| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/25/2008 09:27:48 AM · #1 |
People should be able to vote how they want whether that is low or high. I mean what is the alternative? Just give everyone a 10 so they are happy? Thats no answer. I do think however that anyone that scores say a 1-3 or a 9-10 should HAVE to post a comment. Atleast then the person knows why the person hated there foto or loved it.
Just my two cents.
Ben |
|
|
|
10/29/2007 06:21:59 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
IMO....it is the 3, 4, 5 shots that need the comments in order to understand WHY those shots are rather "unspectacular" so that there is a chance to see where improvement can be made. |
I always find those tough to comment on though, as usually the suggestion I would have is 'find a more creative idea' or 'enter a different shot'
The middle ground is full of technically adequate, uninspired images. Usually there isn't something that needs 'fixed' other than a fairly radical change of idea.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2007 04:21:27 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
The title of the thread...
I'll answer.
Because I am reading HORSE BEATEN rant threads about why... I, you, or they... should be commenting, how I shold be commenting, and what should be worthy or not of a comment.
hehe |
|
|
|
|
10/29/2007 04:15:06 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
[quote=PhotoInterest]
Actually, it is your assumptions that are "elitist". My 7-10 scores are for photos that I personally like, not photos that I think are "upper crust" or photos that I think will score well.
|
Thus, Don's "kiss of death" has firmly been defined. :) :) :)
(if you don't know what I'm talking about, well, stick around a bit.) |
|
|
|
10/29/2007 04:08:58 PM · #5 |
The title of the thread...
I'll answer.
Because I am reading HORSE BEATEN rant threads about why... I, you, or they... should be commenting, how I shold be commenting, and what should be worthy or not of a comment.
hehe
|
|
|
|
10/29/2007 01:32:10 PM · #6 |
This is a funny thread, I personally comment on anything that I vote on. Sometimes, i comment really useless little witty comments. But often I try to go for something that would help improve the photo, not some stupid little thing that "distracts" you... common... if something distracts you, how did you notice the rest of the picture?
But honestly, when i look at my picture, and i see 20-30 people have voted, and i have only gotten 1 comment... and my photo is averaging around 5.0, i would gosh darn enjoy having some comments to explain WHY i have a 5.0 score! ha...
I am not here to show off or anything, I am just trying to be involved in a community and improve my photography!
|
|
|
|
10/18/2007 09:18:48 AM · #7 |
| Because people are inherently selfish and evil? :) |
|
|
|
10/17/2007 07:32:57 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Think about it for a sec.......even if I am too stupid to argue with. *chuckle* |
Actually, putting words into the mouth of an opponent can be a very clever tactic, not stupid at all, but it does preclude reasonable discussion and puts me in the role of "opponent." |
Interesting Don that you'd think of yourself as an "opponent". *chuckle*
I was thinking of this as simply a discussion and by my definition there are no "opponents" in discussions, only participants.
|
|
|
|
10/17/2007 07:00:00 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Think about it for a sec.......even if I am too stupid to argue with. *chuckle* |
Actually, putting words into the mouth of an opponent can be a very clever tactic, not stupid at all, but it does preclude reasonable discussion and puts me in the role of "opponent."
And Ray, I am easy as pie to defend against. I don't like to argue and give up after just a few rounds if no progress is being made. (the best defense against me, by the way, is to write a long rambling post. that is my Kryptonite!!) |
|
|
|
10/17/2007 05:51:18 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
I didn't use those words. I was commenting on your words as you have stated them, right? :) |
"upper crust" and "unworthy" are your words, not mine. Your inability to tell the difference will keep me from arguing with you further. It clearly is of no use. |
...Hmmmm, finally a defensive mechanism!!! Must remember to take note of this, it could prove useful. :O)
Ray |
|
|
|
10/17/2007 05:51:09 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
I didn't use those words. I was commenting on your words as you have stated them, right? :) |
"upper crust" and "unworthy" are your words, not mine. Your inability to tell the difference will keep me from arguing with you further. It clearly is of no use. |
Don....without having used the words themselves, you've also just said...."you're too stupid to argue with"! I'm just translating. ;) *grin*
Edited to add:
I've done as Melethia has suggested and gone back through both the comments that you've given and the ones that you've received on your own shots.
Let me ask you, given what we've just discussed, would you not say that you're seeing that type of "elitist" (as I termed it....YES! *grin) type of commenting going on with your own shots?
When I am looking at your shots, the scores given to them and the number of comments made, against the number of entries that you've made in challenges, would you not say that OTHERS are bypassing commenting on your shots perhaps, BECAUSE they are not scoring them in the upper ranges/"upper crust" (again, MY term YES)of their score ranges???
Are you not then, also a VICTIM of this type of "elitist commenting"??? The type where unless there is something tremendously "unspectacular" or something very "spectacular" to your shot, commenters just stay clear????
Think about it for a sec.......even if I am too stupid to argue with. *chuckle*
Message edited by author 2007-10-17 18:14:52.
|
|
|
|
10/17/2007 05:47:45 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Stepping in where I probably don't belong, but hey, I didn't get to shoot much today and the 'net is too slow to comment on the side challenge I'm in, so...
Jamie, I invite you to go read a page or six of Don's comments - he's a rather prolific and insightful commenter. When he gives a shot a 7 or 8 or 10, it is more likely than not to be a "mid level" scoring picture by DPC scores. Hence, he is in essence often commenting on shots that for a lot of the rest of the voting public are 5s or 6s. And I'm not sure if I didn't just confuse things more. But suffice it to say he's not someone who needs to comment more. Well, he could - I haven't had many from him lately - but he's a pretty good commenter. |
Thanks Melethia and Posthumous......guess I stand corrected...*slap, wrist slap* ;)
|
|
|
|
10/17/2007 03:17:52 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
I didn't use those words. I was commenting on your words as you have stated them, right? :) |
"upper crust" and "unworthy" are your words, not mine. Your inability to tell the difference will keep me from arguing with you further. It clearly is of no use. |
|
|
|
10/17/2007 02:49:14 PM · #14 |
Stepping in where I probably don't belong, but hey, I didn't get to shoot much today and the 'net is too slow to comment on the side challenge I'm in, so...
Jamie, I invite you to go read a page or six of Don's comments - he's a rather prolific and insightful commenter. When he gives a shot a 7 or 8 or 10, it is more likely than not to be a "mid level" scoring picture by DPC scores. Hence, he is in essence often commenting on shots that for a lot of the rest of the voting public are 5s or 6s. And I'm not sure if I didn't just confuse things more. But suffice it to say he's not someone who needs to comment more. Well, he could - I haven't had many from him lately - but he's a pretty good commenter. |
|
|
|
10/17/2007 02:19:47 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
In a way, ignoring those shots and only commenting on the "upper crust" shots so to speak, feels rather "elitist".
Actually, it is your assumptions that are "elitist". My 7-10 scores are for photos that I personally like, not photos that I think are "upper crust" or photos that I think will score well. |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Above the 6 range means to me that it's heading for upper ranks and likely is a top contender and simply needs a pat on the back for a great shot. |
I find it unfortunate that you give scores to photos based on how you think they will score overall. Why not let your own voice be heard in your vote?
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
However, in essence, is this not really saying that only those rated at a 7 to 10 are worthy of commenting on??? |
No, not at all. Not even close. Those are the picture that I have something to say about. I know some commentors aren't deterred by having nothing to say, but I find the condition to be quite daunting. |
Posthumous for the sake of discussion here.......when you say that you pretty much only comment on those photos that you score in the 7 to 10 range, I read that to mean that you are not commenting on the ones that you score below at the lowest, a 6. If that is to be the case (correct me if I have misread your meaning here), then for all intents and purposes, that's akin in my mind and likely other's minds of saying that the shots you score beneath that level are unworthy of commenting on. Is THAT not a form of "elitist commenting" where only those that YOU personally like and have placed as your own form of "upper crust" are worthy of your comments??? I didn't use those words. I was commenting on your words as you have stated them, right? :)
And, may I correct you in a misread that you've taken from my words? I did not say that I scored a 6 or above according to what I thought OTHERS would score it! I was saying that I score those according to MY OWN tastes and views on that particular shot. It is my estimation only that it will place as a "top contender". I don't score it according to what I think others will score it. :)
As for the statement that you only vote on shots that are 7 to 10 in your scoring because they are the ones that you have something to say something about, well again, everyone is different, but if everyone only commented on those that they gave a 7 to 10 and not anything lower, very few photographers would receive comments except for those who scored the higher scores. Would that not be true?
Again, that begs the question of how much one needs to actually say to a photo that has that high a score already, other than a small "nit pick" or a really nice pat on the back. :)
Message edited by author 2007-10-17 14:23:25.
|
|
|
|
10/17/2007 12:31:47 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
In a way, ignoring those shots and only commenting on the "upper crust" shots so to speak, feels rather "elitist". |
Actually, it is your assumptions that are "elitist". My 7-10 scores are for photos that I personally like, not photos that I think are "upper crust" or photos that I think will score well.
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Above the 6 range means to me that it's heading for upper ranks and likely is a top contender and simply needs a pat on the back for a great shot. |
I find it unfortunate that you give scores to photos based on how you think they will score overall. Why not let your own voice be heard in your vote?
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
However, in essence, is this not really saying that only those rated at a 7 to 10 are worthy of commenting on??? |
No, not at all. Not even close. Those are the picture that I have something to say about. I know some commentors aren't deterred by having nothing to say, but I find the condition to be quite daunting. |
|
|
|
10/17/2007 11:22:50 AM · #17 |
Bottom line here is that most of us in here are simply "armchair critics" *grin*. What I see as wonderfully entertaining and a great shot, others may pick apart and vice versa. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", right? *smile*
I think we've all seen in our own "comment galleries" those who truly appreciate our shots and in the same shot comments, we've seen those who have simply torn it apart or dismissed it as "garbage". What one has seen as a brilliant shot, another will see as a "snapshot". Knowing the reasons why those "views" were seen as they were, are what makes it worthy of entering these challenges in the first place.
Scores are only partially helpful and not the be all and end all of everything. There are so many variables as to why a shot does well, or doesn't. They are only a comparison of one's shots to everyone else's in the challenge. If a photo were to be looked upon on its own merit, there could be a totally different reaction/viewpoint on that shot. In all reality, the top ranking photos are there because they hit the voters' fancy more than the others in the challenge. That doesn't mean that a 4 or 5 ranked shot has no merit! It only means that it didn't hit the voters' tastes quite as much as the 6 to 10 rankers and are therefore, deemed as "unspectacular". Again, that is only by COMPARISON! It's all quite subjective in all reality.
Has anyone looked back at the challenge archives to see what was considered a ribbon winner in the early days of DPC? I'm sure that those would now be in the 5 to 6 ranges in most cases were they to be entered into challenges at this point in time. Each and every shot entered into these challenges are really simply a measure of what strikes people's tastes more by comparison to all of the others in the challenge, or in most cases, the percentage of what each individual voter was able to vote upon. Not all of us rate 100% of every challenge. We sometimes only get our 20% in or 30% or even 50%. Again, there is that "variable" coming into play, isn't it?
I hope that everyone will keep in mind that no matter what the final tally, comments or no comments, our shots are our shots and the very fact that we picked up a camera and attempted to take a shot, whether it scores well in here, gets a ton of comments or not, it's simply a reflection of personal tastes by comparison.
|
|
|
|
10/17/2007 10:50:51 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
However, in essence, is this not really saying that only those rated at a 7 to 10 are worthy of commenting on???
IF that is the case, in DPC, a 7 to 10 is a pretty high score and therefore, considered a really well done shot. What really needs to be said to someone who is getting those higher scores? "Nice Job!"???? And, if they are already in that score range, then what is the need to "back pat" even further or, for that matter, "improve"???? Personally, I feel that's akin to saying....."Well, this 4 or 5 shot is hopless, so why bother? Not even something to mention or contend with."
When I give out a 1 or 2....it has to be a total DNMC in my mind, or it has to be a pretty blatant attempt at a snub, or an obvious aim for a "brown". A 3 in my books, misses the mark in a lot of ways, but looks like it's not done intentionally...just a lower quality shot. A 4 to 5 range means that it's got merit in a lot of ways, and perhaps, needs improvement. 5 to 6 range means that the shot has a lot of potential and could have made it higher if perhaps....."fill in blank". Above the 6 range means to me that it's heading for upper ranks and likely is a top contender and simply needs a pat on the back for a great shot. It's the 3's to upper 5 ranges that seem to need the "helpful critiques" (not put downs, snubs or being ignored) In a way, ignoring those shots and only commenting on the "upper crust" shots so to speak, feels rather "elitist". |
This echoes my post on the first page ... my sentiments exactly. I still leave "back patting" comments on 9's and 10's because, well they're excellent photos and evoke an emotion from me. But I've started spending more time trying to comment on photos in the 5-7 range since those are the ones that are just missing that something extra, and those photographers are the ones who will benefit most from constructive comments. |
|
|
|
10/16/2007 11:07:10 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Personally, when I vote something a 7 to 10 (yes, I do give out 10's! :)) I either leave a short, "nice job....love it!" It's the ones that I vote a 1 to 5 that I feel the need to comment on. There's a reason why I give scores at that range and I give those reasons where I can. |
When I vote a 7 to 10 I have a very good idea of why I'm doing so, and I can talk about it fairly easily. Same for when I vote a 1 to 4 (but I almost never comment on those because people don't want to hear it no matter how much they ask for it).
A 6 means there is something about the photo that makes it better than average. I could comment on that, but I don't often do.
But a 5? In some cases the 5 is good qualities canceled out by bad qualities, but in most cases a 5 just means... um... ok... the photo is just there. I have no comment for such a photo. What should I say? Be more imaginative? Be more daring? |
Ok, I see your point here in your own personal reasoning and choices on what to comment on. Nicely said!
However, in essence, is this not really saying that only those rated at a 7 to 10 are worthy of commenting on???
IF that is the case, in DPC, a 7 to 10 is a pretty high score and therefore, considered a really well done shot. What really needs to be said to someone who is getting those higher scores? "Nice Job!"???? And, if they are already in that score range, then what is the need to "back pat" even further or, for that matter, "improve"???? Personally, I feel that's akin to saying....."Well, this 4 or 5 shot is hopless, so why bother? Not even something to mention or contend with."
When I give out a 1 or 2....it has to be a total DNMC in my mind, or it has to be a pretty blatant attempt at a snub, or an obvious aim for a "brown". A 3 in my books, misses the mark in a lot of ways, but looks like it's not done intentionally...just a lower quality shot. A 4 to 5 range means that it's got merit in a lot of ways, and perhaps, needs improvement. 5 to 6 range means that the shot has a lot of potential and could have made it higher if perhaps....."fill in blank". Above the 6 range means to me that it's heading for upper ranks and likely is a top contender and simply needs a pat on the back for a great shot. It's the 3's to upper 5 ranges that seem to need the "helpful critiques" (not put downs, snubs or being ignored) In a way, ignoring those shots and only commenting on the "upper crust" shots so to speak, feels rather "elitist".
|
|
|
|
10/16/2007 10:43:40 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Originally posted by doctornick:
Some people have stopped commenting because they have received irate and abusive emails from the comment receiver for one reason or another...
Also, a lack of comments is a comment on the photograph by itself...probably meaning that your photo did not hit the viewer as being awful or exceptional, just so so. |
I had two annoyed entrants PM me moaning about my comments on their current flora entry. they both made the mistake of naming their shots, so I voted them even lower. If they had emailed me to discuss my comments politely, then I would of taken the time out of my day to put together a far more comprehenisce critique of their image, something that isnt really possible during the voting stage as it would take far too long. Fact of the matter is, dont insult me, then ask me to take another look at your shots, I am hardly in the best frame of mind after being abused and I am a bugger that "1" button. |
Though I understand it is frustrating to get a nasty PM in response to a comment, I do feel compelled to point out that changing your vote to punish a user for such a PM is a violation of the voting rules ("you may not... offer or cast biased votes for any other user"). I would therefore recommend changing back any votes you have lowered for this reason.
If you have received an abusive or retaliatory PM, or one that asked you to reconsider or change your vote, then it is possible that PM violates the challenge rules. Please forward any such PM's to the Site Council (via the Contact Us page) so that we can take appropriate corrective action.
Thanks,
~Terry
|
|
|
|
10/16/2007 10:37:05 PM · #21 |
Feel free to use it - but use it as is. That way it'll be a cool code or something. People will know if they get the "Deb, is this yours?" that they got a 5. Or that people think it was shot in the Middle East by either me or  fetor. Or that it could be another Deb. It'll be fun... :-) |
|
|
|
10/16/2007 09:48:54 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by posthumous:
But a 5? In some cases the 5 is good qualities canceled out by bad qualities, but in most cases a 5 just means... um... ok... the photo is just there. I have no comment for such a photo. What should I say? Be more imaginative? Be more daring? |
You could just say "Deb, is this yours?" (OK, I thought it was funny...) |
LOL. Can I steal that line? I already have a few names in mind. Probably won't come across funny though if I use it. :P
|
|
|
|
10/16/2007 09:32:28 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Originally posted by posthumous:
But a 5? In some cases the 5 is good qualities canceled out by bad qualities, but in most cases a 5 just means... um... ok... the photo is just there. I have no comment for such a photo. What should I say? Be more imaginative? Be more daring? |
You could just say "Deb, is this yours?" (OK, I thought it was funny...) |
That IS funny, Thread Killer! |
|
|
|
10/16/2007 02:50:50 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
But a 5? In some cases the 5 is good qualities canceled out by bad qualities, but in most cases a 5 just means... um... ok... the photo is just there. I have no comment for such a photo. What should I say? Be more imaginative? Be more daring? |
You could just say "Deb, is this yours?" (OK, I thought it was funny...) |
|
|
|
10/16/2007 02:05:23 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Personally, when I vote something a 7 to 10 (yes, I do give out 10's! :)) I either leave a short, "nice job....love it!" It's the ones that I vote a 1 to 5 that I feel the need to comment on. There's a reason why I give scores at that range and I give those reasons where I can. |
When I vote a 7 to 10 I have a very good idea of why I'm doing so, and I can talk about it fairly easily. Same for when I vote a 1 to 4 (but I almost never comment on those because people don't want to hear it no matter how much they ask for it).
A 6 means there is something about the photo that makes it better than average. I could comment on that, but I don't often do.
But a 5? In some cases the 5 is good qualities canceled out by bad qualities, but in most cases a 5 just means... um... ok... the photo is just there. I have no comment for such a photo. What should I say? Be more imaginative? Be more daring? |
|
