Require Comment On 1 Votes (example included)

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro for Nikon

03/23/2006 01:51:56 PM · #26

I agree with all the points made. I guess the 'point' needs to be whatever the personal objective is. I 'hoped' to use this as a learning community something to get hands on help from. In many cases it just seems to be a contest. OK, my mistake. I know nothing, (or as I am totally learning) almost every comment will teach me something. Nasty comments not needed. At-a-boys are good ego boosts and just as necessary.

Since I complained about the lack of comments, ladymonarda, glad2badad and mk have given me very indepth comments. That is what I was looking for. Now I have an idea what was so bad about the pic.

I view photography as a craft. I assumed that crafty people shared their crafts. I am far more knowledgable on stitchery crafts and share that expertise 24/7.

For the majority of the people this is just a competition site. I will keep that in mind. I feel I learn something everyday simply from reading the posts.

Again, thank you for all the learning I receive from every single post made in these forums.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

03/23/2006 01:52:30 PM · #27

Originally posted by rswank:

... Unless you have some degenerative eye disease even seeing the world differently would never warrant a 1 for an image that is so far from being on the crap end of any criteria of judging...
A 1 for this?

I'm not advocating this, but maybe someone has a very strong dislike for guns and violence ("Kill" in the title). They could have skipped it and not voted on it, or they're making their own personal statement with their vote. Who knows? Maybe it WAS a troll that slipped the anti-troll algorithms. ;^)

mosall

Nikon D80

03/23/2006 02:08:40 PM · #28

I gave "big fat kill" a very high grade. However, some people see things differently and that certainly is their prerogative. Why should we waste our time trying to explain or rationalize the irrational?

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

03/23/2006 02:16:22 PM · #29

Originally posted by stdavidson:

It is not a good idea to require comments under any conditions. It is well intentioned, but wrong. It smacks of "big brother is watching" and controling the behavior of the membership. The road to tyranny is paved with good intentions.

Aren't we being a little melodramatic here? Besides, the second editing rules, forum etiquette, etc., were introduced that road started to get paved. You call it tyranny others could call it progress. ;)

Message edited by author 2006-03-23 14:16:58.

wheeledd

Panasonic LUMIX-DMC ZS100

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/23/2006 02:16:23 PM · #30

Originally posted by rswank:

Originally posted by wheeledd:
I know that there are people who see differently and there is not much I can learn from their explanation.

Absolutely true that there are different perceptions.
Unless you have some degenerative eye disease even seeing the world differently would never warrant a 1 for an image that is so far from being on the crap end of any criteria of judging...
A 1 for this?

Again, the goal is to give pause to those voting 1's that truly are not even below average.

Ryan,

You have misunderstood what I meant about differences in perception. I'm talking about aesthetic judgments; this has nothing to do with eye disease. I can easily imaging a photography instructor (with 20/20 vision) telling a student that the image you presented by Qart is really horrible (trite and melodramatic) and saying that the student should reshoot something else for an assignment on Literary Adventures. (I have had the experience of taking a photography class from an instructor whose vision was quite different from mine. I did not learn much from him.)

You also talked about images "that truly are not even below average." I think a large part of the problem here is that you believe in Truth. I'm sorry, there is no TRUTH.

You liked Qart's image and you regard your views as reflecting the Truth about the image. I also liked Qart's image very much, but I find it easy to understand how some people could think it is worthless and deserving of a 1.

Although there is no Truth here, the voting process gives us a valuable consensus about the quality of the images. To try to force people to justify some of their votes would interfere with this process and would reduce the value of the results.

--Dan

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

03/23/2006 02:24:01 PM · #31

I've brought this up in the past and have never gotten any reasons as to why this is a bad idea so I'll post it again:

Lets have checkboxes on the voting page under the heading of "What you don't like about this photo". Have a series of options to choose from (composition, lighting, editing, etc) where voters can easily indicate to the photographer what they didn't like without having to leave comments to that affect. Then afterwards the photographer could get a statistical breakdown on the number of checkboxes checked and get a consensus view of your photo that goes beyond just the score. If you think that's too much work for the voter than maybe just require this for votes of 4 or lower? What's wrong with that? It's simple, it gives more information to the photographer, it may even reduce overall negativity. What's not to like?

Message edited by author 2006-03-23 14:25:59.

mosall

Nikon D80

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro for Nikon

03/23/2006 02:25:03 PM · #32

That might not be a bad idea at all actually. I think the checkbox system is a good idea.

MikeO

Fujifilm x100

03/23/2006 02:47:53 PM · #33

Challenges Entered: 2
Votes Cast: 1826
Avg Vote Cast: 3.6325
Votes Received: 510
Avg Vote Received: 4.4157

Hey Ryan - just looking at your stats above your avg vote cast is pretty low!!

03/23/2006 02:52:34 PM · #34

re: checkbox idea
...And it would really reduce hard feelings to those inclined to be hurt, leading to less rant/flames etc.

Wheeldd, the eye disease comment was facetious.
I can understand that a photography instructor may blast that pic for one reason or another but I think there is nearly unanimous consensus that a 1 communicates that the image is wretched and was perhaps a waste of time having been posted.
Not real sure on your "truth" waxing but I think it's fair to say that it is true that Qart's image (and those like his that receive ones - otherwise high scoring shots) is somehow degenerate to the worst degree in any judgement category - focus, lighting, composition, 'triteness' etc.

How do you "find it easy to understand how some people could think it is worthless and deserving of a 1."
By what criteria or combination of criteria could you fathom this image (or ajschel's memory lane for road) be perceived as being so wretched as outweighing all other criteria enough to warrant it being considered as one of the worst of the worst?

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

03/23/2006 02:56:38 PM · #35

Originally posted by MikeOwens:

Hey Ryan - just looking at your stats above your avg vote cast is pretty low!!

Ok, your point being?
I give out lots of 3's and often 2's.
I've also voted in relatively few challenges and have since adjusted my scoring upwards by an average of +2 or so.

My low ave. vote probably has more to do with my definition of average.
I don't think half of the pics in all challenges need to be 1-5 and half 6-10.
I see "average" in the subjective non-statistical sense of the word.
And see lots of "average" snapshot quality shots entered.

Canon EOS-20D

03/23/2006 03:09:31 PM · #36

Originally posted by rswank:

Originally posted by MikeOwens:

Hey Ryan - just looking at your stats above your avg vote cast is pretty low!!

Ok, your point being?
I give out lots of 3's and often 2's.
I've also voted in relatively few challenges and have since adjusted my scoring upwards by an average of +2 or so.

My low ave. vote probably has more to do with my definition of average.
I don't think half of the pics in all challenges need to be 1-5 and half 6-10.
I see "average" in the subjective non-statistical sense of the word.
And see lots of "average" snapshot quality shots entered.

Just out of curiousity, have you left a comment on every shot you voted a 1?

peecee

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/23/2006 03:15:48 PM · #37

I thought the idea here was to learn, that is done by getting away from the snapshot and taking more time and effort in your shots, the same should go for voting, I start everyone off on my average which is 5..then alter according to quality, sharpness,care in composition,which is usually lacking in a snapshot. etc.etc.
We are given a scale of 1 to 10 why not use it? of course there are some shots I will give 1s or 2s but not as an average.
I have seen many pictures here that deserve ribbons yet only scrape through on mid 5s..that is the quality to aim for.

edit. sorry for the rant but if I give a 1 it doesn't merit a comment cos it is bad, and the person that took it will probably know that.

Message edited by author 2006-03-23 15:17:52.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

03/23/2006 03:32:15 PM · #38

Originally posted by mk:

Just out of curiousity, have you left a comment on every shot you voted a 1?

As SC I think you may have easier access to that info than I (maybe my perception of SC's datamining tools are more extensive than they are ;)
But, no I have not left comments on all of my 1's (about 7 or so after a cursory search).
But I'd have no problem leaving a comment if compelled to do so and on second glance I see that a photo I gave a 1 to was not deserving of it and probably would have bumped it up to a 2 or 3 if being forced to critically reconsider.
I also have not voted a 1 for any shots that even cracked the top 100 if that matters at all, and I think it does as one of the goals of implementing a check like this is to help reduce unwarranted 1's - and rants, bashes etc.

But I guess nobody really cares or think this idea sucks.
So I'll drop it.

Louis

Nikon D800

03/23/2006 03:39:57 PM · #39

Originally posted by rswank:

And all my monitors have been calibrated with Adobe Gamma tool. (If someone has a better suggestion for calibration I'm all ears.)

ColorVision Spyder.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

03/23/2006 03:50:02 PM · #40

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by rswank:
And all my monitors have been calibrated with Adobe Gamma tool. (If someone has a better suggestion for calibration I'm all ears.)

ColorVision Spyder.

Saw that before and wondered if it was worth it.
How do you like it?
Would be nice if the local shop rented it out so I wouldn't have to drop ~200.

thanks

Louis

Nikon D800

03/23/2006 05:02:09 PM · #41

Originally posted by rswank:

Saw that before and wondered if it was worth it.
How do you like it?

I wouldn't turn on my monitor without it. :) It's well worth the cost, especially combined with their PrintFix scanner/software bundle. You get prints that look pretty much identical to what you see on your screen. (No, I don't work for ColorVision.) ;)

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

03/23/2006 05:22:40 PM · #42

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by rswank:
Saw that before and wondered if it was worth it.
How do you like it?

I wouldn't turn on my monitor without it. :)

If you have a CRT monitor, you should let it warm up for 30-60 minutes before doing serious work or calibration. I suspect it doesn't make a difference with LCD monitors.

I never thought of it before, but I wonder if a lot of color management "problems" come from people being "good" and calibrating their monitor as soon as they get to the office ...

Louis

Nikon D800

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

03/23/2006 08:29:38 PM · #43

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by rswank:
Saw that before and wondered if it was worth it.
How do you like it?

I wouldn't turn on my monitor without it. :)

If you have a CRT monitor, you should let it warm up for 30-60 minutes before doing serious work or calibration. I suspect it doesn't make a difference with LCD monitors.

I never thought of it before, but I wonder if a lot of color management "problems" come from people being "good" and calibrating their monitor as soon as they get to the office ...

Not sure what you mean, but calibration is usually a good thing. Do it once, and the profile is loaded each time you log in to your computer (not necessary to do it with each use, though it's a good idea to recalibrate on a regular basis due to the inevitable colour "drift" every monitor experiences over time).

It's recommended to let LCD monitors warm up for at least 60 minutes as well.

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

03/23/2006 08:35:22 PM · #44

I've said this before and you don't have to agree.

Inspired comments are always better than forced ones. Not all images inspire people to comment.

theSaj

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

03/23/2006 08:55:33 PM · #45

IMHO...if it inspires you to give a "1" then yeah, I think you can comment why.

theSaj

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

03/23/2006 09:02:08 PM · #46

This isssue is most definitive when it comes to ribbon winners which receive a "1"

I do not believe a ribbon winner can justly be given a "1". It's not about the differences of inspiration and emotional reaction of different people. It's the matter that ribbon photographs need to be technically decent, and reasonably nice photographs.

No technically decent reasonably nice photograph merits a "1". It's not a matter of opinion. One may not like the subject matter, or may feel it's been done before, etc, etc, etc. All the opinions in the world could be there but such photos are still technically decent. Thus a "1" is an inaccurate vote. It's like giving an Olympic diver a score of a "1" simply because you don't like certain flips. Doing so, is not judging...

bcoble

Olympus E-300 EVOLT

Olympus 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Digital ED

03/23/2006 09:31:19 PM · #47

For someone like myself that get's low numbers alot I look at it this way. We complain alot when we get 1's yet we dont when we get 10's.
Why? We know that in most cases the image did not warrant a 10 yet we accept that and not a 1. I personaly have never given any image a one. Perhaps a couple of 2's and I have voted over 10K times. If you can get the image on this site it is worth at least a 2+. Anyway my point is for the people that complain for that score or scores of 1. Look at the tens and see if they really apply. You take the good with the bad. It all averages out in the end anyway.

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

03/23/2006 10:54:01 PM · #48

Originally posted by bcoble:

I think some people have this crazy notion that the 9s and 10s are all justified and that may well be for some exceptional images. However just because a photo ribbons doesn't make it worthy of a 10. Hell, anything that looks like stock photography is not a 10 in my book. I need something more inspiring then just an exercise in technical expertise.

Message edited by author 2006-03-23 22:55:18.

klstover

Panasonic DMC-FZ8

03/23/2006 11:31:08 PM · #49

It seems to me that if someone thinks certain votes aren't justified, then it would make more sense if he or she were to submit photos to a site where a judge or panel of judges rates the photos. Assuming those are out there, of course. That way the person would be able to look at the tastes and expertise of the judge or judges, and decide for themselves if they think those attributes qualifies them to judge their pictures.

I definitely agree that some votes just don't make sense, but I also feel that is part of the inherent nature of a site like this where photos get rated by everybody.

Makka