| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/10/2010 07:43:31 PM · #1 |
| Please note that the former 5th place image has been disqualified for being taken outside the challenge dates. Congratulation to the new top 10 images! |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 09:32:45 AM · #2 |
The results of the 'Cold II' challenge have been recalculated again, as the former 3rd place winner has been disqualified for being unable to provide a valid original. Congrats to our new 3rd place!
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 09:49:48 AM · #3 |
OK guys - who do I need to correspond with to find out why my pic was disqualified. The file I send was as it came out of the camera. I still have the pic on the CD card if that helps. Something does not add up here....
Drake |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 10:04:24 AM · #4 |
submit a ticket to SC and include the original file from the card.
Originally posted by Drake:
OK guys - who do I need to correspond with to find out why my pic was disqualified. The file I send was as it came out of the camera. I still have the pic on the CD card if that helps. Something does not add up here....
Drake |
|
|
|
|
02/12/2010 10:06:09 AM · #5 |
Just did - thanks. This one has me puzzled, as I am extremely diligent about keeping the original file "pure"...
Drake |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 02:36:34 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by frisca:
Please note that the former 5th place image has been disqualified for being taken outside the challenge dates. Congratulation to the new top 10 images! |
I must be missing something because when I right click on the Yosemite thumbnail, it appears the EXIF says the image was taken on 2010:01:28 at 12:28:36 and the submission dates were Jan 27 2010 - Feb 2 2010. Or is that not the date the image was taken? |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 04:24:26 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by CJinCA:
Originally posted by frisca:
Please note that the former 5th place image has been disqualified for being taken outside the challenge dates. Congratulation to the new top 10 images! |
I must be missing something because when I right click on the Yosemite thumbnail, it appears the EXIF says the image was taken on 2010:01:28 at 12:28:36 and the submission dates were Jan 27 2010 - Feb 2 2010. Or is that not the date the image was taken? |
Just a guess, but maybe the date refers to the new clear overlay on the image and the overlay was created when the image was uploaded. The properties show it as a .gif file. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 04:42:35 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by yakatme:
Originally posted by CJinCA:
Originally posted by frisca:
Please note that the former 5th place image has been disqualified for being taken outside the challenge dates. Congratulation to the new top 10 images! |
I must be missing something because when I right click on the Yosemite thumbnail, it appears the EXIF says the image was taken on 2010:01:28 at 12:28:36 and the submission dates were Jan 27 2010 - Feb 2 2010. Or is that not the date the image was taken? |
Just a guess, but maybe the date refers to the new clear overlay on the image and the overlay was created when the image was uploaded. The properties show it as a .gif file. |
I think this is the problem in the exif. They usually match!
# Original Date/Time = 2010:01:28 12:28:36
# Digitization Date/Time = 2009:12:30 12:28:36
Edited to add. You can use an add blocker to block the .gif
Message edited by author 2010-02-12 16:47:40. |
|
|
|
02/12/2010 11:20:08 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Drake:
Just did - thanks. This one has me puzzled, as I am extremely diligent about keeping the original file "pure"... |
Unfortunately, your computer wasn't so diligent. The file off your card was the right one, and the ribbon has been restored. ;-) |
|
|
|
02/13/2010 12:01:17 AM · #10 |
Thanks again!
(I plan to find a way to adequately punish my computer...maybe toss it into the icy waters - along with the Nikon tansfer software...)
Drake |
|
|
|
02/13/2010 12:02:01 AM · #11 |
| or just with the nikon. . . |
|
|
|
02/13/2010 12:07:28 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by karmat:
or just with the nikon. . . |
I knew I had that one coming.... |
|
|
|
02/13/2010 12:20:36 AM · #13 |
| hey, so, why not confirm with user before revoking ribbon? drake's no newbie. |
|
|
|
02/13/2010 12:29:57 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by skewsme:
hey, so, why not confirm with user before revoking ribbon? drake's no newbie. |
it wasn't dq'ed until the "unoriginal" was re-submitted (we asked after we saw that the first one was not the original, as we typically do). in my sleep-deprived state right now, I believe (and scalvert can correct me), the 3rd, and original was received shortly after the dq was issued. |
|
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: 04/17/2024 08:30:34 PM EDT.
