That's because you're a noob. Check your signature.

Your use of upper case along with your leads me to believe you're a passive/aggressive person with the second coolest avy evah.

You think too much, Eve.
And if my avy is the 2nd coolest ever, which one would be 1st? (I know it's mine, but let's pretend it's not)
((And BTW, I created that avy myself. It's not from the Internet. Just saying.))
(((Sorry Reinier... We're wayyyyy off topic now. My bad.)))

Nobody is preventing you from judging an image "on its own merit", whether all source or with externals. Why limit creative expression?

I don't understand this "all or none" business. Can someone explain the rational basis for such a requirement? If I use elements from copyrighted images, I generally make them unrecognizable. In chops using significant recognizable elements that some might think I created, I often cite the source if it is not in the public domain. Usually these are Flickr images that are licensed for derivative use, but require attribution. To tell me that I must cite all externals if I cite any puts me in a difficult position. I want to credit the photographer whose work I am adapting under the terms of their license. If I do that, must I also cite the source for inconsequential elements? It sounds like that is what is now required. If I continue in my established practice I'll be banned. Am I getting this right?

So in this entry: http://photoshopcontest.com/view-entry/159691/diorama.html I should have cited the public domain painting of the Kearsarge and Alabama and the unrecognizable toy soldiers in the background? Shit. I don't remember where I get some of the material I use. And if I did, where would I list it? There isn't sufficient space in the author's notes textbox. I presume that will be expanded, or some other mechanism for listing sources will be made available.

After reading this thread I am not at all sure what you're trying to achieve here--or more precisely how "all or none" makes any sense.


.

To be clear, my statement wasn't about whether an image labeled as "all source" has more merit than an image labeled with something like "externals used...". It was about the fact that either one is irrelevant to me as to whether or not I would vote for it. I just used the "all source" in my original statement to represent the labeling idea as a whole.

But you are absolutely right, nobody is preventing me from doing that. Just as I wouldn't try to prevent somebody from providing that information as part of their creative expression. I'm just saying that, for me, that information is irrelevant.

Reinman's quote doesn't say anything about "all or none". However, I agree that listing all of your externals would be a pain in the ass, and I certainly wouldn't expect anybody to do so (see below).

The way that I interpret all of this is as follows:

If you are going to say "all source" then it better be ALL SOURCE. If you say "all source except for X, Y and Z" then those 3 things better be the ONLY externals that you used. And if you DID use other minor (or now unrecognizable) externals then you could say "all source except X, Y, Z and a few minor bits and bobs". But at that point it would be ridiculous to even include "all source" in there.

Even if you don't say anything about "all source", you can still give credit where you feel like doing so. Crediting one external wouldn't obligate you to credit any others, contrary to an "all or none" stance.

You could also just not write anything in the author's notes and respond to inquiries about this issue as they arise.

i think i will stick to my stories..

Hello! I usually create my entries with in the source. In my recent entries and some of my old entries, I did use externals. I am very sorry to tell you that I forgot the name of the site where i got my external images, usually from google search engine. I usually copy it directly and paste it in Photoshop with out giving credit. The reason for this is, I usually join the contest late night, here in our place it is 9:00 PM, Philippines. From school I have to wait for 3 hours to let the contest open. And I usually chop for 3-4 hours. Not in my personal computer but in internet cafe. I have to hurry to minimize my payment.
So I feel guilty in here....sorry guys!

So, getting images in the net is not advisable? What should I do?

Thank you for the information!

oh dear

group hug?

Dear MODs,

Yesterday, after reading this forum, I went back online and tracked the link to the image I used as extra in one of my contest entries. I entered the link, and it was underneath my contest entry. And now, a day later, the contest entry shows up WITHOUT the link I put in the comment box.

Have you updated the site to a previous state?

--TutorMe

--Reinman

Doesn't this mean "all or none"?

The use of the term "all or none" was simply my own interpretation, which is certainly open to correction.
--
And yes, Beef, there have now been many "outings" for significant use of uncredited sources, particularly when there are either NO author's notes or an inaccurate "all source" notation. It has made me very sad to see, especially with how carefree and enjoyable PSC used to be. It is one of the many changes to PSC that I have been grappling to adjust to. But this seems to be how PSC IS now, no matter how fondly we remember how it WAS. I still hope the new guidelines, once more clearly understood by the masses, will help eliminate this kind of source-witch-hunt.

It is well known through Life that not all desires are necessary. But here, too, perhaps, not all necessities are necessarily desired.

Hey, Taw...

Sorry for the confusion... you can see why it took us MODs a few days to even get THIS far with presenting these GUIDELINES.

Some of the words we used were "impeccable" and "thorough". You may see them as ALL or NOTHING words, I see them as a call to be clear and honorable. It is true, most of the planet KNOWS the Mono Lisa, and if you didn't list it I don't think anyone is gonna slap you on the back and say "Shit, that's a great painting you did, Tawiskaro!". Something like that is pretty safe - though the Louvre Cops may come after you!

That is why this GUIDELINE was, and is, so hard to delineate. There is no SCIENCE to it. Again, mostly what we are talking about here is a MORAL call. That involves the HEART. Most people know when they are trying to put something past others. We MODs are calling you all to be more AWARE of that voice that says "hmmm... I wonder if they'll notice that I didn't do that...".

If this were strictly a legal issue it WOULD be black and white. We would not call them GUIDELINES. We would call them RULES. And we'd ban the first F*cker that broke that rule. We wouldn't be talking to you. We'd be telling you. This thread would be LOCKED from the start. This would not be an open thread where you could ENJOY my fantastic typography and have the ability to add your own WITTY and INSIGHTFUL comments.

(AND PLEASE REMEMBER: (sorry for the CAPS in there, folks - there will be MORE!) THESE ARE NOT MY GUIDELINES. THEY WERE COMPOSED BY ALL ACTIVE MODERATORS AND THE SITE OWNER! Please, I know the ones of you who are not happy that this needs to be dealt with may wish to shoot the messenger, but PLEASE don't shoot the messenger )