| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/01/2005 12:22:49 AM · #1 |
These were my 10s.
27 votes below 5?
28 below 5?
23 below 5?
47 below 5?
18 below 5?
27 below 5?
33 below 5?
And finally, my own. I'm not saying it's a 10, but....
52 votes below 5? Is it really that technically and emotionally deficient?
I must re-evaluate my time here, I don't think I'm on the same wavelength as many of the voters.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:24:31 AM · #2 |
You know... I am looking through the results, and I am saying the same thing. I can't believe how some shots that finished in the 6 range, when there are better shots in the 5 range.
Message edited by author 2005-02-01 00:24:48.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:25:10 AM · #3 |
I guess 255 people don't have the same taste as you... Just think if we all had the exact same taste, all challenges would end up tied for first place...
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:26:40 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
I guess 255 people don't have the same taste as you... |
If someone can take a photograph in focus and relatively well lit it should not warrant a 1 or 2. That is not a matter of taste.... or rather, shouldn't be.
Message edited by author 2005-02-01 00:27:08.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:31:18 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by ahaze:
Originally posted by TooCool:
I guess 255 people don't have the same taste as you... |
If someone can take a photograph in focus and relatively well lit it should not warrant a 1 or 2. That is not a matter of taste.... or rather, shouldn't be. |
OK... Let's say I take the most technically perfect picture of a turd. Let's also say that you don't like turds. Should I expect you to give it a 4 or 5 or even better score on my turd picture just because it's technically done well? If I don't like your shot why should I have to give it a higher score than I normally would just cause it's in focus?
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:34:03 AM · #6 |
Andi - to survive here you have to learn to ignore the 1's and 2's. Even the first place finishers get some. I think they call them trollers here. And lots of people vote each challenge using the full spectrum of scores which means that half their votes will be 5 or less. The main point is how you do in comparison with your past scores and the rest of the challenge entries in that particular challenge. Don't give up on us. You will learn quite a bit about the general taste of this audience as well a photography. Good luck.
P.S. - my nines and tens came in anywhere from 6th to 150th. |
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:36:27 AM · #7 |
I'm realitively new to the site but I've already got a pretty good idea of what will do well. Doesn't mean I can take a picture to fit this or maybe even that I would if I could. Everyones tastes are different and for what it's worth that's what I like about the site you get a bunch of different perspectives.
You also have to take into account there were 200 plus voters. Someone has a bad day and you get a 2 for no reason. Same things goes on the flip side a person may throw out an 8 because there having a great day on an average shot.
Just my 2 cents... J
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:36:30 AM · #8 |
They are all very nice photos, and most finished pretty well (except for yours, which indeed is underrated).
Here's what I was hoping were the top three (and of course, I was wrong):
In 32nd place (which is very good anyway, but I think it's still underrated):
In 318th place!!!! This work of art by BAMartin:
In 89th place, what a catch:
(Hope you don't mind me bringing in some more photos here; I was going to start a new thread, but I presumed someone would start one like this we could share).
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:36:45 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
OK... Let's say I take the most technically perfect picture of a turd. Let's also say that you don't like turds. Should I expect you to give it a 4 or 5 or even better score on my turd picture just because it's technically done well? If I don't like your shot why should I have to give it a higher score than I normally would just cause it's in focus? |
I have to disagree with this way of thinking. There are a lot of things I don't like - snakes, spiders, figurines - but if the shot is technically good you shouldn't let your opinion of the subject matter interfere with scoring it in the mid- to high range.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:38:07 AM · #10 |
Andi, I'm glad you started this thread. I was thinking of starting one myself. I'm shaking my head at the results as well. It sure is interesting. I'll add my top picks to this list tomorrow.
Edit: I should clarify. I'm specifically disappointed in the ranking of some photos, not how many "below 5's" or 1's, etc.. Although it all adds up tot he final placements...
Message edited by author 2005-02-01 00:40:14.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:39:27 AM · #11 |
This was one of my 8s.. It's amazing that such a wonderful shot will do so poorly just because it's probably perceived as being "grainy" or "out of focus"
Bah.
None of my nines even hit the top 50.. but I've always known I have odd tastes compared to the rest of this community :)
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:41:58 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by ButterflySis:
I have to disagree with this way of thinking. There are a lot of things I don't like - snakes, spiders, figurines - but if the shot is technically good you shouldn't let your opinion of the subject matter interfere with scoring it in the mid- to high range. |
OK... Let's try it this way. How many times have you dropped 8 bucks on a movie that the critics say is the most fantastic pictue ever made and then thought to yourself I coulda bought a six pack and stayed at home and been more entertained? Art is strange beast. What some love, some won't. Ya just gotta live with it...
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:42:42 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by ahaze:
Originally posted by TooCool:
I guess 255 people don't have the same taste as you... |
If someone can take a photograph in focus and relatively well lit it should not warrant a 1 or 2. That is not a matter of taste.... or rather, shouldn't be. |
And if it's taken out of focus (or otherwise blurred) in an artistic way it shouldn't be given 1's and 2's either. There does seem to be an antiblur patrol on the site. I got 5 ones, 9 twos, and 14 threes for this. Does someone think I just can't hold steady ;)
But I still feel good because of the nice comments, and noting that my average score for commenters (23 of them) was 8.652. I think I'll only count commenters from now on. ;-)
BUT: I still think the big travesty of the vote was BAMartin's placement. She got 7 one's, 12 twos, and 19 threes!
Edit: not done talking yet ;)
Message edited by author 2005-02-01 00:45:03. |
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:44:09 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
but I've always known I have odd tastes compared to the rest of this community :) |
I just thought you were a little odd! :-P
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:44:31 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
OK... Let's try it this way. How many times have you dropped 8 bucks on a movie that the critics say is the most fantastic pictue ever made and then thought to yourself I coulda bought a six pack and stayed at home and been more entertained? Art is strange beast. What some love, some won't. Ya just gotta live with it... |
I wasn't saying that everyone has to like the same thing. I was just saying that you shouldn't let your personal feelings of a subject matter interfere (too much, anyway) with your scoring of it. If the image is well executed it's deserving of a good score.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:44:57 AM · #16 |
Ahaze,
I also voted the photos you picked much higher than most of the other voters. On average I gave them an 8. What I couldn't believe was the second place on the faceless. When I graded that picture I orginally thoguht that whoever shot it had used a cheap Cokin Tobacco filter. I was wrong they used a Cokin P2. |
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:45:19 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
And if it's taken out of focus (or otherwise blurred) in an artistic way it shouldn't be given 1's and 2's either. |
Yes, I should have mentioned that as well. Yours was one of my 8's, and BAMartin's was one of my 7s. There is emotion to be found in photos that are intentionally NOT tack sharp.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:46:11 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by ButterflySis:
I was just saying that you shouldn't let your personal feelings of a subject matter interfere (too much, anyway) with your scoring of it. |
And I believe that it is human nature that this is, in most people, impossible.
Edited to make more readable
Message edited by author 2005-02-01 00:47:18.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:47:26 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by ahaze:
I must re-evaluate my time here, I don't think I'm on the same wavelength as many of the voters. |
I hope your re-evaluation doesn't lead to any drastic changes in your participation on the site.
You gave seven 10's in a challenge that had 531 entries. I think that might indicate that you are voting a little higher than most here, but it was a "best of" challenge so it would be fair to expect better than average entries. There is no real need for us all to be on the same wavelength when it comes to voting. It's a pretty individual thing. There is no correct wavelength.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:47:26 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
And I believe that it is human nature that this, is in most people, impossible. |
It appears that way. :-)
/hijack (Sorry!)
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:48:21 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Originally posted by Artyste:
but I've always known I have odd tastes compared to the rest of this community :) |
I just thought you were a little odd! :-P |
EVERYONE thinks I'm a little odd.
That's not so odd.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:51:25 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
Originally posted by ahaze:
Originally posted by TooCool:
I guess 255 people don't have the same taste as you... |
If someone can take a photograph in focus and relatively well lit it should not warrant a 1 or 2. That is not a matter of taste.... or rather, shouldn't be. |
And if it's taken out of focus (or otherwise blurred) in an artistic way it shouldn't be given 1's and 2's either. There does seem to be an antiblur patrol on the site. I got 5 ones, 9 twos, and 14 threes for this. Does someone think I just can't hold steady ;)
But I still feel good because of the nice comments, and noting that my average score for commenters (23 of them) was 8.652. I think I'll only count commenters from now on. ;-)
BUT: I still think the big travesty of the vote was BAMartin's placement. She got 7 one's, 12 twos, and 19 threes!
Edit: not done talking yet ;) |
You got an 8 or a 9 from me on this great abstract, can't remember which now. A lot of people didn't deserve some of the votes they got, but that is unfortunately the nature of this site and it's members. |
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:54:30 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by ahaze:
I must re-evaluate my time here, I don't think I'm on the same wavelength as many of the voters. |
I hope your re-evaluation doesn't lead to any drastic changes in your participation on the site.
You gave seven 10's in a challenge that had 531 entries. I think that might indicate that you are voting a little higher than most here, but it was a "best of" challenge so it would be fair to expect better than average entries. There is no real need for us all to be on the same wavelength when it comes to voting. It's a pretty individual thing. There is no correct wavelength. |
Thank you cool, once again someone else here has more eloquantly stated my point of view. We are a very diverse group of people here. Complaining that some score photos differently than you do is IMHO a waste of time and bandwith.
ahaze: I'm constantly amazed that shot that I liked in a challenge diddn't do so well. I'm also amazed when shots that I liked actually ended up in the top whatever. EG: of the 150 or so shots that I voted on this time around, 2 of my top votes are in the top three. That made me say WOW more than when I'm totally off base.
Message edited by author 2005-02-01 00:56:23.
|
|
|
|
02/01/2005 12:56:51 AM · #24 |
In the order you posted I gave a
8
10
7
Did not vote on movie titles
9
6
6
7
I also gave this a 9
For me this is the most under rated photo
I also think this is a great photo and gave it a 10
I am very satisfied with were my photo placed but very disappointed in how many others, that I thought were great, did. |
|
|
|
02/01/2005 01:03:46 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
This was one of my 8s.. It's amazing that such a wonderful shot will do so poorly just because it's probably perceived as being "grainy" or "out of focus"
|
You mean its supposed to look like that??? My apologies to the photographer, I did mark this photo down because in my ignorance I thought it was out of focus... oh well.. live and learn I guess.
Ray |
|
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: 08/21/2025 12:44:15 PM EDT.
