| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
No Borders, please.
Grover Sanschagrin, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Albany | CA | USA | Posted: 3:26 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> We had to delete a lot of contest entries today.
It's the 16th of the month, and that means it is time to judge the entries in the montly contests. That's right, I said "contests" - plural, because we have TWO of them now.
The Clip Contest, and the Student Portfolio of the Year "Week's Work" contest.
The single rule that many people are overlooking is the "NO BORDERS" rule. If you add a border to your images in the contest, your entry will be deleted.
Sounds harsh, right? Well, it's something we had to do. In the past, some people have been adding wild-and-crazy borders to their pictures. Drop shadows, stuff that looks like picture frames, big thick colored borders, and other such ugly and useless things.
Since both of these contests are about photography, and not how nice/creative/special your borders are, we're going to stick firmly to the "No Borders" rule, and maintain a Zero Tolerance policy.
If your entry has been deleted, you have already been sent an email.
So, to recap: No Borders. Not even a single pixel in width. None. Zero. Pictures only.
Thanks, and for all of those people who followed the rules, good luck! |
|
Max Waugh, Photographer
 |
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 4:00 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Can we add a Dusty Mangum category for next month? Talk about the most popular photo moment in January... so hard to choose one's favorite Dusty shot! ;)
(hey, I did vote for one) |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer
 |
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 4:10 PM on 02.16.05 |
| ->> Grover, question: what about the "borders" from Type 55 Polaroids - stuff not PS'ed in? I noticed people leave them in there sometimes. Thanks. |
|
Grover Sanschagrin, Photographer, Assistant
|
Albany | CA | USA | Posted: 6:22 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Jason: If it's a border, then we don't want to be looking at it, so it should be cropped out. For the sake of these two contests, it's about the picture/moment not the border.
And, especially in the Student Portfolio Contest, it's more about how you see/shoot/think than how you decorate your image afterward.
I can see it now - someone makes a "Polaroid Frame" in Photoshop because they think this is acceptable. Which will then lead to a "full-frame-with-trendy-sprocket-holes" border to give it that "Leica-feel".
Let's worry about the images, not the borders. |
|
Joe Cavaretta, Photographer
 |
Las Vegas | NV | USA | Posted: 6:46 PM on 02.16.05 |
| ->> who has better sprocket holes? Nikon or Canon? |
|
Eric Lian, Photographer
 |
Sebastopol | CA | USA | Posted: 7:14 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Joe,
Last time I checked, only Kodak, Fuji, and Agfa were in the business of manufacturing sprocket holes... ;) |
|
Rick Burnham, Photographer
|
Enfield | CT | USA | Posted: 7:51 PM on 02.16.05 |
| ->> Did you actually remove them?? I just counted at least 20 with borders in sports action. |
|
Mark Cornelison, Photographer
 |
Lexington | KY | U.S.A. | Posted: 11:03 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Just my two cents but being a Polaroid Type 55 shooter I dont like the rule of no borders. Part of the point of shooting this film is the full frame effect. I do agree that there are some pretty horrible photoshop borders out there and any artificial borders should be excluded. Are we saying all of Robert Hanashiros portraits would be pulled from his Olympic shoot? Doesnt seem right to pull the real thing.
Mark |
|
Chip Litherland, Photographer
 |
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 10:13 AM on 02.17.05 |
->> Grover,
If this was in fact a standing rule, or an old one you were going to start enforcing, then it would have been nice to have a little warning put out on the front of the site before we took the time to edit, tone, and participate in Sportsshooter's monthy contest. Even an email prior to judging would havd been nice, so we could have re-entered our pics without borders before the 16th deadline. Perhaps we could resubmit the photos now?
If you look over the last year's winners, every month had at least a couple images with thin, black borders around the image - not unlike we run in newsprint down here. For me, that implies that this was okay with the Sportsshooter powers-that-be, and perfectly accepted practice. You could argue that the gray area included around the images without our choice in our Sportsshooter's gallery is also a border.
I know this may sound a bit whiny, but I really don't think this was handled correctly. I had all six of my entries deleted. I choose to make this complaint public rather than reply to the email I received, because I feel alot of shooters probably feel a bit unfailry eliminated - like I do - and don't want to offend yourself or others that run this fantastic site.
If you enforce this "no borders" rule, then there need to be major changes to what is also accepted into categories, including portraits, illustrations, and the like.
Thank you,
Chip Litherland |
|
chris curry, Photographer
|
Peoria | IL | usa | Posted: 12:09 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> "Let's worry about the images, not the borders."
Exactly. It IS about the pictures and not about the borders.
Name one picture that has won a contest because it contains a gimmicky border.
I have always judged for content and never paid any attention to drop shadow borders, big thick colored borders and the like. Obviously other judges have done the same when you look at all of the winners collectivley.
We, as photojournalists, have enough things to worry about in this day in age. Ethics and digital manipulation among other things.
Not to sound condescending but your "Zero Tolerence policy" on borders or black strokes around the frame is laughable when compared to these other issues.
It's about visual communication and was the photographer able to tell a story within a single frame, not about a black stroke on the outside of the picture.
I, as I am sure along with other members, would appreciate you reconsidering this policy and leave it up to the judges to decide whether the border is appropriate or a gimmick. Never once has a border-issue been the subject of why a picture did well in a contest.
Let the members decide. |
|
Byron Hetzler, Photographer
 |
Granby | CO | USA | Posted: 12:15 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> Enough about borders...let's talk about the real problem--entering features in the action category. |
|
Niko Kallianiotis, Photographer
 |
Watertown | NY | | Posted: 12:20 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> I agree with Chip and Chris100%.
I received the email about the boarder this morning, I had all of my photos deleted. A warning, or at least this rule to take place from next month would be best, in my opinion. Also, I don't think that the boarder is that distracting to the viewer, not to mention that the members do the judging. |
|
Chris Machian, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Omaha | NE | USA | Posted: 12:26 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> I think you guys are missing a point about borders in contests. You aren't supposed to know who took what photos, they are all presented in a random way. If you have the same border on all your photos, then one person can associate all those photos with one photog, thus possible providing a bias. Almost every major photo contest has this rule, people should be used to this. |
|
Joshua Buck, Photographer
 |
Denver | CO | United States | Posted: 12:41 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> "Almost every major photo contest has this rule, people should be used to this."
I disagree. I enter the NPPA region clip contest every month. No where in the rules does it state we have to cut the 1 pt border off of the photos that run in our papers. Also, we recently had a feature photo page (which was entered) consisting of black and white silver prints with full frame borders. These borders were OK for the contest.
By the way, I agree with Chip and Chris also. Let the members decide what is acceptable. What is wrong with a 1 pt black border like the ones seen on some member pages? Some heads up would have been nice, since all of my entries were deleted, too. But, that's life, right? I am not going to let it ruin my day.
Josh |
|
Robert Seale, Photographer
 |
Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 12:45 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> I never knew that this was a rule....many of the photos that I get back from our office are scanned on a drum scanner with the borders on. Sometimes I add a small border in black - particularly to square cropped photos and I almost always add a small black border to prints I make for people.
It's not that big of a deal because the photo I entered sucked anyway, but i agree with Chip - some warning on enforcement would have been polite rather than just deleting things out of the blue - especially if that was the common practice before.
Now we know.
Robert |
|
Brad Penner, Photographer
 |
Neptune | NJ | USA | Posted: 12:47 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> I'm with Chip and Chris too.
If this is a new rule, or even if this rule hasn't been enforced until now, it would have been nice to have some advanced notice. No one's ever said anything to me before, and a thin, black, two pixel border has always been a part of my SS workflow because, as Chip said, that's how the images appear in the paper, with a thin, black border. If you're gonna enforce that rule, then I think Byron's right, too. Start deleting all the sport features entered in the sports action category, or better still, all the captions which don't identify anyone. Also, the rules very clearly state that you guys reserve the right to delete any entry that has "technical problems." Well then you better start cracking on half the friggen entries in -every- category.
If this is a new rule, or even a new enforcement of the rule, it woulda been nice to know that on Feb 13th or 14th while preparing the entries, rather than on the 17th, where it's now too late to comply.
-b.
PS: I don't, however, agree with whoever's giving Grover the inappropriate rankings. If you have a problem with what he's saying, say it here, this is not the place to use the ranking system. |
|
Howie McCormick, Photographer
|
Proctorville | OH | USA | Posted: 12:49 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> I have entered a bunch before, probably ALL with small to medium-sized borders, having no idea there was a rule against it. I'll know next time. |
|
Rod Mar, Photographer
 |
Seattle | WA | USA | Posted: 12:59 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> grover,
do you think you own this website, or what? |
|
John Amis, Photographer
|
Duluth | GA | USA | Posted: 1:00 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Grover,
In the judging process there is no telling how many times a picture with a well done border has come up against a picture which adheres to the rules.
The border in many cases may have been the winning influence. Lets face it a thin black border will make almost any picture look better. Why else do you think everyone likes it so much? Unfortunately it was allowed for so long many members probably forgot it was even a rule.
Keeping this thought in the interest of fairness, could you announce your intention regarding the revoking of points that were won when this rule was broken. Perhaps then, those that had entrys deleted will realize the fairness of your decision.
Far more important though... can you please implement a portrait or a posed category (for a combination of illustrations and portraits)?
The feature category is by no means the perfect place for a portrait as the official description describes. A true feature and a portrait are completly opposite in content. |
|
Erik Schelkun, Photographer
 |
Troy | Ohio | USA | Posted: 1:01 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> I do enter the clip contest occasionally. I only enter when I feel my images have a chance of competing. I have never earned a place in the monthly winners circle, but according to my stats have received votes on many of the images I have submitted all of which have had a thin black border. I really did read the clip contest rules AGES ago when I entered for the first month and do not recall anything about borders not being accepted! Since none of my images have ever been deleted in the past or even mentioned that this was a problem I kept on with the same process each time I enter. However, I did just re read the rules and it says no borders, I just feel that if it has been a problem in the past it would have been just as easy to post a message as a heads up instead of deleting images after the fact. Either way it is not a big deal, but it sure would have been nice to see how my images fared this month.
Respectfully
erik |
|
Brad Penner, Photographer
|
Neptune | NJ | USA | Posted: 1:03 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Chris (M),
A lot of the images in the contest are in member galleries here, too. I am one of those people who looks at just about every newly updated gallery, regardless of whose gallery it is. I see a lot, if not most, of the contest images long before I see them in the clip contest. Does that mean I should disqualify myself from judging because I might know who shot the image? Should anyone with a contest entry that's also in their member gallery be disqualified because that might create a bias? Hardly. I judge based on which are the best images, and if there's a tiny black border or even a 40 pixel white border with a drop shadow, I'm still looking at just the image. Hell, I think the drop shadows take away from the images and therefore they wouldn't get my vote anyway!
There are a lot of ways to determine which photos in the contest belong to whom other than what kind of border the entrant uses. That doesn't mean I'm gonna go looking back through the galleries to find out where I've seen that photo before.
Again, I have no problem with the enforcement of the rule, after all, it is stated clearly in the rules, I just woulda liked to know that it was going to be enforced before the entry deadline, not after.
-b. |
|
Jean Finley, Student/Intern
 |
Iowa City | IA | USA | Posted: 1:31 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> It's always been a rule. I read it in the "rules" the first time I entered. I'm sure it's still there.
This sort of reminds me of something we call the "California Roll", or the rolling stop at a stop sign. Just because you get away with it sometimes doesn't mean it's legal.
We have these fights in my house all the time about my driving. My son says I drive too slow. I obey the speed limit signs. |
|
Chip Litherland, Photographer
|
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 1:52 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Gang,
Just so my earlier post is clear, my point was that I am completely fine if there is a rule against borders, it just would have been nice to get the professional courtesy of being informed that this was going to change or be enforced with the new year. I've been entering all my images with the same border for a year and half now with noone saying anything at all.
Chip |
|
Rob Mattson, Photographer
 |
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 2:34 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> This sucks. I'm feeling a little sore about the borders. This "zero tolerance" policy was implemented the day after judging began for a new year? Give me a break! This is an issue that should have been addressed at the end of December 2004, since it was commonplace for entries to have borders, not after the first month of competition. Should Barry Bonds, Mark McGuire, Jose Canseco and Jason Giambi (and the rest of roid-pumping athletes) have their careers erased from the books of history because steroids are illegal? Should teams who find steriod-using players be prohibited from playing the rest of a season? One person is just a small portion of the team right? Well, one month out of 12 is a pretty small portion of the year. And, a 10 pixel stroke is a pretty small portion of a photograph. |
|
Dave Amorde, Photographer
 |
Lake Forest | CA | USA | Posted: 2:38 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Does a photo originally shot in December of 2004, but "bordered and published" in Jan 2005, become eligible for the February contest?
Is it a photo, or a "photo illustration"?
Does heavy burning or dodging around the entire image constitute "creating a border?"
Is this a Taco Bell commercial, or a discussion of post 9/11 isolationism?
These are nagging social questions that define our times. I know I'm on pins and needles.
Wow - my $50 a year is allowing me a hand in shaping the social mores of our time. Before you know it, we'll be arguing about "what the meaning of 'is' is."
I guess "better luck next month" isn't good enough?
Peace and Pixels |
|
Brian Davies, Photographer
 |
Eugene | OR | USA | Posted: 2:52 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> This is a pointless rule, enforced in a unfair way, over a non-issue.
When has an excessive border ever elevated a mediocre photo in this contest?
I have always and will continue to put borders on every photo I post on SportsShooter. If the administration wants to delete them in the contest, have at it.
Yes, I can be stubborn.
But it is my work.
Brian |
|
Dave Rossman, Photographer
 |
Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 3:25 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> I'm starting a new group call Photographers Without Borders. Feel free to join. We will travel the world helping those photographers who just can't let go of that silly little line around their pictures. |
|
Robert Caplin, Student/Intern, Photographer
 |
Athens | OH | USA | Posted: 3:50 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> -Do borders make my photos better images? No.
-Do borders make my photos look more official? I think.
-Have borders biased my voting in past contests? No.
-Have they biased other's voting? Maybe.
-Did I spend 2 hours editing my folio and 'weeks work' for the student section? Yes.
-Did my images get removed from this month's contest? Yes.
After seeing all the people's names in this thread whose images who were deleted, I'd say there were probably a few winner's among them.
BUT, the rules are the RULES! C'est la vie.
Monthly Clip-
"9. Don't surround your images with any kind of border. No decorative frames, artsy cool borders, or anything else other than just a photograph."
Student Portfolio-
"8. Do not put a border, or a frame, or any kind of 'decorative enhancement' on your "Week's Work" images. This includes any type of copyright or photo credit statement embedded within the image. Images alone, without special effects or borders of any kind are acceptable. If your image contains a border or any kind of special effect, it will disqualify your entry from that month's competition."
They've been there all this time, but overlooked for some time now. The fact is, I didn't follow the blatantly clear rules for this contest, and was disqualified.
Am I bummed? Yep....but after 2 minutes I got over it. It's only one month...Next month I will try even harder to make some great images to submit, border-free, to the contest.
Thanks Nikon, Cannon, and SS staff for making these contest available to us all! Kudos!
Respectfully,
Robert |
|
Thomas E. Witte, Photographer
 |
Cincinnati | OH | USA | Posted: 3:51 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> A rule is a rule is a rule. Doesn't matter if it's old or new, it's currently in effect and should be honored as such.
If you don't like it, stay out of the sandbox. |
|
Allen Murabayashi, Photographer
 |
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 3:54 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> dave rossman you a funny man. |
|
David Higginbotham, Photographer
|
Decatur | AL | USA | Posted: 4:21 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Thomas is 100% dead on!
Grover made a simple statement RE-informing everyone of a clearly stated rule. He didn't CREATE a rule and then delete photos after the fact. It's easy to write a post that is critical of "the boss" but it is even easier to shrug it off and try again next month. |
|
Robert McClory, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | USA | Posted: 4:35 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Yes, and as one of those deleted, I am affected, but not so much as Chip who has a legit chance to win the yearly contest. However, his chances are greatly reduced now because he loses a month of eligibility.
Rules are rules but I think it is the sudden enforcment of a rule, after the date where the offending images could have been re-submitted by the photographer, is what concerns many of us.
Me, I wish it had not happened, and I surely wish I had read the rules more carefully but alas, I did not.
RM |
|
Michael Troutman, Photographer
 |
Carmel | CA | USA | Posted: 4:46 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Photographers Without Borders. Now THAT'S funny!
I am astonished that some members here are arguing with the site administrator over "blatantly clear rules" (as Robert put it). Amazing. |
|
Louis Lopez, Photographer
 |
Fontana | CA | USA | Posted: 7:24 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> Have you read some of the other posts and topics in other threads recently?? not a surprise. |
|
Robert McClory, Photographer
|
Orlando | FL | USA | Posted: 7:39 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> I would feel remiss if I didn't state my position more clearly lest I get lumped in with those arguing over following rules. I fully agree with Grover/the site's decision to pull offending images. If it's against the rules, then it is on us to know that and enter accordingly. The timing sucks, but I guess we should feel lucky that we got away with it the months we did.
I think arguing with the powers that be is foolish, especially powers that are as benevolent as those running this site.
RM |
|
John Green, Photographer
|
Northern | CA | USA | Posted: 7:51 PM on 02.17.05 |
->> Borders or no borders , who gives a crap, it is kinda petty isn't it? Are the judges picking the photos because of the borders? I think not.
But i guess rules are rules!! |
|
Dan Powers, Photographer
 |
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 8:12 PM on 02.17.05 |
| ->> I'm gonna cross the border Sunday! I'm going to bring my passport because it is one of the rules. I bet if I didn't they would delete...er...um...detain me! Guys...you took the time to size your images correctly, caption them correctly and submit them on time. So...don't put borders on them...just another one of the rules. Would a warning about strict enforcement been nice? Sure...but they are not obligated to do that. Read the rules, follow the rules or don't enter...you have a choice. Live and learn...and by the way...it's just a contest...chill...Dan. |
|
Matthew Apgar, Photographer
|
Bridgewater | NJ | USA | Posted: 2:53 AM on 02.18.05 |
->> I know this is SportsShooter.com's clip contest, and you all have the final say in what is eligible for entry, but I feel I have to state my opinion...
If what you say Grover, "it's about the picture/moment not the border" is true, than you should know that a moment is just a fraction of a second captured in time. That moment cannot be repeated; it is there for the photographer to see and record for the rest of the community to view and *hopefully* cherish.
that said, is it really right to eliminate these once-a-lifetime moments from contests just because the photographer chose to frame it with a border? Granted, some borders are over the top, with drop shadows or other unrealistic gimmicks which the photographer might hope would improve an otherwise unworthy clip. Just because a photo has a border, does that detract from the picture/moment? Sure it *can*, but in my opinion, only if it does, should it not win. And that's the beauty of the SS.com clip contest. It's judged by its members, who ultimately have the final say in who wins. I'd say, by the comments above, that the judges who voiced their say do not judge a photo by it's border, but the "picture/moment".
Reiterated: the photographs entered are once in a lifetime moments for our subjects. Is something so minute as a border substantial enough to disqualify it from being an award winning photograph? I would hope not. Although this is your contest, and I have absolutely no weight in the matter, other than being a member who frequently enters and judges the contests. Just my humble opinion. Borders don't rule, nor do they suck, they just *are*. |
|
Chip Litherland, Photographer
|
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 12:54 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> SS,
I hate to think that I'm looked down upon for questioning the decision of the SS administrators, BUT I - like all of you - pay my annual fee with real money from my real bank account. This gives me the right to voice my opinions on how this site is run. If this was a free site, then by all means, I would accept it and not post pics anymore here. When I feel like a large group of the members here have been treated unfairly, I feel it is my right to say something professionally as oppossed to the schoolyard comments coming across some of these threads lately.
That said, I realize that its a photo contest and not worth losing any sleep over (trust me I didn't). I feel like I, and the many others who have emailed or called me personally, deserve a public explanantion of why there was no warning to this new enforcement. The no border policy I will deal with, but the timing is what I'm concerned about.
For example, look at the Southern Short Course in Photography website: http://www.southernshortcourse.com. On their website, they made a change to their contest this year allowing single entries to be entered from story categories. I thought this was an already accepted practice like POYi, BOP, Atlanta PJ, etc., but it wasn't. I would never have guessed that since I've never entered the SSC contest until this year, but the administrators put up a note on the contest section of the site just in case, letting photographers know before they prepared their entries and paid their fees. That's what was missing in this situation. We paid our money, but have lost our opportunity to enter.
All of this is about the work and making sure that everyone's is treated with same amount of respect.
Chip |
|
Bob Ford, Photographer
 |
Lehighton | Pa | USA | Posted: 1:20 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> I don't enter the contest here very often, but I too would like to mention that I think this was not handled the best possible way.
It seems to me that the best way to see what the judges like is to look at previous winners. If you look at the entries by the top ten finishers last year you will see that the photographers that placed 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 10th, consistently used borders on their winning entries.
I have to echo other's opinions that this could have, and should have, been mentioned before the 15th of the month when entries closed. Or if it was that much of a problem this month it could have been mentioned before the entries were due next month. |
|
Jack Gruber, Photographer
 |
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 2:56 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> If you argue that borders placed on photos for the contest do not influence judging, you would have to argue that it does stop the viewer in his tracks when a photo with borders appears in the queue of images without a border. It is something out of the ordinary and not normal in the rest of the entries. So the viewer/judge may stop and look at the image out of curiosity more so than content. Will the border influence his vote, probably not but the border may have pulled someone in who would have passed on the image.
Is this an unfair advantage for some while others who don't use borders and play by the rules are put at a disadvantage in this contest?
This contest is all about a level playing field allowing people to judge the images without any bias. No names in captions and no generated borders around photographs. What should separate images from others in the contest judging is content. Nothing else.
I understand some of the frustration but this has been mentioned before---in the rules. The rule has been there since day one and it is not buried in fine print. I have seen the rule and obviously the majority of others have too.
I am a big fan of the thin black borders around pictures in a members gallery or on the web. But I also realize the reason why it is called out specifically in the rules for this contest and others. Not everyone does it and no one should have an unfair advantage in any way.
For some reason, at least two of the photo contests this year announced right at deadline time that since a "large" number of people requested deadline extensions for entering, the contest deadline would be extended a week or more. Not weeks but just days before deadline. I understand how busy people can be but for the majority of others who adjusted schedules, travel or whatever and still managed to make the contest entry deadline by shipping off their entries on time, the extension seems unfair to the majority who shipped before the contest deadline.
Maybe not everyone received the notice or checked their email concerning the benefit of the extra time. Would I have liked the luxury of another week to fine tune entries? Sure. But I played inside the rules listed by the contest. I shipped meeting the contest deadline hoping for the best along with everyone else who either spent months or moments preparing their entries. Are those who now spend an extra week working on contest entries offered an unfair advantage? In all fairness, yes, I could have resubmitted my entries to these contests if I felt the need but I just feel contests should stick to what is listed in the rules for that particular year. If I submitted an image in a hurry and forgot to resize to rules specifications or included my name in the caption or a black border around the photo and the contest committee deleted my entry, that is the contest’s right. It was in the rules. Because I ran out of time or didn’t read the rules is no excuse. It is not my contest and I should not be offered any special consideration because I was one of the few who did not follow the guidelines of the contest.
Yes, the SSC has a rule change for this years contest. It is a change in the rules. They are informing you of it. Nothing has changed in the Sports Shooter contest except the playing field is now the same for everyone entering this contest.
And for everyone who marks any opposing viewpoint to their own in this message board as “inappropriate” , you should make sure you read the rules.
Jack |
|
Erik Schelkun, Photographer
|
Troy | Ohio | USA | Posted: 4:21 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> I just want to clarify that I have no problem with leaving the borders off. I understand the reasoning and agree with creating a level playing field for the images. I am just bummed that we were told after the deadline that this was a problem and that it was actually going to be a zero-tolerance enforcement starting THIS month. I just think a little warning was in order since this has obviously never been enforced in the past. Either way, lesson learned, and I will certainly be borderless next time I have images that I feel can compete!
respectfully
erik |
|
Chip Litherland, Photographer
|
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 4:37 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> You are missing the point. I could really care less that borders aren't allowed in entering the contest, as I don't rely on them to make my photo better. I find it sad that some think that images with borders on them have an advantage over those that don't. I like to think I could frame my photo with maccaroni and it would still have the same content that it did without. That being said, I will gladly adhere to the new rules once all is said and done.
My point is that I really don't understand why the Sportsshooter administration decided after nearly two years of allowing borders to filter into the contest, awarding them prizes, and bestowing titles like Photographer of Year to the makers of said images with borders, that they are going to enforce this rule on the day AFTER the contest deadline when noone can do a single thing about it. The message board has been reduced to our only option to have a voice, since noone seems to be enlightening us as to why there was no warning. Its just a really sour way to start a new year with this community, and a bit frustrating that nothing is being done.
This "No Borders, please" thread could have a been a perfect thing even a single day before the contest deadline.
Chip |
|
Pablo Galvez, Photographer
|
Calgary | AB | CANADA | Posted: 5:07 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> Darn... now I wish I'd entered some photos in the January contest. My odds would have been a lot better now that all the border photos are out!
-Pablo (recent border user) |
|
Nick Doan, Photographer, Assistant
|
Scottsdale | AZ | USA | Posted: 5:09 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> I don't really want to get into the border/no-border debate. I don't make the rules, and I will respect them.
However, everybody here is a working photographer, or aspiring photographer in some capacity. We all know how busy it can be. We, also, all know that there are millions of little details of this board whether we use all the features or not. This is just one aspect that wasn't address until now.
In my opinion, the fact that it is being addressed now should not be in contention. It just happened to be at a time that was inoppurtune for some people. For all of those who had the entries deleted, I am sure it is disappointing. But, for all of the other details the Sportsshooter administration has to deal with, I still believe that they do what they can as quickly and timely as they can.
Heck, I started working on producing my won website back in July. I don't think it's any farther along than it was in August. I can't even imagine how long it takes to make SS.com run well. |
|
Eric Jones, Photographer
 |
Ayden | NC | USA | Posted: 5:50 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> I've looked at the contest rules...since I've never submitted a pic. I have a question though if anyone can answer it...This was #3 on the rules of the contest.
3. All images you enter MUST have been shot or initially published within the specified month of the specified year.
Question..."initially published within the specified month. What does that actually mean? Published where?
Sorry if that sounds like a dumb question but not sure if I was understanding it correctly.
Thanks |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
 |
Bloomington | IL | United States | Posted: 6:05 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> Eric, when you submit a photo there is a box you have to check that state that the photo you are submitting was TAKEN the prior month (the month the contest is covering). I don't believe the check box says anything about the published date.
Hope that helps. |
|
Brad Wilder, Photographer, Student/Intern
|
Lexington | Ky | USA | Posted: 6:12 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> Eric,
I believe the purpose of that rule is to allow photographers to enter photos that couldn't be entered in earlier months because they had to wait for them to be published by their client. Depending on the situation, some staffers and freelancers have a contractual obligation not to publish the photos before the client does, whether in a contest or otherwise. |
|
chris curry, Photographer
|
Peoria | IL | usa | Posted: 6:33 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> Jack,
No disrespect, but, there is a rule in the Atlanta Photojournalism Seminar that limits captions to 25 words. However I believe one of your pictures contained more what looked like 100 words. Maybe more.
Now I would have rather seen your picture, quite powerful as I remember, (2nd Place, War on Terror in 2003) than have it be disqualified. Afterall, it's a contest designed to produce the best pictures for the public to see.
I would have liked a warning. Why couldn't Grover come out a few days before contest deadline with this post? Sure, it's in the rules but most previous winners put borders on their entries.
It just seems a little strange that the sportsshooter staff is willing to possibly reshape the results of a contest on a rule that has, never in its history, been enforced or brought up.
chris curry |
|
Jack Gruber, Photographer
|
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 6:36 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> Chip,
What would you like done?
When your are stopped the interstate going 80mph in a 55mph zone and ticketed are you going to fight the ticket? Is your excuse that everyone has been driving 80mph for two years and no one has stopped you before. Now that you have been stopped and ticketed, hey, I understand now that this "fuzzy" rule is real and will now abide by it. Maybe a little warning would have helped but how about if I just go back and come back the same way but driving 55mph?
jack |
|
Armando Solares, Photographer
 |
Venice | FL | USA | Posted: 6:37 PM on 02.18.05 |
->> SS,
I also received the e-mail stating my photographs were deleted because of a simple and very small black border. I have no issue with the rules at all. But perhaps and I don't know if this is possible, we can re-enter those images deleted this month in the next month's contest. Maybe there is another solution, other than just deletion.
It seems like a lot of the photographers on the site did not know or were not aware of the penalties for creating borders.
The rule is clear now, but maybe something can be done. Perhaps not enforcing this rule until the next month.
Thanks,
Armando Solares |
|
Jason Grow, Photographer
|
Gloucester | MA | USA | Posted: 6:51 PM on 02.18.05 |
| ->> There's a contest???? |
|
This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]
|| Sponsor Special Deals
Nikon D3 (refurbished demo!)
|
Available from:
Samy's Camera
|
Price: $3799.00 |
Notes:
We have 15 refurbished demo Nikon D3 cameras available. First come, first served! Comes with a 3 month manufacturer warranty, and extended warranties are available. Send an email to samys@sportsshooter.com, or call 866-726-9463 and identify yourself as a person from SportsShooter.
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|