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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Announcements >> "Abandoned Buildings IV" Results Recalculated
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 13 of 13, (reverse)
AuthorThread
05/25/2015 10:33:56 AM · #1
The former 3rd-place image in "Abandoned Buildings IV" has been disqualified for using two images to make up the entry. Congratulations to our new ribboner and HM.

It's important to note that this is not a blatant, intentional "foul" and it caused some discussion within SC. Basically, Linda had a blank sky in the original exposure and she imported what she saw as a "cloud texture" to make it more interesting. But we don't see how importing clouds to a place where they belong and making them a prime component of the composition becomes something other than a composite or montage just because someone chose to call the clouds "textures". But it was a difficult call.

Message edited by author 2015-05-25 10:34:21.
05/25/2015 11:22:31 AM · #2
sorry for the dq but love these explanations thank you SC for the hard work and decisions!
05/25/2015 11:38:34 AM · #3
I completely understand the decision and appreciate the review and consideraton by the SC. I did not think it would be a DQ because the cloud texture was not an "image" exactly, but rather a digitally created "texture" that I had from a previous project. For those who are interested in exactly why this was DQ'd, I've provided the images that I used in the description under the DQ'd image. Thanks SC and its cool!
05/25/2015 11:40:05 AM · #4
Sorry to see the DQ but SC has done a tremendous job under the newer regime at explaining exactly why something was deemed a DQ which I think is great.
05/25/2015 12:04:49 PM · #5
Originally posted by LindaLee:

Thanks SC and its cool!

I find your coolness is cool too.
05/25/2015 12:12:42 PM · #6
Originally posted by mitalapo:

Originally posted by LindaLee:

Thanks SC and its cool!

I find your coolness is cool too.


' . substr('//36.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m80blxvsgC1rvbnyoo1_500.jpg', strrpos('//36.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m80blxvsgC1rvbnyoo1_500.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
05/25/2015 12:23:24 PM · #7
Hahaha...now that's funny!
05/25/2015 12:31:59 PM · #8
Originally posted by LindaLee:

...and its cool!


Yours is a very gracious acceptance of the situation, Linda. The refined manner in which you have handled the DQ is perhaps even more inspiring that the ribbon itself. Your skills are clear; you will rebound. Best of luck.
05/25/2015 12:44:24 PM · #9
If the texture had clearly overlaid the houses too, i.e. over the whole image - would that have had a better shot at being judged legal?
05/25/2015 12:58:46 PM · #10
Originally posted by skewsme:

If the texture had clearly overlaid the houses too, i.e. over the whole image - would that have had a better shot at being judged legal?

I was going to ask the same question but got lazy.
05/25/2015 01:01:14 PM · #11
Originally posted by skewsme:

If the texture had clearly overlaid the houses too, i.e. over the whole image - would that have had a better shot at being judged legal?

Arguably, yes.

But there does come a point when a putative "texture" just becomes a second, overlaid image, and that point will come a lot sooner when the "texture" is (or appears to be) actual objects rather than more abstract, "conventional" textures. People have been pushing the boundary of what is and what is not a "texture" in their DPC entries, which is good, but there WILL be occasions when they push a bit too far.

It's a gray area for us, unfortunately. And there's no black-and-white definition that we can use, so collectively we have to accept that it's a gray area judged on an individual basis, or drop the textures out of the rule again.
05/25/2015 01:23:40 PM · #12
I, personally, would hate to see textures dropped from the rules. Textures can add so much to images and are also so much fun to play with when editing. I'd much rather have a DQ, learn and move on.
05/25/2015 01:46:33 PM · #13
Originally posted by skewsme:

If the texture had clearly overlaid the houses too, i.e. over the whole image - would that have had a better shot at being judged legal?


It'd would have satisfied me - the viewer would have seen it as a texture file then rather than as a sky to (arguably) be taken at face value.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/27/2020 05:32:25 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 05/27/2020 05:32:25 AM EDT.