| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/24/2003 10:06:06 AM · #51 |
I always keep the origional un editd file as well as the .PSD of the image and then the submitted file.
I don't see why it such trouble unless you have something to hide.
Message edited by author 2003-12-24 10:07:29.
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 10:21:15 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by spectre013:
I always keep the origional un editd file as well as the .PSD of the image and then the submitted file.
I don't see why it such trouble unless you have something to hide. |
My thoughts exactly... |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 10:24:43 AM · #53 |
This is a positive step, I think, however I would suggest a few things that should be addressed...
1.) Make an administravie announcement of this change and post it as a news item.
2.) Put a notification on the user's stats display, like for DQ request (in addition to e-mailing them)
3.) You can put up the notifications at least a day or two early if you do a running calculation of votes; the top 5-10 will not change much within that time, and so you have a bit of wiggle room if there are places swapped near the cutoff point after the notification.
4.) Define this requirement right up front in the challenge rules.
5.) As suggested above, provide a path for the user to do this proactively, if they are going to be away.
All of this said, I do feel for those on dialup trying to upload big-arse images.
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 10:44:55 AM · #54 |
I noticed a few posts back about date format. I think if a specific date format on your original is required it should be posted in the rules as I think my camera is set to mm/dd/ccyy. That would avoid confusion in the future with this new rule. Of course I dont have to worry about getting in the top ten anyway. hahahahaha
Edit: Capture One displays it as ccyy/mm/dd hh:mm:ss though. hmmmmm
Message edited by author 2003-12-24 10:52:16. |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 11:05:39 AM · #55 |
We are trying to make the changes as easy to implement without Drew and Langdon having to do a ton of extra work.
1) An administrative notice has already been posted
2) I don't know if there is any indication in the "My Stats" box about a pending request for proof for challenges that have ended. I do know that Langdon coded up that "feature" for challenges that are still in the voting phase.
3) Although a possibility, it would require special coding, and also that the potential winning entries would be known by the Site Council "early".
4) The rules already state the following:
If the validity of your submitted photograph comes into question, you may be asked to submit your original, unmodified photograph and steps to recreate your submitted photograph from your original photograph.
5) If you are going to be gone when the challenge results are announceed and you feel you have a "contender" (score is in the high 6's or above), you can already use the "request administrative note" function (the link is visible under your photo when you are viewing your own challenge entry) to submit your original and explain any post-processing that was done.
As for the date format, the capture date and time is stored internally in the EXIF chunk in a "non-display dependent" format that can then be viewed by an EXIF reader in any desired format, so that isn't an issue.
Message edited by author 2003-12-24 11:08:38. |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 11:06:35 AM · #56 |
Originally posted by deafwolf:
I noticed a few posts back about date format. I think if a specific date format on your original is required it should be posted in the rules as I think my camera is set to mm/dd/ccyy. That would avoid confusion in the future with this new rule. Of course I dont have to worry about getting in the top ten anyway. hahahahaha
Edit: Capture One displays it as ccyy/mm/dd hh:mm:ss though. hmmmmm |
LOL, I think here in the US we are the only ones that use the mm/dd/yy (or mm/dd/ccyy) format, pretty much everywhere else it is dd/mm/yy. Our way makes at least a bit of bass-ackwards sense in that when you write it out, mostly you write December 24, 2003, that is, month, day, year.
I don't think it would be a good idea at all to try to force a particular date format. The site council is well aware, I'm sure, of the format issues, & I'm sure they cna easily deal with the varying formats.
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 12:06:50 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
They are just questioning our integrity Mike. But we aren't suppose to question theirs. |
I'd like to know what this means. Are you implying that we are requesting the original so that we can steal it? I mean, I know that was my plan but I don't think the rest of the SC had it in mind.
I'm pretty sure if you came in fourth place and found out after the week that the winners had been on display that the third place entry was not within the rules, that you would have problems with us not "questioning [your] integrity."
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 12:20:46 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
They are just questioning our integrity Mike. But we aren't suppose to question theirs. |
I'd like to know what this means. Are you implying that we are requesting the original so that we can steal it? I mean, I know that was my plan but I don't think the rest of the SC had it in mind.
I'm pretty sure if you came in fourth place and found out after the week that the winners had been on display that the third place entry was not within the rules, that you would have problems with us not "questioning [your] integrity." |
Actually I do not like sharing my orginal with anyone and to have to submit it to more than just one person does leave it open for things to happen to it. I'm not saying anyone would steal the orginal anymore than site council is saying they don't trust us anymore!
I know that I had an accident with an orginal once getting saved over it and had that photo finished in the top 10 I wouldn't have had the exif file to submit. That particular photo was resized and converted to black and white, what would have happened? The photo was well within site rules but with this new rule would I have been disqaulified cause of accidently saving over top of the orginal? |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 12:25:27 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
They are just questioning our integrity Mike. But we aren't suppose to question theirs. |
I'd like to know what this means. Are you implying that we are requesting the original so that we can steal it? I mean, I know that was my plan but I don't think the rest of the SC had it in mind.
I'm pretty sure if you came in fourth place and found out after the week that the winners had been on display that the third place entry was not within the rules, that you would have problems with us not "questioning [your] integrity." |
Actually I do not like sharing my orginal with anyone and to have to submit it to more than just one person does leave it open for things to happen to it. I'm not saying anyone would steal the orginal anymore than site council is saying they don't trust us anymore!
I know that I had an accident with an orginal once getting saved over it and had that photo finished in the top 10 I wouldn't have had the exif file to submit. That particular photo was resized and converted to black and white, what would have happened? The photo was well within site rules but with this new rule would I have been disqaulified cause of accidently saving over top of the orginal? |
Then you would have 'accidentally' violated the clearly stated rule that requires you to present the original if questioned.
"sorry officer, I didn't MEAN to run that red light...it was just an accident." |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 12:27:07 PM · #60 |
How come folks think this new process about the admins not trusting us? Isn;t fair to validate the winners just in case, especiallya fter a few DQ's recently? What's the big deal in saving the originals, anyway?
One could easily think that those who oppose have guilty consciences and thusly feel this new process to be wrong. There aren;t many rules to this site so why not just comply with the few to be fair to everyone. Afterall, they are there for us not the admins.
Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 12:34:47 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by Rooster:
One could easily think that those who oppose have guilty consciences and thusly feel this new process to be wrong. |
When I first heard the complaining i was thinking "Thou dost protest too much" :) |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 12:56:15 PM · #62 |
When I first heard the complaining i was thinking "Thou dost protest too much"
I think they are just choking at the fact that on DPC you are guilty until proven innocent. All communist nations have this law, why shouldn’t DPC? HAHAHAHAHA
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 02:51:28 PM · #63 |
| I thought that I'd throw this out there to let people know. There are early models of digital cameras (Sony FD-90 being one) that do not save any EXIF data. I'm not sure how many people have cameras like these, and if it will become an issue, but I thought people should think about that as well. |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 02:56:14 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I'm not real fond of this rule, my question is how many people then have access to the orginal file that is submitted? One member of site council or all of the council? |
I dont get how people think this. If we were guilty until proven innocent than we wouldnt even be allowed to submit shots without proving it was legit or the winners wouldnt even be posted until they could cough up the right info.
I think this way people win & then have to prove that they deserved to win. What's wrong wiht that? |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:25:47 PM · #65 |
No offense to those who think this is wrong, but you just don't get it. It seems to me that given that 2 of the top images have just been DQed for date violations, that this is a very good thing for those of us who do not violate the rules. It protects us, and gives us a better chance at a ribbon, by weeding out the cheaters, at least the cheaters who take good photos.
People will have to think twice about entering that GREAT shot taken just last week. Nobody will know....Well if they place, now they will. They'll just have to settle for that mediocre shot they took for the challenge.
Better for me. Ready and willing to submit my original....
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:26:20 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by Rooster:
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I'm not real fond of this rule, my question is how many people then have access to the orginal file that is submitted? One member of site council or all of the council? |
I dont get how people think this. If we were guilty until proven innocent than we wouldnt even be allowed to submit shots without proving it was legit or the winners wouldnt even be posted until they could cough up the right info.
I think this way people win & then have to prove that they deserved to win. What's wrong wiht that? |
I have tried to avoid saying this directly but I don't see any other choice but to say when I upload an unaltered image it is going to be a lot larger than what I submit to the challenge. I am not saying that any member of site council would steal a photo but what I am trying to say is what is to prevent them from doing so? If we are having to prove that we aren't cheating by violating rules what is to say someone wouldn't steal an image.
I think it would be much better to send the image to only one member of site council for validation than to send it to the entire council. That person then could copy the data info and then resize it for the rest of the council when there are questions about the image. |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:32:03 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
Originally posted by Rooster:
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I'm not real fond of this rule, my question is how many people then have access to the orginal file that is submitted? One member of site council or all of the council? |
I dont get how people think this. If we were guilty until proven innocent than we wouldnt even be allowed to submit shots without proving it was legit or the winners wouldnt even be posted until they could cough up the right info.
I think this way people win & then have to prove that they deserved to win. What's wrong wiht that? |
I have tried to avoid saying this directly but I don't see any other choice but to say when I upload an unaltered image it is going to be a lot larger than what I submit to the challenge. I am not saying that any member of site council would steal a photo but what I am trying to say is what is to prevent them from doing so? If we are having to prove that we aren't cheating by violating rules what is to say someone wouldn't steal an image.
I think it would be much better to send the image to only one member of site council for validation than to send it to the entire council. That person then could copy the data info and then resize it for the rest of the council when there are questions about the image. |
Are you serious? Yes someone could but why would they? |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:32:58 PM · #68 |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:38:50 PM · #69 |
Site Council stealing my photo after a DQ request is furthest from my mind. I'm amazed that this has even come up... why would they want to do that? What purpose would it serve?
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:38:54 PM · #70 |
It's not that bad. Just a matter of protecting your copyrights. If I ever end up in the top whatever I'll just have them download the image from my password SSL protected site that they have to sign in, has copyright warnings and a terms and agreement that must be filled out and agreed to for download. I'll then keep the transaction and server IP and secruity logs for future reference.
I've been doing copyright since 1974, so nothing leaves my hands unprotected. |
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:38:59 PM · #71 |
Give me a break! What about any images sent to DPCPrints. Do you think they are making exra copies and selling them themselves? I thought I saw a picture of the Brooklyn Bridge selling on the streets of NY that looked like one of mine...;)
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:41:08 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by mariomel:
It protects us, and gives us a better chance at a ribbon, by weeding out the cheaters, at least the cheaters who take good photos. |
A lot of the recent DQ's have been pics from new DPC'ers, so I wouldn't really say that most of them are cheaters. More that they didn't read the rules fully in the first place.
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:42:09 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I have tried to avoid saying this directly but I don't see any other choice but to say when I upload an unaltered image it is going to be a lot larger than what I submit to the challenge. I am not saying that any member of site council would steal a photo but what I am trying to say is what is to prevent them from doing so? If we are having to prove that we aren't cheating by violating rules what is to say someone wouldn't steal an image.
I think it would be much better to send the image to only one member of site council for validation than to send it to the entire council. That person then could copy the data info and then resize it for the rest of the council when there are questions about the image. |
And is each user going to choose which site council member they trust?
Basically, you have several options
1) Trust us.
2) Don't trust us.
Now, you have made it clear which option you have chosen. We are going to request originals on the top pics each challenge. If you are one of them, your original will be requested. At that point, you have another choice. Upload it or not. You can do whatever makes you happy.
We are not doing this because we don't trust people.
We are not doing this to lower the quality of photography on the site.
We are simply doing it to insure that people are paying attention and playing by the rules.
I also want to point out that though the word "cheater" has been used several times in threads such as this, it does generally seem to be as much "cheating" as "carelessnes." Most of the pics we look at are not deliberate attempts break the rules. They either just did not read carefully, or weren't paying attention.
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:47:31 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by karmat:
I also want to point out that though the word "cheater" has been used several times in threads such as this, it does generally seem to be as much "cheating" as "carelessnes." Most of the pics we look at are not deliberate attempts break the rules. They either just did not read carefully, or weren't paying attention. |
I'll only accept a "mistake" from a new member. Someone on their 1st or 2nd entry. Anything more than that, and it's deliberate, IMO.
|
|
|
|
12/24/2003 03:50:00 PM · #75 |
Karma, I think many are more concerned about copyrights than anything else. Perhaps a copyright agreement that the counsel has to sign and adhere to will help? I've been in film and music for years and your asking for orginal proofs not questions asked. For the novice, no problem, but for those making money, it's a legal issue. So some safeguards in place will help in the long run. Personally, I have no problem as long as whoever downloads the original agrees to the terms of agreement as with any copyrighted material. Whats your thoughts?
BTW, the second lead actress in a film I just finished name was Karma, is this a sign? hahahahaha
Love and hugs, TC |
|
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: 04/03/2025 03:20:04 PM EDT.
