I'll never figure this place out...

12/24/2008 09:09:07 AM · #1

I apologize for calling this one out, but I have to know what is was about this entry that it came in at almost a 5.4? Looking at the the comments, I was far from the only one to low vote and leave a harsh critique on this. Apparently it was well photographed to come in this high. I just don't see it, and I saw lots of entries which I thought were much better that came in lower.

Can someone who gave this a high vote pipe in and explain what I am missing?

davidw

Canon EOS R6

Google Glass Google Glass

12/24/2008 09:18:57 AM · #2

Its too small, its kind of grainy, there's some kind of weird grid over it and by any normal definition, its a pretty boring snapshot type of picture...but it met the definition of the challenge so well that I think many people overlooked its technical deficiencies and gave it a higher score; I certainly did.

ambaker

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

12/24/2008 09:21:45 AM · #3

You don't see the two guys waving?

This appears to be a naturally occurring shot, as opposed to staged.

12/24/2008 09:26:25 AM · #4

Originally posted by ambaker:

You don't see the two guys waving?

Absolutely I see, it, and I said so in my comment, but if meeting the challenge is all there is to this, then I want a recount on a few of my low scoring entries.

davidw

Canon EOS R6

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

12/24/2008 09:30:10 AM · #5

I just want to be clearer here, I gave it a higher score than I would have, I didn't give it a high score. Normally this would be a 4 (or maybe a 2 or 3, what's with that grid?) from me, and I gave it a 6.

I'd be very interested in the reasoning behind the five 9s and 4 10s.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

12/24/2008 09:32:41 AM · #6

I'm right there with you as far as being perplexed.....I've got a ytechnically deficient shot in "All I Want..." and a really nice image in "Window Shopping".They're doing 5.8 and 5.0 respectively, and in my clueless mind, they should be reversed.

"I'll never figure this place out."

LOL!!!

bobnospum

Sony Alpha a77 II

Tamron AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD IF Macro Lens for Sony

12/24/2008 09:46:58 AM · #7

Yup. We need to add this to the top of every Web page.

dpchallenge
.... a digital photography contest
........ you will never figure this place out

Art is subjective. DPC issues with DNMC photos scoring well (or winning ribbons), 3-second voters missing obvious technical flaws, 3-second voters missing depth/details, and eye candy doing it's job of "catching the eye" all lead to frustration from each of us at times. That being said this is a great place to learn and is mostly a fun place to hang out. :)

Message edited by author 2008-12-24 09:47:30.

Camabs

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 35mm f/2.0

12/24/2008 09:51:50 AM · #8

Originally posted by ambaker:

You don't see the two guys waving?

This appears to be a naturally occurring shot, as opposed to staged.

That's an interesting statement you make here. It implies that naturally occurring shots are a good thing and staged shots are bad. That reveals a certain view on what photography is about, that may be different from other views.

I am not judging it. Each view is as valid as the next one. I just observe that views differ. And because of that, votes differ. This in turn, leads to people not understanding why images score as low/high as they do.

Message edited by author 2008-12-24 09:53:08.

vxpra

Pentax K100D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

12/24/2008 10:19:09 AM · #9

Originally posted by ambaker:

You don't see the two guys waving?

There's three. Look at the left side, its a "child".

I didn't vote on this challenge. But this is my opinion, or my dissection of the voters thoughts. Technically the image is weak, small, pixelated. Someone comments that the "grid" is a fence, possibly, I am not really sure. I give the photographer credit for picking this out and meeting the challenge. There are certainly shots ahead of it in the scoring that didn't meet the challenge as well and there are shots behind it that are technically better and meet the challenge description just as well. I think it got bonus points for meeting the challenge, and meeting it in a way that voters expected.

Personally, I gave up figuring out voters. Which is why these are listed on my goals for 2009- "Get in at least 3 "underrated" threads. Not really worried about ribbons. Feel like I got "screwed" out of an oobie."

Message edited by author 2008-12-24 10:23:22.

12/24/2008 10:21:39 AM · #10

I was probably correct, as I saw some very good shots in this challenge that scored low, apparently for that reason.

FocusPoint

XIAOMI Redmi Note 8 Pro

12/24/2008 10:23:27 AM · #11

I figured it out... Even though it's a theory, I think it has something to do with "E=MC2"

12/24/2008 10:25:25 AM · #12

Originally posted by FocusPoint:

I figured it out... Even though it's a theory, I think it has something to do with "E=MC2"

And just like an entry here, it's likely to blow up in your face!

Five_Seat

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

12/24/2008 10:25:43 AM · #13

bassbone

Nikon Df

Nikon MF 105mm f/2.5 AIS

12/24/2008 10:26:09 AM · #14

The comments during voting provided some clear indication as to why the votes were low. There were significant issues with pixelation (a grid like pattern) that really affected scoring here.

It is really important to remember that challenges are not merely scavanger hunts -finding something that meets challenge - but it is a photography contest. Image quality is paramount and that is why the vast majority of high scoring images scored well.
Those that scored the ribbons also had either some humor, some emotional impact, or some level of creative vision to find or create the image.

Panks

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

12/24/2008 10:26:11 AM · #15

Originally posted by yospiff:

I guess one factor is obviousness versus the "I dont get it" factor. I had an entry for this, but aborted it and entered a gag in bokeh instead, as I felt my personification was not obvious enough without the title to support it.

I was probably correct, as I saw some very good shots in this challenge that scored low, apparently for that reason.

I think you would have been in top 10 if you had entered this challenge instead of the Bokeh one ... This is a nice picture and meets the challenge too ... and now I know why you are so pissed :)

bvy

Sigma DP1x

12/24/2008 10:31:07 AM · #16

I started at a four but ended up giving it a five, which I knew was generous. A few reasons:

-I thought it was a great subject even if poorly photographed and edited.
-The title, I thought, was perfect.
-I was underwhelmed by a lot of the entries in the challenge. I thought they missed the mark or were unoriginal. This was neither, so my score was a relative one. In a Free Study, I probably would have given this a three.
-I'm making a conscious effort to raise my average score given.

That rationale aside, my comment basically said the same thing yours did,

yospiff.

vtruan

Nikon D5100

Tamron AF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical for Nikon

12/24/2008 10:36:03 AM · #17

Lack of imagination is the key. It has to be obvious to score well here. It was my No. 1 choice.

Melethia

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

12/24/2008 10:38:05 AM · #18

Does anyone know what causes that strange grid pattern? I see it from time to time and I'd love to leave the "why" if there is one in the comment for the person so they know what not to do next time. Thanks! (Didn't vote the challenge, but it's a very cute interpretation of the theme.)

FocusPoint

XIAOMI Redmi Note 8 Pro

12/24/2008 10:53:40 AM · #19

Originally posted by yospiff:

Originally posted by FocusPoint:
I figured it out... Even though it's a theory, I think it has something to do with "E=MC2"

And just like an entry here, it's likely to blow up in your face!

Hmmm... you are correct :P

SteveJ

Canon EOS-7D

12/24/2008 11:05:35 AM · #20

Originally posted by Melethia:

Not too sure, Deb, but my first couple of Fuji cameras did a similar thing in certain conditions, normally with trees and greenery. I think it has something to do with the way the sensor gathers the info. It happens on photos with grass as well. I know that the Fuji cameras used a diamond pattern on the sensor so perhaps this has something to do with it.

ambaker

Google Glass Google Glass

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

12/24/2008 11:24:08 AM · #21

Originally posted by Camabs:

Originally posted by ambaker:
You don't see the two guys waving?

This appears to be a naturally occurring shot, as opposed to staged.

That's an interesting statement you make here. It implies that naturally occurring shots are a good thing and staged shots are bad. That reveals a certain view on what photography is about, that may be different from other views.

I am not judging it. Each view is as valid as the next one. I just observe that views differ. And because of that, votes differ. This in turn, leads to people not understanding why images score as low/high as they do.

I think you are over implying a bit, but on the right track. I do value a natural shot, over a staged shot (all else being equal). But staged shots are not "bad". Some challenges demand a staged shot. Portraits come to mind here. The winning shot, being certainly staged, finished deservedly higher than current subject shot. It was better all the way round.

The image in question did get a few high votes, but did finish in the lower half of the class, so I'm not sure what the ruckus is.

Normally people with an above average image complain when they get ones and twos in the voting. Suddenly we are on why an image we didn't care for, got a 10....

For the record, I do not see the "grid", the others have mentioned. Perhaps it is an artifact of some people's monitors.

david_c

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

12/24/2008 11:24:29 AM · #22

Originally posted by Melethia:

Does anyone know what causes that strange grid pattern?

Looks to me like the image was taken through a fence, and that fence was (poorly) cloned out. Is that legal in basic?

david_c

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

12/24/2008 11:25:17 AM · #23

Originally posted by ambaker:

For the record, I do not see the "grid", the others have mentioned. Perhaps it is an artifact of some people's monitors.

You're kidding. It's really, really obvious.