| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/22/2005 10:05:30 PM · #1 |
In hindsight, I actually think every photo I have uploaded that bombs out deserves its lousy score.... but occationally there is a photo that you upload that you know will ribbon!!... only to rank in the 10% percentile at 4.123. ;-(
We could have a "challenge" where you could upload the same file that has already been voted on that bombed the first time. It would be like "Best of 2005 That Should Have Scored Higher" vote.
People could only upload a truly bad score. They will find out once and for all that they were actually "robbed" or if the photo is "really lame" and get over it.
Am I on to something, or should I cut off my fingers?
|
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:12:18 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:13:33 PM · #3 |
| Thanks for the bump anyway ;-) |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:14:10 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by gusto:
Yes. |
I agree. "Yes."
Edit: Yes, you are not on to something. No, you should not cut off your fingers as they are, perhaps, your best road to enlightenment. And, no, I haven't looked at any of your pictures....
Message edited by author 2005-05-22 22:16:27.
|
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:16:50 PM · #5 |
This could be a truly hilarious, eye-wrenching competition, depending on what the cutoff value was.
My general observation has been that if you ended up with less than 4.5, you probably did something wrong. If you ended up above 6.0, you definitely did something right, though you may not be able to figure out exactly what. Everything in between is a crap shoot. I keep reading image descriptions even in the top 20 where the photographer didn't expect it to score well at all. I also end up finding underdogs in just about every competition that I gave 8-10, but that scored in the bottom 40%... but they're generally still above 4.5 average. |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:18:36 PM · #6 |
| Oh this would be very neat. Would you be allowed to submit "corrected" versions based on original comments if you wanted to? For example, a different crop or cloning of minor elements? |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:19:29 PM · #7 |
| That would make it more interesting to vote on for sure. |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:30:04 PM · #8 |
While this could be a good idea, especially being able to submit a corrected version; I wonder if, and I'm not saying this happens cause I don't know but it could, an image may do better or worse because the fact that the owner of the picture is known since it was already voted on once. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:34:00 PM · #9 |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:51:32 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by sabphoto:
While this could be a good idea, especially being able to submit a corrected version; I wonder if, and I'm not saying this happens cause I don't know but it could, an image may do better or worse because the fact that the owner of the picture is known since it was already voted on once. Just a thought. |
Quite right, it's possible. Would that still count for the stinkers, though? The only low-scoring one I actually can remember is from the self-portrait challenge, and only because there was lots of forum discussion about it.
For instance, I have one that I thought would score better but I got a lot of comments about "not meeting challenge" and I'd be interested if the score improved in a different setting, or if it was just truly a below-average shot. |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 10:55:35 PM · #11 |
I don't think it would be much fun to vote/re-vote a bunch of "stinkers".
Lets face it we all have shots that we thought were winners..the public DPC voters didn't.
O'well, if you like them that's all that matters really. Love your art!! |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 11:03:52 PM · #12 |
I think that photos that finished in the 10% range finished there for a very good reason, lets not put ourselves through hell having to re vote on them.
Everyone has great photos and everyone has photos that majorly suck. Sure sometimes you will be disappointed with something, but then you read the comments and you learn from it and move on.
I don't believe in 'being robbed'. If I take a photo that I truely love that much and it doesn't do too well, I am still proud of my efforts and therefore am a winner.
|
|
|
|
05/22/2005 11:11:25 PM · #13 |
| I think it could be fun... (I actually don't think I've been completely robbed yet) but the problem is that if we have like a score cut-off for entry, chances are the winner of this challenge will just be a great shot, that got a low score because it didn't meet the challenge it was submitted too. I've seen plenty of really great shots end up in the fours for that very reason - and in a lot of those cases (with the exception of the creative challenge interpretations that most didn't get) the person could hardly claim to have been robbed. |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 11:25:39 PM · #14 |
i like the general idea of it but i would like to see some of the loose ends tied together, for example is there a socre cut-off? are corrected versions allowed?
Another somewhat related idea is to have a deja-vu challenge for the brown ribbon shots instead of the top three. And maybe the lowest rated shot wins the blue instead of the highest, so people have to try to make their shots as bad as possible. I think it would be hilarious and a change of pace around here.
|
|
|
|
05/22/2005 11:28:27 PM · #15 |
I've got some low-scoring images that I don't want to see again.
And, no you don't want to see them either, honest. |
|
|
|
05/22/2005 11:40:20 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by JoelHSmith:
People could only upload a truly bad score. They will find out once and for all that they were actually "robbed" or if the photo is "really lame" and get over it.
Am I on to something, or should I cut off my fingers? |
Then your poor photo would only compete with other poor photos, so all we would see get ribbons is the least worst. ;-) AND - you will want to cut off your fingers if your entry gets the brown and is known as the worst of the worst. :)
Best to forget that photo and move on. I did suggest a "Do Over" where you could at least enter your alternate ideas or shots for past bad scoring challenges.
It doesn't bother me if my entry scores badly unless it's one of several ideas or shots I had - then it always leaves me wondering... :(
|
|
|
|
05/23/2005 12:16:28 AM · #17 |
what of we could "do over" the shot. using the constructive comments made. and I know a bad pics gets lots of comments and see if there is an improvement. It would have to be a split screen thing old shot new shot, but it would certainly show growth as a photographer.
Just my 2 cents
Karen |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 12:28:51 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by khdoss:
what of we could "do over" the shot. using the constructive comments made. and I know a bad pics gets lots of comments and see if there is an improvement. It would have to be a split screen thing old shot new shot, but it would certainly show growth as a photographer.
Just my 2 cents
Karen |
I'd be ok with that - probably too complicated logistically though. The more I think about it it, the more I think particular type of suggestion will never go anywhere and I'm pretty ok with that - the stakes are not that high in these challenges that I can't just learn from it and move on. :)
|
|
|
|
05/23/2005 12:38:13 AM · #19 |
| well we could do it as thread.. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 01:42:45 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by A1275:
Originally posted by sabphoto:
While this could be a good idea, especially being able to submit a corrected version; I wonder if, and I'm not saying this happens cause I don't know but it could, an image may do better or worse because the fact that the owner of the picture is known since it was already voted on once. Just a thought. |
Quite right, it's possible. Would that still count for the stinkers, though? The only low-scoring one I actually can remember is from the self-portrait challenge, and only because there was lots of forum discussion about it. |
That'd be me, right? Immortality of a sort... jejeje�
Robt.
|
|
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: 06/16/2025 10:48:42 AM EDT.
