POV Recalculations - DPChallenge Forums

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

01/22/2004 05:10:51 PM · #26

Quote" Try to remember that these matters are not being handled by a corporate customer-service center or bureaucracy, but by a few volunteers scattered around the world who try to do this in their "spare" time, and in multiple time zones. To "discuss" any issue among more than a dozen people under these circumstances can easily involve several days of back-and-forth postings. I don't feel we really need to keep you apprised of our progress (or lack thereof) along the way ... you can be sure as soon as there is any decision you will be informed.

Likewise, we try to not discuss our criteria or investigative methods in the public forums, since that would immediately undermine their efficacy. Sorry to sound like Mr. Ashcroft, but the best policy here is to not cheat, and then the secret police won't bother you (that you'll know about) ... if this were over any subject other than a symbolic prize among a voluntary association of supposedly honorable individuals, I'd be marching in protest over what we do ... but under these circumstances I find it appropriate and effective.[/quote]

I would like to make two points about your reply.
Firstly you say, "You can be sure as soon as there is a decision, you will be informed". The first I knew that my image was being allowed to stand was when I checked the results of the POV contest and found that it was sitting at 13th position. I have had absolutely no official contact from any member of the site council to tell me the outcome of
the investigation into the matter and why it was allowed to stand.
I also sent the original of my "NG" and "After dark" challenge to ensure that they were OK and that the problem was not due to the way I was processing the images..still waiting to hear on that one too !

I`m not quite sure how to take your statement that "the best policy is not to cheat and the secret police won`t bother you"
The whole point I`m trying to make here is..I DID NOT CHEAT..yet the secret police bothered me..BIG TIME.
Unless you are inferring I did cheat ?

I fully realise and understand that we cannot go into details on messageboards but I do have an e-mail address and have written countless times to no effect.
Funny how one message on this board gets immediate results.

Gordon Whyte

Message edited by author 2004-01-22 17:12:24.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

01/22/2004 05:22:22 PM · #27

Originally posted by geewhy:

I`m not quite sure how to take your statement that "the best policy is not to cheat and the secret police won`t bother you"
The whole point I`m trying to make here is..I DID NOT CHEAT..yet the secret police bothered me..BIG TIME.
Unless you are inferring I did cheat ?

Funny how one message on this board gets immediate results.

Gordon Whyte

You should take that remark as sarcasm. Ultimately if you do not cheat you should suffer no consequences.

I don't suggest that you did -- I have zero personal knowledge of the matter, since my time has been drawn from here lately and I've been inconsistent, I haven't even been voting on any of the photos submitted for DQ. I you check the forums periodically and post something if I'm really concerned about it. I mainly want to encourage your patience; that even though the process seems frustrating, people are really trying to do the best we can.

We got a ton of complaints about people not receiving emails from the SC, so we went to a system where the status of your photo is displayed on the Home page. I just had a request -- first it said "DQ requested -- submit here," then there was a message "thanks for the orig -- we're on it," and then a message "your photo has been validated."

What more do you want to know? We just don't have the time or personnel to keep up a running correspondence with everyone whose photo we're checking into. The whole DQ/verification process is being updated as a result of the recent discovery of widespread cheating -- it's not unusual for such systems to need tweaking and experimentation, and to have occasional problems.

tfaust

Canon EOS 80D

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/22/2004 05:42:43 PM · #28

Originally posted by e301:

A lot of the recent DQ's have been to first-time submitters: is there any mileage in making it even more obvious on the submission page that your shot must be taken within the dates and that any frauds (however accidental) will be uncovered? It's really very easy to just check the check-boxes without reading the accompanying text.

Not quite sure how this would be done though.

Ed

I don't know how much easier or clearer they can make it. There is already a seperate checkbox saying: "Yes, this photograph was taken with a digital camera on or between and "

This is on top of having to put in the date you took the picture.

If people choose to mark those buttons, then there is nothing else that can be done except to assume they have read everything. If they don't and get DQ'ed - well... that's the way the cookie crumbles and I bet they'll read it next time.

The SC and Admins have made great strides and done a lot to make the submission process clearer of the rules. There's only so much they can do. At some point, you have to leave it up to the individuals to be responsible.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/22/2004 05:51:17 PM · #29

.

[/quote]
You should take that remark as sarcasm. Ultimately if you do not cheat you should suffer no consequences.

I don't suggest that you did -- I have zero personal knowledge of the matter, since my time has been drawn from here lately and I've been inconsistent, I haven't even been voting on any of the photos submitted for DQ. I you check the forums periodically and post something if I'm really concerned about it. I mainly want to encourage your patience; that even though the process seems frustrating, people are really trying to do the best we can.

We got a ton of complaints about people not receiving emails from the SC, so we went to a system where the status of your photo is displayed on the Home page. I just had a request -- first it said "DQ requested -- submit here," then there was a message "thanks for the orig -- we're on it," and then a message "your photo has been validated."

What more do you want to know? We just don't have the time or personnel to keep up a running correspondence with everyone whose photo we're checking into. The whole DQ/verification process is being updated as a result of the recent discovery of widespread cheating -- it's not unusual for such systems to need tweaking and experimentation, and to have occasional problems.[/quote]

I really do understand that there is an enormous load on the individuals running this site and I appreciate the work they do.

All I am saying is that I was literally accused of tampering with the original image and obviously, since my submission stood..then it must have been decided that the missing data was not crucial and not caused through tampering. Even if I had seen the message "photo validated" on my homepage, I would have been satisfied with that.
I agree that a certain amount of leeway should be allowed for the fact that the site is being run by volunteers and from various parts of the world.However,that shouldn`t alter the fact that you can`t accuse people of cheating before knowing all the facts.Accusing someone of cheating is a serious matter and remember a lot of these people have paid cash to the site to become members and deserve a bit of decent treatment.

Gordon Whyte

Message edited by author 2004-01-22 18:09:16.

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

01/22/2004 06:32:42 PM · #30

I don't see how requesting proof is accusing anybody of cheating.

When you submit, you check a box that says:

If requested, I will provide the unedited, original file from my digital camera within 48 hours.

If you cannot provide an unedited, original file, your submission can be disqualified. This does not imply "cheating", just that you were unable to provide the original for verification.

If you hear a site council member or site administrator use the term "cheating", you can be pretty sure we have the proof to back it up. Being disqualified for not providing the original would not be "cheating", but simply a "rules violation". There is a difference, and someone caught cheating is typically suspended.

Warby

Canon EOS-7D Mark II

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 I

01/22/2004 06:36:14 PM · #31

My situation is similar to that of geewhy.

I was notified by e-mail and a message on my Home Page that my original file was required and this was sent straight away. The message on my Home Page changed to something like thank you for the file, we are investigaing further. Some time later, I was asked by e-mail to produce a JPEG file that had been extracted from the RAW file. I had never done this before, so provided what I thought was required and asked for confirmation that this was sufficient.

The message on my home page did not change until the results were declared, when it disappeared altogether. I had assumed that my entry had been verified, but I have since noticed that at least two entries have been DQ'd since the results were declared. I guess that I was wrong to assume that my entry had been verified.

Based on what generalE has said, I should expect an e-mail when my entry is verified, so my entry must still be the subject of on-going investigations. Is this correct?

This is my first challenge, so I am just trying to understand the requirements and proceedures.

Paul

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

01/22/2004 06:47:58 PM · #32

Originally posted by EddyG:

You are absolutely correct, asking for proof is valid and proper and I have no qualms with that. If you read my first message again you will see the quote that I mentioned whereby I was e-mailed by a council member and told that the image I supplied was not the original and told to "tell the truth".
The fact was that the image I sent was the original but because certain data was missing from it it was assumed that I had tampered with it.
I am currently waiting to hear from Fuji on this matter as I believe it is due to operating the camera in sub zero temperatures.

However,I am in the same position as "Warby" still unaware if my POV entry is seen as legal or not. Why the lack of communication ???

Gordon Whyte

Message edited by author 2004-01-22 18:49:19.

GinaRothfels

Olympus 8mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko Digital ED Fisheye PRO Lens

01/22/2004 07:15:05 PM · #33

Just curious as to what EXIF data was missing. For some strange reason my Canon A80 does not show film speed and I'd hate to run into trouble over this. I've just been filling in 100 for this field because that's what my camera is set on most of the time, but I certainly can't prove it.