someone questions the particular image that it does not meet the "exact" part, and if the the image really does not meet the challenge , the score should be punished by the some percentages. And it could happen after the results are anounced (lets say 3days after the results are anounced). So in such challenges then people will take the rules seriously.
(this should not be for all challenges but for this kinda challenge rules should be changed).

Originally posted by KiwiPix:

Originally posted by BobsterLobster:

It was hardly a free study, the challenge was to create a photo that *looked* like it was taken with a 2-second shutter speed.

You must have a different english to the rest of us?

"Take a photograph using a shutter speed of exactly 2 seconds."

I'm not familiar with a dictionary that gives the meaning of "exactly" as "looking like".

Brett
03/27/2006 07:45:36 AM · #105
(just in case this topic is up for some debate in the SC, I'd like to chime in)

If the rules say "exactly 2 seconds", then DQ's should be handed out. I actually agree with Brent (which is rare :) The photo shouldn't necessarily have to LOOK like a 2 second exposure, it should just be a 2 second exposure.

I should be able to rely on that during voting knowing that I'm only handing out a 10 because I assume this person followed the rules, otherwise I would have given it a 1.
03/27/2006 07:47:14 AM · #106
Gatoguy said:

As for the discussion about the winner giving up the ribbon? Unless everyone is required to submit exifs for verification and the results retabulated based on that, I don't think so. I'll bet there are a lot of images that would fall out if proof was requested. Let's just learn from this one and close the loophole.

Hear, hear
03/27/2006 07:51:05 AM · #107
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

If the rules allowed us to DQ the ribbon winners that weren't 2 seconds, I would vote to do so in a heartbeat.~Terry

Terry maybe it's time for SC and the Owners to take a stand. You would upset a lot less people by just saying ...

"this is wrong, everyone knows it, we're going to fix it - these are DQ'd, members take note!"

Is it better to defend a rule that everyone now agrees needs fixing or is it better to let the integrity of DPC join the integrity of those who wish to make a mockery of it.

Leadership is required, this is serious for DPC as a commercial business - really.

Brett
03/27/2006 07:51:22 AM · #108
my 2cents,
If any photograph in the 2sec challenge that was not taken with a shutter speed of exactly 2secs should be removed from the results. Quite simple,

This was not a "take an image that looks like 2 seconds" challenge.

It is not fair on the players that a non 2 second shutter photography should be placed higher than there own effort.
SC need to look at this challenge and take steps to rectify all results

BTW My image did not look like 2 secs but it was and meet the challenge.

03/27/2006 08:01:42 AM · #109
Originally posted by idnic:

Burn the village at midnight! I'll bring the torches!


ArtROFLMAO where's your torch and where are the Angry villagers?
03/27/2006 08:04:13 AM · #110
Originally posted by doctornick:

Originally posted by idnic:

Burn the village at midnight! I'll bring the torches!


ArtROFLMAO where's your torch and where are the Angry villagers?

How about one villager and some angry grapes?
03/27/2006 08:08:14 AM · #111


ROFLMAOOOO! How did I miss this gem???? IN my Favourites it goes!!! :D
03/27/2006 08:09:05 AM · #112
Originally posted by idnic:

Burn the village at midnight! I'll bring the torches!


i'll bring the drink, and lenses :-)
03/27/2006 08:10:08 AM · #113
Originally posted by gooc:

Originally posted by idnic:

Burn the village at midnight! I'll bring the torches!


i'll bring the drink, and lenses :-)

I'll bring the stopwatches.
03/27/2006 08:12:07 AM · #114
Originally posted by rachelellen:

Originally posted by elsapo:

Ok I see some ppl are not happy, well this was by far the hardest shot I have taken, the waterfall was so strong that the mist got everything wet, and at the same time I had to balance myself (w/ a tripod) on slippery rocks (yes dangerous). I tried 2 second shots and they came out way way to bright, little by little I lowered the shutter until 1/2 second, then it came out. The sun is very strong (even on this cloudy day) up in the andes mnts., even with an ND4 filter I couldn't get it to come out at 2 seconds. I submited only because of the amount of effort I put into the shot. Sorry to those who do not like my choice to submit.


In that case, wow, you have a gorgeous print to hang up on your wall, or enter in some other contest where I'm sure it would do well, or post in your portfolio under 'gorgeous shots that didn't meet the challenge', and you should have gone and taken an actual two-second shot for the two-second challenge. What you did was disingenuous and totally against the spirit of the challenge, in my opinion, and the fact that you won by doing that really sucks.

I definitely think it's time for non-subjective technical challenges to have special DQ rules, and this is a perfect example as to why.


Doesn't matter how hard the shot was when it doesn't meet the challenge. I think it is a terrible shame this image won. Nice image - but DNMC! Same with the 3rd place shot and all the other non 2 second shots that scored higher than all the actual 2 second shots. Integrity...guess some people have none. If they did, it would be more important than a little virtual ribbon and the right thing would be done.

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 08:46:23.
03/27/2006 08:14:16 AM · #115
I feel that when that requirement is in the title, it should be grounds for dq if not adhered to. Why? Because my entry, which was 2 seconds, ended up five from the last. It was 2 seconds, and I had hoped that people would see that my overexposure was on purpose, hence the title. apparently not. At least those who look at it will know that what I tried to do cannot be done with 2 seconds. I have to say, this was my second to the last worse position, beat only by my very first entry I submitted.
The worse part is that I lost sleep that entire week trying to get a shot where the moon was where I wanted it when I took the shot. The whole process made me ill, had to leave work early on Friday, and I could not get up the whole weekend because I was so tired. So the lesson here is, I have got to stop trying to get these very hard to get shots, because they always do badly.
Here is the one I originally was going to enter, but decided the focus was too soft. I'll bet it would have done better than the one I entered. And this one I got around 10:30 at night, early in the week. If I had just left it at this, I wouldn't have gotten sick by trying to get a better one.


Message edited by author 2006-03-27 08:20:38.
03/27/2006 08:19:38 AM · #116
The main thing here is that an answer be found to stop it happening in the future. [/quote]

I agree, so let us move on and make sure there is clearer text in the future, IF that is what we want.
I made the mistake of setting shutter on 2, but should of course have set it on 2'', didn't realize this untill i was submitting. I knew it would do poorly, but really wanted comments and submitted it. And on one of the threads here there was a discussion before dead-line and it was made clear that there would not be a DQ if it wasn't a 2-sec-shot. I got many good comments, all of which tought me something. Only my 6th entry, but learning a little every time.

I am so sorry ShutterPug didn't get a ribbon. Stunning shot and met challenge.

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 08:21:57.
03/27/2006 08:26:12 AM · #117
Originally posted by Alienyst:

Originally posted by rachelellen:

Originally posted by elsapo:

Ok I see some ppl are not happy, well this was by far the hardest shot I have taken, the waterfall was so strong that the mist got everything wet, and at the same time I had to balance myself (w/ a tripod) on slippery rocks (yes dangerous). I tried 2 second shots and they came out way way to bright, little by little I lowered the shutter until 1/2 second, then it came out. The sun is very strong (even on this cloudy day) up in the andes mnts., even with an ND4 filter I couldn't get it to come out at 2 seconds. I submited only because of the amount of effort I put into the shot. Sorry to those who do not like my choice to submit.


In that case, wow, you have a gorgeous print to hang up on your wall, or enter in some other contest where I'm sure it would do well, or post in your portfolio under 'gorgeous shots that didn't meet the challenge', and you should have gone and taken an actual two-second shot for the two-second challenge. What you did was disingenuous and totally against the spirit of the challenge, in my opinion, and the fact that you won by doing that really sucks.

I definitely think it's time for non-subjective technical challenges to have special DQ rules, and this is a perfect example as to why.


Doesn't matter how hard the shot was when it doesn't meet the challenge. I think it is a terrible shame this image won. Nice image - but DNMC! Same with the 3rd place shot and all the other non 2 second shots that scored higher than all the actual 2 second shots.


I'm really, truly surprised a photo with EXIF data showing it does not meet the strict requirement of the challenge is allowed to stand in the winner's circle. Seems simple to me to DQ all such non-qualifying images. As a new member to this site, I assumed winning photos would have their EXIF data verified. But then, you know what they say about assume...
03/27/2006 08:36:21 AM · #118
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:

If the rules allowed us to DQ the ribbon winners that weren't 2 seconds, I would vote to do so in a heartbeat.

To the ribbon winners who did not have two second photos: For better or worse, this challenge ran on an honor system. How you choose to handle this situation says more about your honor than I can in this post. Were I in your shoes, I know what I would do.

~Terry


Heavy words Terry, but when you're right....you're right.

But should it just be the ribbon winners? Shouldn't it be all non 2 second entries?
03/27/2006 08:43:16 AM · #119
This type of thing annoys me to no end because I seem to always be holding myself to standards that don't seem to apply to others. I constantly do not enter images that DNMC or drive myself crazy trying to adhere to rules that in the end, occasionally mean nothing.

If I don't, can't or have trouble meeting the Challenge I simply don't enter, even if I've taken hundreds of images with hopes to compete.


This image taken at 1/10 sec (off of a mailbox)was one I was going to reshoot but some quick test shots taken at 2 Sec proved to be a mess so I sat this one out. Damn....with some effort(tripod)I might have even placed nicely at 1 sec.

One of the best of the mess @2 sec.I would have gotten slaughtered, don't ya think???


Message edited by author 2006-03-27 08:51:07.
03/27/2006 08:53:56 AM · #120
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.


Maybe related? :)

03/27/2006 09:01:38 AM · #121
K - My 2 cents:

Not meeting the challenge requirements isn't and never has been reason for DQ. So why all the yammering? SC isn't going to make special DQ rules for this one challenge. The chips fell where they did and that's that.
03/27/2006 09:03:00 AM · #122
The rules are clear. Nobody can be disqualified for not doing a 2 second exposure, because that is merely DNMC. All we can do is hope for better rules in the future. Personally, I think a rather simple rule can be instated (and explicitly stated each time it's relevant):

If a challenge requirement can be checked in the EXIF data, then breaking it should be grounds for DQ.

The corollary is that people should loosen up about other challenges, like milk and water. That is where creativity should be allowed and even encouraged.

I had a really great 15 second exposure of my waterfall, and to be honest I took into consideration that it could not be DQ'd, but decided to play by the rules, even if they are not enforced... because that's the point of the game. Chess is more fun if both players are using the same pieces.
03/27/2006 09:05:02 AM · #123
Originally posted by Gatorguy:

[quote=hotpasta] It gets stickier where, if for example in the current challenge "yellow" and someone takes one of blue and converts it in PP. Then those who went to the effort to find yellow would feel cheated.


Has the precedence been set? In the example of "Yellow", would a Blue image be DQ'd? On what grounds? This effectively makes each challenge a free for all.

Ok ok... Sanity prevails. Rules need to be enforced, and agree that let this one lie and close loophole.

One other thing, I got a few DNMC comments because I did not depict movement, nor a clock face. If the challenge had said "show 2 secs your own way" I would agree. But the challenge was "Exactly 2 sec exposure". Mine was, so I feel that such comments ... Ah well, lets just leave it there.
03/27/2006 09:06:45 AM · #124
I too tried a shot but couldn't possibly manage it in under 4 seconds because I shoot alone. I did not enter. Because I am quite a beginner and most technical shots for me are a first time learning curve (3 out of 5 submissions), I inevitably end up spending 3-6 hours on the shoot, often on more than 1 day and often from 1-5 hours on learning the Post Processing (it doesn't show unfortunately) as I am also a total newbie to Photoshop. True, much of this time is spent searching for tutorials or making adjustments repeatedly to multiple images (and my workflow is streamlining rapidly), but the bottom line is, I put a lot of time and effort into my images.

So do many others.

For a high-skill or pro level photographer to say that this was the hardest shots they have ever taken so it merits some special consideration is quite plainly haughtiness of a strongly distasteful sort.

Imagine how a 12-year old guy would feel after being smartly beaten by Michael Jordan in a 300+ point defeat in a little friendly game of 1 on 1. And how he would feel if Michael said that it was OK because he hadn't played so hard in any NBA series game. Totally irrelevant and honestly, pretty durned offensive.

I too feel that it would be the honorable thing for all entrants who took advantage of the system this time to self-DQ.

On the other hand, it's not really worth getting too worked up about. What's done is done, and it's just a learning experience for us and for the SC.

As a teacher, I understand (as I'm sure many parents do as well), the extreme importance of defining standards BEFORE carving the lines into stone. If I don't tell my kids that they have to do something, then I suddenly expect them to change, all he1k breaks loose. Rightly so.

The precedent has been set and as was mentioned earlier, it is a simple thing for the SC to flag certain challenges to DNMC=DQ.

This was not done on this challenge, so we should all just swallow the gripe water and look forward.

I sincerely hope that the SC will consider making all strict definition technical challenges DNMC=DQ.

The greatest sting of deceit here lies in the fact that in most challenges, the voters are given the 'responsibility' to make the decision and pass judgement on DNMC entries.

In this case, there was NO WAY that any voter could have access to this information during voting. Therefore, the entire IDEA and CONCEPT of a DNMC 'vote' has been taken from the voters' hands.

If it has been taken from our hands and the SC refuses to act on it, then this means that the challenge was an anarchistic free study for those cunning enough to detect the 'loophole'.

This has left a bad taste in my mouth towards entrants who have made this move. Not so much SC because in this case, their hands are indeed somewhat tied.

A serious bummer, but in the hopes that it will be attended to in future challenges, it's not going to sway my future here.

I hope that others share this view.

The only way to look is forwards.

Message edited by author 2006-03-27 09:13:43.
03/27/2006 09:21:38 AM · #125
Originally posted by posthumous:


If a challenge requirement can be checked in the EXIF data, then breaking it should be grounds for DQ.


I think that's the best suggestion yet.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 09:57:16 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: 03/28/2024 09:57:16 AM EDT.