| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/10/2009 07:04:07 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
Originally posted by Connor:
I was pretty upset to have my pic DQd even before the oil challenge had finished.
My pic
I really don't understand this as the rules state that it must not consist Entirely of another photo which it clearly does not.
and that it must not fool voters into thinking that I captured the original which the first 3 comments confirm is not the case
What happens if a pic that was DQd before the end of a challenge is then allowed back in, what happens to the lost votes?wouldn't it be better to allow all pics to run to the end of the challenge just in case the photographer can prove the DQ was wrong? |
Sorry.. :-(... Doesn't appear that the SC is reading at least what you wrote here and/or is interested in answering.. I think you've asked a good question.. What if a photo is wrongly DQ'd... wait.. Is there such a thing ??? OH yes, memory serves me correctly, one was recently allowed back because it was wrongly DQ'd due to incorrect processing steps given by the photographer.. Once that was corrected, the image DQ was taken back and the photo went back to it's rightfull ribbon spot.. But, what if it's DQ'd during voting ???? And then it turns out that was a mistake...
Maybe it's a good idea to simply wait for the voting to be completed, the results to be calculated then any images that need to be DQ'd, be done at that time ??? |
In theory that's a good idea. The counter point is if an image really should be DQ'd, why should voters waste their time on it? |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 07:24:50 PM · #27 |
My image did get a validation request early on in the challenge. I was worried that it was because of the artwork rule.. but I basically created the painting just for the shot. It was not a pre-existing painting. I spread oil paint on a glass board and erased out a big chunk of it so that the model's face could be seen through the glass.. The intention was to make it look like she was part of the painting and the artist at the same time..
Message edited by author 2009-08-10 19:25:38. |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 07:29:12 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by haze:
My image did get a validation request early on in the challenge. I was worried that it was because of the artwork rule.. but I basically created the painting just for the shot. It was not a pre-existing painting. I spread oil paint on a glass board and erased out a big chunk of it so that the model's face could be seen through the glass.. The intention was to make it look like she was part of the painting and the artist at the same time.. |
Yeah - it's awesome and legal. And legally awesome. :) I was wondering if the face part was actually painted on (canvas, not glass, let's say) if it would matter rules wise. Any reply from one of more pleasant SC? |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 09:20:11 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by haze:
My image did get a validation request early on in the challenge. I was worried that it was because of the artwork rule.. but I basically created the painting just for the shot. It was not a pre-existing painting. I spread oil paint on a glass board and erased out a big chunk of it so that the model's face could be seen through the glass.. The intention was to make it look like she was part of the painting and the artist at the same time.. |
Yeah - it's awesome and legal. And legally awesome. :) I was wondering if the face part was actually painted on (canvas, not glass, let's say) if it would matter rules wise. Any reply from one of more pleasant SC? |
Wouldn't that be like the "point of view" challenge? |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 09:55:37 PM · #30 |
| So basically, artwork used to deceive = bad. Artwork used to enhance = good. Simple enough. |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 10:33:49 PM · #31 |
I took one look at the photo in question and thought, "Wow, that's a D.Q."
Having said that, I voted on it as though it were legal, and while I do think that the D.Q. was legit, I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 10:41:08 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I took one look at the photo in question and thought, "Wow, that's a D.Q."
Having said that, I voted on it as though it were legal, and while I do think that the D.Q. was legit, I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
I agree. Once the DQ is instated the die is cast. Too much damage that cannot be undone. What harm is there to let people decide to vote on the image and let their score or comment show how they feel about the legitimacy of the image? Since the majority of the voters here are not SC and cannot decide whether or not the image should be DQ'ed, why not let the voters speak and let SC, DQ or not, the image after the voting is finished?
Message edited by author 2009-08-10 22:41:43. |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 10:56:07 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by scooter97:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I took one look at the photo in question and thought, "Wow, that's a D.Q."
Having said that, I voted on it as though it were legal, and while I do think that the D.Q. was legit, I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
I agree. Once the DQ is instated the die is cast. Too much damage that cannot be undone. What harm is there to let people decide to vote on the image and let their score or comment show how they feel about the legitimacy of the image? Since the majority of the voters here are not SC and cannot decide whether or not the image should be DQ'ed, why not let the voters speak and let SC, DQ or not, the image after the voting is finished? |
So, let's say an image, instead of getting DQ'd during the voting process, does exceedingly well and wins a ribbon and takes one of the three spots on the front page...is that fair? IMO, it's not. Even if the image was on the front page for only an hour after rollover it wouldn't be fair to the ones that made the front page without breaking any rules.
On the other hand, wouldn't it really suck to finish voting, end up with a Brown ribbon and then get DQ'd - BAM! :-) |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 11:02:08 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by scooter97:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I took one look at the photo in question and thought, "Wow, that's a D.Q."
Having said that, I voted on it as though it were legal, and while I do think that the D.Q. was legit, I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
I agree. Once the DQ is instated the die is cast. Too much damage that cannot be undone. What harm is there to let people decide to vote on the image and let their score or comment show how they feel about the legitimacy of the image? Since the majority of the voters here are not SC and cannot decide whether or not the image should be DQ'ed, why not let the voters speak and let SC, DQ or not, the image after the voting is finished? |
So, let's say an image, instead of getting DQ'd during the voting process, does exceedingly well and wins a ribbon and takes one of the three spots on the front page...is that fair? IMO, it's not. Even if the image was on the front page for only an hour after rollover it wouldn't be fair to the ones that made the front page without breaking any rules.
On the other hand, wouldn't it really suck to finish voting, end up with a Brown ribbon and then get DQ'd - BAM! :-) |
There are plenty of ways to look at this. Somebody will always be disappointed, unfortunately. |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 11:09:41 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by Marc923:
So basically, artwork used to deceive = bad. Artwork used to enhance = good. Simple enough. |
hell no.... this will make things even more complicated than they already are :P |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 11:13:14 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
It is an extraordinarily rare event that a shot is reinstated after being DQ'd. It has happened, but probably fewer times than I could count on one hand. If we waited until after voting was over, it would only encourage more people to cheat, I strongly believe. For example, if someone had a great shot that fit the challenge but was taken years ago... wouldn't it be tempting to enter it to know how it would place, knowing that it couldn't be disqualified until after voting finished? |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 11:16:09 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by alanfreed:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
It is an extraordinarily rare event that a shot is reinstated after being DQ'd. It has happened, but probably fewer times than I could count on one hand. If we waited until after voting was over, it would only encourage more people to cheat, I strongly believe. For example, if someone had a great shot that fit the challenge but was taken years ago... wouldn't it be tempting to enter it to know how it would place, knowing that it couldn't be disqualified until after voting finished? |
So that being said. Isn't there a distinct difference between a subjective rules infraction and a blatant one that can be easily DQ'ed because of the EXIF file data? |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 11:45:35 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by alanfreed:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
It is an extraordinarily rare event that a shot is reinstated after being DQ'd. It has happened, but probably fewer times than I could count on one hand. If we waited until after voting was over, it would only encourage more people to cheat, I strongly believe. For example, if someone had a great shot that fit the challenge but was taken years ago... wouldn't it be tempting to enter it to know how it would place, knowing that it couldn't be disqualified until after voting finished? |
HUH......??? This train of thought is so far fetched to me, it's basically on par with any DQ'd image being reinstated when all is said and done..
I mean, you might as well say, why not DQ images during voting because aliens may land on earth and take over DPChallenge and allow the image in error after voting is finished...
People could do this ANYWAY... there is NO SUCH THING as encouraging anyone to cheat... everything about the system set in place is to discourage cheating.. If someone is going to cheat then they are going to cheat & there is nothing to do to prevent it.. I can't see how DQ'ing an image after all the voting is finished has any effect on anything.. Except, in the case of an image being DQ'd in error.. And, just like anything else, until that EXACT circumstance rearse it's ugly head, then nothing will change.. Cause, why fix it if it ain't broke.. :-)
edit just to say the specific reason I don't think anyone would enter a challenge, knowing their entry will be dq'd, simply to see how it will place is the penalties.. I don't think anyone is soooooo curious how an image will do in voting, that they are willing to risk losing the opportunity to participate in other challenges... Just my thoughts on why that would never be the case.
Message edited by author 2009-08-10 23:48:16. |
|
|
|
08/10/2009 11:54:47 PM · #39 |
I Pulled this image for exactly what is being discussed here. I wonder how it would have faired.
Pollution of Our Oceans
I created this scene 24hrs before I did the shoot, thinking to myself that most will probably do oil in bottles or such like things making master portraits, I decided to step outside the box again and go for a topic to fit the challenge as well as show what we all know is happening to our oceans.
I found a picture frame with a solid border around it and glass fitted to it, painting the glass with a layer of clean motor oil I poured some water based paint onto the glass surface, (Blue & Beige) then with a brush painted into the oil trying to create an ocean effect, I let this settle for a couple of hours, allowing the paint to dry some, then with a screwdriver tip made the swirls leaving to settle overnight.
This was set up on a table and using a piece of A4 plain paper painted and stuck it to the base laying it back over the edge of the frame to give a wave effect and painted along the length with variable strokes. The background is a soft box pushing light down from behind, and set another on the left, doing the shoot with the camera in the portrait profile to take in the oil I poured while shooting with a remote.
Processing was done in LightRoom 1.4.1 where tone was achieved by raising the brightness to blend the soft box with the plain paper, adjusting camera tone and crop, exporting to Cs3.
Spot healed along the paper edge on the base Zoomed to500%
New crop @ 50%
Tone Map
Topaz Sharpen
Hue/Sat
Curves
Border
Final Sharpen USM.
I like the effect and the message this photo gives, hope you did to.
|
|
|
|
08/11/2009 12:08:52 AM · #40 |
similar to the comment i left on the DQ'ed entry being discussed by the original poster of this thread, i felt that a photograph of an artwork (whether legal on DPC or not, aside) highly reduce the merit the photograph has. one could argue that the photograph involves capturing the best angle, or light source, but that is more appropriately applied to sculptures, buildings, or statues - things which are more 3-dimensional. photograph of a 2-dimensional artwork, however, lacks effort.
this is the same reason why i wouldn't photograph myself standing in front of a backdrop of mt fuji, or the grand canyon if i'm not really there myself. it totally destroy the merit of the photograph, no matter how perfectly done it is. |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 12:18:10 AM · #41 |
| not that i'm that interested in this topic... what if you used a backdrop with mt fuji on it? is that legit? =P |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 12:30:23 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by scooter97:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by scooter97:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I took one look at the photo in question and thought, "Wow, that's a D.Q."
Having said that, I voted on it as though it were legal, and while I do think that the D.Q. was legit, I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
I agree. Once the DQ is instated the die is cast. Too much damage that cannot be undone. What harm is there to let people decide to vote on the image and let their score or comment show how they feel about the legitimacy of the image? Since the majority of the voters here are not SC and cannot decide whether or not the image should be DQ'ed, why not let the voters speak and let SC, DQ or not, the image after the voting is finished? |
So, let's say an image, instead of getting DQ'd during the voting process, does exceedingly well and wins a ribbon and takes one of the three spots on the front page...is that fair? IMO, it's not. Even if the image was on the front page for only an hour after rollover it wouldn't be fair to the ones that made the front page without breaking any rules.
On the other hand, wouldn't it really suck to finish voting, end up with a Brown ribbon and then get DQ'd - BAM! :-) |
There are plenty of ways to look at this. Somebody will always be disappointed, unfortunately. |
Well, I'd certainly prefer that the one to be disappointed is the one that didn't play by the rules, rather than someone not getting recognition at challenge rollover when they followed the rules. Seems like the only right way to do it (DQ during voting period gets DQ'd). |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 09:10:49 AM · #43 |
| Are you having a bad day or something? All of your replies seem to extremely abrasive and you are coming off as arrogant and rude. Nothing worse than a great photographer with a piss poor attitude. |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 09:17:04 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by ajdelaware:
Are you having a bad day or something? All of your replies seem to extremely abrasive and you are coming off as arrogant and rude. Nothing worse than a great photographer with a piss poor attitude. |
And apparently he removed all of his posts so now your post doesn't make sense.
Matt |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 09:21:26 AM · #45 |
| What a dirty trickster. I mean I tend to be abrasive as hell too, so if its striking me as over the top, it must be bad. AMIRITE?! |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 10:00:15 AM · #46 |
| Well based on all of this it seems clear to me that any entry in "Ribbons" that contain a picture of a printout of a ribbon from this site is an automatic DQ. |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 10:15:24 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by scooter97:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by scooter97:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
I took one look at the photo in question and thought, "Wow, that's a D.Q."
Having said that, I voted on it as though it were legal, and while I do think that the D.Q. was legit, I don't think D.Q.'s should take place until after the voting, simply because if the shot had to be reinstated, it would not be fair because not everyone was able to vote on it. |
I agree. Once the DQ is instated the die is cast. Too much damage that cannot be undone. What harm is there to let people decide to vote on the image and let their score or comment show how they feel about the legitimacy of the image? Since the majority of the voters here are not SC and cannot decide whether or not the image should be DQ'ed, why not let the voters speak and let SC, DQ or not, the image after the voting is finished? |
So, let's say an image, instead of getting DQ'd during the voting process, does exceedingly well and wins a ribbon and takes one of the three spots on the front page...is that fair? IMO, it's not. Even if the image was on the front page for only an hour after rollover it wouldn't be fair to the ones that made the front page without breaking any rules.
On the other hand, wouldn't it really suck to finish voting, end up with a Brown ribbon and then get DQ'd - BAM! :-) |
There are plenty of ways to look at this. Somebody will always be disappointed, unfortunately. |
Did it ever happen that a picture could not be reinstated because it was disqualified during voting? Not as far I am aware. If that's right nobody has bee disappointed so far. Give SC a rest. There is so much moaning about DQs lately that I am not astonished that we get abrasive answers... |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 10:28:12 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by MistyMucky:
|
Did it ever happen that a picture could not be reinstated because it was disqualified during voting? Not as far I am aware. If that's right nobody has bee disappointed so far. Give SC a rest. There is so much moaning about DQs lately that I am not astonished that we get abrasive answers...
I agree, there has been a TON of moaning going on lately, but not in this thread.. What a bummer that things have now gotten so intense, even civil discussions can't take place without it turning to a negative direction..
I am wondering about the ribbon challenge and  Lutchenko brings up a great point.. Do I even dare use a print out of a ribbon, or do I need to come up with a way to physically create it out of tangible items... I'm not even going to ask.. I'll just skip it |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 10:35:21 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
I am wondering about the ribbon challenge and Lutchenko brings up a great point.. Do I even dare use a print out of a ribbon, or do I need to come up with a way to physically create it out of tangible items... I'm not even going to ask.. I'll just skip it |
Of course you can use a print-out of a ribbon, as long as it follows the artwork rule. It was discussed here. |
|
|
|
08/11/2009 10:39:35 AM · #50 |
yes you can use print outs. I have decided that the art work rule should go as follows and this way you can not get DQ'd for it,
As long as 75% of your shot is a photograph you should be ok! =) |
|
