I literally shot and edited this in the hour before rollover, lol. My daughter snuck down from bed, and I was like "stand here for a minute, oh you don't reach, stand on this bucket" -- hence the bewildered look and random item in her hand, doh!
Pure silliness.
-- post DQ -------
Here're the cited offenses for those who are curious what might constitute "changing a typical viewer's description of the photograph":
Originally posted by DQ notice:
In this case, the big issue was the nylon webbing holding the cart up, but close behind was the strobe light behind the transparent can.
I didn't think it was pushing it too far at the time - strap or fishing wire, what's the difference? ~10 pixels in width? But I'm not upset. I'm glad we have SC to make these calls for us and keep it fair. And I already had a great image for my DPL team this week in Golden Hour. =)
Cheers!
Disqualification Details
You may not use ANY editing tool to move, remove or duplicate any element of your photograph that would change a typical viewer's description of the photograph (aside from color), even if the tool is otherwise legal, and regardless of whether you intended the change when the photograph was taken. IN this case, the big issue was the nylon webbing holding the cart up, but close behind was the strobe light behind the transparent can.
Statistics
Views since voting: 444 Views during voting: 267 Comments: 10 Favorites: 0
Yup, this was a bummer dq Jeff! However, I guess since many voters obviously thought your daughter was strong enough to hold the trolley up then yes, you tricked them. ok, so a wire may have better suited the challenge but surely the same voters would be tricked again?
There was an entry not so long ago where an entire ship was poorly (imho) removed from a shot but remember it was ok as when they removed it the sea/sky was replaced and the ship definitely would have distracted my view of the image.
After what we have seen in Advanced editing and all the talk about pushing beyond expert, this is a silly and totally unnecessary DQ. Badly written as well, that last sentence makes no sense. Not sure what exactly bothered the SC.
Does the "typical viewer" really suffer so much from the removed strap and the flash behind the jar? Unbelievable!
The bucket is odd enough and I kept looking at it, wondering about its significance.
Had you not cloned away the strobe light, I would have spent even more time looking at that part of the image.
You really think you would get the same description/feel/impression from a photo that appears to have a small child magically juggling a cart, vs seeing that it WAS (of course) strung up?
Sorry, but that is too much "pushing" in my books, too.
However, it is a super cute shot for the family album!
Very cool idea. I think the paint can takes away from the image though. I found myself staring at it trying to figure out what it was when I should be staring at the adorable model and the shopping cart.
I can only guess that you hung the cart and it was too high for her so you decided on using the can to elevate her instead of lowering the cart? Just a guess. My vote will not be based on the guess but I very curious if I am correct or not.
Add photograph to your favorites
Add photographer to your favorites
Photographer found comment helpful.
