DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Suggestions >> Are Photos Getting Better? Voters More Discerning?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 52, (reverse)
AuthorThread
10/05/2004 04:19:54 PM · #1
I looked back at some of the early challenges recently and believe that the Photos are getting better and the Voters are getting more discerning. Shall we find out?

How about taking an old challenge and opening it up to voting a second time? You'd have to hide the old results during the voting, I suppose. It would be interesting to see how the average, high, and low scores turn out for the challenge. Interesting to see how the average for each old photo compares to the new average resulting from the new voting?

Which challenge? How about "Light Source" or "Macro" from roughly 2 years ago?
10/05/2004 06:04:37 PM · #2
Definitely an interesting idea. The only real "fault" I could find is that the usership 2 years ago is very different from today, so the voters would be different.

My unscientific opinion? I think the photos are better.
10/05/2004 06:11:27 PM · #3
I personally think the photos are much better but the voters are actually voting lower, all else being equal. It is almost like we are really voting 1-7 instead of 1-10 in some ways. I had to really re-think my own voting because I was voting too low before I think, even though I don't always think the averge photo is great. Hope that all makes some sense.

Message edited by author 2004-10-05 18:12:12.
10/05/2004 06:18:27 PM · #4
Originally posted by Kylie:

I personally think the photos are much better but the voters are actually voting lower, all else being equal. It is almost like we are really voting 1-7 instead of 1-10 in some ways. I had to really re-think my own voting because I was voting too low before I think, even though I don't always think the averge photo is great. Hope that all makes some sense.


hehe, I'm inhalling silicon gel fumes right now and it made purfect sense to me :)

As for average photos, on average, I take great average shots (on average ;)
10/05/2004 06:21:23 PM · #5
Originally posted by Ecce Signum:

Originally posted by Kylie:

I personally think the photos are much better but the voters are actually voting lower, all else being equal. It is almost like we are really voting 1-7 instead of 1-10 in some ways. I had to really re-think my own voting because I was voting too low before I think, even though I don't always think the averge photo is great. Hope that all makes some sense.


hehe, I'm inhalling silicon gel fumes right now and it made purfect sense to me :)

Bet my average is more average than your average on average! LOL

As for average photos, on average, I take great average shots (on average ;)

10/05/2004 06:32:49 PM · #6
I think two things have happened to the standard. First of all the general standard has gone up. There are still a few dull snapshots but far less than there used to be.

Secondly there are now a lot more REALLY good photographers here. Our top end has gone up considerably.

Given these two observations I can't help wondering if the higher standards don't scare off some of the more amateur members. I think a lot of them see the amazing quality pictures on the front page every day and feel like they can't possibly compete.

I'd like to see us investigating ways to get some of those lurkers to take part more. Possible solutions:

1. The opposite of a "masters challenge" - a challenge where you CANNOT enter if you've ever won a ribbon.
2. A come-back challenge where people are asked to recreate a photo they've taken before in order to see how much better they can make it look from last time.
3. Perhaps some new awards for highest placing newcomers or biggest improvement in score.
4. More focus on the tutorial elements of the site perhaps with associated "newbie challenges". For example we might write a tutorial on shallow DoF and then invite entries from anyone with an average score below 6 to enter a newbie shallow DoF challenge.
5. Consider "divisions" in order to split the real god-like photographers from the amateurs. Anyone winning 2 ribbons in a division could be promoted to the next division up for example.

Just some ideas.

John
10/05/2004 06:32:50 PM · #7
Originally posted by Kylie:

Originally posted by Ecce Signum:

Originally posted by Kylie:

I personally think the photos are much better but the voters are actually voting lower, all else being equal. It is almost like we are really voting 1-7 instead of 1-10 in some ways. I had to really re-think my own voting because I was voting too low before I think, even though I don't always think the averge photo is great. Hope that all makes some sense.


hehe, I'm inhalling silicon gel fumes right now and it made purfect sense to me :)

Bet my average is more average than your average on average! LOL

As for average photos, on average, I take great average shots (on average ;)


Surely my votes received average is more average than your average? and as for votes cast, my average is higher than your average and as the average vote is higher than my average my average vote cast is more average than your average?

*wanders off to infuse some more silicon gel fumes*
10/05/2004 06:46:19 PM · #8
Originally posted by floyd:

I think two things have happened to the standard. First of all the general standard has gone up. There are still a few dull snapshots but far less than there used to be.

Secondly there are now a lot more REALLY good photographers here. Our top end has gone up considerably.

Given these two observations I can't help wondering if the higher standards don't scare off some of the more amateur members. I think a lot of them see the amazing quality pictures on the front page every day and feel like they can't possibly compete.

I'd like to see us investigating ways to get some of those lurkers to take part more. Possible solutions:

1. The opposite of a "masters challenge" - a challenge where you CANNOT enter if you've ever won a ribbon.
2. A come-back challenge where people are asked to recreate a photo they've taken before in order to see how much better they can make it look from last time.
3. Perhaps some new awards for highest placing newcomers or biggest improvement in score.
4. More focus on the tutorial elements of the site perhaps with associated "newbie challenges". For example we might write a tutorial on shallow DoF and then invite entries from anyone with an average score below 6 to enter a newbie shallow DoF challenge.
5. Consider "divisions" in order to split the real god-like photographers from the amateurs. Anyone winning 2 ribbons in a division could be promoted to the next division up for example.

Just some ideas.

John


There have been discussions of this sort before, and I have hoped that someday we will see some kind of implementation like it. DPCis getting so huge, maybe there could be "divisions". I am one of those intimidated ones! lol
10/06/2004 03:51:40 AM · #9
I was just looking at Konador's tutorial on how he made his "Love" picture. That would make a fun newbie challenge. All the pictures would be VERY alike but at least everyone would know what they were shooting for and I think we'd all learn a few things about lighting, white balance and colour manipulation.

John
10/06/2004 04:28:23 AM · #10
if voters are getting more harder
what is considered a good score? and
what is considered a bad score?
10/06/2004 04:58:33 AM · #11
I think the top 10 photographs maybe have gotten worse on average than when I first joined here, I also believe more weight is now given to meeting the challenge than was before which probably goes a long way to explaining why.

As the site grows it obviously attracts more users. That coupled with a huge growth in digital photography equals a big increase in rank beginners who have never had an interest in photography until now.

This is great for photography, but it does cause the standard of this site to slip somewhat and fills each challenge with more and more pretty average snapshots. For example look at the recent threads saying how much people are loving the masters challenge because it's full of good photography and actually a pleasure to vote on and view.

More importantly these new photographers seldom read any literature before shooting, and as a result you find comments like "I am marking you down because half your photograph is out of focus! In a proper photograph everything should be sharp". This is when you have used shallow depth of field to isolate your object. Something they have yet to come across. So there is an effect directly on scores from things like that.

Then you get all the effects like over use of NI, funky borders, faded edges,over saturation, etc etc and we all do these to a degree because they tend to score better, and before you know it the new comers are seeing these images win and so they do the same.. An evil circle of photoshop effects if you like.

This is all good for the site, but more than a few of the more popular members have expressed their lack of desire to continue on a site that is catering to and for such styles so maybe it is something that should be addressed.?

I think the masters challenge proved a very good improvement and idea..

Message edited by author 2004-10-06 05:16:29.
10/06/2004 06:08:17 AM · #12
I agree with what Jon said here. By no means can I say I'm a good photographer myself, but in all honesty my faith in the DPC voters is diminishing. I've seen several pictures getting scores that I'm horrified with, both high and low.

I mentioned to two fellow DPCers recently that I think DPC is in some ways bad for photography. That's not to say it doesn't help teach a novice the technical side of photography, because for that it is excellent. However, the voting mentality and final scores lead to feedback that anything that isn't completely sharp and 110% free of noise is essentially rubbish. Does that help the mediocre photographer (like myself) grow as a photographer? I don't think it does.

As the masters' challenge has shown - there is some value in ranked challenges. Maybe this needs to be considered as a more regular system.
10/06/2004 06:42:37 AM · #13
Originally posted by PaulMdx:

I agree with what Jon said here. By no means can I say I'm a good photographer myself, but in all honesty my faith in the DPC voters is diminishing. I've seen several pictures getting scores that I'm horrified with, both high and low.

I mentioned to two fellow DPCers recently that I think DPC is in some ways bad for photography. That's not to say it doesn't help teach a novice the technical side of photography, because for that it is excellent. However, the voting mentality and final scores lead to feedback that anything that isn't completely sharp and 110% free of noise is essentially rubbish. Does that help the mediocre photographer (like myself) grow as a photographer? I don't think it does.

As the masters' challenge has shown - there is some value in ranked challenges. Maybe this needs to be considered as a more regular system.


Well I am very happy that at least one person agrees with me.

I too have spoken privately with some of the 'big names' here and discussed the same things. I have never thought it teaches photography very well because your taking advice of professionals, amateurs, keen enthusiasts all with a different style and taste so knowing what to listen too is impossible.

Because people do not write what they like in their comments it leads to the wrong signal being given out.

For example I recently read the comments on this photo:

And noted that most people think it should be shot at F22 like a sweeping landscape. The didn't like the knife being soft at the end.

Now if that photographer didn't know better he would start shooting all his food shots that way, and well in my opinion and the opinion from a fellow professional food photographer that is pretty much the last thing you want to do with food shots.

Turns out the photographer knew better - I liked his comment:
"With regard to shallow depth of field comments, this was the look I was after (obviously otherwise I would have re-taken the shot with less!)"
10/06/2004 06:45:59 AM · #14
Originally posted by floyd:

1. The opposite of a "masters challenge" - a challenge where you CANNOT enter if you've ever won a ribbon.


Oh my god - no please don't tell me your being serious..

;)

Message edited by author 2004-10-06 06:46:10.
10/06/2004 08:10:27 AM · #15
Originally posted by jonpink:




And noted that most people think it should be shot at F22 like a sweeping landscape. The didn't like the knife being soft at the end.

Now if that photographer didn't know better he would start shooting all his food shots that way, and well in my opinion and the opinion from a fellow professional food photographer that is pretty much the last thing you want to do with food shots.


Exactly what I thought when I saw the comments on that photo, you are absolutely right. I couldn't believe that people recommended deepening out the depth of field!

Message edited by author 2004-10-06 08:12:30.
10/06/2004 08:26:39 AM · #16
Dear jonpink, what a load of elitist crap. If you think the majority of DPCers are not sufficiently experience or equipped to vote and comment on your photographs then don't enter them to be judged. Just because somebody doesn't have years of photographic experience it doesn't mean their opinion is any less valid than yours or mine.

If you submit a challenge winning photograph it will win, or at least be very near the top.

If you submit an abstract "art" shot then it will not appeal to such a wide audience and will not attract such a high score. The whole idea of posting your photographs on a web site such as DPC is so that you will get the thoughts "of professionals, amateurs, keen enthusiasts all with a different style and taste" that way you can develop your skills. If you want to lock yourself away from the real world and diminish in ever decreasing circles until finally you produce exactly the same "perfect professional" shot over and over again go ahead, it will do well when entered into the right category.

I intend to do exactly the opposite and gather as much and as varied an opinion as I can, even yours, at the end of the day that's all it is an opinion and you can either listen, digest and learn or turn away and ignore it.

I think the idea of some sort of challenge for new members is an excellent idea. Graded challenges will encourage beginers to take part. Entering a competition will get them to think more about what they are producing. We have the so called Masters Challenge, why not one at the other end of the scale?

Or are some people afraid they may loose their big fish in a small pond status?
10/06/2004 08:44:45 AM · #17
Blackdog, if you haven't already, please read below. That is the problem Jon is highlighting. Also note kiwiness' agreement.

Originally posted by jonpink:

For example I recently read the comments on this photo:

And noted that most people think it should be shot at F22 like a sweeping landscape. The didn't like the knife being soft at the end.

Now if that photographer didn't know better he would start shooting all his food shots that way, and well in my opinion and the opinion from a fellow professional food photographer that is pretty much the last thing you want to do with food shots.

Turns out the photographer knew better - I liked his comment:
"With regard to shallow depth of field comments, this was the look I was after (obviously otherwise I would have re-taken the shot with less!)"
10/06/2004 09:19:17 AM · #18
Yes I read the comments and I agree with them but that's not to say that somebody who thinks the shot would be better if it was shot at f22 is wrong.

Have you read my comments in the thread about that particular shot, note the date and time, long before I read this thread.

To the idea of having some sort of beginners challenge I also read "Oh my god - no please don't tell me your being serious..

Now tell me that's not elitist.

What I will concede is the idea of anybody who has a computer being eligible to vote and comment. This is not a widely sustained idea. I mean non-members of photographic clubs cannot wander in from the street and vote on a club competition. Effectively that's what happens on the DPC site.

If someone is serious enough about their photography to subscribe to DPC, be it at professional or amateur level then they should be allowed to vote and comment. Perhaps registered users should only have viewing access, like the public have access to a gallery, (now who sounds elitist?).

I still think that various levels of challenges that would cater for the beginners is a good idea.

Wouldn't that have the desired effect without excluding the less experienced from competition and judging?

Message edited by author 2004-10-06 09:35:52.
10/06/2004 10:28:56 AM · #19
Originally posted by Blackdog:

Dear jonpink, what a load of elitist crap. If you think the majority of DPCers are not sufficiently experience or equipped to vote and comment on your photographs then don't enter them to be judged.


I didn't say my photographs. This thread isn't anything to do with my photographs - I made a statement about our photographs as a, well, DPC group if you will. And no I don't think the majority of us,myself included, are "Sufficiently experience" to judge and critique photographs properly. There is more to it than saying what you like about the picture you know...

If it was as easy as you seem to believe, then we would all be paid fancy art critics - food critics - film critics.

Yes it's fair and democratic if every man woman child and dog gets a Chance to vote on images but the fact is that the results are different than if a National Geographic panel were to vote. That was my point - and the point still stands that if you take advice from someone who knows not exactly what they are saying then the pupil will not achieve his / her full potential.

Kind of like taking a French lesson from someone whom can't speak French if you like.

Originally posted by Blackdog:

Just because somebody doesn't have years of photographic experience it doesn't mean their opinion is any less valid than yours or mine.
Well we all have our own opinion, but for what it's worth I would tend to listen to professional photographers with 10 years experience rather than my girlfriends aunt Mavis whom has just brought her first camera.

Originally posted by Blackdog:

If you submit a challenge winning photograph it will win..

Now that is a colemanball ;D

Originally posted by Blackdog:

If you submit an abstract "art" shot then it will not appeal to such a wide audience and will not attract such a high score.


That is my point. Abstract art on DPC is grain in the real world isn't it? lol - joke - well kind of

Originally posted by Blackdog:

I intend to do exactly the opposite and gather as much and as varied an opinion as I can, even yours, at the end of the day that's all it is an opinion and you can either listen, digest and learn or turn away and ignore it.


That's exactly what i do too.

Originally posted by Blackdog:

Or are some people afraid they may loose their big fish in a small pond status?


It is more a case of DPC loosing it's big fish - that is what the post was about.

Message edited by author 2004-10-06 10:36:24.
10/06/2004 10:34:40 AM · #20
Originally posted by Blackdog:

Yes I read the comments and I agree with them but that's not to say that somebody who thinks the shot would be better if it was shot at f22 is wrong.


Yes it does. To me that is the wrong way to teach newcomers, with mixed advice and suggestions from all angles? If that is elitist then so be it.

10/06/2004 10:40:13 AM · #21
Finally - gasp.

I agree with your: "I still think that various levels of challenges that would cater for the beginners is a good idea. "

Having sections and divisions may work and attract some of the better photographers here, but how the ability is ranked is nigh on impossible to answer.



Message edited by author 2004-10-06 10:40:26.
10/06/2004 10:43:17 AM · #22
Originally posted by jonpink:

Originally posted by Blackdog:

Yes I read the comments and I agree with them but that's not to say that somebody who thinks the shot would be better if it was shot at f22 is wrong.


Yes it does. To me that is the wrong way to teach newcomers, with mixed advice and suggestions from all angles? If that is elitist then so be it.


To me the point of comments from different angles is to get the photographer to look at the image from all angles. If a shot was taken at f5.6 and someone thinks the shallow DOF doesn't work then that's what they think. Trying the shot at f22 to see the difference is the point. The photographer doesn't have to agree that it's better, just see the difference.

Here's an assignment to try to see what your lenses see. A variation of this assignment is to take several photos at the same focal length, varying the f-stop.

//members.rogers.com/orleansphotoclub/assignments/assignment1.html


10/06/2004 10:49:04 AM · #23
Originally posted by cpanaioti:

If a shot was taken at f5.6 and someone thinks the shallow DOF doesn't work then that's what they think. Trying the shot at f22 to see the difference is the point.

One of the comments implies it would be better with a deeper DOF. I don't see that as suggesting to try it, I see that as (wrongly) saying how it should be done.

I think this is precisely the problem - how do we discern the different between someone making an abritrary suggestion, and someone that is actually right? (Not that the two can't overlap..)
10/06/2004 10:52:28 AM · #24
Getting back to the original question... yes, both are true. This image is one of the highest-rated on the site, but a good part of the score may be because there were only 9 entries in that early challenge. No offense, but in a "modern" challenge that same image might not merit a 6.



Hmmm... using this particular example is sorta' like waving a golf club in a thunderstorm and cursing at the sky. ;-)
10/06/2004 10:54:13 AM · #25
When I started the original thread, lo these many posts ago, I hadn't intended it to take quite this direction, but okay, whatever.

I don't know about you all, but when I receive a comment, the first thing I do is check the profile of the commenter. It lets me know something about the possible technical accuracy of the comment. I can then take or discount technical advice given. Even comments from no-submit, no-vote, no-post commenters still gives insight to what folks like and don't.

Some members aspire to sell their photographs to the market. So it's probably helpful to know what the market likes (i.e. will buy).

Just my POV.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 11:37:04 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 11:37:04 AM EDT.