| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/29/2006 01:51:06 PM · #1 |
So let's say that, uh, someone, takes all entries during the correct week.
But later, that person, who's purely hypothetical, of course, realizes that his, err ... his/her camera's clock wasn't set back an hour when daylight saving time ended.
And as a result, one of the entries, errr, purely hypothetical entries, which was actually taken before midnight, has EXIF data saying it was taken after midnight.
What shoud that person do? The tick box on the submission form says the photo had to have been taken during the challenge week, and it was. The rules also say that, if asked for validation, the EXIF data have to be correct.
All editing rules were obeyed.
So you have a situation where, if asked, the EXIF data won't be able to demonstrate it was taken at the proper time, but the hypothetical person hasn't been asked.
Is there an obligation to self-report? Nothing relevant is a top-5 entry.
I'm asking here, as opposed to sending in a ticket, because I, errr, the hypothetical person in question, is interested in this as an ethical question.
Naturally, any potential person in this situation would go along with anything the SC decided, but it's still an interesting discussion question.
Edited for grammar.
Message edited by author 2006-11-29 13:52:13.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 01:53:10 PM · #2 |
If you aren't at risk of a Top 10 shot, I wouldn't sweat it. If they getcha, then fess up (and it may be too late already after this post), if they don't, honest mistake and move on.
I'm thinking of the spirit of the law rather than the letter of it.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 01:53:22 PM · #3 |
ensure that your camera date and time are correctly set to your local time zone before shooting your entry. If the date recorded in your original image file is not within the specified challenge dates, your entry will be disqualified – NO exceptions! If your photo was taken in a different location than indicated in your profile, please note the location in the submission form so that we can adjust accordingly.
Nothing very unclear in this.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 01:55:04 PM · #4 |
| "Date" at DPChallenge is EXIF date. So the ethical thing to do would be to self-report. |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 01:57:25 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
If you aren't at risk of a Top 10 shot, I wouldn't sweat it. If they getcha, then fess up (and it may be too late already after this post), if they don't, honest mistake and move on.
I'm thinking of the spirit of the law rather than the letter of it. |
I disagree, an honest mistake is not a right because it goes unnoticed. If I am aware of it, the ethical thing to do is to face up to it. IMHO of course. |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 01:57:34 PM · #6 |
It sounds like his picture would have the date and time of an hour after the challenge went into vote. Would be an interesting (yet unfortunate) violation of that rule.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 01:59:30 PM · #7 |
I did forget to mention the average DPC member has what is called "concrete thinking" and not "abstract thinking".
Incedently, the developmentalist Piaget characterized this as the thinking process of an average 7-11 year old.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:02:06 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I did forget to mention the average DPC member has what is called "concrete thinking" and not "abstract thinking".
Incedently, the developmentalist Piaget characterized this as the thinking process of an average 7-11 year old. |
What do you mean with this? |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:02:22 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by ursula:
I disagree, an honest mistake is not a right because it goes unnoticed. If I am aware of it, the ethical thing to do is to face up to it. IMHO of course. |
I don't want to get into an argument here, but my opinion is the rule is meant to keep people from including shots shot BEFORE the challenge is announced. Our anonymous friend here DID that but had a technical glitch which indicates he didn't. So according to the spirit of the law he complied. I do agree though that according to the letter of the law he brokes the rules.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:03:07 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I did forget to mention the average DPC member has what is called "concrete thinking" and not "abstract thinking".
Incedently, the developmentalist Piaget characterized this as the thinking process of an average 7-11 year old. |
What do you mean with this? |
That's just me showing frustration. I typed it before your post ursula, but knew exactly what the response would be in general. I just disagree with it.
Jean Piaget on Wikipedia
Message edited by author 2006-11-29 14:03:38.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:05:29 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I did forget to mention the average DPC member has what is called "concrete thinking" and not "abstract thinking".
Incedently, the developmentalist Piaget characterized this as the thinking process of an average 7-11 year old. |
What do you mean with this? |
That's just me showing frustration. I typed it before your post ursula, but knew exactly what the response would be in general. I just disagree with it.
Jean Piaget on Wikipedia |
I know who Piaget is. I knew who he is when I was 7 years old, now that I'm 9, I still do. |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:06:24 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by ursula:
I know who Piaget is. I knew who he is when I was 7 years old, now that I'm 9, I still do. |
Well, if you are 9, what's the problem? :)
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:08:30 PM · #13 |
| And now Miss Nancy says "That's enough -- let's stick to the topic, children." |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:12:10 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Incedently, the developmentalist Piaget characterized this as the thinking process of an average 7-11 year old. |
I think you mean "thinking process WHICH BEGINS TO DEVELOP in an average 7-11 year". Otherwise, you'd be calling everyone who doesn't agree with you a child.
... and that would be childish
... which would lump you in with the rest of the children
... which now become ALL of us
:) |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:14:52 PM · #15 |
yeah. count me as one of the childish people who can tell black from white.
be a man. self report.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:19:18 PM · #16 |
Things could get interesting if your camera date showed that you had taken the picture after you had already submitted it. That would be cool, taking pictures of the future. Kinda like that episode of the Twilight Zone
Message edited by author 2006-11-29 14:19:42. |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:22:14 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Things could get interesting if your camera date showed that you had taken the picture after you had already submitted it. That would be cool, taking pictures of the future. Kinda like that episode of the Twilight Zone |
I think I remember that happening not so long ago with a validation. |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:24:15 PM · #18 |
A very similar situation occurred to me. And I continue to kick myself for not double checking my camera date/time (it was set to the wrong year...DUH!..) I felt that I would rather lose the opportunity for a good score than be DQ'ed so I self reported and had my photo removed.
With all of the negative attention given to recent rules violations, even the perception of wrongdoing was something that I wanted to avoid. This was particularly important to me as a newer member of the site.
I feel that attention to details like these will, in the long run, make me a better photographer.
As hard as it might be, self report..
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:24:16 PM · #19 |
| You know you didn't cheat. In fact, it's impossible for your EXIF date/time to be correct, since you would not have been able to submit it. If it is called into question, we'll have to DQ it by the letter of the rules. If you want to avoid the wondering whether it will, self-report. If you are comfortable that it was shot in the required timeframe and believe that the risk is low, let it ride. I really see no ethical problem with that path. |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:28:38 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I did forget to mention the average DPC member has what is called "concrete thinking" and not "abstract thinking".
Incedently, the developmentalist Piaget characterized this as the thinking process of an average 7-11 year old. |
Ya know what, Jason, I'm thinking not many people round these parts have any idea who Piaget is.
Btw, did you know that Piaget got rid of all his children? Pretty hypocritical given his educational philosophy, don't you think?
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:30:07 PM · #21 |
If I became aware of the situation prior to anyone else, I would self report it. If I had waited to see if I would get 'caught' I would feel so much worse about the scenario. caught or not.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:37:46 PM · #22 |
Well, I'm content in the knowledge not everybody thinks alike. I would be able to live with myself if I knew I was following the spirit of the law (take your picture within the challenge period). If I was asked for validation and got DQ'd, I wouldn't bitch about it though. I just wouldn't self-report. Especially if it wasn't a Top 10.
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:40:51 PM · #23 |
If you took the photo during the submission period then there is no ethnical dilemna here. Now if you used it to your advantage knowing full well the time was incorrect then that would be unethical.
Message edited by author 2006-11-29 14:41:28. |
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:41:09 PM · #24 |
GO CHECK THE DATE ON YOUR CAMERA. IF IT IS INCORRECT, FIX IT!!!!
|
|
|
|
11/29/2006 02:56:52 PM · #25 |
Let me be clear on one point: had I realized I violated ANY other rule, or actually shot on the wrong date, I would self-report immediately. In fact, I forgot the portrait in landscape had advanced rules, and two days into voting I was about to self-report my using spot editing when I noticed on the challenges page that advanced editing was allowed for that open challenge.
So the interesting question to me isn't "should I self-report editing or actually taking the pic outside the right dates." My answer on that is definitely "yes."
Rather, it's "I met all the requirements, but can't demonstrate that, so is self-reporting required?"
Another one is, should the requirement be:
1) shoot during the dates
2) have EXIF data showing you did
3) both 1 and 2
If it's 3, then I don't understand why, but okay; please just change the tick box on the submission form to say so.
The discussion so far is as interesting as I thought it'd be, and thanks to the SC members for ringing in. :)
Edited to add: we take people's word for it when they say they took a shot outside of the eastern time zone, so we do allow for some trusting of people to tell the truth about some things that make EXIF data appear off. For example, if I'd taken the shot in Brazil, which is an hour ahead of here, then without touching my camera, the camera would've been incorrect, but I'd be okay within the rules.
Message edited by author 2006-11-29 14:59:24. |
|
