| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/07/2005 12:26:20 PM · #26 |
Clearly I'm int he minority among those who are commenting to this thread. I take it for granted that bias is being shown in the voting, and don't consider it remarkable in the least. It's easy for anyone to figure out what sort of image is most likely to get high scores, and up to each individual to decide whether that's the sort of image they want to shoot.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 12:36:26 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Clearly I'm int he minority among those who are commenting to this thread. I take it for granted that bias is being shown in the voting, and don't consider it remarkable in the least. It's easy for anyone to figure out what sort of image is most likely to get high scores, and up to each individual to decide whether that's the sort of image they want to shoot.
Robt. |
I do agree that we all know it's true...one commenter was courageous enough to say so...nothging wrong with that.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 12:58:06 PM · #28 |
Actually, my comments in the above thread are not to say that the voter should eliminate the personal attraction to an image at all. I am simply stating that at the extreme a number of voters seems to take a challenge paramter like 3-anything to do with the number or Light - any interpretation of the word and then eliminate certain submissions based on a narrow interpretation of the challenge details.
To give a 1 to a technically sound, but boring image that does not meet your interpretation of light or 3, but is very much AN interpretation of Light or 3 is a serious injustice to the submitter and is at the worst an unfair bias that punishes the submitter for choosing one of many interpretations that were allowed in that kind of an open challenge. yes it is boring, yes it is not what WE would have chosen to submit. But if it qualifies at the challenge level, it should not be punished for not meeting the challenge just because we chose to insert our personal biases into the challenge parameters.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 01:06:24 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Clearly I'm int he minority among those who are commenting to this thread. I take it for granted that bias is being shown in the voting, and don't consider it remarkable in the least. It's easy for anyone to figure out what sort of image is most likely to get high scores, and up to each individual to decide whether that's the sort of image they want to shoot.
Robt. |
While I respect your position here, minority or not, I'd be more inclined toward a culture of improved critical comments and, perhaps, voting as well. We can either play the game for what it is without any expectations beyond this or we can try to contribute a little precision and emphasis in the direction of an improved utility and meaning.
If we choose the second route, our comments, I imagine, will read like many of the ones you, yourself, are in the habit to conribute and less than those otherwise inclined.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 01:09:22 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Arcanist:
... if it qualifies at the challenge level, it should not be punished for not meeting the challenge just because we chose to insert our personal biases into the challenge parameters. |
Mais, oui!
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 01:25:53 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Arcanist:
...To give a 1 to a technically sound, but boring image that does not meet your interpretation of light... |
Agreed. However, that was *not* the case in this issue. The deduction was 1 point - and made 0.000 difference in the final score that the image received. Got a 4 instead of a 5 from me. Big deal, IMO.
If you can't vote your preferences in interpretation of the challenge, why have topical challenges? I normally tend to give great latitude in one's interpretation and very often reward creativity more than I probably should, even if the image is deficient in some way.
I explained why *TO ME* this challenge was a bit different. Photography is all about light, and *I* was looking forward to the type image that ribboned. Clearly, I was not alone. I just had the misfortune of being honest in my comment. Perhaps I should have said "It doesn't seem to meet the challenge?" I think not. It was not what *I* was looking for - just like Bush wasn't - even though he clearly met the requirements (at least on some level).
Different strokes for different folks.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 01:45:52 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by jemison:
Originally posted by Arcanist:
...To give a 1 to a technically sound, but boring image that does not meet your interpretation of light... |
Agreed. However, that was *not* the case in this issue. The deduction was 1 point - and made 0.000 difference in the final score that the image received. Got a 4 instead of a 5 from me. Big deal, IMO.
If you can't vote your preferences in interpretation of the challenge, why have topical challenges? I normally tend to give great latitude in one's interpretation and very often reward creativity more than I probably should, even if the image is deficient in some way.
I explained why *TO ME* this challenge was a bit different. Photography is all about light, and *I* was looking forward to the type image that ribboned. Clearly, I was not alone. I just had the misfortune of being honest in my comment. Perhaps I should have said "It doesn't seem to meet the challenge?" I think not. It was not what *I* was looking for - just like Bush wasn't - even though he clearly met the requirements (at least on some level).
Different strokes for different folks. |
Ah Jem,
Please do not misunderstand. I am in no way saying you are out of line or wrong in voting the way you did, or in adjusting your vote in the manner you identified for the reasons you identified.
I am overstating the extreme that others often seem to take in reference to the interpretation. Your method and comment are very fair to my understanding of responsibility when voting. The process of simply voting a one on images that qualify on the detail, but don't fit the viewer's narrowed expectation is what I am more concerned is rampant and unfair to all submitters.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:04:27 PM · #33 |
| jemison, I found your original comment on the image interesting, because it seems contradictory. Let me first say that I'm a hack compared to many of the people here, and my eye is highly untrained. But, you said "I was looking for lighting not lightweight". To me, the pic in question is extremely well lit. The feather does not seem to be the main subject, since it is nearly silhouetted. Instead, the face seems perfectly lit. I just don't follow the reasoning. |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:05:08 PM · #34 |
As always you have to decide why you're here. Are you here to WIN? If so then stick to high contrast, sharply focused and non-creative interpretations of the challenge. You'll do great.
If, on the other hand, you're here to have fun, learn or excercise your brain and/or creativity then you'll have to learn not to fret too much when people score you down.
/shrug
John |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:09:54 PM · #35 |
yeah, i wish scalvert would get more creative :)
Originally posted by floyd:
As always you have to decide why you're here. Are you here to WIN? If so then stick to high contrast, sharply focused and non-creative interpretations of the challenge. You'll do great.
If, on the other hand, you're here to have fun, learn or excercise your brain and/or creativity then you'll have to learn not to fret too much when people score you down.
/shrug
John |
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:14:01 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by jemison:
...Got a 4 instead of a 5 from me. Big deal, IMO.
...I just had the misfortune of being honest in my comment. Perhaps I should have said "It doesn't seem to meet the challenge?" ...Different strokes for different folks. |
I can, easily, accept your vote. To deduct one point, IMO, also is reasonable. When you say, "I had the misfortune of being honest in my comment", I'd view the aspect of honesty as 'fortunate' and the aspect of regretting this as 'unfortunate'. If you had written "It doesn't seem to meet the challenge?", only the question mark would prevent a reader from jumping to conclusions you would, likely, regard as regrettable.
Instead, what you call 'honesty' could have been more clearly and considerately presented as such, i.e. by articulating why you felt this way instead of merely presenting a personal preference without, clearly, qualifying it.
I have a feeling that you deducted that point not because you had misread the challenge description but because you felt, the particular choice made here had, perhaps, 'missed out' on a potentially greater, more personally satisfying one.
You could have put this opinion of yours even more squarely on your own shoulders, instead of allowing it as to be misread as 'fact', as in 'that's what I do and there it is'.
Your motive, I believe, was carelessness, not ill intent.
I found several 'faults' with this image, actually, and neither voted nor commented on it. My rating of it would have been lower than yours. I, too, would have including a personal observation in my comment, had I made one.
Message edited by author 2005-02-07 14:17:10.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:18:27 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
you can't force people to see things your way..I think that's called Communism :-)
Anyway, at least the comment he left was polite. |
Not to highjack the thread, but I think you are describing Totalitarianism, a state which can emerge under any economic system, not just under state Communism. For example, Iran and Saudi Arabia are far from Communist, but certainly (try to) tell their citizens what to think ...
On this actual voting topic, I think there's a huge difference between marking a photo lower (e.g. 5 to 4 as in this case) and marking it way down (like giving a 1 to an in-focus shot) on the basis of an individual interpretation of the challenge topic. I think in this case the comment was probably, at least partly, misinterpreted. |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:31:38 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
you can't force people to see things your way..I think that's called Communism :-)
|
I think Communism is where everyone shares the same resources, not the same thoughts!
It's actually a great idea, until you throw humans into the mix.
Message edited by author 2005-02-07 14:32:12.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:33:17 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
you can't force people to see things your way..I think that's called Communism :-)
|
I think Communism is where everyone shares the same resources, not the same thoughts!
It's actually a great idea, until you throw humans into the mix. |
"What he said"
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:44:44 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by jemison:
...Got a 4 instead of a 5 from me. Big deal, IMO.
...I just had the misfortune of being honest in my comment. Perhaps I should have said "It doesn't seem to meet the challenge?" ...Different strokes for different folks. |
I can, easily, accept your vote. To deduct one point, IMO, also is reasonable. When you say, "I had the misfortune of being honest in my comment", I'd view the aspect of honesty as 'fortunate' and the aspect of regretting this as 'unfortunate'. If you had written "It doesn't seem to meet the challenge?", only the question mark would prevent a reader from jumping to conclusions you would, likely, regard as regrettable.
Instead, what you call 'honesty' could have been more clearly and considerately presented as such, i.e. by articulating why you felt this way instead of merely presenting a personal preference without, clearly, qualifying it.
I have a feeling that you deducted that point not because you had misread the challenge description but because you felt, the particular choice made here had, perhaps, 'missed out' on a potentially greater, more personally satisfying one.
You could have put this opinion of yours even more squarely on your own shoulders, instead of allowing it as to be misread as 'fact', as in 'that's what I do and there it is'.
Your motive, I believe, was carelessness, not ill intent.
I found several 'faults' with this image, actually, and neither voted nor commented on it. My rating of it would have been lower than yours. I, too, would have including a personal observation in my comment, had I made one. |
I don't really want to belabor the point, but I don't see how I could have "put this opinion of [mine] even more squarely on [my] own shoulders," than I did. My comment on his photo: "i tended to downgrade all the feather interpretations of "light". Probably not fair, i admit, but I was looking for lighting not lightweight" was made for exactly that reason. I explained that it was a purely *personal* bias. How could I have taken it more squarely on my shoulders than that? Maybe I could/should have worded it differently, but the result would have been the same communication. I was looking for "light" not lightweight" and maybe that could be interpreted as unfair.
You win some, you lose some.
BTW, what do you mean that my motive was carelessness? That was not my motive by any means. My motive was to explain my vote. Nothing more or less.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:44:54 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
you can't force people to see things your way..I think that's called Communism :-)
|
I think Communism is where everyone shares the same resources, not the same thoughts!
It's actually a great idea, until you throw humans into the mix. |
It did not work out too well for the farm animals either :) |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:51:31 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
You could have put this opinion of yours even more squarely on your own shoulders, instead of allowing it as to be misread as 'fact', as in 'that's what I do and there it is'.
|
Reading anyone's comment as 'fact' is the fault of the reader, not of the commenter. |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 02:52:28 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by scottwilson:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
you can't force people to see things your way..I think that's called Communism :-)
|
I think Communism is where everyone shares the same resources, not the same thoughts!
It's actually a great idea, until you throw humans into the mix. |
It did not work out too well for the farm animals either :) |
True, but they didn't read Marx carefully enough...they kept screwing up on the details! ...like that little part about the violence...
Message edited by author 2005-02-07 14:53:11.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 03:53:46 PM · #44 |
No-one seems to have mentioned the grammatical problem that this challenge title posed. Regardless of what the sub-title says, a one-word title is always going to be considered a noun: that's the way the language works, I'm afraid, and the reson that the highest placed image that referenced the quality of weight was 29th. 'Light', in reference to a quality of weight, is an adjective.
Consider: the challenge could have been entitled 'Lightness', but it wasn't.
Language is a subtle thing, used and generally understood at a level below the conscious. A challenge title is a name: therefore, a noun.
E |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 04:35:37 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by jemison:
...BTW, what do you mean that my motive was carelessness? That was not my motive by any means. My motive was to explain my vote. Nothing more or less. |
I too should exercise a little precision. What I meant was that the 'cause' for the unfortunate wording was, probably, carelessness, not ill intent. Your motive, I'm sure, was as you said.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 04:44:25 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
You could have put this opinion of yours even more squarely on your own shoulders, instead of allowing it as to be misread as 'fact', as in 'that's what I do and there it is'.
|
Reading anyone's comment as 'fact' is the fault of the reader, not of the commenter. |
I wasn't looking for fault or blame. I was looking at ways to get his intended meaning clearer. A reader can, very easily get a sense of 'that's what I do and there it is'. He can only 'follow' what is there. Depending on the precision of the words, he has either ample leverage or very little to interpret them.
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 05:00:37 PM · #47 |
Didn't bother to read the whole posting...there is always something wrong with voting.
You enter, we vote, you get a score and maybe a comment! That's what it's all about...no big deal, no contracts...it's for fun??
I vote for what I like. You vote for what you like. Damn simple, isn't it?
I don't vote low unless it is way off challenge, too small or crap.
I take crap shots and get low votes, who cares...it's great here!! |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 05:12:45 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Formerlee:
Didn't bother to read the whole posting...there is always something wrong with voting.
You enter, we vote, you get a score and maybe a comment! That's what it's all about...no big deal, no contracts...it's for fun??
I vote for what I like. You vote for what you like. Damn simple, isn't it?
I don't vote low unless it is way off challenge, too small or crap.
I take crap shots and get low votes, who cares...it's great here!! |
Outstanding!!! Applause, applause... I love the no nonsense, tell it like it is approach. Hooray!
|
|
|
|
02/07/2005 06:46:16 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by jemison:
I think it is interesting that the person who started this thread hasn't bothered to post a reply. Like he said...he just wanted to vent. Perhaps he is justified. I'm not the one to judge that. |
I was at my job where I can't connect to DPC to check for reply. I do think that your comment was honest and I don't have any problem with a lower vote. I'm happy with my result in this challenge. The only problem I see is that many voter give low score with a comment that say doesn't fit challenge. In that aspect you did better than most but you comment could have read "it doesn't fit MY interpretation of the challenge". The questions is: If we have someday a fruit challenge, and I submit a shot of a tomato (wich is a fruit) could I get a comment like "sorry but fruit are sweet and a tomato is not!"? |
|
|
|
02/07/2005 07:49:19 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by nicklevy:
... The only problem I see is that many voter give low score with a comment that say doesn't fit challenge. In that aspect you did better than most but you comment could have read "it doesn't fit MY interpretation of the challenge"... |
That is pretty much what he said though, and you still started this thread. (emphasis added by me)
nothing wrong with the shot, but i tended to downgrade all the feather interpretations of "light". Probably not fair, i admit, but I was looking for lighting not lightweight
|
|
