| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/18/2005 01:14:05 PM · #1 |
A comment by Neophyte in the recent spelling thread: "This site isn't as much about quality of photo but about trying to appeal to the fickle public."
This struck me a bit and I'm wondering if there's a way to find out just how fickle DPC voters are. I'm not talking about opinions here, but do we have statistics on:
a) Ratio of ribbon winners to collective voting body. A fickle voter community might produce a larger ratio, as fickle people by nature are less likely to establish a pattern. A smaller ratio should suggest that there is consistency in patterns, and that a small group of photographers, due to their technical abilities and vision, are being recognized by a not-so-fickle voting community.
b) Out of the ribbon winners, what's the percentage that go on to nab another ribbon, or more? This should also establish a baseline of sort on the consistency factor.
Just two stats that I thought might be interesting. Any thought on this?
|
|
|
|
05/18/2005 01:22:01 PM · #2 |
One measure that would show something for each individual would be the Statistically favourite photographer
When compared to the photographer's actual average, it could show you how well do your views of other people's photos compare to the general public.
You'd have to have been a member and voted in many challenges for this comparison to make statistical sense.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2005 01:22:54 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
One measure that would show something for each individual would be the Statistically favourite photographer
When compared to the photographer's actual average, it could show you how well do your views of other people's photos compare to the general public.
You'd have to have been a member and voted in many challenges for this comparison to make statistical sense. |
Yep, but that would be individualized. I'm more interested in the collective behavior.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2005 02:20:02 PM · #4 |
Heida has 13 ribbons, 6 of them blue, in 73 challenges entered:
Challenges Entered: 73
Votes Cast: 24904
Avg Vote Cast: 5.7147
Votes Received: 14973
Avg Vote Received: 6.4760
Her average vote received is 6.4760 (!). This would seem to argue to some consistency in the voters over a considerable timespan.
Another argument for consistency might be a comparison of the blue ribbon in this year's architecture challenge with the top-10 shot by the same photographer in the triangles challenge just completed; basically the same shot, exact same tonalities, slightly different angle, and it damned near ribboned... So the voters, collectively, have shown they'll vote the same thing the same way again, given the opportunity...
I'm not sure how relevant would be an analysis of what percentage of ribboners go on to win another. As the saying goes, "Even a blind pig finds an acorn every now and then." I've always thought that was silly, btw: pigs find acorns through smell... But you get the point.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2005 02:24:31 PM · #5 |
I reckon in several recent challenges there were several shots in each challenge that resembled each other. Are we being used as guinea pigs here, as in someone's plugging in the shots to test our consistency? I know, I know...a group of folks go out shooting together and shoot the same things...
BUT...
|
|
|
|
05/18/2005 02:30:08 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by rgo:
I reckon in several recent challenges there were several shots in each challenge that resembled each other. Are we being used as guinea pigs here, as in someone's plugging in the shots to test our consistency? I know, I know...a group of folks go out shooting together and shoot the same things...
BUT... |
Nah... there's a certain number of "obvious" approaches to a given challenge, and there will always be lookalike images for this reason. "Apples" is full of them, no surprise. Any time you have a sharply-defined subject matter, you're gonna have a lot of "cloned" images basically.
And then there's the fact that some people go to previous challenges to see what worked the first time around, then focus their energies on similar shots, I think...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
05/18/2005 03:05:50 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by rgo:
A comment by Neophyte in the recent spelling thread: "This site isn't as much about quality of photo but about trying to appeal to the fickle public." |
I'm really a statistical kinda guy and have no statistical evidence to support this view, but think that what Neophyte calls "fickle" better reflects the concept of 'meeting the challenge' more so than just being "fickle" per se.
In the 'meet the challenge' concept a photographically inferior image percieved to meet the challenge better will score higher than a photographically superior image percieved to not meet the challenge as well. That is the choice that many voters take. There is nothing wrong with that view but it can easily be misinterpreted as "fickle".
I'd agree that certain photographic styles or subjects will become temporarily popular much like exceptionally good bird-of-prey images have recently done well at DPC.
If that is fickle then so be it. But I tend to think that images of technical superiority will and should score high regardless of subject. Sometimes specific subjects will achieve temporary dominance but that is short term. There is no substitute for quality.
That being said, desert landscapes should become the next great topical area to score high in DPC challenges. :)
|
|
|
|
05/18/2005 03:07:02 PM · #8 |
adine 8.3333 3
p_johns 7.3333 3
toad32 7.3333 3
imolaavant 7.3333 3
VisiBlanco 7.2000 5
daninbc 7.0000 6
ScantyNebula 7.0000 6
smokeditor 7.0000 6
MotoCycleBoi 7.0000 4
micknewton 7.0000 4
heida 7.0000 3
bigjohnny 7.0000 3
clarmore 7.0000 3
tyt2000 6.8182 11
Very interesting!
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/03/2026 11:42:04 AM EST.
