| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/24/2005 06:57:18 PM · #1 |
I just finished my first pass at voting on Stock Photography II, and I have to tell you I'm "all shook up."
By way of background, on my first pass, I give a 4, 5 or 6 to each image. Then I come back and bump the 6's to fill out the top of the league table. And I bump the 4's to fill out the bottom of the league table.
So why the drama? I found myself giving more 6's than I ever have. I am wondering why! I don't believe this challenge is populated with significantly better photos than previous challenges. I think that I am applying a different filter to the photos ... "Can I see them on Corbis, Getty, or Shutterstock?" and "Do I think there might be mass appeal?" And finally, "Would they sell?"
I find I'm not voting for what I think are the very best photos, but only the best in that context. And it's skewing my whole voting pattern.
Anybody else experiencing this? |
|
|
|
03/24/2005 07:05:52 PM · #2 |
But isn't that what the challenge is all about? Voting should be based on fitting the challenge, so a brilliant photo that doesn't fit the challenge shouldn't win.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2005 07:23:43 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
...a brilliant photo that doesn't fit the challenge shouldn't win. |
What kind of photo would u consider not to meet the challenge?
Stock would be virtually anything.
I agree with ur statement, but in this particular challenge, you have to image what kind of situation would a particular photo will be suitable. a Beach photo has nothing to do at all with a flower photo, but based on what would u consider one as "stock" and the other one as "not stock"?
|
|
|
|
03/24/2005 07:51:32 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by scuds:
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
...a brilliant photo that doesn't fit the challenge shouldn't win. |
What kind of photo would u consider not to meet the challenge?
|
I can't think of anything particular, but sometimes you'd just look at a picture and feel that it's not going to be particularly useful. On the other hand something may not be particularly artistic, but you just know that lots of people are going to find it useful - especially so when you've been looking at what kind of pictures are most popular on some of the stock sites.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2005 07:53:47 PM · #5 |
Funny, I perceive my photo as very useful,, as well as something that I am positive everybody wants... still, it's not doing well.
Ray |
|
|
|
03/24/2005 08:07:41 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Funny, I perceive my photo as very useful,, as well as something that I am positive everybody wants... still, it's not doing well.
Ray |
I might have said the same, but for once I'm getting quite a few comments and I definitely plan to rework the idea I've used for this entry. My score is probably about what I deserve.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2005 08:11:57 PM · #7 |
Heh, I was certain I would get several comments suggesting mine's "not a stock photo" but so far I've gotten 15 comments, and not a one suggests that. Three commentors actually noted that it was well in line with the challenge. Guess I misread the voters... LOL, no real surprise there.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2005 08:19:19 PM · #8 |
I tried to vote with a stock head on in this challenge. Rather than looking at the aesthetic quality of the photo i voted more towards the technically correct side of the photo. Stock photos tend to be just a good straight forward shot of a single subject.
Oh, and i`m pleased mine is hovering around 7 which i think Kirbic`s is to, as well as a couple of others.
Message edited by author 2005-03-24 20:29:34.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2005 09:00:24 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by marbo:
Stock photos tend to be just a good straight forward shot of a single subject.
|
I'm afraid it is sooo much more complex then that. I haven't seen one in the challenge yet that would not qualify as "stock".
And yet some twerp thought so much of my entry to comment it did not meet the challenge. Tell me the lighting is bad or maybe the focus is soft. Loser.
|
|
|
|
03/24/2005 09:09:17 PM · #10 |
I got a comment saying my entry was not very unique or interesting. I didn't know stock shots were supposed to be unique or interesting. I thought they were supposed to be sort of generic and technically flawless. Mine is doing poorly and it ticks me off because I put in a shot that I didn't really care for too much but I thought fit the challenge and is technically flawless. Back to the drawing board.
|
|
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: 09/06/2025 07:17:07 AM EDT.
