I requested a Self-DQ - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/09/2008 01:37:01 PM · #1

...not because I think the score is low.. hell its in high 4's that I have always cherished!
..but because I realised after a validation request that I dont have the original.

I make weekly backups of all the pictures from the laptop onto an external HDD. In doing so, I backup all but the most recent folder on the computer (because it usually has challenge entries) and then delete the rest after copying to HDD. I think this past week I did everything right except that I deleted the original folder from the computer after the backup action.. thinking everything is safe now (damn Ctrl-A -> Delete shortcut).

I feel stupid now. But I requested a self-DQ with the SC. I hope they honor the request.

P.S. For once, I loved this picture... I will share it after the challenge is over.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

12/09/2008 01:56:58 PM · #2

FYI- you can't use a Self-DQ to avoid a rules violation.

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

12/09/2008 02:02:16 PM · #3

Originally posted by scalvert:

FYI- you can't use a Self-DQ to avoid a rules violation.

I know it is hard to make-belief, but even if it was an unintentional rules violation?

I have opened a ticket with the SC, and will wait to hear in there. I do not want to discuss it here for the sanctity of the system.

Thanks.

Message edited by author 2008-12-09 14:06:44.

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

12/09/2008 02:29:17 PM · #4

Originally posted by Prash:

I do not want to discuss it here for the sanctity of the system.

Thanks.

If you don't want to discuss it for the 'sanctity of the system,' why did you start a thread about it? For that matter, just out of curiosity, why is your requesting a DQ something to start a thread about anyway? Who cares other than you? (I don't mean that to sound mean)

Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

12/09/2008 02:33:44 PM · #5

Originally posted by CEJ:

Originally posted by Prash:
I do not want to discuss it here for the sanctity of the system.

Thanks.

If you don't want to discuss it for the 'sanctity of the system,' why did you start a thread about it? For that matter, just out of curiosity, why is your requesting a DQ something to start a thread about anyway? Who cares other than you? (I don't mean that to sound mean)

I wanted to communicate in all good faith that I did not violate any rules. Only that I dont have any proof saying that. I thought just the fact that I am standing up with my mistake will say a bit about whether I could do that or not.

So it was supposed to be a one-way communication from my side explaining my part to the fellow DPCers whose opinion is important to me. I am learning and improving pgotography and dont want to come across as someone who would break rules to get ahead.

And so I said I dont want any discussion here. Thats it.

Hope that clarifies it a bit.

ETA: I believe people here on DPC do care... which is what makes it different from other websites. Checkout the awards link in my signature if you wish and you will know what I mean.

Message edited by author 2008-12-09 14:36:51.

CEJ

Canon EOS-40D

12/09/2008 02:42:13 PM · #6

Well, after this I have nothing more to say about it, BUT, again, who cares? No one would know you even requested a DQ unless you told them. Then, and only then, would anyone who may care have the chance to do so. Self DQ's, for whatever the DQ reason, do not show in the challenge results nor your portfolio unless you upload them again. By posting this thread all you did was open up the action for discussion/suspicion/attention.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

12/09/2008 03:02:31 PM · #7

Originally posted by CEJ:

If you don't want to discuss it for the 'sanctity of the system,' why did you start a thread about it? ...

:-D

12/09/2008 03:13:02 PM · #8

Originally posted by CEJ:

By posting this thread all you did was open up the action for discussion/suspicion/attention.

I will agree with the attention part. I did want to bring people's attention here, because I am not sure a self-DQ will be granted in these conditions as

scalvert hinted. And so before it gets DQ'd, I want to put my part up front. again I emphasize - STANDING UP WITH MY MISTAKE OF DELETING THE FOLDER WITH ORIGINALS.

And by the way, YOU care. That is why you are in this thread.

So thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!

:-)

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

12/09/2008 03:13:53 PM · #9

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by CEJ:
If you don't want to discuss it for the 'sanctity of the system,' why did you start a thread about it? ...

:-D

You owe me quite a few fun times there, Barry. I have lost count of how many popcorn moments I have given you in just 3 months ;-)

Message edited by author 2008-12-09 15:14:08.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

12/09/2008 03:33:37 PM · #10

Originally posted by Prash:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by CEJ:
If you don't want to discuss it for the 'sanctity of the system,' why did you start a thread about it? ...

:-D

You owe me quite a few fun times there, Barry. I have lost count of how many popcorn moments I have given you in just 3 months ;-)

He-he...and I need to lay off the butter! Hoping for a treadmill for Christmas! :-D

Apple iPhone 5

12/09/2008 03:54:42 PM · #11

Your dpc image will be sullied by the DQ stripe of shame.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/09/2008 04:05:07 PM · #12

Originally posted by JH:

Your dpc image will be sullied by the DQ stripe of shame.

Thank you!

What an honor it will be...

Nuzzer

Canon EOS-7D

12/09/2008 04:08:59 PM · #13

Originally posted by Prash:

Originally posted by CEJ:
By posting this thread all you did was open up the action for discussion/suspicion/attention.

I will agree with the attention part. I did want to bring people's attention here, because I am not sure a self-DQ will be granted in these conditions as scalvert hinted. And so before it gets DQ'd, I want to put my part up front. again I emphasize - STANDING UP WITH MY MISTAKE OF DELETING THE FOLDER WITH ORIGINALS.

And by the way, YOU care. That is why you are in this thread.

So thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!

:-)

You could have put it in the image details so anybody who looked at the DQ'd image could read all about it

BeeCee

Nikon D40

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

12/09/2008 04:15:25 PM · #14

I really don't understand why you can't request a self-DQ if you realise you've accidently broken the rules, as in this case.

Okay, it can be argued that folks will intentionally break them, hoping to slip through, then when their shot is scoring well enough that they'll likely be top 5 and required to submit they request it to avoid getting caught.

But that would be rather self-defeating anyway, wouldn't it? For example; I cheat to score better, but then when I do score better I have to pull it and not have any more chance at that ribbon than if I hadn't cheated.

As it stands, if don't like my score I can have my entry removed, falsely inflating my average score, but if I make an honest mistake and discover it during voting, I still have to suffer the pink band of shame.

Am I missing something here?

Manic

DJI Mini 3 Pro

Kamlan 28mm F1.4 MF for APS-C

12/09/2008 04:24:10 PM · #15

Originally posted by BeeCee:

I really don't understand why you can't request a self-DQ if you realise you've accidently broken the rules, as in this case.

The key here is that the user didn't inform us that they'd broken the rules until after we'd decided to request the original. Given that the challenge had been in voting for nearly a week, the user had ample time to realise and confess to the accidental violation...

12/09/2008 04:25:24 PM · #16

Originally posted by Nuzzer:

Originally posted by Prash:

Originally posted by CEJ:
By posting this thread all you did was open up the action for discussion/suspicion/attention.

I will agree with the attention part. I did want to bring people's attention here, because I am not sure a self-DQ will be granted in these conditions as scalvert hinted. And so before it gets DQ'd, I want to put my part up front. again I emphasize - STANDING UP WITH MY MISTAKE OF DELETING THE FOLDER WITH ORIGINALS.

And by the way, YOU care. That is why you are in this thread.

So thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!

:-)

You could have put it in the image details so anybody who looked at the DQ'd image could read all about it

My point is: I shouldnt have the image DQ'd in the first place.. since I want to exercise my right to self-DQ it. See how conveniently

scalvert suggested that I cannot use self-DQ to avoid a rule violation.

My point is that I DID NOT KNOW I violated a rule. In fact I was submitting all originals always right away with the submissions until I realised I need to learn a lot so I dont think an original will be needed because I wont ribbon anyways.

I agree it was a blunder I deleted that folder.. but until this morning I was under the impression that I have the original.

Well... thats ok. lets play by the rules. I guess I wont mind a strip on the prifile page for a mistake that I cant prove... at the same time have people with suspiciously rule-violating images win ribbons and real art ones ignored.

I am here to follow rules if they are consistently complied with.

12/09/2008 04:27:24 PM · #17

Originally posted by Manic:

Originally posted by BeeCee:
I really don't understand why you can't request a self-DQ if you realise you've accidently broken the rules, as in this case.

The key here is that the user didn't inform us that they'd broken the rules until after we'd decided to request the original. Given that the challenge had been in voting for nearly a week, the user had ample time to realise and confess to the accidental violation...

Thats the point. I could never imagine my image could ribbon.. which is the only case one needs to provide an original for.. unless someone suspects an editing rule violation... which I never do. Plus I did not know about the violation. Why would I look for the original after all unless someone asked for it??? I dont even have the one I submitted for that matter.. everything gone with the folder :-(

I dont think you will believe me anyways. But thank you for all the trust.

Message edited by author 2008-12-09 16:28:39.

Kamlan 28mm F1.4 MF for APS-C

12/09/2008 04:37:21 PM · #18

Well thank you SC and you-all for the attention. The case is closed. I intend not to discuss this any further. I feel disheartened, discouraged, but I will follow the rules. When I couldnt find my original (in fact the whole dated folder) with the HDD this morning, the first thing I told my wife was "This cant be happening. The one time I dont submit an original at the time of submission, and its asked for!!".

I wish I hadnt returned the Sigma I took that picture with so I could take another one and sort of prove there was no foul play there it was a very simple picture. I just hope rules are followed in all faith, because the SC is doing a great job... except for sometimes when one would doubt if everyone is following the rules.

Thank you.

Here is an excerpt from the SC email:

"We regret to inform you that your submission to the Twisted challenge ("Noname") has been disqualified for the following reason:

You must retain your original, unedited file (exactly as recorded by your camera), and provide it to the Site Council along with a list of your editing steps within 48 hours of any validation request. Files that have been saved or altered with any editing or transfer software are NOT originals.

Your entry has been reviewed by the Site Council and/or Administrators, who have confirmed that your submission must be disqualified.

Thank you for your continued participation in DPChallenge, and please do not let this deter you from submitting photographs for future challenges!"

Message edited by author 2008-12-09 16:37:46.

Manic

DJI Mini 3 Pro

12/09/2008 04:41:09 PM · #19

Originally posted by Prash:

Originally posted by Manic:

Originally posted by BeeCee:
I really don't understand why you can't request a self-DQ if you realise you've accidently broken the rules, as in this case.

The key here is that the user didn't inform us that they'd broken the rules until after we'd decided to request the original. Given that the challenge had been in voting for nearly a week, the user had ample time to realise and confess to the accidental violation...

Thats the point. I could never imagine my image could ribbon.. which is the only case one needs to provide an original for.. unless someone suspects an editing rule violation... which I never do. Plus I did not know about the violation. Why would I look for the original after all unless someone asked for it??? I dont even have the one I submitted for that matter.. everything gone with the folder :-(

I dont think you will believe me anyways. But thank you for all the trust.

There was a validation request against your entry that the SC decided warranted requesting your original for. Since you are unable to provide the original, we have no way of verifying whether or not your entry did violate the rule that was original request suspected, thus we have no choice but to DQ (since providing the original is mandatory when requested). It's quite possible that your original & editing would have been validated (assuming losing your original was the only rule broken here), and after that validation you would have been able to selfDQ if you still desired... but without an original, we can't do any of that.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

12/09/2008 04:44:05 PM · #20

Originally posted by Manic:

Originally posted by Prash:

Originally posted by Manic:

Originally posted by BeeCee:
I really don't understand why you can't request a self-DQ if you realise you've accidently broken the rules, as in this case.

The key here is that the user didn't inform us that they'd broken the rules until after we'd decided to request the original. Given that the challenge had been in voting for nearly a week, the user had ample time to realise and confess to the accidental violation...

Thats the point. I could never imagine my image could ribbon.. which is the only case one needs to provide an original for.. unless someone suspects an editing rule violation... which I never do. Plus I did not know about the violation. Why would I look for the original after all unless someone asked for it??? I dont even have the one I submitted for that matter.. everything gone with the folder :-(

I dont think you will believe me anyways. But thank you for all the trust.

There was a validation request against your entry that the SC decided warranted requesting your original for. Since you are unable to provide the original, we have no way of verifying whether or not your entry did violate the rule that was original request suspected, thus we have no choice but to DQ (since providing the original is mandatory when requested). It's quite possible that your original & editing would have been validated (assuming losing your original was the only rule broken here), and after that validation you would have been able to selfDQ if you still desired... but without an original, we can't do any of that.

But as soon as I realised I was missing the original (+ the whole folder), I did request a self DQ. Why was that not granted? I agree I realised that only after SC's email. But I really didnt know myself. I was under the impression that the backup has it all.

Anyways, thanks a lot.

BTW: Can I disclose which image it was now that its out of the contest? Or I lost that right too?

Message edited by author 2008-12-09 16:46:14.

BeeCee

Nikon D40

12/09/2008 04:52:51 PM · #21

Okay, I can see it in this case; intentional infraction or not, he'd already been "caught". I'd still like to clarify the comment that one can't request self-DQ for rules violations, though.

I'll use my wildlife entry;

On a Tuesday I shot a couple hundred swan/goose/duck shots then later that evening the Wildlife challenge was announced so I went back Wednesday and shot a few hundred more.

Supposing I'd discovered during the week that I'd accidently entered one from the Tuesday folder instead of Wednesday's. Could I not remove it from voting, since it shouldn't have been there, but was a totally honest mistake and not an attempt to circumvent the date rule?

kaiser_chief

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D

12/09/2008 04:57:08 PM · #22

Anyone who actually cares will be able to see the submission on your profile page at roll-over, which is in about 7 hours........

All others who don't care might now stop posting to this thread, and it can die a quick death......

12/10/2008 12:39:21 AM · #23

Here is the image in question:

How many of you think this cannot be taken and edited with the Basic Editing ruleset? I am just curious....