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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> 'Before & After Self Portrait' Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 41 of 41, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 12/02/2014 07:40:12 PM · #26
Getting a little ridiculous here, Mike :-(
 12/02/2014 08:55:01 PM · #27
This dq is arbitrary, unparalleled and unfathomable :-)

12/02/2014 09:00:25 PM · #28
We can debate the merit of having editing rules, but I don't think they could have made any decision except to DQ given the current rule set.
 12/02/2014 09:04:50 PM · #29
Originally posted by skewsme:
This dq is arbitrary, unparalleled and unfathomable :-)



This one does surprise me. I thought those filters were not legalâ€Â¦?
 12/02/2014 09:05:37 PM · #30
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by skewsme:
This dq is arbitrary, unparalleled and unfathomable :-)



This one does surprise me. I thought those filters were not legalâ€Â¦?


oh wait -- was that after the textures addition? Then i get it.
 12/02/2014 09:53:44 PM · #31
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by skewsme:
This dq is arbitrary, unparalleled and unfathomable :-)


This one does surprise me. I thought those filters were not legalâ€Â¦?

oh wait -- was that after the textures addition? Then i get it.


Really? Even after we quizzed sc on what would be allowed? GTFOH.
Elaine, that is one opinion. Thanks for adding it. But please don't quash mine.
 12/02/2014 10:21:47 PM · #32
Originally posted by Elaine:
We can debate the merit of having editing rules, but I don't think they could have made any decision except to DQ given the current rule set.


I was talking about the before and after photo, and I said "I don't think" to establish it is my opinion. Did not mean to quash your opinion.
 12/02/2014 10:44:34 PM · #33
Originally posted by skewsme:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by skewsme:
This dq is arbitrary, unparalleled and unfathomable :-)


This one does surprise me. I thought those filters were not legalâ€Â¦?

oh wait -- was that after the textures addition? Then i get it.


Really? Even after we quizzed sc on what would be allowed? GTFOH.
Elaine, that is one opinion. Thanks for adding it. But please don't quash mine.


I reckon this one is quite funky!

12/02/2014 11:11:44 PM · #34
My apologies, chaimelle. I had felt you were saying there could be no argument.
 12/02/2014 11:14:38 PM · #35
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by skewsme:
This dq is arbitrary, unparalleled and unfathomable :-)



This one does surprise me. I thought those filters were not legalâ€Â¦?


And I guess at this point there's no provision to ask for a validation? Just wondering.
 12/03/2014 01:50:52 AM · #36
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
Originally posted by vawendy:
Originally posted by skewsme:
This dq is arbitrary, unparalleled and unfathomable :-)



This one does surprise me. I thought those filters were not legalâ€Â¦?


And I guess at this point there's no provision to ask for a validation? Just wondering.

Wouldn't be much point in it, probably. We're pretty liberal about textures and art filters in general now. It's up to the voters whether they LIKE this approach or not...
 12/03/2014 10:49:02 AM · #37
Originally posted by skewsme:
My apologies, chaimelle. I had felt you were saying there could be no argument.


No problem. Glad you posted instead of remaining silent.
 12/03/2014 10:50:45 AM · #38
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Wouldn't be much point in it, probably. We're pretty liberal about textures and art filters in general now. It's up to the voters whether they LIKE this approach or not...


I've been wondering about using Topaz Impression. Would that be legal?
 12/03/2014 01:25:32 PM · #39
Originally posted by Mike:
....i love it that everyone comments on her photo how much they love the processing and asks how to do it and it gets dq'd for the processing, you cant make this stuff up.


Uhm Ok so let me get this straight, Mike...you said in another thread that you post ONLY photos of attractive people on your website....and I bet more than a few of them were helped along by your pp skills, correct?

Yet...when those of us who are NOT a 10/10 on the beauty scale express an interest in learning how to 'Samantha-ize', whether or not we actually do use that skill set in application to us or other people, you're all over us like a dirty shirt.

So what gives?
 12/03/2014 01:28:55 PM · #40
Originally posted by Elaine:
I've been wondering about using Topaz Impression. Would that be legal?

It's like anything else, legal up to a point. Impression has the power to turn a portrait into an absolute abstraction, and that's going too far.
 12/03/2014 02:26:10 PM · #41
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Elaine:
I've been wondering about using Topaz Impression. Would that be legal?

It's like anything else, legal up to a point. Impression has the power to turn a portrait into an absolute abstraction, and that's going too far.


Good to know. I won't rule out using it then.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/11/2025 02:15:32 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/11/2025 02:15:32 PM EDT.