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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> "Color-Full" Challenge Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 15 of 15, (reverse)
AuthorThread
04/07/2022 05:58:58 PM · #1
The former runner-up in the "Color-Full" Challenge has been disqualified. The submission used 3 separate images to create a composite, which is not allowed in Standard Editing. Congrats to our new ribboner and HM.
04/07/2022 06:40:04 PM · #2
Lame.
I wanted a fifth place finish so I have one of each.

Are you sure it was a composite?
04/07/2022 07:30:40 PM · #3
Originally posted by Venser:

Are you sure it was a composite?

Of course we are!
04/08/2022 03:24:51 AM · #4
hi
in Standard Editing Rule :
"create your entry from 1 or more captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose overall composition/framing does not change)"
I probably did not understand exactly the rules :-(
my photo was composite from 3 photos but the 3 of them was shot in same time , composition and frame just the smoke moves like smoke does.

you are so hard with your rules that make a lot of people Leaving this site for more fun to participat site.

04/08/2022 05:04:20 AM · #5
Originally posted by mshonak:

hi
in Standard Editing Rule :
"create your entry from 1 or more captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose overall composition/framing does not change)"
I probably did not understand exactly the rules :-(
my photo was composite from 3 photos but the 3 of them was shot in same time , composition and frame just the smoke moves like smoke does.

you are so hard with your rules that make a lot of people Leaving this site for more fun to participat site.

The rule in question, in its entirety, reads:

Originally posted by standard editing rules:

create your entry from 1 or more captures of a single scene (defined as a scene whose overall composition/framing does not change). All captures used must be shot within the challenge submission dates and as part of a single series in relatively short time frame (e.g NOT time-lapse photography) This rule is intended to allow HDR imaging, focus-stacking, "crowd removal" composites, "light painting", astro-photography, and panoramic or other techniques that use multiple, nearly simultaneous, images of a scene stitched together into a single image.

We're sorry for any misunderstanding, but your entry used in effect 3 different stages of the same thing to show its evolution; it is as such a time-lapse image presenting 3 different aspects of the same subject as it evolves over time. That sort of composite is only allowed in Extended Editing.

Message edited by author 2022-04-08 05:04:59.
04/09/2022 01:18:24 PM · #6
Damn, this was a quite good image (gave it a 10).
There is still, to my understanding, an allowed way to do a timelapse: long exposure with successive flash triggering. This way, it is a single capture.

And for sure, it would be very challenging to achieve :-)
04/09/2022 11:19:59 PM · #7
Originally posted by Gabriel:

Damn, this was a quite good image (gave it a 10).
There is still, to my understanding, an allowed way to do a timelapse: long exposure with successive flash triggering. This way, it is a single capture.

And for sure, it would be very challenging to achieve :-)

That's correct on both camps; legal, and danged hard to do with smoke :-)
04/11/2022 04:23:02 AM · #8
The former 3rd and 5th place images in the "Color-Full" challenge have been disqualified, both because they had processed over the original JPG files long ago. It's definitely something to watch out for with archival entries :-( Congrats to our new ribboner and HM.
04/11/2022 08:54:21 AM · #9
I hesitated in entering it, because I didn’t have a RAW file. I was only shooting in JPEG back then. But I had many photos from that session. Some that were obviously edited and some that weren’t. The stupid thing was that I considered sending in the original to see if it was valid before the challenge started. So this is my own dumb fault for not doing so.

Bear was very nice when sending the DQ information to me. But I had some questions, so I thought I’d ask here in case others were interested.

Bear sent me this information About my file

Modify Date: 2009:03:22 12:40:34
Create Date: 2009:03:22 15:01:05
Date/Time Original: 2009:03:22 15:01:05

He said the modify, create, and date/time original should all be the same.

1. Is that the only thing that we need to look at to make sure it’s a valid original?

But after writing that last question it got worse — I went to my computer to double check the dates bear was seeing. I did check in the beginning of the challenge that the dates were the same, but didn’t notice the times. But now that I looked this is what I see under properties, and this is what I saw in details view





The 2020 date didn't show up until now, and wasn't showing up on the one I sent to Bear. 2020 was when I moved the file from an old hard drive onto a new 4TB drive.

Are originals no longer valid if they're simply moved from one hard drive to another through explorer? That doesn't make much sense. Or is it if the file was actually copied vs moved?

So this long winded post boils down to: What's the best way for us to check if an original is truly the real, unaltered original?

Thanks for everything, SC! I should have just checked with you before entering it - but I thought I knew better. :O

Message edited by author 2022-04-11 08:56:04.
04/11/2022 09:55:48 AM · #10
Originally posted by vawendy:


Are originals no longer valid if they're simply moved from one hard drive to another through explorer?


They're still valid if this is all that is done.

Originally posted by vawendy:

That doesn't make much sense. Or is it if the file was actually copied vs moved?


Either is fine. Often "moving" simply means copying and then deleting. If you "move" from one drive to another, that is always done as a copy / delete.

Message edited by author 2022-04-11 09:56:04.
04/11/2022 10:24:24 AM · #11
Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by vawendy:


Are originals no longer valid if they're simply moved from one hard drive to another through explorer?


They're still valid if this is all that is done.

Originally posted by vawendy:

That doesn't make much sense. Or is it if the file was actually copied vs moved?


Either is fine. Often "moving" simply means copying and then deleting. If you "move" from one drive to another, that is always done as a copy / delete.


Then I'm not sure why they would have a created date of 7/2020?
04/11/2022 10:32:55 AM · #12
Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by vawendy:


Are originals no longer valid if they're simply moved from one hard drive to another through explorer?


They're still valid if this is all that is done.

Originally posted by vawendy:

That doesn't make much sense. Or is it if the file was actually copied vs moved?


Either is fine. Often "moving" simply means copying and then deleting. If you "move" from one drive to another, that is always done as a copy / delete.


Then I'm not sure why they would have a created date of 7/2020?


When you move or copy a file, the newly-written copy of the file is in fact created at the time of the move/copy operation, and so that is the create date. This is why the date created can be later than the date modified.
04/11/2022 01:15:13 PM · #13
Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by vawendy:


Are originals no longer valid if they're simply moved from one hard drive to another through explorer?


They're still valid if this is all that is done.

Originally posted by vawendy:

That doesn't make much sense. Or is it if the file was actually copied vs moved?


Either is fine. Often "moving" simply means copying and then deleting. If you "move" from one drive to another, that is always done as a copy / delete.


Then I'm not sure why they would have a created date of 7/2020?


When you move or copy a file, the newly-written copy of the file is in fact created at the time of the move/copy operation, and so that is the create date. This is why the date created can be later than the date modified.


I feel like, among the 4 of us, we are confusing the file properties with the EXIF in the image.
04/11/2022 01:27:37 PM · #14
Originally posted by posthumous:


I feel like, among the 4 of us, we are confusing the file properties with the EXIF in the image.

04/11/2022 01:55:58 PM · #15
Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by vawendy:

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by vawendy:


Are originals no longer valid if they're simply moved from one hard drive to another through explorer?


They're still valid if this is all that is done.

Originally posted by vawendy:

That doesn't make much sense. Or is it if the file was actually copied vs moved?


Either is fine. Often "moving" simply means copying and then deleting. If you "move" from one drive to another, that is always done as a copy / delete.


Then I'm not sure why they would have a created date of 7/2020?


When you move or copy a file, the newly-written copy of the file is in fact created at the time of the move/copy operation, and so that is the create date. This is why the date created can be later than the date modified.


I feel like, among the 4 of us, we are confusing the file properties with the EXIF in the image.


Good point. I am using file properties. I’ll go see if I can get at the exif.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 05:17:52 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 05:17:52 AM EDT.