Caedes
Upload Images
Welcome guest
Log In or Register
User Stats
- 0 total users online
- 52 users active today
- 259179 total members
- +show users online
Member-Initiated Projects
Discussion Board -> Member-Initiated Projects -> False allegations
False allegations
::biffobear
01/11/11 9:12 PM GMT
I recently posted an IR shot on Caedes..I then got a PM off Caedes himself stating a Mod had been in touch about certain aspects of the picture and because I hadn't replied,I was now banned from uploading for two weeks..No Mod has contacted me about the said upload "IR Pano",So really speaking this is a false allegation..The picture in question had clouds added to the sky using a PS Cloud brush..This brush is a freely available PS plugin and can be aquired from a site called Brusheezy..The plugin can be used freely unless it is used for commercial value and if the downloaded file contains a readme asking to credit the author then you must do so..If the zip file contains no readme it is freely available to use as is..With No credits as the file itself did not contain the authors name and credits are not required as clearly stated on the site..I mean in all honesty this is a legitimate PS Plugin and if it's use is not permitted,What's the point of uploading it.But to get back to my main point,Why has it been alleged that a Mod has contacted me,When clearly they have not.A simple question of which i would like an answer...I half expect this post to be deleted.I hope not as we do live in a democratic society ..Don't we...Richie.
1∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
Comments
Post a Comment - Subscribe to this discussion
R. I'm speechless on this one Richie, I'm suprised and hope that things will get straightened out. I hope we still live in a democratic society, though sometimes I wonder about that.
Tigs♥ =^..^=
Tigs♥ =^..^=
1∈
[?]
Nature in all her glory is my uplift on life and so is my love of photography. sandi ♪ ♫
I see lots of uploads where Brushes have been used...I dunno...Whatever...
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
I believe the image Geri was referring to was one that I contacted you about where you had taken another members image from the site and used it in one of your own works without giving any credit (and presumably without permission). I certainly received no reply or explanation about that.
0∈
[?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
He reffered to IR Pano..I do not use other members images..People on this site know that...R.
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
If I may I can honestly say that Richie has done some reworks for me, but has always shared them through email, and left it to me if I wanted to post it. Which I have and I then give him credit for the help. I hope this helps to shed some light on his integrity. Tigs♥ =^..^=
0∈
[?]
Nature in all her glory is my uplift on life and so is my love of photography. sandi ♪ ♫
There must be some major misunderstanding somewhere because I know Richie to be honest and straight forward. He is a always willing to help and share his editing techniques.
0∈
[?]
Cameras are like people--sometimes they lose focus.
From the code of conduct: "Public domain images (such as from NASA) should state the source of the images in the image description."
At the very least you have not abided by this. Although I suppose this is not so serious an infringement, it may have led to the current situation as it is not possible for us to know that an image you have used is public domain if you don't state the source as required. In this case another member has also used the image (properly stating the source) and you have then used the same image, making it appear that you have actually simply taken that members image and used it in your own work. If you had followed the COC, no problems would have occurred.
You also recently uploaded this image: http://echo.msk.ru/att/element-603730-misc-anufriy_200.jpg
...which is widely available on the internet, again without permission and without providing any mention of the source or even that you did not take the photo...
Then in the most recent image you mention we found several images on the internet which have exactly the same cloud formation in the background as is in your image. Although you have now explained that this was actually a brush (which I presume is public domain), the previous violations of the COC mentioned above meant that it had gone beyond the point where Geri could give you the benefit of the doubt. I suppose technically it is not specifically required by the COC to give details of what brushes are used in an image, in this instance (since the effect is the same as using an actual photo of a cloud) it would have been very helpful if you had at least mentioned that one had been used, or even just that the image was a composite, or even just that it was a manipulation... it would be nice if people could work with us and make our job a little easier as we do have better things to do than trawl the internet trying to establish whether a member has the right to use parts of an image, or whether they made those parts of the image themselves... etc. As you know people get pretty upset around here when their own images get used elsewhere on the internet without permission and it would be highly hypocritical of us if we weren't vigilant about stopping the same thing from happening here.
In the end I guess you could argue that the whole thing comes down to a simple misunderstanding; however the fact is that it wouldn't have become an issue if the previous recent violations of the COC had not occurred and the fact is it is the members responsibility, not ours, to ensure that they abide by the COC and be prepared for consequences if they choose to ignore them or not read them carefully enough.
At the very least you have not abided by this. Although I suppose this is not so serious an infringement, it may have led to the current situation as it is not possible for us to know that an image you have used is public domain if you don't state the source as required. In this case another member has also used the image (properly stating the source) and you have then used the same image, making it appear that you have actually simply taken that members image and used it in your own work. If you had followed the COC, no problems would have occurred.
You also recently uploaded this image: http://echo.msk.ru/att/element-603730-misc-anufriy_200.jpg
...which is widely available on the internet, again without permission and without providing any mention of the source or even that you did not take the photo...
Then in the most recent image you mention we found several images on the internet which have exactly the same cloud formation in the background as is in your image. Although you have now explained that this was actually a brush (which I presume is public domain), the previous violations of the COC mentioned above meant that it had gone beyond the point where Geri could give you the benefit of the doubt. I suppose technically it is not specifically required by the COC to give details of what brushes are used in an image, in this instance (since the effect is the same as using an actual photo of a cloud) it would have been very helpful if you had at least mentioned that one had been used, or even just that the image was a composite, or even just that it was a manipulation... it would be nice if people could work with us and make our job a little easier as we do have better things to do than trawl the internet trying to establish whether a member has the right to use parts of an image, or whether they made those parts of the image themselves... etc. As you know people get pretty upset around here when their own images get used elsewhere on the internet without permission and it would be highly hypocritical of us if we weren't vigilant about stopping the same thing from happening here.
In the end I guess you could argue that the whole thing comes down to a simple misunderstanding; however the fact is that it wouldn't have become an issue if the previous recent violations of the COC had not occurred and the fact is it is the members responsibility, not ours, to ensure that they abide by the COC and be prepared for consequences if they choose to ignore them or not read them carefully enough.
7∈
[?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
Yes OK ..So it's a kind of totting up procedure,For minor misdemeanors and not the fact as first stated my use of brushes that has resulted in my two week ban..I seem to remember a while back an issue arose with a Mod and one of our members over the fact a Macdonald sign was in the background of one of his shots and it was duly deleted..The self same Mod uploading NASA Images without credit.Due credit he did credit NASA when challenged..So we all make mistakes..Well I'll serve my term and say no more.....
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
Side stepping the issues of who did what in the past. 'Cause, quite simply I am unaware of this situation you make reference to in your post directly above, Richie.
Some thoughts.. on the note of 'brushes'..
The phrase 'caveat emptor' applies, I believe, vis-a-vis the Caedes.net Code of Conduct in these instances.
Just because a brush set is found/available somewhere on the internet ... gives no credence as to the creator of said brushes having secured rights to usage of the base images used in the creation of the brushes in the first place.
In fact and furthermore, and to illustrate the point ... in perusing some of the resources on DevianArt, for example ... the creator of the brushes sometimes place restrictions on their usage. And typically at the bare minimum, ask for credit when used in works.
Have to accept that there are those that will download these brushes and then, make them available elsewhere. Posting on blogs and other forums, as examples, and which are notoriously not policed very well.
So..
If 'you' (speaking generally here) can not discern the original source of whatever is being considered (brushes, base images in manipulations, etc.) ... do not use them/it.
And if you do, satisfied that the resource(s)/imagery are in the 'public domain', provide a link in your accompanying narrative(s).
Or..
If in doubt, PM one of us prior to uploading/posting. Maybe then, these kinds of misunderstandings (to an extent) can be avoided.
Some thoughts.. on the note of 'brushes'..
The phrase 'caveat emptor' applies, I believe, vis-a-vis the Caedes.net Code of Conduct in these instances.
Just because a brush set is found/available somewhere on the internet ... gives no credence as to the creator of said brushes having secured rights to usage of the base images used in the creation of the brushes in the first place.
In fact and furthermore, and to illustrate the point ... in perusing some of the resources on DevianArt, for example ... the creator of the brushes sometimes place restrictions on their usage. And typically at the bare minimum, ask for credit when used in works.
Have to accept that there are those that will download these brushes and then, make them available elsewhere. Posting on blogs and other forums, as examples, and which are notoriously not policed very well.
So..
If 'you' (speaking generally here) can not discern the original source of whatever is being considered (brushes, base images in manipulations, etc.) ... do not use them/it.
And if you do, satisfied that the resource(s)/imagery are in the 'public domain', provide a link in your accompanying narrative(s).
Or..
If in doubt, PM one of us prior to uploading/posting. Maybe then, these kinds of misunderstandings (to an extent) can be avoided.
2∈
[?]
I will create my own brushes and they will be available to anyone who want's them..If i were to place restrictions on them,I wouldn't put them on the net for others to download in the first place..Why do they upload them if they apply these restrictions?..Are they trying to show how clever they are."Hey look at me,I can do brushes but you can't use them",Even though they are designed as a plugin..The site i use states if there's a readme file in the zip stating give credit.Fair enough..If there's not,What does one do,Hire Pilkingtons to find the creator..That is a total no brainer...Suffice to say if i do upload again,It will be my own brush set..I would indeed welcome a review on this site of images that have used brushes and have not given credit.I bet there's a few hundred.The issue of the images i used in my manips,I accept but the use of brushes defies logic...R.
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
"If there's not,What does one do,Hire Pilkingtons to find the creator."
No, much simpler answer and as alluded to above ... don't use them. As they could have been created from images that are copyrighted.
Avoid those instances and there is no problem, Richie.
What is the site you are referring to in your post?
No, much simpler answer and as alluded to above ... don't use them. As they could have been created from images that are copyrighted.
Avoid those instances and there is no problem, Richie.
What is the site you are referring to in your post?
0∈
[?]
At the very least people could note in their description that they have used a brush for whichever element? I don't think it should have to be a "rule" but then again I don't see any reason not to do so?
As I already mentioned it would certainly make our job a little easier... also I think it is a bit dodgy when people start to take credit for a "photo" which is actually compiled of other peoples brushes but maybe that's just me.
As I already mentioned it would certainly make our job a little easier... also I think it is a bit dodgy when people start to take credit for a "photo" which is actually compiled of other peoples brushes but maybe that's just me.
7∈
[?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
brushking ..Quote from their website .. Brush King is a collection of high quality Photoshop Brushes. You can download them for free and you can use them for your website design or other graphic creations...Brushes are a handy tool to to enhance an otherwise drab sky,They aren't "photos" only a tool to improve an image..It would be interesting to know how many pics on the site are straight from the camera..
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
Well, I am a little confused. When I asked what site? ... I guess you had logged off for the evening. Saw mention of "Brusheezy" in your opening post. So..
Went over to that site and had a look.
From their "Community" section:
"The more you channel your inner creativity and dig deeper into what drives your ability to produce, the more worth you will bring to the Brusheezy community and more importantly, the greater world of art. Something inherent in those words is the fact that YOU bring what YOU produce - you create things brought from your mind, and you don't try to be someone else. People will respect you more when you don't forge someone else's work and when you tell it true. Misrepresenting where a resource came from, or how it is licensed to be used, or who you are in the first place isn't ever cool anywhere, but especially on Brusheezy. Therefore: tell the truth."
From their "Terms of Use" section:
"For downloaders:
Abide by each Creative Commons License for the files you download - they are often not the same, so read each license carefully and/or follow the terms as stated in the README file attached to the downloaded brushes. Don't be a jerk and make some poor artist try to track you down and sue you for your Vespa. Brusheezy will not be held responsible for the uses of any brushes, brush sets, or patterns. Brusheezy does not and cannot monitor the use of brushes before or after they are published on the site."
"For Everyone:
Here's the deal. When it comes to brushes and resources, our role as rule makers or rule enforcers is limited. If you upload/ download/ comment, know you take full responsibility for your actions. We are a site that provides a place for artists to create and exchange cool stuff."
In short, they only provide an FTP service, and there is no legal obligation on their part for policing anything that is uploaded or subsequently downloaded.
That is, unless, the owner of a copyrighted image that has been used in a brush or brush set ... contacts them and sends them a DMCA notice/claim. At which point, they are legally obligated to contact the uploader of the item in question and notify that person that it is in dispute, and remove access to said item for a period of time.
Until such time, that ownership can be discerned.
Simply put.
Final decisions may be rendered by courts in these matters. If both parties; meaning the person that uploaded the item and then, that of the person that filed the DMCA notice/claim ... cannot resolve the issue of copyright/ownership between themselves.
"Brushking".
On the home page is a brush set, titled; "Cloudbrushes v.10", for example.
This brush set can be traced to a user on DeviantArt. Namely that of; "SaviourMachine".
And in the accompanying narrative on the download page for that brush set on DeviantArt, this;
"Source images are from SXC.HU."
They are not SaviourMachine's original images. He downloaded them from SXC.HU and modified/transformed them into a plug-in. ("It would be interesting to know how many pics on the site are straight from the camera..")
It may be that their use is 'unrestricted' on SXC.HU ... then, again ... there are no links to the separate or base images from SXC.HU ... used in this brush set. Just this broad credit given to the site SXC.HU. No individual authors/photographers.
Apart from the modifying and then redistribution considerations.
Which ... in my mind would have raised a flag or two.
No way of knowing for sure, in short. Unless you trace down the original base images found on SXC.HU and check the licensing and restrictions. Or, perhaps, contact SaviourMachine and ask some questions.
Comparing the two sites; that of brusheezy.com and brushking.eu ... they are one in the same in some regards. As mentioned above, both are simply that of FTP sites.
People can upload/download near anything they want. (No policing, really.)
Which, is a major point of contention on the copyright fronts. The argument being that the current legislation creates these 'safe harbours' (FTP sites) for what may constitute aiding and abetting copyright infringement of works. The owners are only obligated to act, if contacted and/or served a DMCA notice/claim.
So..
'Caveat emptor' really is the operative phrase here.
And reiterating, if unsure ... don't use the resources. Would be my counsel.
(Side-note: I do tend to err on the side of caution. Which, is not a bad thing, I believe.)
Better solution?
Use your own camera(s) and know how ... and take the images you want. Create your own portfolio of stock images/brushes. That way, there are no questions about 'rights to usage'.
Went over to that site and had a look.
From their "Community" section:
"The more you channel your inner creativity and dig deeper into what drives your ability to produce, the more worth you will bring to the Brusheezy community and more importantly, the greater world of art. Something inherent in those words is the fact that YOU bring what YOU produce - you create things brought from your mind, and you don't try to be someone else. People will respect you more when you don't forge someone else's work and when you tell it true. Misrepresenting where a resource came from, or how it is licensed to be used, or who you are in the first place isn't ever cool anywhere, but especially on Brusheezy. Therefore: tell the truth."
From their "Terms of Use" section:
"For downloaders:
Abide by each Creative Commons License for the files you download - they are often not the same, so read each license carefully and/or follow the terms as stated in the README file attached to the downloaded brushes. Don't be a jerk and make some poor artist try to track you down and sue you for your Vespa. Brusheezy will not be held responsible for the uses of any brushes, brush sets, or patterns. Brusheezy does not and cannot monitor the use of brushes before or after they are published on the site."
"For Everyone:
Here's the deal. When it comes to brushes and resources, our role as rule makers or rule enforcers is limited. If you upload/ download/ comment, know you take full responsibility for your actions. We are a site that provides a place for artists to create and exchange cool stuff."
In short, they only provide an FTP service, and there is no legal obligation on their part for policing anything that is uploaded or subsequently downloaded.
That is, unless, the owner of a copyrighted image that has been used in a brush or brush set ... contacts them and sends them a DMCA notice/claim. At which point, they are legally obligated to contact the uploader of the item in question and notify that person that it is in dispute, and remove access to said item for a period of time.
Until such time, that ownership can be discerned.
Simply put.
Final decisions may be rendered by courts in these matters. If both parties; meaning the person that uploaded the item and then, that of the person that filed the DMCA notice/claim ... cannot resolve the issue of copyright/ownership between themselves.
"Brushking".
On the home page is a brush set, titled; "Cloudbrushes v.10", for example.
This brush set can be traced to a user on DeviantArt. Namely that of; "SaviourMachine".
And in the accompanying narrative on the download page for that brush set on DeviantArt, this;
"Source images are from SXC.HU."
They are not SaviourMachine's original images. He downloaded them from SXC.HU and modified/transformed them into a plug-in. ("It would be interesting to know how many pics on the site are straight from the camera..")
It may be that their use is 'unrestricted' on SXC.HU ... then, again ... there are no links to the separate or base images from SXC.HU ... used in this brush set. Just this broad credit given to the site SXC.HU. No individual authors/photographers.
Apart from the modifying and then redistribution considerations.
Which ... in my mind would have raised a flag or two.
No way of knowing for sure, in short. Unless you trace down the original base images found on SXC.HU and check the licensing and restrictions. Or, perhaps, contact SaviourMachine and ask some questions.
Comparing the two sites; that of brusheezy.com and brushking.eu ... they are one in the same in some regards. As mentioned above, both are simply that of FTP sites.
People can upload/download near anything they want. (No policing, really.)
Which, is a major point of contention on the copyright fronts. The argument being that the current legislation creates these 'safe harbours' (FTP sites) for what may constitute aiding and abetting copyright infringement of works. The owners are only obligated to act, if contacted and/or served a DMCA notice/claim.
So..
'Caveat emptor' really is the operative phrase here.
And reiterating, if unsure ... don't use the resources. Would be my counsel.
(Side-note: I do tend to err on the side of caution. Which, is not a bad thing, I believe.)
Better solution?
Use your own camera(s) and know how ... and take the images you want. Create your own portfolio of stock images/brushes. That way, there are no questions about 'rights to usage'.
5∈
[?]
Use your own camera(s) and know how ... and take the images you want. Create your own portfolio of stock images/brushes. That way, there are no questions about 'rights to usage'
I think I covered that in an earlier post..So that's the way to go..Still seems silly to allow people to post These brushes if they can't really be used to any great extent,Without an FBI case being made..Never mind..I'll do my own in future..
I think I covered that in an earlier post..So that's the way to go..Still seems silly to allow people to post These brushes if they can't really be used to any great extent,Without an FBI case being made..Never mind..I'll do my own in future..
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
I would say the same about the many 'plug-ins' that are available 'Free' to Photoshop etc!....
I know for a fact that a great many of members use these including Mods!...do we have declare every one we use!...
If that was the case...there would be lot of images on here that that would be in breach of the COC!...
I add that I am in the process of designing a plug-in!..which will be freely available to anyone without the need to credit me!...
I know for a fact that a great many of members use these including Mods!...do we have declare every one we use!...
If that was the case...there would be lot of images on here that that would be in breach of the COC!...
I add that I am in the process of designing a plug-in!..which will be freely available to anyone without the need to credit me!...
5∈
[?]
* A picture is the expression of an impression * .. .. OwdBob'sGallery
“He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know.” - Abraham Lincoln
1∈
[?]
Cameras are like people--sometimes they lose focus.
IMHO there are a lot of images on the site that are manipulated far too much... skies replaced, landscapes replaced, buildings added etc... sometimes you have to wonder how much of the original photo is left! Not to mentioned that after seeing a few of these the signs that they have been edited (imperfect joins, different lighting etc) becomes obvious. Again, just my opinion, but I think this sort of thing often ruins the image.
Bob: Whilst it may seem tedious to check the source of everything we use in our images, it really is our responsibility to ensure we retain the integrity of the site. It may seem like a small thing but once you start down that path it's a slippery slope. I feel the same way about CGI works where the person has just downloaded a 3d model from the internet, rendered it and then pretty much claims it as their own (ie gives no mention to the fact that they did not make it). That is the sort of thing I think we need to work hard to avoid.
If you don't know the source of an image or "brush", then it's quite possible (as shown by Les's post above) that you are using something you shouldn't be.
As I have also mentioned several times, at the very least you should be letting people know that you are using a brush, or something you sourced from the internet. I don't see that asking that much is a big deal?
Bob: Whilst it may seem tedious to check the source of everything we use in our images, it really is our responsibility to ensure we retain the integrity of the site. It may seem like a small thing but once you start down that path it's a slippery slope. I feel the same way about CGI works where the person has just downloaded a 3d model from the internet, rendered it and then pretty much claims it as their own (ie gives no mention to the fact that they did not make it). That is the sort of thing I think we need to work hard to avoid.
If you don't know the source of an image or "brush", then it's quite possible (as shown by Les's post above) that you are using something you shouldn't be.
As I have also mentioned several times, at the very least you should be letting people know that you are using a brush, or something you sourced from the internet. I don't see that asking that much is a big deal?
7∈
[?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion-
There are two aspects to this issue:
1. If the images you upload here contain or incorporate any images that were not your own, (this doesn't include plugin and filters), then you must cite the source of those constituent images so that someone can verify that permission was given for their use.
2. You must have redistribution rights or permission for any of the materials that you incorporate into images that you upload here.
Every image must abide by both these rules, it doesn't matter is #2 is satisfied if #1 is not.
As Sam mentioned, we have these rules because it would be very hypocritical of us to allow improper use of images here while simultaneously complaining about other people using our images without permission.
1. If the images you upload here contain or incorporate any images that were not your own, (this doesn't include plugin and filters), then you must cite the source of those constituent images so that someone can verify that permission was given for their use.
2. You must have redistribution rights or permission for any of the materials that you incorporate into images that you upload here.
Every image must abide by both these rules, it doesn't matter is #2 is satisfied if #1 is not.
As Sam mentioned, we have these rules because it would be very hypocritical of us to allow improper use of images here while simultaneously complaining about other people using our images without permission.
4∈
[?]
-caedes
I agree as far as images go and ok I'm guilty of using an image that i shouldn't have.Namely the old truck that i stuck Owd Bob on..The image was an old one and on many sites..I thought it was public domain when it wasn't..I notice you say "this doesn't include plugin and filters",..Does this include the brushes that are freely available for download?...Or are these a seperate issue?...Richie.
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
"Brushes" in this context are insert other image content into your image, so they would not be the same as a a simple caligraphic brush shape. It is inserting another image into yours, so it should be cited in a similar fashion as if you copy+pasted the image in.
0∈
[?]
-caedes
OK Boss...Let me know when I'm out of solitary..And don't throw the keys away :)
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
Any time off for good behaviour?..
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
(*sounds of keys falling through a grate are heard.. followed by a distinctive *splash*)
Oh oh..
Bob? You're used to getting wet, hop down there and give your mate a lil' assist?
No worries though, Richie ... the gruel around these parts is quite good.
(*brushes away the dirt from the edges of the bowl*)
Here you go..
:oP
Oh oh..
Bob? You're used to getting wet, hop down there and give your mate a lil' assist?
No worries though, Richie ... the gruel around these parts is quite good.
(*brushes away the dirt from the edges of the bowl*)
Here you go..
:oP
0∈
[?]
If anyone needs me, I shall be standing in the corner..
... ...
Which, I must say ... is a tad better punishment over that of having to shovel the snow from *caedes' driveway. You'd think what with alllll of the money that pours into this place ... he'd have installed some underground heating pipes to do away with that chore.
I mean, really..
... ...
(*narrowly avoids bolt of lightning from the heavens*)
... ...
Which, I must say ... is a tad better punishment over that of having to shovel the snow from *caedes' driveway. You'd think what with alllll of the money that pours into this place ... he'd have installed some underground heating pipes to do away with that chore.
I mean, really..
... ...
(*narrowly avoids bolt of lightning from the heavens*)
0∈
[?]
~Sneaks a pork pie and a pint in!~
0∈
[?]
* A picture is the expression of an impression * .. .. OwdBob'sGallery
Water.....Water.. :p
0∈
[?]
A pretty face is fine but what a farmer needs is a woman that can carry a pig under each arm
Hey dad, look at that funny man behind those bars. What did he do?
1∈
[?]
Cameras are like people--sometimes they lose focus.
This brings me to a contest suggestion. The way it was. No cropping, no color enhancement, no editing...nothing except the resizing as required to upload.
1∈
[?]