Maybe a random request for EXIF data would be a good deterrent? I've also wondered if the winners of the challenges should perhaps submit their EXIF, that would keep anyone who hopes to win honest. Of course I'm sure no one breaks rules here! : )
We have tossed around the idea in the past of automatically requesting originals from the winners... threads like this one will certainly improve the chances of that happening...
I like this idea of automatically requesting the originals fo the 3 winners!
Because something that bothers me here is that I am pretty sure that some of the pics submitted have not been taken during the current week. Let's think again of this submission for the current challenge 30 minutes after the beginning of the challenge... I also know by experience in another website that many people don't read the rules at all before submitting pics in a challenge. They rush to submit when a theme finally appears for which they have a great picture that fits. So some of them might be cheating not on purpose.
I don't see any reason why we shouldn't apply this rule. It is a great idea.
I also read a while ago another proposition: the exposure date should be left blank by default when submitting the entry. It would make people realize the picture has to be taken during the current week.
I much prefer the honor system. Another photo site I visit requires you to upload the original file with your entry. I lost one of my best shots because I rotated the original which disqulalified it for submission as it was then "modified".
I think that winners only should have to submit their original file. That would keep it as honest as it needed to be.
As has been mentioned before here, EXIF data is really easily modified if you know how to do it. It's not any sort of a safeguard. It might serve as something of a deterrant, but ultimately you can't be sure that anything was taken between the submission dates; there will still be doubt.
As has been mentioned before here, EXIF data is really easily modified if you know how to do it. It's not any sort of a safeguard. It might serve as something of a deterrant, but ultimately you can't be sure that anything was taken between the submission dates; there will still be doubt.
True, but to ask for the original will at least prevent people from submitting an old picture they took out from their online gallery and for which they don't have the original anymore.
Plus it allows to check if spot editing for example has been performed.
And to ask for it only to the winners doesn't transform this contest into a very serious thing. It's a good balance I think.
I like the honors system myself. I also think that some modification should be allowed, like the offending cord in the above message. If photographers get out of hand with manipulation, voters seem to favor photos that don't look altered.
ON THE OTHER HAND, my photography has improved greatly because I could not manipulate images with spot editing, etc. And I've also learned that too much fiddling with acceptable editing makes a bad image only slightly better.
True, but to ask for the original will at least prevent people from submitting an old picture they took out from their online gallery and for which they don't have the original anymore.
Plus it allows to check if spot editing for example has been performed.
And to ask for it only to the winners doesn't transform this contest into a very serious thing. It's a good balance I think.
No, it doesn't prevent people from using old images, images that aren't theirs, and edited images. EXIF data can be added to any image. It's easy to do if you have the patience to do 10 minutes of research.
I agree with John...the people who will go to those lengths probably won't get into the top 3 anyways, but the fact remains that we're on the honour system whether we like it or not.
As a university teacher, I have many of my fellow faculty lamenting that they can't catch all the "cheaters," but I find that when I trust my students, they usually do it right and learn more in the process. I learned long ago that learning is greatly inhibited in an environment of distrust, threats and bribes. This really isn't a classroom, but I still think the same principle exists. If we had Big Brother watching us all the time, many of us would get fed up and go somewhere else.
Some people who have cheated have already made it into the top three, whether it was "purposeful" or not, we won't always know. However, when cheaters win, they deserve it. How much satisfaction can they possibly get out of it? I'm with others who have said that any EXIF data can be falsified, so why bother? If somebody who cheats gets a better score than me, more power to them, the bottom line is - they know who they are. The ACDSee Photo imaging program does a nice job of editing any EXIF data you want to change, so I'm sure there are ways.
personally, i think that people who are gonna purposefully cheat won't find their way into the top three anyway... :)
I completely agree with this... Cheating won't help you win because if the image isn't good to begin with, subtle edits won't help you at all. And non-subtle edits that may boost your score somewhat will probably be caught and get you DQ'd so why bother? :)
personally, i think that people who are gonna purposefully cheat won't find their way into the top three anyway... :)
I have to disagree with that.
What about for example a candid challenge where I had the chance a year ago to photograph a wonderful unusual scene. If I submit this picture, wouldn't it be very unfair towards the others? Some themes require a bit of luck to get a good picture, something you are most likely to have in a lifetime of photogrpahy compared to a week...
... something that bothers me here is that I am pretty sure that some of the pics submitted have not been taken during the current week. Let's think again of this submission for the current challenge 30 minutes after the beginning of the challenge...
I suspect that this is because of confusion about deadline times from entrants who live in different time zones - although DPC time is clearly displayed at the bottom of the page many people get confused about it anyway. I'm sure you will have noticed that in many challenges there are one or two entries that were clearly intended to be entered in the previous challenge.
