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

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Remove My Tutorials
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 318, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/19/2004 01:36:02 AM · #51
Personal note: I don't think any of you are any more P-O'd or frustrated about this than I am.
04/19/2004 01:37:13 AM · #52
Originally posted by achiral:

Originally posted by Pedro:


@ach - anonymity doesn't necessarily solve that - standing up for your own actions does. but i agree with the rest.

Pedro


i totally agree, i just think it would help things to have a little more authoritarian response sometimes. that's a heck of a lot easier when it's anonymous

The problem is that SC members are not anonymous to each other. We don't care what the membership thinks of us </sarcasm>
04/19/2004 01:37:19 AM · #53
Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Thansk for showing an interest in photography :)


Thank YOU for giving a damn...


LOL! :D

Man, I don't know about you guys, but I am really starting to get tired. I think I am about ready to retire to a wonderful place where rest is abundant...bed. I really need to sleep on all this, a LOT has happened int the last couple of hours, I feel like DPC has just taken a huge unexpected hit, kind of like Pearl Harbor. Wow, I am officially tired.
04/19/2004 01:37:48 AM · #54
Originally posted by Pedro:

good luck getting your $12.50 back. what a ridiculous comment.
Pedro


What exactly is ridiculous about feeling cheated??? I paid to join a photography site. This is rapidly becoming something else. Don't believe in truth in advertising?
04/19/2004 01:38:02 AM · #55
When I first started submitting here, it was awesum. I learned SO much. Setz was a mentor to me. I havent submitted here regularly for awhile now. Its just not FUN here anymore. I can spend hours on end shooting only to be put down for my adverage skills. (No heavy PS) Setz, do what you gotta do. Its not worth argueing over. I'll follow your work no matter
04/19/2004 01:39:00 AM · #56
Giving in to the terrorists huh?
04/19/2004 01:39:59 AM · #57
Originally posted by Pedro:

@ Setz - what's your real issue here? I don't disagree that some of the digital creations do not maintain photographic integrity. Clearly we're just going through some growing pains as the site evolves - kind of like the border mess last year. What i can't figure is what pulling the tutorials does. It's kind of like taking your bat and ball and going home. If you don't want to contribute anymore that's fine; I understand, and don't even disagree with your motives. but to pull the old ones? that's a little bit pointless i think.

I understand your statement, and as I said - I don't disagree with it. But step back a little and look and where we've been, and remember how far we've come. this isn't the answer to what i see as a pretty minor problem (minor in that I don't see too much opposition to changing the rules to prohibit these sorts of images).Pedro


My real issue is that I don't support what is going on and I don't support the site council's slow approach to attacking this issue. I think they actually support it as is. I know several who did and probalby still do. I don't expect them to change it and I'm not asking them to.
04/19/2004 01:40:23 AM · #58
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Giving in to the terrorists huh?


GenerelE, you kill me everytime! LOL!

:D
04/19/2004 01:41:48 AM · #59
John-- you know how I feel about making assumptions. I think this one of your's is wrong.
04/19/2004 01:42:32 AM · #60
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by achiral:

Originally posted by Pedro:


@ach - anonymity doesn't necessarily solve that - standing up for your own actions does. but i agree with the rest.

Pedro


i totally agree, i just think it would help things to have a little more authoritarian response sometimes. that's a heck of a lot easier when it's anonymous

The problem is that SC members are not anonymous to each other. We don't care what the membership thinks of us </sarcasm>


i was really just hypothesizing sp? that part of the reason that sc hasn't made a decision was that they were worried about hurting feelings or something like that because to me the issue is really simple to understand and resolve.

even if a certain type of photo isn't definable enough to prevent from occuring, the easiest way for people to know is to dq when it happens. people will start to understand really quickly what is allowed.

i guess the main difference is i think i understand the issue and know that it probably isn't definable, and the site council peeps also know the issue but feel the need to legislate, when that isn't necessary at all. to me, enough is said in the rules to know what is and isn't allowed.
04/19/2004 01:43:01 AM · #61
Originally posted by goinskiing:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Giving in to the terrorists huh?


GenerelE, you kill me everytime! LOL!

:D

I hope not! In my youth I went to great lengths to make sure I wouldn't be sent off to kill anybody.
04/19/2004 01:43:48 AM · #62
Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by Pedro:

good luck getting your $12.50 back. what a ridiculous comment.
Pedro


What exactly is ridiculous about feeling cheated??? I paid to join a photography site. This is rapidly becoming something else. Don't believe in truth in advertising?


You find me a place where you can get this much free information and help and a community of people who like to help for less than $25 per year, and I'll join. The challenges are almost secondary to the real learning that goes on here in the forums, and from seeing others shoot. My top ten all-time favourite photos from this site were never entered in challenges.

If you find anything inaccurate about what I've said, I'll send you your $12.50. at $37.50 per year, it's still the best deal going. and I've learned a ton from the photoshop people too. whether i think it belongs in the challenges or not is irrelevant (I don't, by the way).

P
04/19/2004 01:44:09 AM · #63
Gee, I wonder why I voiced my opnion against allowing more editing capabilities when this topic first came up.

I knew it would be a bad thing then and knew it would create many more problems later on, but not many people would listen.

James


04/19/2004 01:44:15 AM · #64
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by goinskiing:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Giving in to the terrorists huh?


GenerelE, you kill me everytime! LOL!

:D

I hope not! In my youth I went to great lengths to make sure I wouldn't be sent off to kill anybody.


Okay okay, poor wording there.

I agree with everything you have said thus far.
04/19/2004 01:45:06 AM · #65
I'm still fairly new here.. and still completely new to photography. I've learned a lot from this site... and not any of it has been how to use Photoshop to manipulate photos. I just want to add in my opinion here.. as the voice of a new "photographer" (I hesitate to even call myself one, yet.)

The reason that I came to this site at all was to learn about photography. I have been blown away by what I've learned through tutorials. I have been amazed and inspired by the creativity shown by the people on this site. Creativity that doesn't come from drawing in window frames... but comes from taking on the ever-difficult task of taking a photograph and letting people see it for what it is. Finding new ways to trick peoples perceptions only with what can sometimes be painstaking setups to get just the perfect shot.

If nobody teaches us how to do that.. how to produce stellar shots without "cheating" then.. what's to stop us from running to Photoshop to try and create that effect?

In my opinion... pulling instruction and guidance on how to create real, quality photos is only adding to the problem.
04/19/2004 01:47:44 AM · #66
Originally posted by GeneralE:

John-- you know how I feel about making assumptions. I think this one of your's is wrong.


I do understand and I have just lost interest in the issue. I'm tired of it and I don't really care which way things go from here.
04/19/2004 01:48:20 AM · #67
Originally posted by Pedro:

Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by Pedro:

good luck getting your $12.50 back. what a ridiculous comment.
Pedro


What exactly is ridiculous about feeling cheated??? I paid to join a photography site. This is rapidly becoming something else. Don't believe in truth in advertising?


You find me a place where you can get this much free information and help and a community of people who like to help for less than $25 per year, and I'll join. The challenges are almost secondary to the real learning that goes on here in the forums, and from seeing others shoot. My top ten all-time favourite photos from this site were never entered in challenges.

If you find anything inaccurate about what I've said, I'll send you your $12.50. at $37.50 per year, it's still the best deal going. and I've learned a ton from the photoshop people too. whether i think it belongs in the challenges or not is irrelevant (I don't, by the way).

P


All I can say to this is that I'm not sory for spending 25$ here, I got much more thant those money can buy anywhere else, but if this site is becoming a photoshop artwork site I will probably not pay again next year. If not for other reason it's probably because I will loose my interest in "Member Challenges"

Message edited by author 2004-04-19 01:50:03.
04/19/2004 01:51:27 AM · #68
Originally posted by frumoaznicul:

Originally posted by Pedro:

Originally posted by TooCool:

Originally posted by Pedro:

good luck getting your $12.50 back. what a ridiculous comment.
Pedro


What exactly is ridiculous about feeling cheated??? I paid to join a photography site. This is rapidly becoming something else. Don't believe in truth in advertising?


You find me a place where you can get this much free information and help and a community of people who like to help for less than $25 per year, and I'll join. The challenges are almost secondary to the real learning that goes on here in the forums, and from seeing others shoot. My top ten all-time favourite photos from this site were never entered in challenges.

If you find anything inaccurate about what I've said, I'll send you your $12.50. at $37.50 per year, it's still the best deal going. and I've learned a ton from the photoshop people too. whether i think it belongs in the challenges or not is irrelevant (I don't, by the way).

P


All I can say to this is that I'm not sory for spending 25$ here, I got much more thant those money can buy anywhere else, but if this site is becoming a photoshop artwork site I will probably not pay again next year.


But I really trust that it won't be this way down the road. Like said before, we are going through growing pains. I know that the vast majority here aren't going to allow this manipulation continue and trust that all will be well before too long. I mean, look! People really care here! That is why there is such an uproar, if people didn't care, then we would all accept it and move on without saying anything. I know I am willing to stick it through, the real question is, are you?

Edit: Not you fromaznicul

Message edited by author 2004-04-19 01:52:53.
04/19/2004 01:52:30 AM · #69
let the detail field show during the voting!!

from what i've seen, everyone who used photoshop to enhance their photos beyond what the evangelical photographers deem to be acceptable have been openly descriptive about it in their detail field.

if the details of such photoshoping were clear during, and not just after, the voting, then people could vote accordingly and when such post-work starts affecting people's scores negatively, it will subside.

simple.
04/19/2004 01:52:33 AM · #70
Originally posted by jmsetzler:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

John-- you know how I feel about making assumptions. I think this one of your's is wrong.


I do understand and I have just lost interest in the issue. I'm tired of it and I don't really care which way things go from here.

I empathize completely, and am trying hard to not reach that depth of frustration. Maybe I'll try to find a cheerful postcard to send you.
04/19/2004 01:52:57 AM · #71
What percent of the photos are you guys talking about. First place and second place in the last challenge. Any more? That makes all this fuss over 1% or even less of all the photos.

Come one, seriously. It's not even about winning. Most people are learning photography or doing it for fun. And if everyone is so against it, I don't understand why they keep winning.

Anyway, I don't think it's a big deal. If you don't like what they photographer is doing, than give it a one. If it wins, then it wins. I honestly just don't see a big deal.
04/19/2004 01:53:41 AM · #72
Originally posted by Pedro:

If you find anything inaccurate about what I've said, I'll send you your $12.50. at $37.50 per year, it's still the best deal going. and I've learned a ton from the photoshop people too. whether i think it belongs in the challenges or not is irrelevant (I don't, by the way).

P


I guess that we have more in common than I originally assumed. I am all for PS'ing an image to make it all it can be in most forums. For the challenges I've said as long as I've been here that it is NOT needed and that the basic editing rules (as their known now) were the great equalizer. All that said, I still feel kind of cheated by the way things have gone lately...
04/19/2004 01:53:53 AM · #73
Originally posted by jmsetzler:


My real issue is that I don't support what is going on and I don't support the site council's slow approach to attacking this issue. I think they actually support it as is. I know several who did and probalby still do. I don't expect them to change it and I'm not asking them to.


I hear you, and I agree. But asking them to remove past contributions doesn't really solve anything. in fact, at best it does nothing, and at worst it contributes to the problem. I guess i ask the question, because you obviously were a big supporter of the site when it functioned in a way that you liked it...wouldn't it make more sense to try to restore that?

you know I still love you in any event :)
04/19/2004 01:53:53 AM · #74
Originally posted by darcy:

let the detail field show during the voting!!

from what i've seen, everyone who used photoshop to enhance their photos beyond what the evangelical photographers deem to be acceptable have been openly descriptive about it in their detail field.

if the details of such photoshoping were clear during, and not just after, the voting, then people could vote accordingly and when such post-work starts affecting people's scores negatively, it will subside.

simple.


The only problem is that it's too easy to give away identity in the text.
04/19/2004 01:55:12 AM · #75
so, who's going to start up the elitist photo challenge site which you can enter by invitation only?

I forgot about that postcard exchange! I've got to get one out soon too...
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 08/05/2021 09:32:55 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 © 2001-2021 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: 08/05/2021 09:32:55 AM EDT.