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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Picture of Marijuana for "Scents and Aromas"
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 86, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/04/2003 09:45:44 AM · #26
to me, this whole discussion is about suppression of artistic freedom.

which, no matter how i slice it, stinks :)


12/04/2003 09:47:27 AM · #27
All of these voting issues and discussions about what is right and wrong just says one thing to me... "If you don't agree with the majority you are wrong and should be punished".

Let's all just be sheep and follow the flock.

Message edited by author 2003-12-04 09:54:33.
12/04/2003 09:57:03 AM · #28
Originally posted by robsmith:

Let's all just be sheep and follow the flock.


The correct term for the people you describe is sheeple.
12/04/2003 10:20:40 AM · #29
I agree that the terms of use should either be changed or be enforced. Wichever way it goes doesn't matter to me. If it's there for a reason, we need to enforce it. If we are not going to enforce it, it should be removed from the terms.
12/04/2003 10:46:09 AM · #30
Originally posted by arnit:

This is my picture you are refering to in the propaganda challenge.

Didn't mean to pick on you Árni, it was just easy to find because it did so well. These two images from Scents & Aromas could also technically be in violation:
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/161/thumb/48030.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/161/thumb/48030.jpg', '/') + 1) . ' ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/161/thumb/48009.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/161/thumb/48009.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
along with many other images on the site. Or maybe they wouldn't, since "pipes" and "cigars" are not explicitly listed as being unaccpetable in the TOU, just "cigarettes".

And has been pointed out, two of my challenge entries have alcohol in them, but do not actually depict the use of alcohol (i.e., someone drinking it).

Message edited by author 2003-12-04 11:01:19.
12/04/2003 10:46:55 AM · #31
Listening to something on the radio about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms, made me wonder if we could add gun images to the list of controlled subjects - those pictures offend and worry a lot of people too...

and can we get <sarcasm> tags added too please ?

Message edited by author 2003-12-04 10:47:48.
12/04/2003 10:49:28 AM · #32
Originally posted by EddyG:

And has been pointed, two of my challenge entries have alcohol in them, but do not actually depict the use of alcohol (i.e., someone drinking it).


Your profile pic would probably be an easier example - though it could be mistaken for a swimming pool and promoting health and exercise I guess.

It'd make most sense to just remove that clause - I guess it was something added by the lawyers at one point.
12/04/2003 10:49:29 AM · #33
Originally posted by Gordon:

Listening to something on the radio about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms, made me wonder if we could add gun images to the list of controlled subjects - those pictures offend and worry a lot of people too...

and can we get <sarcasm> tags added too please ?

Unless you are licenced owning a gun is illegal in the UK, can we be more specific about which countries laws we need to abide by?
12/04/2003 10:50:24 AM · #34
Originally posted by Gordon:

....and can we get <sarcasm> tags added too please ?


It's always important to properly close your tags. </sarcasm>
12/04/2003 10:52:51 AM · #35
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:

Originally posted by Gordon:

....and can we get <sarcasm> tags added too please ?


It's always important to properly close your tags. </sarcasm>


Only when you are finished...
12/04/2003 10:55:04 AM · #36
Originally posted by EddyG:

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/161/thumb/48030.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/161/thumb/48030.jpg', '/') + 1) . '


There is a simple solution to all of this, just ask yourself <humor>What would Jesus Do?</humor>
12/04/2003 11:21:01 AM · #37
everything is offensive to someone
i am just going to keep taking pictures

BTW - i almost submitted a better image/bud ;} of the thread topic - but didnt due the TOU, and knowing it would do poorly despite being a well done photo.

12/04/2003 12:00:34 PM · #38
I really don’t understand how some people can make the jump to say that just because a photo depicts some kind of image that contains as the main subject the use of drugs, alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, or anything else thing else they deem offensive (whether legal or illegal), that this connotes the promotion of its use or activity and as such violates the rules of this site or the law. No one here to my knowledge is promoting the sale of these substances. To me, this site is about communication through the use of visual media, but it seems that some people are missing this point and jumping to conclusions too fast. We need not to just concern ourselves with technical issues of a photo but to evaluate what is it that the photographer is trying to communicate and see where he/she is successful, or unsuccessful, in doing so.

Just because a substance is illegal does not mean that it can’t be discussed or debated and for photographers, discussing through the use of imagery is perfectly natural and it should not be automatically assumed that the image encourages illicit activity. Maybe, in the minds of some of those who want certain kinds of images banned that they would even jump to the conclusion that since this forum discusses the use of illegal substances the powers that be should immediately put a halt to this thread! Where does this kind of thinking stop? Would they say that “Who Was Playing with Matches?” (in scents and aromas) depicts the promotion of arson? Certainly that would be a big stretch of the imagination, if not downright absurd.

I would be for amending the terms of use and taking out the word “depicts.”
12/04/2003 12:16:58 PM · #39
indeed
12/04/2003 12:19:40 PM · #40
Originally posted by Olyuzi:

I really don’t understand how some people can make the jump to say that just because a photo depicts some kind of image that contains as the main subject the use of drugs, alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, or anything else thing else they deem offensive (whether legal or illegal), that this connotes the promotion of its use or activity and as such violates the rules of this site or the law. No one here to my knowledge is promoting the sale of these substances. To me, this site is about communication through the use of visual media, but it seems that some people are missing this point and jumping to conclusions too fast. We need not to just concern ourselves with technical issues of a photo but to evaluate what is it that the photographer is trying to communicate and see where he/she is successful, or unsuccessful, in doing so.

Just because a substance is illegal does not mean that it can’t be discussed or debated and for photographers, discussing through the use of imagery is perfectly natural and it should not be automatically assumed that the image encourages illicit activity. Maybe, in the minds of some of those who want certain kinds of images banned that they would even jump to the conclusion that since this forum discusses the use of illegal substances the powers that be should immediately put a halt to this thread! Where does this kind of thinking stop? Would they say that “Who Was Playing with Matches?” (in scents and aromas) depicts the promotion of arson? Certainly that would be a big stretch of the imagination, if not downright absurd.

I would be for amending the terms of use and taking out the word “depicts.”


I don't think anyone is taking this the wrong way. The issue at hand is the way the site terms of use are worded.
12/04/2003 12:31:26 PM · #41
if the wording is changed - the photos of such items will still be voted poorly i imagine - as folks will still be offended/ disapproving of certain things.

the real issue is looking at a photo for what it is, not so much the subject matter contained in it. its understandable some wont approve of certain things, but voting low as a result is close minded. if the image is quality - the vote should be high, no matter what its of.

IMO this photo under scrutiny is not a quality photo, and would have received a low vote from me despite my positive vies on the subject.

a side note about Marijuana. It is the only drug in which there is a chemical our brains have no natural receptors for. all other drugs either organic or synthetic mimic chemicals already contained in our brain chemistry. so i ask - why would our brain have a THC receptor when it is only activated after using Marijuana? this info came from a GOV web site relating the the affects/chemical content/addictive properties of many different substances. excluded of course were alcohol & tobacco <sarcasm> since they arent bad for you as long as you are of age to use them ;} </sarcasm>
12/04/2003 12:52:52 PM · #42
In Amsterdam and other parts of the world, marijuana is legal. So, yes..taboo in some cultures, not in others just as maybe peyote and mushrooms for certain Native American cultures.
12/04/2003 01:14:36 PM · #43
Originally posted by soup:


the real issue is looking at a photo for what it is, not so much the subject matter contained in it. its understandable some wont approve of certain things, but voting low as a result is close minded. if the image is quality - the vote should be high, no matter what its of.

IMO this photo under scrutiny is not a quality photo, and would have received a low vote from me despite my positive vies on the subject.


I disagree with the first part of your statement and agree with the second. I voted it rather low because I did not find any inspiration in it as a photograph. I also voted it low because I think it's a bit childish.

Your choice of subject plays a great role in how people will vote on your photo. I would never toss that aside when I'm evaluating an image. If I don't like the subject choice, I certainly don't have to discard that thought when I'm voting and I wouldn't.
12/04/2003 01:36:56 PM · #44
its the quality of the photo that gives it merit - is my point.
no matter the subject - whether distasteful, controversial, obscure,
abstract, what have you. if the image pops, and makes you look deeper -its effective and should be looked/voted on as such.

this particular image did not pop to me.

i am here to better my skills, not choose subjects based on how i think others will like them. if thats the general mentality around here, folks need to open their minds a bit.

childish in what sense? elaborate


12/04/2003 01:40:36 PM · #45
Originally posted by soup:

its the quality of the photo that gives it merit - is my point.
no matter the subject - whether distasteful, controversial, obscure,
abstract, what have you. if the image pops, and makes you look deeper -its effective and should be looked/voted on as such.

this particular image did not pop to me.

i am here to better my skills, not choose subjects based on how i think others will like them. if thats the general mentality around here, folks need to open their minds a bit.

childish in what sense? elaborate


We just don't look at photos the same way. The overall quality of the image doesn't really mean as much to me as what the image may have to say. If the image has a strong message, the quality is just a bonus.

As for being childish, I refuse to comment on why I think it's childish. As I commented on the photo, if you have to ask, my explanation would not be satisfying.
12/04/2003 01:46:25 PM · #46

thats a shot in the dark
too each his own as far as point of view/opinion goes
but knocking on someone/something with no explanation seems childish to me.
12/04/2003 01:51:53 PM · #47
Originally posted by soup:

thats a shot in the dark
too each his own as far as point of view/opinion goes
but knocking on someone/something with no explanation seems childish to me.


In that case, I think that this photo is childish for several reasons. First of all, marijuana is an illegal substance here in the US. The photographer, in my opinion, chose to photograph this subject for shock value moreso than for the art of photography. The way the photographer titled the photo with the :) indicates to me that it's a tongue-in-cheek title. The aroma of marijuana in this state is not very strong, so I wonder why else the photographer may have made this subject choice. I could not think of anything reasonable since the photo was not particularly well done in my opinion. Hey.. it's all about perception, right? This is my perception.

12/04/2003 01:58:15 PM · #48
Originally posted by soup:

its the quality of the photo that gives it merit - is my point.


A high quality picture of paint drying is still dead boring.
12/04/2003 01:59:50 PM · #49
Originally posted by ScottK:

Originally posted by soup:

its the quality of the photo that gives it merit - is my point.


A high quality picture of paint drying is still dead boring.


Exactly.. this is why I don't weight technical merit very highly overall...
12/04/2003 02:03:30 PM · #50
Originally posted by magnetic9999:

to me, this whole discussion is about suppression of artistic freedom.

which, no matter how i slice it, stinks :)


This is a red herring. If the site rules indicate you can't submit a picture of X, no one has stopped you from taking, displaying or distributing the picture. This community (and/or those responsible for creating and developing it) has determined that within the confines of this site, there are certain limits and standards that the community wants to maintain. If you take a picture of people having sex while shooting up, smoking pot, and pouring vodka all over themselves, no one from this site is going to come banging on your door and taking you away to DPC prison. You've simply been asked (required?) to keep it off this site.

Your artistic freedom isn't, in fact in no way can be, limited by any rule on this site.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 10/20/2019 09:33:35 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 © 2001-2019 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: 10/20/2019 09:33:35 AM EDT.