| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/28/2002 10:11:16 AM · #1 |
Our site will VERY soon require date proof methods for challenges delimiting photo shoot dates. If your camera saves EXIF data, then you're OK. If you're not shooting in a mode that saves EXIF data, your proof might be shooting the close-to-same shot in a mode that does.
If your camera doesn't save EXIF data, you'll need to prove your date of exposure (or at least prove it was taken that week). Remember, this proof photo is in addition to your submission... you need not and should not ruin your submission with your 'proof' method. And this is where we need your feedback. How do you think you can prove your photo?
Two (eh) ideas we've had are:
- Take a picture of some sort of dated material at your photo shoot.
- DPChallenge could maybe give you a page to print and take with you to your shoot (specific to that week), and you could take a picture of that while on the shoot.
You'll be able to submit any one of several approved methods of proof, so speak up to get those ideas in! Your better suggestions are more that welcome now... |
|
|
|
03/28/2002 11:11:05 AM · #2 |
I like the idea of printing a page for those who don't have the EXIF data.
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/28/2002 11:35:07 AM. |
|
|
|
03/28/2002 11:11:52 AM · #3 |
A newspaper could work, with the headline and date across the bottom of the frame, and they're often free for the taking in many locations.
I don't envy the poor photographer without EXIF information who'll have to snap an extra shot of every picture they're considering for submission.
Everyone make sure your cameras have their date set properly, too!
|
|
|
|
03/28/2002 03:56:13 PM · #4 |
I don't want to sound contrary here, but how is taking a picture of a newspaper or any other paper for that matter going to prove that someone took their picture on that date, (or that week?)
Here's my senario....I went out yesterday and took some pictures for the architecture challenge, I was on the side of the road using my zoom lens. To show "proof" that I took the pic this week, I'm assuming you mean that I need to take a picture of the paper with the building in the background? First of all it would be difficult to get a closeup of the date on the paper but still show the building. But if it were required, I could go back at any time and take a pic of the newspaper, but how is that going to prove that I took it this week? Yesterday it was kind of cloudy and I took the pic late in the afternoon. If I went back today, it is bright sunshine, the pictures would look entirely different, (except that there are still no leaves on the trees). But the point is that I could have taken that particular picture anytime in the winter months and then go back this week to take the picture of the newspaper.
Again I don't mean to sound contrary or argumentative, but my camera doesn't save EXIF data. Any picture that I take, would I have to submit an identical photo except with the paper included?
I am not arguing with the need for the photo to be taken in the week of the challenge. But I'm not sure that making some of us take double the number of photos is going to make it more fair.
|
|
|
|
03/28/2002 05:15:59 PM · #5 |
| Question. Why do you need to require that photos be taken a certain week? Seems like it is becoming more trouble than it is worth, maybe. |
|
|
|
03/28/2002 06:18:52 PM · #6 |
Because it's more fun if you know that you're testing yourself against everybody's elses creativity and resourcefulness, instead of somebody's photo collection.
I think the newspaper or printout is a good compromise for those without EXIF info.
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/28/2002 6:23:48 PM. |
|
|
|
03/28/2002 10:16:35 PM · #7 |
I just noticed that every time I take my batteries out to recharge them I have to reset the date.
It never crossed my mind because I never worried about when I took the pictures.
Before I noticed this I took my picture for the week with no date. So I used an envelope with this weeks date ...
Hope that will be ok?
* This message has been edited by the author on 3/28/2002 10:18:15 PM. |
|
|
|
03/28/2002 10:27:27 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Melanie:
Question. Why do you need to require that photos be taken a certain week? Seems like it is becoming more trouble than it is worth, maybe.
When we didn't delimit the date, we received 70+ submissions... and we were probably 150-200 users smaller then. Really, any kind of valid date proof will work here. We were just hoping maybe there was something easy we were overlooking.
Skill levels are in the not-too-distant future, and we might just end up delimiting dates on certain levels... but for right now, we're just trying to keep the submissions at a reasonable level, so you'll still enjoy voting :D |
|
|
|
03/29/2002 07:49:02 AM · #9 |
I believe in the word "challenge" and in submitting an honest piece of work, but a dated piece of paper as a separate photo isn't going to stop someone from submitting a photo taken months ago. Also, I don't understand how requiring those of us without exif data cameras to shoot each and every potential entry twice with a piece of dated material in the 2nd photo is fair, or how it's going to help us learn (it was my understanding this site was supposed to be a fun learning experience).
Nor do i see how skill levels are going to weed out those photos that weren't taken during the week of the challenge -- i'm a hobbyist/wannabe so if i start out in a beginner skill level with my nonexif data camera (that i plan on having around for many many years) and my skills improve, are you saying i could never post my improved photos amongst those who's cameras have exif data? how is that fair?
I've been enjoying this site very much, especially the different perspectives the comments give me, but having to "prove" i'm honest doesn't sit well with me and the effort of doing so appears to be more of a chore to be done versus submitting a photo because it's a blast to receive different opinions
Have you thought of 'breaking up' the site into two categories?
Challenge of the Week (perhaps limited to only those cameras with exif data)
and
Photo Critique (for those of us who don't have exif data or those who simply wish to get critiqued on a favorite photo taken 2 weeks or 2 years previous)
My apologies, this was all i could come up with since the date of the photo seems to be more important than the critique/learning experience i thought this site was about and which some of us are seeking ...just my 2cents
|
|
|
|
03/29/2002 08:36:15 AM · #10 |
I'm not sure that creating skill levels will change the number of submissions enterred, or have that big of an impact for that matter. I am not a very good photographer, but unless I am explicitly restricted from the higher echelon of the skill level, I am definitely going to keep submitting photos that will (attempt to) compete against the best photographers here, and I imagine I speak for many on this issue. The best way to improve (in photography or anything for that matter) is to learn from those with experience (aka the skilled). As an alternative, I would suggest having 2 challenges per week:
1st challenge-challenge as it is, the picture has to be taken during the week of the challenge
2nd challenge-submission of picture regardless of date of exposure
This would still keep both challenges competitive, and give photographers a chance to show off their best archived photos |
|
|
|
03/29/2002 09:02:39 AM · #11 |
And I think that's what's going to end up happening ... certain challenge(s) will be dated, while other(s) will not.
lecook: I can definitely understand where you're coming from here... and this is a huge consideration. The other side of the "fairness" coin, though, is that there definitely are photographers on the site who ignored the date restriction on the last challenge and will continue to do so. Is it fair to photographers who are busting their butts to get a shot for the week (and not submitting if they can't do so) to compete against someone who's browsing his portfolio for his best shot he's ever taken to submit it?
And this also goes back to our concerns about having too many submissions -- if there are 100 submissions, I guarantee there will be less people finishing voting than there already are.
Arghhh. |
|
|
|
03/29/2002 09:41:18 AM · #12 |
heehee arghhh is right! so what about two separate categories then? like maverick suggested:
1st challenge - as it is, the picture has to be taken during the current week -- those with cameras without exif data, if they wish to submit to this, will have to provide some form of proof the photo was taken during the current week. It seems to me the only way to prove it was taken during the current week would be to take the shot, then take a 2nd shot with the date set to show. If someone gets a shot that's a once in a lifetime deal and can't prove the date they could either send you the original unadulterated version so the date doesn't change or enter it in the 2nd challenge where the date of the photo doesn't matter.
2nd challenge - as maverick suggested, the photo could be taken at any time (i know i'd LOVE to get critiques/opinions on some of my older stuff)
and as the rules are now, only ONE photo per week which wouldn't increase the amount of submissions too much (hopefully)
does any of this make sense? or was i just being redundant...
|
|
|
|
03/29/2002 11:15:38 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by drewmedia:
And this also goes back to our concerns about having too many submissions -- if there are 100 submissions, I guarantee there will be less people finishing voting than there already are.
If the number of submissions in one week is a problem, why can't you limit the number to say the first 50-75 entries in the week?
|
|
|
|
03/29/2002 11:58:34 AM · #14 |
| Then that would eliminate the working people who can only get their pictures over that weekend when the callenge ends. In my opinion, that is not a good idea. |
|
|
|
03/29/2002 02:10:24 PM · #15 |
I think it's better to have one or two people cheating than to force a number of people to prove that they are honest. But if you do require proof, I suggest you give each challenge a "proof color", where people can put a colored piece of paper (or any other out of place object of the same color as the proof color) in the scene for their proof photo. It's too hard to focus on a date in many photos. Of course, all methods of proof should still be allowed.
There are a couple of questions I have for you. Will you be checking the proof on every photo? If you do, you'll have scaling problems. If you only check those which people raise questions about, then people will feel their efforts to prove themselves honest (something people will already resent) are wasted.
If you do end up requiring a photo with proof, I recommend you allow it to be accessed by the public to avoid both of the above problems.
The next question is, which cameras don't have EXIF data? You might want to consider compiling a list, and only accept photos with EXIF data when the photographer has a camera which stores it.
If it turns out that only low end cameras don't have EXIF data, then consider which users will be using those cameras. Probably only people new to photography. Although it's still not fair if these people cheat, it certainly isn't as damaging.
|
|
|
|
03/29/2002 03:26:49 PM · #16 |
I submitted my photo this week without EXIF data because I do not have that capability with my Sony. However, I did shoot another pic with an envelope in front of it, same lighting and all, that said Dpchallenge, as the rules specified. No one ever asked me to send it in, but I do have it, so I don't know if I am included in the "did not follow the rules" category. ; P
I think two challenges per week would be great. This is a great site and I check in here every other day or so at least. A second challenge going on would be interesting. I have a question though, if you separate the challenges, what would you base it on? I have a part time job as a photographer for a newspaper, but am no where near being great. So where does that leave me?
|
|
|
|
03/29/2002 03:27:36 PM · #17 |
I notice that although my camera saves the exif data in the original shot and shows the details in the supplied Camedia browser, this information is no longer available after resizing and cropping within Paint Shop Pro. The date of the file is shown as the last 'modified' date. My query is, does the exif data still exist after the allowable modifications are made?
Is it possible that because of the rule that submitting photographers must vote on all the pics in that challenge that other rules are being introduced to restrict submissions? I have a very slow connection and going through 70 odd submissions does take a hell of a long time and from my point of view it would certainly be much simpler and quicker to award points on the top 20 pics.
Cheats will always find a way around rules - this is there particular challenge but they still have to produce the goods which we are hoping to beat. With no tangible prize to be gained I would think they would be very thin on the ground.
Just my thoughts, great site, good to compete.
Vin. |
|
|
|
03/29/2002 03:37:49 PM · #18 |
| oh reuben! as the owner of one of those *low end cameras*, it is good to know that I can potentially cheat without being *damaging*!;) However, providing proof of time/date is not a problem for me at all, since I will probably be taking 8 million shots of that challenge anyway...so what is one more? To open up another can of worms, tho, I don't really see what the big deal is for people to convert their pictures to black and white. There are so many models of cameras out there--I am currently researching one that has everything I want, and it is tough! But for those that have already invested in their cameras, I guess I don't really see how discarding the color info in a given picture is much different than, say, sharpening the pic or fixing the levels. Bad levels on a color or b&w converted pic are still bad levels, y'know? On my camera, taking a picture in b&w or sepia is only a button away from color...it isn't as if I had to buy b&w film and specifically have it processed, etc., it is just a function. I guess I am looking at this from my old school days of 35mm (and no personal darkroom!)--regardless of the film color capacity, a badly executed picture was just bad, you couldn't modify your picture at all--but now we can and do, so what difference does this particular modification make? Does this make sense? I just don't see what the big deal is, and think it is an unnecessary limitation for those lacking this function. Wow, es gooood to be back! |
|
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: 04/27/2024 02:33:12 PM EDT.
