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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Followed the rules and still disqualified !!
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 375, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/02/2006 12:30:27 PM · #76
Originally posted by mk:

Originally posted by Gringo:


Shannon, why is the shot removed from the voting stage when it is DQ'd. In some situations the photo could be reinstated. I can understand shutting off the statistics, but I don't see any reason to not let the shot run the entire length of the voting process and DQ it after the challenge ends. Is this something to consider, or an easy thing to implement?


The downside to this is how would you feel if, at the end of a challenge, you find out that another photo got 35 comments to your 2, when that photo was illegally edited and yours wasn't?


I agree MK, I think the statistics should be hidden, but not lost.
02/02/2006 12:32:58 PM · #77
Originally posted by samanwar:

THE EDITING RULES CLEARLY STATES IT'S LEGAL !!! ...it said I can use filter in whole or part


The tool may be legal, but what you do with it is a different story. Yes, you can use a filter on all or part of your image in Advanced, but "...using ANY editing tools to duplicate, create, or move major elements of your photograph is not permitted." You can add a blur, but if you affect major elements by doing so, then it's illegal. Some SC felt that the background was removed or that the [added] blur itself became a major element of the image. I didn't agree with either, but there's the reason.

Originally posted by Gringo:

...the SC has added several new members since Joey's shot...


Nope. We were all here for that, and the debate went on for a LONG time. FWIW, Joey's validation was deadlocked. I changed my vote to No DQ to break the tie because the challenge results period was almost over and we had allowed some motion blurs in the past (he got the benefit of the doubt). I can't recall any other image being a tie vote for as long.

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 12:36:10.
02/02/2006 12:34:26 PM · #78
:) Thanks for that.... Ugh!
02/02/2006 12:41:16 PM · #79
Originally posted by Gringo:

Originally posted by Imagineer:

I say ban motion blur and effects filters...

Why have 'em in a photography challenge contest?


Would you allow perspective corrections Imagineer?

I would - since it's there mainlyto correct lens distortion. If it was used exaggeratedly then it may look mad anyway.

The reason for banning said filters in my view is to make it easier for people who vote to know that an effect was achievable in camera. If the effect is false it benfits no one. Anyone can hack it on Photoshop, so where's the photographic skill?

Yes, it's a game and there's no money at stake but just look at the column inches given up to complaints arising from the use of cheat filters.
02/02/2006 12:42:25 PM · #80
Borderline cases always are hard.

I've voted consistantly that this use of motion blur adds a major element. I voted DQ on Joey's shot, and DQ on this one. I'm nothing if not consistant.

This is in part the price we pay for the added flexability of Advanced editing. More tools mean more room for debate. In this case, two people felt more strongly about the addition of a major element.

Believe me, it wasn't just rubber stamped, and there was an appeal. I hate DQing shots. I don't think any of us like to do it.

This is why we continue to work on defining a very difficult to define area. We continue to do our best. I know that doesn't mean a lot right now, but we are working to improve things.
02/02/2006 12:45:38 PM · #81
Originally posted by Imagineer:

Anyone can hack it on Photoshop, so where's the photographic skill?

It's all right here.

LOL - Just Kidding - but it is a lot harder to get it right in camera, as all those were.
02/02/2006 12:49:18 PM · #82
I'm a big fan of photographic integrity. I've often thought that a "straight from camera" challenge would be fun. Taking PS out of the equation gives those of us that aren't PS masters yet, can show the things they do BEFORE the shot to make it better.

But on top of that, I hate these discussions. The SC members do a damn good job making this site a fair representation. No matter what decision they make on these close calls, they get called out on, and that's crap. They sacrifice alot of personal time and energy for this site for nothing more than $20/year.

While a dramatic image. I agree with the DQ, I think that the change to the image is too drastic, and violates the spirit of the rules. As to if this is a fair application, I dont' have a fair judge, I think Joey's image is the best comparison, can we dig up the origional from that? Either way, the fact that Joey's discussion went for so long, and was also very close, I think the SC has been more than fair.

As a side note, I'm also wondering if the timing of DQ's might be tricky. I'm not 100% of the way this works, but if an image is DQ'd, it's removed from voting correct? Well, if it's restored, that image wasn't as visible as others, and would give some "what if" to people that would get restored from this type of appeal process. I just noticed mk's response to a similar statement. I OFTEN wonder why images get fewer comments than mine, or others, it doesn't bother me, it makes me wonder, but it wouldn't bother me. THe image would be illegal, and yes, it may have scored higher than mine, but they cheated to do that. I would imagine the comments would be alot of "how'd you do that inside the rules" and that sort of thing. It wouldn't bother me enough to get bent out of shape about it. (I'm thinking this topic may require it's own thread soon.)
02/02/2006 12:50:53 PM · #83
Originally posted by blemt:

I've voted consistantly that this use of motion blur adds a major element. ... We continue to do our best. I know that doesn't mean a lot right now ...


Of course it means a lot! I'm sure that 95% of those disagreeing with the decision in this case still completely support the SC's honest efforts to do their best.

Nonetheless, although you may personally have voted consistently, the impression was certainly given to the DPC community that this type of blur was legal, and I don't believe it's fair to then retract it without a publicized rule change.

Still, I'd love to hear from the SC who voted to allow Joey's image and not this one ...

02/02/2006 12:54:41 PM · #84
Originally posted by Imagineer:

Originally posted by Gringo:

Originally posted by Imagineer:

I say ban motion blur and effects filters...

Why have 'em in a photography challenge contest?


Would you allow perspective corrections Imagineer?

I would - since it's there mainlyto correct lens distortion. If it was used exaggeratedly then it may look mad anyway.

The reason for banning said filters in my view is to make it easier for people who vote to know that an effect was achievable in camera. If the effect is false it benfits no one. Anyone can hack it on Photoshop, so where's the photographic skill?

Yes, it's a game and there's no money at stake but just look at the column inches given up to complaints arising from the use of cheat filters.


I agree with you completely here!
However, to have it look mad might be just the vision the artist wanted.
It's the term "corrected" that is in question.

To "correct" a blur as Samanwar did in the direction that is not typical.

To correct a fisheye distortion so it has less photographic integrity than the original. (is typically seen as improving the integrity).

Or, as in this shot;
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/6804/thumb/174641.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/6804/thumb/174641.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
The "correction" to the perspective make's it look "mad" which is just what makes it interesting. Does it have less integrity now because it is in the opposite direction of what is typical? I don't think so. How would you correct the perspective on this shot without making it "digital art" ?

It is all perception, and that's what makes it hard to define.

02/02/2006 12:55:07 PM · #85
Originally posted by Bebe:

Still, I'd love to hear from the SC who voted to allow Joey's image and not this one ...


That's what I'm calling for.
02/02/2006 12:59:09 PM · #86
I think their decision is wrong. The rules state that filters can be used. If they are saying the filter changed too many pixels, then maybe mine should also go. I didn't use a filter but the dodging and burning would have changed a few pixels.
02/02/2006 01:01:00 PM · #87
Originally posted by Mr Tee:

I think their decision is wrong. The rules state that filters can be used. If they are saying the filter changed too many pixels, then maybe mine should also go. I didn't use a filter but the dodging and burning would have changed a few pixels.


Dodge and burn would only change the color/saturation of the pixels, not the position.
02/02/2006 01:01:24 PM · #88
You could always purchase my DPC-approved Photoshop Filter Package and you'll never have to use any other filters or worry about DQ's :)

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/5728/thumb/272022.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/5728/thumb/272022.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
02/02/2006 01:06:11 PM · #89
nevermind

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 13:06:26.
02/02/2006 01:07:36 PM · #90
Seems unfair that there is currently a revision to a rule being worked on about motion blur, etc., while you are simultaneously punishing some (and not all) of those who choose to use it. Cart before the horse? You can't blame people for not knowing if you not only have no rule against it, but have allowed other, very well-known photographers to have used it. That one picture by Joey Lawrence - it's one of the one photographs I think of when I think of DPC.

If anyone should eat the consequences for an unclear rule, it should not be the paying member, it should be the ones who made the rules. No?

By the way, for what it's worth I actually like the original image much better, sans the filter. Great capture.

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 13:09:19.
02/02/2006 01:07:59 PM · #91
Originally posted by pcody:

But other than that, how about DPCourt? If a picture is so close that one vote will say dq or no dq, let the picture remain in the challenge. After the challenge, the photographer can choose one sc member that was for a dq and one that was against it. These two sc would start a thread and introduce the case. Then they would defend their position with evidence like previous photos that were either validated or not.
We would all be spectators and not be allowed to voice our opinions until both sides had finished presenting their case.
Then a vote could be set up on the front page for the membership. Could be fun if everyone respected the rules.

This places a huge additional burden of time and effort onto SC members who are already giving a huge amount of time each on a voluntary basis. For that reason, and also because I think it would be awful to be subjected to such a process myself, I don't support this idea.

My suggestion that, in cases where SC are not unanimous, 75% of votes cast must be for a DQ in order for it to be applied was put forward because it would not add further to their existing workload.
02/02/2006 01:10:59 PM · #92
Originally posted by Kavey:

My suggestion that, in cases where SC are not unanimous, 75% of votes cast must be for a DQ in order for it to be applied was put forward because it would not add further to their existing workload.


I've suggested something similar within the SC discussion but it wasn't very well supported by others. I can't remember the reasoning (if any) - I'll have to read back and see.
02/02/2006 01:11:52 PM · #93
Also keep in mind that the SC votes dynamically. By that I mean not every member votes on every DQ. This is why we have a large SC. Heida has also recently resigned from SC due to time constraints.

ANY of these factors could change the vote.

As an example, due to work I basically voted on no DQs during the Chrismtas season. Now that the holidays are over, I'm back and voting/participating.

This wasn't rubber stamped. Impassioned arguments were made on both sides. And Sam's position was very well represented. I really, really feel for him. But part of what you guys want from us is consistancy. The best I, or any of us can do is vote consistantly. I did that, and based on review of the discussions, it seems to me that the rest of SC did as well.

I back the decision each one of them made, even if I don't always agree with their logic.

For the record, the vote meets the 75% threshold that Kavey suggested. :) So there was a clear majority on this one. Borderline, but still a clear majority.
02/02/2006 01:21:58 PM · #94
Well, shall we chalk this one up to a learning experience? Looks like everyone has done their part as fair as possible. We may not agree with the outcome, but it's not going to change anything. Kudos to SC for fair discussion (even though I think you're wrong on this one). Now, on to voting, commenting, and for SC... clarifying those darn rules!!!

:-)
02/02/2006 01:27:43 PM · #95
Originally posted by blemt:

Also keep in mind that the SC votes dynamically. By that I mean not every member votes on every DQ. This is why we have a large SC. Heida has also recently resigned from SC due to time constraints.

For that reason, IF the 75% suggestion is taken onboard, I'd suggest implementing it to refer to 75% of votes actually cast not 75% of potential votes cast. That way if one or more SC is not able to participate in the vote on a particular image it would not skew the 75% quorum.

Originally posted by blemt:

This wasn't rubber stamped.

I'm not sure anyone thinks it was rubber stamped. One can certainly accept and believe (as I do) that SC put in a lot of time and effort on a particular issue but still feel that the results are inconsistent with other decisions they have made on similar issues.

Originally posted by blemt:

For the record, the vote meets the 75% threshold that Kavey suggested. :) So there was a clear majority on this one. Borderline, but still a clear majority.

I'm a little confused. If I read an earlier post correctly, the vote on the Joey Lawrence DQ was tied until one member changed their vote in order to move things forward. You've stated that over 75% of votes on this image were in agreement that it should be DQd. I'm assuming that SC were taking into account the issue of very similar image modifications as were made by Joey. It's also been stated that SC individuals are consistent in their opinions and applications of the rules and that SC membership has not changed between these two votes. So I'd like to hear from the 25% of SC who voted to pass Joey's image but to DQ this one. I am not being argumentative, I'm genuinely very interested in understanding the situation and reducing the likelihood of similat threads about inconsistenct in the DQ process in the future.

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 13:32:54.
02/02/2006 01:28:40 PM · #96
As one of the authors of a 'motion blurred' image I have to say I had several attempts at the blur level, trying to judge where the acceptable limit was. I knew it was borderline when I used it and half expected to be called into question.

However, I would suggest that using such things as the Draganizer action is just as borderline. The Draganizer actually adds very dark pixels to selected areas, and there are lots of people using Draganizer regularly on DPC. If we change the rules to stop the use of radial blur then the week after we will be changing again to stop the use of something else.

Going back to the DQ of this particular image my own feeling is that the rules don't currently have any real enforcable limit, resulting in a judgement call. This time the judgement call is in my opinion wrong, the image should have been allowed.

just my 2c worth

02/02/2006 01:36:33 PM · #97
This shot being DQ'd is ridiculous. I'm tired of all the arguing that takes place about these very poor SC decisions.

If it's allowed once, it should be allowed until a rules change in writing. So if his shot gets DQ'd, so should every shot that is simliar.

I think only certain mambers of the SC should be allowed to judge photos. Just because your great at coding doesn't make you great at judging photography. Also, get some people like Bear on the SC that actually have photographic experience...
02/02/2006 01:41:06 PM · #98
there's lots of ways to say things ... why insult the "photographic experience" of a group of people you know nothing about?

Originally posted by Brent_Ward:

This shot being DQ'd is ridiculous. I'm tired of all the arguing that takes place about these very poor SC decisions.

If it's allowed once, it should be allowed until a rules change in writing. So if his shot gets DQ'd, so should every shot that is simliar.

I think only certain mambers of the SC should be allowed to judge photos. Just because your great at coding doesn't make you great at judging photography. Also, get some people like Bear on the SC that actually have photographic experience...
02/02/2006 01:47:09 PM · #99
Originally posted by samanwar:

This is my "Best of 2005" entry, and this is the original shot:


just read your post and wow this should not have been disqualified, this is why I never alter my images too much cause too me the advanced editing is not clear to me and this is a very good example. I have seen many here in challenges that I can tell have been altered in the advanced editing in some challeges and there are some photos that should DQ'ed before this one or questionable.

just read the rules again and still see no where which states that you did something against the rules for it to be DQ'ed

"Filters: At your discretion, you may apply filters to your photo, in whole or part. (Be aware that extensively altering the "look" of your photograph with an "effects" filter is often not well received by voters.) "

hmm not saying that U cant do this or use filters

Message edited by author 2006-02-02 13:52:56.
02/02/2006 01:48:57 PM · #100
Rules should not be based on PS features, there are way too many versions of PS as well as other programs. Things that are very basic are now in PS CS2 that require extensive manipulation with other programs including previous versions of PS. Streamline the rules. Give a very short list of exactly what can be done (not PS related) for basic and then a more indepth list for Advanced. Or better yet add a third category for members that has no rules. That way if someone thinks they are pushing the envelope they can go play in category 3. So many of the winning photog in many challenges are so extensively changed by post processing they look nothing like what was seen by the eye anyway. The fights does no one good here especially the DPC community. Basic is Basic, Advanced must look like a photos as the eye sees it (maybe more contrast, sharpness for us blind guys), and a free for all where your computer is the artist.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 05/26/2020 11:41:25 PM

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: 05/26/2020 11:41:25 PM EDT.