| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/30/2008 09:40:32 AM · #1 |
I apologize for starting what may be another dead-horse topic, but I think I may be asking the question slightly differently this time.
I realize that not everyone has the same criteria when they vote. To me however, a vote of 3 says "This is the average snapshot taken by someone who knows nothing about photography", and a 2 is not even a decent snapshot.
For instance, I took this photo of my daughter with a 2Mp P&S (before I got serious about this pastime) and this is something I would give a vote of 3 on:
I do realize that not everyone uses that same criteria or scale, and I am trying to gain some insight so that I don't get insulted when people give my entry an extremely low vote. I did recently get some feedback from a member (who I will not call out) that has a strict standards and a low voting average. I have a better understanding of what this person expects, even if I disagree with their criteria.
I have suspected that where I try to use a scale of Bad<--->Good, others may be using a scale of I Don't Like it<--->I Like it. Might be a subtle difference there, but there is one.
To start off, I will often low vote a shot with heavy and obvious compression artifacts and a small file size. I think it is easy to avoid and kills detail. Sometimes the entry is otherwise decent and might get a 5 from me except for that. (I always leave a comment about it)
So, what I want to know, is this: If you tend to give 2's and 3's to entries that most members would consider to be at least a decent effort, what is your criteria? |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 03:48:13 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 03:56:06 PM · #3 |
It's like going around a crowded tourist area and asking thousands of individuals which busker they like the best and why, in the hopes of tuning in to what the best busking activity to start would be.
You're going to get close to a thousand different answers, and you will end up more confused than you were in the beginning.
Here are all the reasons that I personally feel people vote low:
1. They don't like the photo for one of near infinite reasons.
2. They are mad their score isn't doing so well.
3. They have a lower voting scale than others.
4. Personal vendetta.
5. They got yelled at by their boss/mom/dad/spouse/hot dog vendor, and came home grumpy.
6. Not enough beer.
7. They got their pubic hair caught in a zipper.
My point is, no matter how you ask this question, you're never going to get a satisfactory answer. Low votes happen. Accept them when they happen. Period.
Work more instead on finding a way to connect in a stronger way to the core voting, listening to the reactions you do get, and studying the reactions on the photos that do well. (If, that is, your main intention is to submit photographs that score better.)
We focus too much on the negative. This needs to stop. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 03:58:26 PM · #4 |
I rarely give 2s and 3s, and 1s even less, so my opinion probably isn't what you were looking for.
I'll use your posted picture as an example.
If the challenge was "High School" or "Sports" I would probably give it a 4 or a 5.
If the challenge was "Yellow," that score would drop to probably a 3.
If the challenge was yellow, and the picture was really, really, really out of focus, or had serious exposure issues, I would give a 2, maybe a one. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 03:59:56 PM · #5 |
I doubt I'm who you're looking for, since my votes tend to clump in the middle, but my criteria....
A really (technically) bad, bad photo that basically meets the challenge would get a 3. The photo you posted, in a cheerleader challenge, would get a 3 or 4. I'm not sure it's quite bad enough for me to give it a 3.
A really bad, bad photo that basically doesn't meet the challenge gets a 2. If the photo you posted were in a "fire truck" challenge, it would get a 2.
If a photo is so bad that I can't tell if it meets the challenge or not, I give it a 1. I don't give 1's in every challenge. I don't give 10's in every challenge, either, but I probably give more 10's than 1's.
In general, I vote on the technical merits of the photo, with bonus points added for intangibles like creativity, emotion, humor, etc, and minus points subtracted for not meeting the challenge, or being in poor (to me) taste. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 04:04:11 PM · #6 |
I reserve the 1 - 3 scores for the true junk. The blurry out of focus kind of pictures. And the stuff that makes no sense. Like a picture of a dead fish in a portrait challenge. I'm not talking a well composed picture either.
Now as for your picture. Depends on the challenge. If it fits the challenge, probably a 5. There is some nice use of framing. You can see her clearly. But to me it's definitely not a 3.
So if it's a decent effort and meets the challenge, at least a 5. If it's a decent effort and not even close to meeting the challenge, 4 with a comment. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 04:14:23 PM · #7 |
| I would vote that photo a 3 as well. You and I obviously have the same voting scale, so I can't add anything helpful ;) |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 04:22:56 PM · #8 |
I hardly ever vote 1-3 but if I do then it's either because the shot is do poor that I can't believe someone is seriously trying for anything other than the brown or because I feel they have ignored a key point in the challenge topic eg: if the challenge was Wildlife (which I didn't vote on) and teh description said "not insects" then any insect shot no matter how good would get a vote in the 1-3 range
:) |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 04:40:42 PM · #9 |
1
- DNMC
2
- I am almost certain it is DNMC
3
- Only meets the challenge by using the title or by using such a broad interpretation that the photographer really needs to try harder to find a suitable subject.
- Focus/white balance/tilt really off
- Disgusting subject: dog poop, graphic violence, so offensive to me that I can not even look at it for another second
4
- Reasonable attempt that shows promise but is lacking in Focus/white balance/tilt/compostion in some way
5
- Average DPC photo. Not great but ok. Needs slight improvement in focus/composttion etc.
6
- Above averaage DPC photo. Technically needs little improvement but only has a little wow factor.
- Would be a 5 but made me laugh
7
- Like 6, but has a Good wow factor.
- Would be a 5, but I fell off my chair laughing.
8
- Like 6 but has a Great wow factor.
9
- Like 6 but has an Excellent wow factor.
10
- My picks for top 2-5 photos depending on the challenge.
Ohh and if it has a metal shoehorn in it, it gets a +2 added to it :)
I'd give the drill team a 4, maybe a five.
.
Message edited by author 2008-10-30 16:43:09. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 04:46:25 PM · #10 |
If a photo is very OOF, completely DNMC, badly composed and no details can be made out, I will give it a 2, a 1 if it is also ridiculously under the size limit.
If I can tell what the subject is but the pic is poorly composed, maybe a bit OOF, has generally uninteresting subject matter and is stretching to meet the challenge, I may give it a 3, or 4 if I think a fair bit of effort has been made.
A photo I consider average will get a 5 (a shot that is clear, composed well enough, fits the challenge and is fairly aesthetic but may have flat lighting.)
6, 7 and 8 will go to shots that are completely in focus (unless there is DOF, which is not OOF and I obviously don't mark down) and well composed, with an attractive subject and is creative, with good lighting.
I reserve 9 and 10 for those really special shots; the ones that are in crisp, perfect focus and sharpness, with interesting/creative subjects, composed well, good light and ones that really stir my emotions and memories.
I favourite ones that I find very creative and attractive, ones that really get me thinking and that I would be proud to have taken myself.
Of course all this is relative however, to whether or not I personally just like the shot or not.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:07:23 PM · #11 |
The last time I gave 3s was in the Upside Down III challenge. Even then, there were only 3 and that was because of poor lighting, compression junk and what I felt was lack of effort.
I usually reserve 1s, 2s and 3s for bad quality/poor light, but then again, I've also given high marks to same because for odd reasons, the overall image seemed to work for me.
I try not to be a dnmc nazi, but if you enter a red image in a blue challenge, the 1 2 and 3 keys look mighty inviting.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:17:32 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by rinac:
I try not to be a dnmc nazi, but if you enter a red image in a blue challenge, the 1 2 and 3 keys look mighty inviting. |
I guess you don't see the world through rose-colored glasses ... ;-)
BTW: I'm one of about 10% of the male population with some form of color-blindness. I can tell the difference between red and blue, but often not between blue and purple, or green and brown. The typical monitor is capable of displaying 16.7 million colors, which we all see a bit differently. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:23:11 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by rinac:
I try not to be a dnmc nazi, but if you enter a red image in a blue challenge, the 1 2 and 3 keys look mighty inviting. |
I guess you don't see the world through rose-colored glasses ... ;-)
BTW: I'm one of about 10% of the male population with some form of color-blindness. I can tell the difference between red and blue, but often not between blue and purple, or green and brown. The typical monitor is capable of displaying 16.7 million colors, which we all see a bit differently. |
Oh no! I had a feeling that would be a bad example, lol!
I just mean to say that an image has to be so far removed from the challenge theme before I will contemplate a low score for dnmc :) |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:25:19 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
BTW: I'm one of about 10% of the male population with some form of color-blindness. I can tell the difference between red and blue, but often not between blue and purple, or green and brown. The typical monitor is capable of displaying 16.7 million colors, which we all see a bit differently. |
This is a nice sentiment, but I'm going to suggest that anyone that deals with any kind of color-blindness has the onus on themselves to make sure, when entering a challenge specifically dependant on color, that their shot is going to connect with the voters for that challenge.
Whether this means using some kind of color recognition software, having someone with good color-vision to work with you on your model selection/post-processing, whatever, it remains the photographer's issue.
If I see a yellow flower in a Green challenge, it gets a low score for DNMC. Period. I'm not going to sit there going, "Well, maybe they can't see color very well." Not happening. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:26:21 PM · #15 |
I got you -- and I wasn't really trying to disagree.
The last part was just taking advantage of a "teachable moment" as they say at Pedantics-R-Us ... ;-) |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:34:06 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
BTW: I'm one of about 10% of the male population with some form of color-blindness. I can tell the difference between red and blue, but often not between blue and purple, or green and brown. The typical monitor is capable of displaying 16.7 million colors, which we all see a bit differently. |
This is a nice sentiment, but I'm going to suggest that anyone that deals with any kind of color-blindness has the onus on themselves to make sure, when entering a challenge specifically dependant on color, that their shot is going to connect with the voters for that challenge.
Whether this means using some kind of color recognition software, having someone with good color-vision to work with you on your model selection/post-processing, whatever, it remains the photographer's issue. |
I was taught to use Photoshop's densitometer (Info window) and to never trust the monitor from the beginning (v 2.0), so I agree with you. Sometimes there isn't time, or software, or someone just makes a mistake.
But, my explanation was not really about whether I can submit the right color image -- what's more relevant is that when I look at your entry and refer to a purple dress as a "lovely shade of blue" you should know I'm not an idiot -- I just don't see the color the way you do, and that up to 5% of the population are not going to download your entry and check to see what color something "really" is, but will just comment on what they see. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:36:32 PM · #17 |
I only vote on what I think should come first, second or third so I vote 1 for first, 2 for second & 3 for third
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:39:39 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I got you -- and I wasn't really trying to disagree.
The last part was just taking advantage of a "teachable moment" as they say at Pedantics-R-Us ... ;-) |
No sweat :)
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:39:53 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
It's like going around a crowded tourist area and asking thousands of individuals which busker they like the best and why, in the hopes of tuning in to what the best busking activity to start would be. |
That's easy. For sober audiences try playing large plastic drinks bottles like drums. For drunk audiences try 'Knocking on Heavens Door' on acoustic guitar. Over and over again.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:40:05 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by 3DsArcher:
I only vote on what I think should come first, second or third so I vote 1 for first, 2 for second & 3 for third |
lmao! |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:46:30 PM · #21 |
This is in danger of becoming another "This is how I vote" topic, but what the hell.......
If I give a 1, 2 or 3, I nearly always comment. The only exception is if I am really, really busy (and then I am usually not voting anyway). I think that people should do this, however that is wishful thinking.
A 1 is very rare. It has to be pretty bad to get a 1. A 2 is normally reserved for a picture that looks like it was taken by my 3 year old Nephew. Out of focus, doesn't meet the challenge (or can't see if it does) and totally unappealing. 3's are less rare.
10s are also relatively rare. I usually give 9's to the best photos in the challenge. A 10 is normally reserved for something that is just brilliant, technically perfect of an amazing scene or picture that meets the challenge as well. The high scores are normally commented as well.
But, each to their own. Anyone who votes tactically to reduce the scores of other photos they think are competing with them for the front page, or spiteful as thier photo is not doing well probably should reconsider why they are here..... |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:48:11 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
BTW: I'm one of about 10% of the male population with some form of color-blindness. I can tell the difference between red and blue, but often not between blue and purple, or green and brown. The typical monitor is capable of displaying 16.7 million colors, which we all see a bit differently. |
This is a nice sentiment, but I'm going to suggest that anyone that deals with any kind of color-blindness has the onus on themselves to make sure, when entering a challenge specifically dependant on color, that their shot is going to connect with the voters for that challenge.
Whether this means using some kind of color recognition software, having someone with good color-vision to work with you on your model selection/post-processing, whatever, it remains the photographer's issue. |
I was taught to use Photoshop's densitometer (Info window) and to never trust the monitor from the beginning (v 2.0), so I agree with you. Sometimes there isn't time, or software, or someone just makes a mistake.
But, my explanation was not really about whether I can submit the right color image -- what's more relevant is that when I look at your entry and refer to a purple dress as a "lovely shade of blue" you should know I'm not an idiot -- I just don't see the color the way you do, and that up to 5% of the population are not going to download your entry and check to see what color something "really" is, but will just comment on what they see. |
ah, gotcha. Wasn't really thinking along the lines of commenting, given the thread. hehe. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:48:33 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by 3DsArcher:
I only vote on what I think should come first, second or third so I vote 1 for first, 2 for second & 3 for third |
We understand Alex, as you come from the other side of the Ditch, and things often can be a little backwards :-) |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:50:27 PM · #24 |
I'm another part of that colorblind population. I see color perfectly natural to me, but the rest of the world sees it differently. My wife checks my color...usually...before I do anything with any photograph.
But...the subject of the thread:
I've voted over 13,000 times, no big thing, but I recall only giving one 1. That was because the subject matter, I felt, was only intended to offend. And it was not original, and it was poorly shot.
2s and 3s should be reserved for really awful stuff, the same as 8s and 9s are reserved for really great stuff. A 10? It's got to make me want to stand up and applaud. Doesn't happen much.
I think we get 3s and 2s a lot because of voter foolishness, which we'll never be able to do anything about. Some folks just like to spit on you to see you cringe. It's not personal, nor has it much to do with photography. Mainly just stupidity and meanness.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 05:53:14 PM · #25 |
I used to be a bit of a troll & dish out 10's all the time.
|
|
