| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/11/2004 02:45:01 PM · #226 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Well said, Ken and Chris.
Jon, I don't really understand why someone would think categorized responses, using a tool are "robotic". Isn't it just as robotic when I press one of the scoring radio buttons? Perhaps even more robotic because I am not bothering to write any comment.
|
Well if it makes people comment then yeah, but people should comment anyway - I seldom give a vote without having a little comment or two.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2004 02:47:39 PM · #227 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
And if the photograph does none of the above, you then do what? Give it a 2 and move on? That does not help the photographer get better. We can learn from our mistakes, but it will take much longer if we are left to figure out on our own what we are doing wrong and how to fix it.
|
In all honestly I would give it a 1 not a 2.
I think that harsh vote helps the photographer more than giving flase information like - your photo is over exposed - or - it's not sharp all the way through. Which is often the way on this site - on high key and shallow depth of field shots for example.
|
|
|
|
12/11/2004 02:58:18 PM · #228 |
| Regardless of how well these methods are liked, there is one technical aspect. In the "frame" version, it should be a resizable frame. At the resolution I view at (1280 x 1024) I can usually see the whole picture. With your "frame" page open, the bottom third of my screen ends up blank, because the "vote helper" frame is not large enough to fill it. I use firefox, but it had the same effect in IE. Second, there needs to be some way to weight the values. I, and I think a lot of others, would weight the "challenge" vote higher than the others. If they were weightable, and stroed across votes, it would be more useful to those of us who are strict on meeting the challenge. |
|
|
|
12/11/2004 03:04:14 PM · #229 |
Originally posted by kpriest:
Originally posted by nshapiro:
No worky on Firefox. :(
The edit box is always empty--which is why I originally thought it was for extra comments. |
Should work now according to EddyG who sent me the fix.
[EddyG]I think I got it working as best as it can under Firefox.
I think it computes everything correctly. It also selects all
of the text in the comment block when you click "Copy to clipboard"
so all you have to do is type Ctrl-V and then Ctrl-C. |
It works better but has the following problems:
1) frame split is half and half, much too big on the bottom. should be easy to correct--note it didn't do this before
2) Copies to the edit field but not the clipboard. That's workable though.
Do you want people to use this from your site, or keep a local copy?
Thanks--Neil |
|
|
|
12/11/2004 03:48:26 PM · #230 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
2) Copies to the edit field but not the clipboard. That's workable though. |
That's all it can do in Firefox. Access to the clipboard is not permitted in Firefox because of security reasons.
Put something on your clipboard. Pretend it is important, like a phone number or your credit card number or whatever... now go to this web page (using Internet Explorer; it won't work in Firefox).
Now, imagine a site that does something similar, but instead of copying your clipboard to a visible form element, it copies it to a hidden form element. This "rogue" site can now get a copy of whatever is on your clipboard. Hence the reason access to the clipboard is disabled in Firefox for unsigned JavaScript.
Message edited by author 2004-12-11 15:49:10. |
|
|
|
12/12/2004 12:23:01 AM · #231 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
It works better but has the following problems:
1) frame split is half and half, much too big on the bottom. should be easy to correct--note it didn't do this before
2) Copies to the edit field but not the clipboard. That's workable though.
Do you want people to use this from your site, or keep a local copy?
Thanks--Neil |
You should be able to move the frame border.
As Eddy mentioned, Firefox won't sllow clipboard access.
You can run it from my site or save the page and upload to your own. |
|
|
|
12/13/2004 09:52:43 AM · #232 |
Originally posted by kpriest:
Ok - I couldn't take it! I became obsessed with finding a better way to vote. I took EddyG's sample and spent about 5 hours hacking through it trying to figure out how to make it work without any requirements from the DPC site. I think I've come up with an interim solution. You can vote in the 4 categories and put comments in for each (if you want), and there is a button that formats it all and puts in a text box AND copies it to the clipboard for you with one click. So all you have to do is then click into the comments field in the DPC photo page, do a CTRL+V to paste in and then you still have to click the appropriate score that matches the overall score you came up with. I also added the option to turn off the auto-calculating of the overall score so you can come select your own Overall score. This works well if you don't weight all categories the same.
It also covers this situation:
Originally posted by Arcanist:
haha thought of another one:
Macro: And if this is another BradP photo, disregard my calculated 10 vote and cast a 2. :p |
A future version will allow you to put weighted values in for each category. It's only 3 steps away (click, CTRL+V, click) from being as good as it would be if it were built into the page. AND--- I am hosting it in a bottom frame with the DPC site on top so it is even in the same browser window. Unfortunately I already voted on all the entries in the 2 current challenges so I can't test it's usability yet. Here is the sample (actual) output for each option combination:
Auto Calc, no comments entered:
-------------------------------
Composition: 9, Technical: 8, Appeal: 8, Challenge: 6, Overall Calculated Average Score: 8
Auto Calc, with comments
------------------------
Composition: 8, Slightly higher angle would've helped
Technical: 6, A touch too blurry
Appeal: 6, not a lot of impact
Challenge: 4, I see the connection, but I have to squint ;-)
Overall Calculated Average Score: 6, Not the worst I've seen
Same Thing with the "include rankings" unchecked
------------------------------------------------
Composition: Slightly higher angle would've helped
Technical: A touch too blurry
Appeal: not a lot of impact
Challenge: I see the connection, but I have to squint ;-)
Overall Comments: Not the worst I've seen
Auto Calc Off
-------------
Composition: 8, Slightly higher angle would've helped
Technical: 6, A touch too blurry
Appeal: 6, not a lot of impact
Challenge: 4, I see the connection, but I have to squint ;-)
Overall Score: 3, Not the worst I've seen, but close
In the little testing I did, it seems like it might slightly increase the time spent voting, but maybe not. In any case, I would hope that the detail and quality of my votes and comments with this tool will add much more value to the recipient.
Anyone is free to use the tool either hosted in a bottom frame:
//www.kpriest.com/dpchallenge/dpc_vote_frameset.htm
or as a separate browser window:
//www.kpriest.com/dpchallenge/dpc_voter.htm
NOTE: This was built for and tested in IE 5.5+. EddyG had problems with it in Firefox and it may well have issues in other browsers. Use it if you like, but I can't provide support for it - so you're on your own and I hope you find it useful. I know those in this thread will complain about even the idea of using this type of method - but - when I vote on your entry, you have roughly 2 choices:
This:
Composition: 10, Framing and cropping make this shot!
Technical: 10, Crisp, bright, perfect DOF
Appeal: 10, Blew me away as soon as I saw it!
Challenge: 10, Fits the challenge to a tee!
Overall Calculated Average Score: 10, Blue Ribbon is in the bag!
Or This:
Great framing and cropping, DOF, etc. 10!
...a better example of the value difference would probably be comments on not-so-good shots. But you get the idea.
Looking back over the thread now, though I noticed this comment from EddyG:
Originally posted by EddyG:
If you ran something like Proxomitron (an awesome proxy filter), you could configure it to inject code like the HTML/JavaScript that I wrote into URL's that contain "challenge_vote_image.php" and it would work without Drew and Langdon doing anything. |
I'll have to look into that... |
Bump for those who wants to use this for voting.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2004 10:22:54 AM · #233 |
Originally posted by kpriest:
Originally posted by nshapiro:
It works better but has the following problems:
1) frame split is half and half, much too big on the bottom. should be easy to correct--note it didn't do this before
2) Copies to the edit field but not the clipboard. That's workable though.
Do you want people to use this from your site, or keep a local copy?
Thanks--Neil |
You should be able to move the frame border.
As Eddy mentioned, Firefox won't sllow clipboard access.
You can run it from my site or save the page and upload to your own. |
You can't adjust the framesizes interactively with the current definition of the frame set, at least in Firefox.
You have it defined as:
|
|
|
|
12/14/2004 05:16:03 AM · #234 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
You can't adjust the framesizes interactively with the current definition of the frame set, at least in Firefox. |
How about now?
//www.kpriest.com/dpchallenge/dpc_vote_frameset.htm |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 07:05:49 AM · #235 |
guys, i ve been trying this new system and what a great help. amazingly enough it confirms my first opinion but forces me to consider the pic more thoroughly. makes me happy to be able to have some to guide me.
thanks so much for this tool. |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 07:17:07 AM · #236 |
Comment #1:
Composition: 7, Technical: 8, Appeal: 7, Challenge: 8, Overall Score: 7
Comment #2:
Composition: 4, Technical: 3, Appeal: 2, Challenge: 2, Overall Score: 3
The first commenter left a "real" comment...the kind that includes a subject, object, verb. No explanation from the second commentor, though. I think if you're going to hand out low scores like that you can at least explain why it's unappealing to you and how you think it missed the challenge.
|
|
|
|
12/14/2004 10:23:08 AM · #237 |
For those interested in this style of voting.
It seems that, because the breakdown vote must go into the "Comments" field, people are getting irritated that this is an insufficient comment.
I have been pointing out, in other threads such as "Broken", that the only reason this is the comment field is because it is an "aftermarket" scoring system. If it were integrated into the system, it would be more "equivalent" to the bare numerical vote they would otherwise get, and of course, they would see that it provides more information than that.
Of course, it's going to get tiring to keep pointing that out as well as making me look like a pest, so I suggest others keep an eye out and make sure the new scoring system is not misconstrued for a comment.
Perhaps the tool, in the absense of a comment, when one isn't supplied, could actually add something like the following disclaimer:
"This is a breakdown vote only without comment; we apologize that it must go into the comment field. Eventually, we hope to see the regular scoring system provide such a breakdown."
Now I suspect that would irritate people even more, but it would remind people that a score broken into parts is more informative than a single score, even without a comment.
Edit: Bad spulling and gramma
Message edited by author 2004-12-14 10:54:02. |
|
|
|
12/14/2004 10:44:58 AM · #238 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
add something like the following disclaimer:
"This is a breakdown vote only without comment; we apologize that it must go into the comment field. Eventually, we hope to see the regular scoring system provide such a breakdown."
|
good idea, neil. or, it could be a little more to the point: "this is what i based your final score on:" at the beginning, with a trailing "i apologize if this isn't helpful enough to you, if i have time, i'll return for a more indepth analysis of your image" |
|
|
|
12/17/2004 11:30:29 PM · #239 |
Originally posted by skiprow:
Originally posted by nshapiro:
add something like the following disclaimer:
"This is a breakdown vote only without comment; we apologize that it must go into the comment field. Eventually, we hope to see the regular scoring system provide such a breakdown."
|
good idea, neil. or, it could be a little more to the point: "this is what i based your final score on:" at the beginning, with a trailing "i apologize if this isn't helpful enough to you, if i have time, i'll return for a more indepth analysis of your image" |
I added a disclaimer field so now you can add whatever disclaimer you feel is appropriate. The disclaimer will be put at the bottom of the comments. Also set it so the disclaimer and auto-calc are not reset when you click the Clear button.
Again though, I just don't see people PM'ing everyone who just clicked the standard number score and didn't leave any comments and telling them that was not helpful. People are still forgetting the appropriate comparison is:
Categorized Numbers in the comments field VS. An anonymous number vote with NO comments.
I used the tool for the "Broken" challenge and found it was more time consuming to leave notes for each category. I had much less time to vote on the "Wind" challenge, so I didn't even use the tool and left very few comments - just clicked away at the number. Apparently that should satisfy those who think that no comments are better than a categorized score in the comments field. At least I know I won't get PM's about those. ;-)
[ edit ] Here is the frame link again: //www.kpriest.com/dpchallenge/dpc_vote_frameset.htm
Message edited by author 2004-12-17 23:50:41. |
|
|
|
12/18/2004 02:19:51 AM · #240 |
I tried to use hte frame link - the idea is great, but my issue is that t taked up too much real estate - i cannot see the entries in their entirety - i must scroll every one of them...PITA.
Could it be a vertical frame...or some of each?
|
|
|
|
12/18/2004 04:53:14 AM · #241 |
| great work, ken! i am starting to use it after making an initial pass at scoring, when i go through for bumps, weeds, and comments. yes, it does take more time, but it does mean that you have to actually look at the image a bit more. thanks, again, for all you efforts here! |
|
|
|
12/18/2004 01:14:08 PM · #242 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
I tried to use hte frame link - the idea is great, but my issue is that t taked up too much real estate - i cannot see the entries in their entirety - i must scroll every one of them...PITA.
Could it be a vertical frame...or some of each? |
Vertical version here: //www.kpriest.com/dpchallenge/dpc_vote_vert_frameset.htm
Should fit ok in 1024x768 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/14/2025 04:31:57 AM EDT.
