| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/11/2003 07:09:04 AM · #1 |
Not that I've been scoring al lthat well in general in the challenges, but I am currently running a 3.2 average in the Magazine Cover challenge.
Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but a 3.2 to me says "off-topic and not a great photo" and/or "on topic but crappy photo". Given the nature of the challenge, it's virtually imposible to be off-topic. I picked a subject that I know for a FACT has appeared, in general terms, on my chosen magazine, so it can't be that. The magazine exists. It's not so terribly niche-specific as to be incomprehensible to a peruser of the title to know what types of things would be in it without randomly guessing. And, trying to look at my shot objectively, I think it's actually better, and certainly NOT worse, than my past entries.
So I am now at the "WHAT THE HELL DOES IT TAKE TO SATISFY YOU PEOPLE? ARE YOU ON CRACK OR JUST CRANKY?" portion of the reaction.
I give up. *throws hands in air* Really. It is not possible for me to satisfy you people.
I am this frustrated because I spent HOURS on setup, after thinking about what I wanted to do for days. And because NOT A SINGLE ONE of 41 voters has left a comment saying how you could possibly think my photo is that lousy.
3.2. FEH. FEH, I say. I am going back to bed, and I'm not voting or commenting. I'm too cranky. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 07:15:08 AM · #2 |
gachyk,
LOL. We posted just about the same thing at just about the same time. Wanna go have our own challenge? :-D
Shari
|
|
|
|
06/11/2003 07:17:29 AM · #3 |
Maybe alot of people think it isn't a very good or interesting or what ever.. kind of photo but you do. Maybe we don't all have the same views on what is nice to look at and what is not....no, that might be too extreme.?
Message edited by author 2003-06-11 07:19:20.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2003 07:34:16 AM · #4 |
hehe.. kinda the same thing happened to me.. as i was voting last night, i was seeing my score dive and dive into the depths of hell.. i spent a heck of a long time on my photo.. only yo see it start at 5.5.. and spiral down.. I had told myself if it dipped under 5 that i'd stop voting that night cuz then i'd start to probably lower my votes for others.. And i was giving some pretty generous votes..when i saw my score go to 4.9, with no comments.. i thought.. ok, i'll go to bed.. maybe i'll wake up with a 5.5. and a few votes telling me why it sucks.. i wake up and it's 4.7 with one comment saying they like it.. ugh.. i'm going to comment on most of my lower voted shots this week cuz i feel the frustration.. i just wish someone could be blunt and say whats wrong.. rude or not, i dont care, i wanna know why :).. in some miracle of fate, i had gotten two 6's in a row, and it seems it was just a fluke, cuz i thought this was another one :) ... oh well, this'll go in my pile of "i like it but no one lese does" pile :)
i had shown this photo to my non-photography friends, and they'll usually tell me outright if they like it or not.. and i didn't get the feeling over the past few days that they didn't like it.. quite a few said they liked it.. usually that'll mean atleast a 5.5 .. pretty much an average photo.. but i wasn't expecting this... ah well.. i guess you cant predict them all hehe
|
|
|
|
06/11/2003 09:07:53 AM · #5 |
[quote=qachyk] I give up. *throws hands in air* Really. It is not possible for me to satisfy you people.
don't ever give up.
Message edited by author 2003-06-11 09:08:10. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 09:15:12 AM · #6 |
| The most disapointing thing in these challenges is that the winners are the most of the time pictures taken in black/white or sepia... I don't know why the voters dont't like color pics ??!!?? |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 10:21:43 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by eweb:
The most disapointing thing in these challenges is that the winners are the most of the time pictures taken in black/white or sepia... I don't know why the voters dont't like color pics ??!!?? |
Oh, I don't know, but I thik they DO like colour ... |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 10:28:40 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by eweb:
The most disapointing thing in these challenges is that the winners are the most of the time pictures taken in black/white or sepia... I don't know why the voters dont't like color pics ??!!?? |
You´re wrong! Look in the archive and count.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2003 10:29:16 AM · #9 |
| In another thread they are saying the winners are all saturated color shots. LOL So they're either saturated color shots or BW/Sepia shots, yes? Anyway, they're clean, sharp, detailed and fit the challenge perfectly. And, what the heck, they're great shots! |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 10:38:22 AM · #10 |
I found this magazine cover challenge to be one of the most challenge to vote on. I know many of the magazines for which covers are suggested, and also know that x photo would never appear on that cover, so I initially gave it a lower score (by two points or so) because of that. But I have also noted that I am moving them around a lot now because I figure that they took a photo, found a magazine that looked like it would house their photo and submitted it. And this is pretty much what I did!
So now I've decided to be give photographers the benefit of the doubt and simply go by whether or not the photo is true to the SUBJECT it declares for itself by the title--just as I hope they do for me, if they know that MY magazine would never print MY photo on its cover!
However, I do look at challenge photos several times, and I move them around up until the final end of voting--and I usually move them up the more I see them. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 02:29:07 PM · #11 |
Yes, to the person who made the snotty comment about this, I realize not everyone has the same idea of what constitutes a good photograph. A 3.2 to me does not say "not very interesting", it says "bad".
Yes, I'm still averaging around there, with almost 80 votes in. Most of 80 people think my shot is bad. None of them have commented on why. As compared to my Office Art Shot, which is averaging only a few tenths better but at least has six comments.
The thing is, I DO think my chosen magazine would print a photo like mine on the cover, or I wouldn't have entered it. Maybe not exactly the same, but something very similar. So yeah, I'm still frustrated, and I'm not entering either of the upcoming challenges, even though I had an idea for one of them.
If I were averaging a 4, I wouldn't be frustrated. I would be disappointed, but not frustrated.
Someday I'm going to start an art-rating site that absolutely requires people to leave comments on any vote 3 or below. I swear I am. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 02:44:06 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by qachyk:
Yes, to the person who made the snotty comment about this, I realize not everyone has the same idea of what constitutes a good photograph. A 3.2 to me does not say "not very interesting", it says "bad".
Yes, I'm still averaging around there, with almost 80 votes in. Most of 80 people think my shot is bad. None of them have commented on why. As compared to my Office Art Shot, which is averaging only a few tenths better but at least has six comments.
The thing is, I DO think my chosen magazine would print a photo like mine on the cover, or I wouldn't have entered it. Maybe not exactly the same, but something very similar. So yeah, I'm still frustrated, and I'm not entering either of the upcoming challenges, even though I had an idea for one of them.
If I were averaging a 4, I wouldn't be frustrated. I would be disappointed, but not frustrated.
Someday I'm going to start an art-rating site that absolutely requires people to leave comments on any vote 3 or below. I swear I am. |
I am in almost exactly the same position, but at 3.7. My shot may be a little boring, but I don't see how it is possible for it to be more on-topic or better cropped/laid-out. 70 votes, 0 comments.
As I mentioned in another thread, this is the first time in about 75 challenges that I'm finding the voters (at least so far) to be significantly off-base. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 02:46:14 PM · #13 |
| I, personally, am on crack. I have to smoke crack to wade thru 240 photos. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 03:00:19 PM · #14 |
hey, dont be upset...i encountered that before, look im still here...some voters said...got a lousy image, out of topic...below 4 rating...my entry disqualifed but i dont care.
just enjoy the challenge...art is not perfect...and voters are subjectives. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 03:02:56 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I, personally, am on crack. I have to smoke crack to wade thru 240 photos. |
Please be aware that cocaine in any form can induce ventricular fibrillation (essentially cardiac arrest) at virtually any dose (like one hit off a crack pipe). Additionally, it is probably the leading cause of stroke in men under age fifty, and can trigger coronary angiospasm leading to heart attack. In higher doses, it will induce seizures.
I strongly encourage the immediate substitution of safer stimulants, such as caffeine and related theobromines (coffee, tea, chocolate, sodas) or perhaps even nicotine gum. A quick jog of 15-20 laps around your workstation might work too ...
Sorry, but I'm obligated to give a serious response to what I hope was a satirical comment--it's my (day) job. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 03:03:50 PM · #16 |
I like the system on PhotoBlink. Each image has a scoring range (usually 5 through 8) in which votes can be anonymous. If you want to score lower OR higher than the range, then a comment MUST be given or the score isn't accepted.
|
|
|
|
06/11/2003 03:05:55 PM · #17 |
| I could work with that, although I think I'd rather have the range from 4-7. |
|
|
|
06/11/2003 04:24:29 PM · #18 |
My score always does the inevitable 6, 5, 4, 3.5 before going back up - I think people see the results from LAST week and start voting immediately. I think voting should not be allowed for the first 6 hours after results are posted. This would keep people from 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 1, 2, 3, 3, 2, 1 on the first 50 shots they see to feel vindicated.
|
|
|
|
06/17/2003 04:15:51 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I, personally, am on crack. I have to smoke crack to wade thru 240 photos. |
John,
in my lengthy 2-weeks as a user of this site, I have to say that my estimation of you has dropped somewhat. Are you really on dope?
Where I live, spontaneous humour is non-existent and there's no irony. Please inform.
Jim
|
|
|
|
06/17/2003 04:56:12 AM · #20 |
| if it's comforting for you guys here, i'm having the worst score for magazine cover as well. i just hit a new low! LOL And heck, I'm still happy because now i know I'm special, and I see things differently from the crowd :) If I'm to rate my own pic, I'd give it a 1. |
|
|
|
06/17/2003 05:42:24 AM · #21 |
gachyk: the only advice i have for you is to invest in a new camera whenever possible. I checked out your profile and I see that you know that your lack of better equipment is what's keeping you from scoring better as well. You have a good eye for photography and choose what I think are interesting subjects. The camera is simply working against you and not for you, as it should be. Personally, if I had the guts to submit unedited photos from the camera you're using I would consider a 6 like a 10, so then a 4 would be like an 8, etc. Don't be discouraged by it, it's just the way it is. My camera's not so great either (but it's still better than yours); I try to remember the influence that has on the voters in general. It's a shame that it causes you to get less feedback though, since thats what the sites all about.
oh... the crack discussion is hilarious btw. i wish i had something ridiculous to add to it at the moment, but i don't, so carry on... |
|
|
|
06/17/2003 07:42:08 AM · #22 |
virtually any camera newer than 3 years old should be able to produce images of reasonable enough quality to satisfy picky challenge voters. particularly if used judiciously within its "comfortable range".
as usual then, the question of what makes a good or bad picture comes down to 'what you point the camera at'.
1.2 mpx camera //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=13873
1.3 mpx camera //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=12268
on a different note, in my time at dpc i've gotten several scores in the 3's and MANY scores in the 4's. I've wanted to strangle the 'stupid voters' many many times.
All this should tell you is that you have perhaps some things to learn - maybe about lighting, about composition, about objective vs subjective appeal. If i were you, i would look at it as a catalyst for growth, learning, and critical self-examination :).
Oh, and this is what too much crack/dpc voting can do to you:
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=398
Best of luck!!
Message edited by author 2003-06-17 07:43:43.
|
|
|
|
06/17/2003 09:00:44 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
virtually any camera newer than 3 years old should be able to produce images of reasonable enough quality to satisfy picky challenge voters. particularly if used judiciously within its "comfortable range". |
If my poor camera could talk it'd be crying at me most of the time, I think, given how far I push it beyond what it could be reasonably expected to do! It's not *its* fault, it is what it is, but I'm addicted to low-light shots and shots in lights that it just does NOT know how to make reasonable color balance out of. And it's far too new for me to even be thinking of pouring money into another one (although I *really* want manual exposure control and manual aperture and 800ASA and and and and ...).
|
|
|
|
06/17/2003 11:11:51 AM · #24 |
I feel so low over the score that my photo is getting in the magazine
challenge that I am not planning to enter another challenge. I did not
think that my photo was a winning one but thought it would get a decent
score. My camera is new and I am just learning to use it.
I will stay here to read, look at all of the pictures, and vote if I
have time until my year's membership is up . Hopefully I will learn
some things from this. I hate to think that I have wasted my money but
so be it.
Message edited by author 2003-06-17 11:15:37. |
|
|
|
06/17/2003 11:46:45 AM · #25 |
I'm on Heineken kegs aand I love giving 3's!
Here is 3 something ! HEHE
Message edited by author 2003-06-17 11:48:04.
|
|
