DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Low votes suggestion
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 251 - 275 of 386, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/17/2009 07:05:38 PM · #251
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
I am very much for the idea of voters being forced to comment on their very low votes. It is much too easy to click on a 1 or 2 'just because'. There are several reasons why people might do that, even if the picture is obviously not that bad, one of which is envy and/or personal dislike for the photo. Do not vote at all if you simply don't like the photo for personal reasons. If the photo is bad then the voter can vote low and offer constructive criticism, to which others and the photographer can offer a reply and everyone wins.
To enable voters to put down a relatively good photo for frivolous reasons is not very wise and lots of discouragement and anxiety occurs within the group.


Its kinda like the telephone sales people wanting me to tell them why I am not interested, I just tell them "because I am not interested", what good is a comment from someone who is not interested in giving one?

Message edited by author 2009-02-17 19:06:50.
 02/17/2009 07:21:58 PM · #252
Originally posted by PapaBob:
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
I am very much for the idea of voters being forced to comment on their very low votes. It is much too easy to click on a 1 or 2 'just because'. There are several reasons why people might do that, even if the picture is obviously not that bad, one of which is envy and/or personal dislike for the photo. Do not vote at all if you simply don't like the photo for personal reasons. If the photo is bad then the voter can vote low and offer constructive criticism, to which others and the photographer can offer a reply and everyone wins.
To enable voters to put down a relatively good photo for frivolous reasons is not very wise and lots of discouragement and anxiety occurs within the group.


Its kinda like the telephone sales people wanting me to tell them why I am not interested, I just tell them "because I am not interested", what good is a comment from someone who is not interested in giving one?


I agree, I think some voters don't want to comment, ("because they are not interested"). But I think some low voters don't comment because they are not interested in their comments being attributed to them. I still think there is merit in being able to make a completely anonymous comment. That way you could say what you honestly think about an entry, for what ever reason.
 02/17/2009 07:29:22 PM · #253
Originally posted by GIS_boy:
I agree, I think some voters don't want to comment, ("because they are not interested"). But I think some low voters don't comment because they are not interested in their comments being attributed to them. I still think there is merit in being able to make a completely anonymous comment. That way you could say what you honestly think about an entry, for what ever reason.


One of the chief benefits of accountability in commenting is that it works to cut down on the number of gratuitously spiteful comments. One of the chief drawbacks of anonymity would be that these might proliferate. We already have threads started every month complaining about comments perceived to be hurtful in nature. Imagine how it would be if the commenters were anonymous... This is the internet, after all, and rude, spiteful behavior is everywhere out here. We actually do a pretty good job of guarding against in DPC, and our standards of accountability have a lot to do with that.

R.
 02/17/2009 07:30:56 PM · #254
Originally posted by dahkota:
Images are like food. Some people like it, some people don't like it. That's the way life goes.

My husband likes broccoli. I don't like broccoli. If he had to rate it, he would give it a 10. If I had to rate it, I would give it a 2. Same broccoli, different tastes. Can't everyone just accept that some people like your image, some don't? some people get it, some don't?



Do we rate it on taste alone?

What about presentation? Color?

In the Pet Portrait IV Challenge should I give all of the shots of cats 1's because I don't like cats or should I take into consideration focus, setting & color.

I think some of the voters need to be reminded they are voting on the entire photo. Not just the taste!
 02/17/2009 07:41:32 PM · #255
This thread is increasingly futile. Anyone who makes another post to it, starting with this one that you're reading right now, is a fool.
 02/17/2009 07:55:19 PM · #256
Originally posted by ubique:
This thread is increasingly futile. Anyone who makes another post to it, starting with this one that you're reading right now, is a fool.


Well I certainly don't wish to be a fool!

... aw crap.
 02/17/2009 08:05:46 PM · #257
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by GIS_boy:
I agree, I think some voters don't want to comment, ("because they are not interested"). But I think some low voters don't comment because they are not interested in their comments being attributed to them. I still think there is merit in being able to make a completely anonymous comment. That way you could say what you honestly think about an entry, for what ever reason.


One of the chief benefits of accountability in commenting is that it works to cut down on the number of gratuitously spiteful comments. One of the chief drawbacks of anonymity would be that these might proliferate. We already have threads started every month complaining about comments perceived to be hurtful in nature. Imagine how it would be if the commenters were anonymous... This is the internet, after all, and rude, spiteful behavior is everywhere out here. We actually do a pretty good job of guarding against in DPC, and our standards of accountability have a lot to do with that.

R.


True, agreed.
 02/17/2009 08:29:21 PM · #258
Originally posted by mikeee:
True, but if I'm trying to improve my photography I'd like to know why somebody didn't like it or why somebody did.

This is the bottom line.

You'd *LIKE* to know why, but the voter is under no obligation.....whatsoever....to tell you.

Acceptance will free you.
 02/17/2009 08:35:22 PM · #259
Originally posted by ubique:
This thread is increasingly futile. Anyone who makes another post to it, starting with this one that you're reading right now, is a fool.

Am NOT!........8>)

Message edited by author 2009-02-17 20:36:14.
 02/17/2009 09:10:35 PM · #260
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
I am very much for the idea of voters being forced to comment on their very low votes. It is much too easy to click on a 1 or 2 'just because'. There are several reasons why people might do that, even if the picture is obviously not that bad, one of which is envy and/or personal dislike for the photo. Do not vote at all if you simply don't like the photo for personal reasons. If the photo is bad then the voter can vote low and offer constructive criticism, to which others and the photographer can offer a reply and everyone wins.
To enable voters to put down a relatively good photo for frivolous reasons is not very wise and lots of discouragement and anxiety occurs within the group.

And again, you cannot tell someone how to vote or comment.

Why do you think you can?

Just because someone doesn't meet your criteria you get to dictate how they play the game?

Nope, ain't gonna happen......and completely unreasonable to expect such.

If discouragement and anxiety arise from a frivolous vote, entirely too much importance is being attached to the image.

I've said it before a little differently, let me try THIS tack....if YOU are not comfortable enough with an image you're considering entering to weather a couple of bad votes, I highly recommend that you go back and do more work, or consider taking a pass on the challenge.

There are just too many people who can make it through challenge after challenge, week after week, without the errant 1s and 2s screwing up their karma.
 02/18/2009 05:24:46 AM · #261
Originally posted by L2:
bcenu,

Thank you for your website suggestion. Unfortunately, we've tried a similar tactic in the past and found that it did not produce the desired results (either an increase in the average # of comments per challenge and/or a statistically significant change in average scored received).

Because the previous experiment ended in failure, we have no plans at this time to re-institute a similar program. Many of the reasons the experiment failed are outlined within the posts in this thread.

We recommend that you use the forums to seek additional feedback on your entry post-challenge.


Much appreciated. I've learned a lot about the scoring mechanics of this site's users, throughout this thread, even to the point of reassessing the way I view submissions and vote.
Unfortunately the point of the suggestion became a little lost in trying to weed out the "troll" votes given to people who amassed a steady score only to have it dampened by a 1 or 2 vote, often, late in the challenge.
Whether this be to boost that voter's score or just to be spiteful, who knows.
As pointed out by many here, it might just be that particular voter's taste, criteria, personal reason etc., etc. but judging by the amount of Current Challenge posts on the subject many participants appear to be put out by this form of voting be it genuine or not.
In my initial post I stated that, as many others, I am here to learn and that I have well and truly done whilst reading this thread.
It WAS only a suggestion and I appreciate everyone's views and look forward to joining, improving and continuing to contribute to the site and making many friends (and debating with others) in the future.
Thanks all, again.
 02/18/2009 03:41:13 PM · #262
02/18/2009 03:56:42 PM · #263
Originally posted by pawdrix:

Europe '72-Best Dead album of them all!
 02/18/2009 04:08:35 PM · #264
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by pawdrix:

Europe '72-Best Dead album of them all!

Isaac and I often listen to Skeletons From the Closet a not-exactly greatest hits amalgamation with some really early stuff and selections from Workingman's Dead and [/b]American Beauty[/b] -- my two favorite albums (with the double [/b]Live Dead[/b] close behind). Somewhere I think I have tapes of one of their early New Year's Eve shows as broadcast live over public radio ...
 02/23/2009 12:34:05 AM · #265
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
I am very much for the idea of voters being forced to comment on their very low votes. It is much too easy to click on a 1 or 2 'just because'. There are several reasons why people might do that, even if the picture is obviously not that bad, one of which is envy and/or personal dislike for the photo. Do not vote at all if you simply don't like the photo for personal reasons. If the photo is bad then the voter can vote low and offer constructive criticism, to which others and the photographer can offer a reply and everyone wins.
To enable voters to put down a relatively good photo for frivolous reasons is not very wise and lots of discouragement and anxiety occurs within the group.


1. Why? Not liking a photo for personal reasons is a completely valid thing. This is a contest we're in, not a bridal shower.

2. Discouragement is part and parcel. Anxiety is out of anyone else's control. If you're going to become anxious and discouraged because someone doesn't like your photo, you're in the wrong place. Also, the reasons are only frivolous to you. To the person voting, they aren't frivolous in the slightest, and 5 - 30 or so people telling you "I simply don't like this" because they were forced to say something isn't going to change anything now, is it? If anything, it'll just make you more anxious and discouraged.

Learn to let the anomalies go, and you'll be a far happier and confident person for it.

Read what L2 had to say just above your post, it is almost the perfect summation.


Take a chill pill will ya! This triggered anger of yours can only mean there's something there in you that got raddled. You are the proof that there is a strange anxiety around this issue of frivolous voting and the very long thread is yet another proof that a lot of people are thinking about it. So take a hike or at least a long walk, breath and post a bit kinder comment next time. I am very confident by the way; just addressing the issues of a group of people, as I see them.
If you want to join a Fight Club then by all means do so. I on the other hand like to photograph and be judged for their quality and creativity, not others' personal moods and tastes. Any pro knows this!
 02/23/2009 12:40:27 AM · #266
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
I on the other hand like to photograph and be judged for their quality and creativity, not others' personal moods and tastes. Any pro knows this!


Then you're in the wrong place, mila... That's the bottom line.

R.
 02/23/2009 12:46:54 AM · #267
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
I am very much for the idea of voters being forced to comment on their very low votes. It is much too easy to click on a 1 or 2 'just because'. There are several reasons why people might do that, even if the picture is obviously not that bad, one of which is envy and/or personal dislike for the photo. Do not vote at all if you simply don't like the photo for personal reasons. If the photo is bad then the voter can vote low and offer constructive criticism, to which others and the photographer can offer a reply and everyone wins.
To enable voters to put down a relatively good photo for frivolous reasons is not very wise and lots of discouragement and anxiety occurs within the group.


1. Why? Not liking a photo for personal reasons is a completely valid thing. This is a contest we're in, not a bridal shower.

2. Discouragement is part and parcel. Anxiety is out of anyone else's control. If you're going to become anxious and discouraged because someone doesn't like your photo, you're in the wrong place. Also, the reasons are only frivolous to you. To the person voting, they aren't frivolous in the slightest, and 5 - 30 or so people telling you "I simply don't like this" because they were forced to say something isn't going to change anything now, is it? If anything, it'll just make you more anxious and discouraged.

Learn to let the anomalies go, and you'll be a far happier and confident person for it.

Read what L2 had to say just above your post, it is almost the perfect summation.


Take a chill pill will ya! This triggered anger of yours can only mean there's something there in you that got raddled. You are the proof that there is a strange anxiety around this issue of frivolous voting and the very long thread is yet another proof that a lot of people are thinking about it. So take a hike or at least a long walk, breath and post a bit kinder comment next time. I am very confident by the way; just addressing the issues of a group of people, as I see them.
If you want to join a Fight Club then by all means do so. I on the other hand like to photograph and be judged for their quality and creativity, not others' personal moods and tastes. Any pro knows this!


I wasn't angry in the slightest, and reading through my reply, I don't see how it can be taken as "angry", but if you wish to take it that way, that's out of my hands.

We can wish that our photographs are judged purely on their quality and creativity alone, but that is a completely unrealistic wish. What is 'quality' anyway? It's a subjective measure. We can apply some objective technical measures, but photography isn't always about technical perfection. Creativity is also subjective. What may be creative to one voter, will be pretty mundane to another, especially if they've seen something similar time and time again.

Lastly, what pro 'knows' that a photograph is only judged on quality and creativity? The magazine ad shooter? The Wedding shooter? The portrait photographer? The Photojournalist? Depending on what professional capacity one is in, personal moods and tastes can be paramount. I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of editors out there that deny plenty of publishings because of their personal moods and tastes.

Fact is, voters are going to vote based on millions of different things, and there will never, ever be a guideline that everyone will agree on and use. As I've said a few times in this thread, it's a part of being human, and it's a part of life.

It doesn't matter to me whatsoever how many debates or threads there are on this, because I know that it's not going to change anything anyway. Voting is what it is. Voters are what they are. There will always be people who vote based on certain criteria that will always be different from other people's criteria, and it is my belief that none of them are really wrong (outside of voting that is rule-bending or obviously malicious).

I just find that there's a large trend of people that just want to be patted on the back or made to feel better about their photography through artificially increased voting scales. Too many voices crying about the mystical troll voter but without any kind of data whatsoever to back their claims. Too many laments of "My photo is so much better than this!". etc. etc. etc.

It's just silly.

Breathe deep, relax, play the game, and let the voters vote.

Message edited by author 2009-02-23 01:04:37.
 02/24/2009 01:39:10 PM · #268
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by MilaMiles:
I am very much for the idea of voters being forced to comment on their very low votes. It is much too easy to click on a 1 or 2 'just because'. There are several reasons why people might do that, even if the picture is obviously not that bad, one of which is envy and/or personal dislike for the photo. Do not vote at all if you simply don't like the photo for personal reasons. If the photo is bad then the voter can vote low and offer constructive criticism, to which others and the photographer can offer a reply and everyone wins.
To enable voters to put down a relatively good photo for frivolous reasons is not very wise and lots of discouragement and anxiety occurs within the group.


1. Why? Not liking a photo for personal reasons is a completely valid thing. This is a contest we're in, not a bridal shower.

2. Discouragement is part and parcel. Anxiety is out of anyone else's control. If you're going to become anxious and discouraged because someone doesn't like your photo, you're in the wrong place. Also, the reasons are only frivolous to you. To the person voting, they aren't frivolous in the slightest, and 5 - 30 or so people telling you "I simply don't like this" because they were forced to say something isn't going to change anything now, is it? If anything, it'll just make you more anxious and discouraged.

Learn to let the anomalies go, and you'll be a far happier and confident person for it.

Read what L2 had to say just above your post, it is almost the perfect summation.


Take a chill pill will ya! This triggered anger of yours can only mean there's something there in you that got raddled. You are the proof that there is a strange anxiety around this issue of frivolous voting and the very long thread is yet another proof that a lot of people are thinking about it. So take a hike or at least a long walk, breath and post a bit kinder comment next time. I am very confident by the way; just addressing the issues of a group of people, as I see them.
If you want to join a Fight Club then by all means do so. I on the other hand like to photograph and be judged for their quality and creativity, not others' personal moods and tastes. Any pro knows this!


LOL...You go, Woman!!! I was trying to say the very same thing earlier on in this thread and got met with the same type of answers as you're getting here.

The bottom line or translation to what is being said here by some (names not included), is that there are those in here who feel that their version of how things should go is the ONLY way and if you're not of that particular mindset, they'll let you know that you shouldn't be here. LOL

But, you're right! There ARE a lot of members in here who do have the same concerns that have been raised by you and me and others. They seem to duck out or not post, in fear of having this type of a reaction, which really isn't fair because it does get personal and it does appear like a gang of "bullies" who gather in bunches to defend each other in their particular line of thinking. It doesn't make them right but, it does tend to stop people from voicing their own personal opinions because it tends to go this way with several, attacking one or two people.

Actually, this started off on a different forum and because of a few in here who took personal swipes as a group, it ended up being put in the Rant Section, where it sits now. It didn't fit their personal opinions so, they kept going until it was considered a "rant".

Such a shame to have a few feel that their opinions rule.

Stick to your beliefs and opinions because you have that right too. Those vocal few are not the only ones with opinions. I agree with you!
 02/24/2009 01:51:54 PM · #269
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
The bottom line or translation to what is being said here by some (names not included), is that there are those in here who feel that their version of how things should go is the ONLY way and if you're not of that particular mindset, they'll let you know that you shouldn't be here. LOL

But, you're right! There ARE a lot of members in here who do have the same concerns that have been raised by you and me and others. They seem to duck out or not post, in fear of having this type of a reaction, which really isn't fair because it does get personal and it does appear like a gang of "bullies" who gather in bunches to defend each other in their particular line of thinking. It doesn't make them right but, it does tend to stop people from voicing their own personal opinions because it tends to go this way with several, attacking one or two people.

Actually, this started off on a different forum and because of a few in here who took personal swipes as a group, it ended up being put in the Rant Section, where it sits now. It didn't fit their personal opinions so, they kept going until it was considered a "rant".

Such a shame to have a few feel that their opinions rule.

Stick to your beliefs and opinions because you have that right too. Those vocal few are not the only ones with opinions. I agree with you!


But... but... but... (he sputters plaintively)... "WE* are not trying to force our version of how things should go on anybody. We are trying to explain *why* things go the way they do, and to point out the impossibility of imposing the sort of "standards" on voting that y'all are proposing. *We* recognize that every point of view is a valid point of view. *We* recognize that every voter is entitled to his/her own taste and perspective.

You guys, on the other hand, are trying to convince everyone else that *some* of us are so off-center in our perspective that our votes are no longer valid, and that for this reason we ought not to be allowed to vote, or our votes should not be counted, or the system should be set up to "punish" people who vote the way we do, or *whichever* damned flavor of fascism is in vogue at the moment, in your world.

Don't you DARE try to paint people like *us* with *your* intolerant brush, when the whole point of our position (a very realistic position, I might add) is that we believe all forms of input can be tolerated.

R.

Message edited by author 2009-02-24 13:52:42.
 02/24/2009 01:55:11 PM · #270
from K10Dguy "Breathe deep, relax, play the game, and let the voters vote."

Some of the wisest words in the thread...
 02/24/2009 01:56:46 PM · #271
Originally posted by K10DGuy:

.....and it is my belief that none of them are really wrong (outside of voting that is rule-bending or obviously malicious).

I just find that there's a large trend of people that just want to be patted on the back or made to feel better about their photography through artificially increased voting scales. Too many voices crying about the mystical troll voter but without any kind of data whatsoever to back their claims. Too many laments of "My photo is so much better than this!". etc. etc. etc.



In saying "outside of voting that is rule-bending or obviously malicious" that is, in effect, making notice that it is a possibility that it's happening.

As for the Troll voting, how does one explain that at rollover, practically every score thread sees the 1's and 2's coming in like dominos going down? One will exclaim that they've been hit by a thrash of 1's and 2's and following, more will note the same thing...one after another? Or, to see at midnight, that someone proclaims to have voted 100% within the first 20 minutes of voting having begun? How closely could those voters have looked over the photos to score them with any real sense of appreciation. It's akin to someone sitting there, saying, "like, don't like, don't like, don't like, don't like, don't like" in one second intervals. How can anyone truly "judge" a photo properly with "like, don't like" and hitting 1's and 2's?

To say that it's fair judging is saying that it doesn't matter what a photog has done to get a shot, they don't like it so, it's a 1!

There are Great Masters paintings that I don't necessarily like as my personal tastes but, if were to judge them on a 1 to 10 basis as we do in DPC, I'd not give them a 1 because it's not my personal tastes. I don't necessarily like Picasso's work nor, Andy Warhol for that matter but, I admire their own styles and the artistry that went into it! I may give Monet's work a 9 and Picasso a 7 but, all the same, there is merit in all of their work. The same holds true of every photographer's work in here, unless of course, it was an "in your face" snub with a black box or a total DNMC entry. All photographs in here, deserve a fair chance and evaluation. An "I don't like it...1" vote is infantile and certainly not valuing photography as it should be valued.

02/24/2009 02:03:06 PM · #272
Originally posted by mpeters:
from K10Dguy "Breathe deep, relax, play the game, and let the voters vote."

Some of the wisest words in the thread...


"Silence is a medium in which the student slowly learns to breathe until he can shake himself loose from the spinal chord and become visible as a haze." -Wm. Burroughs
 02/24/2009 02:08:39 PM · #273
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
The bottom line or translation to what is being said here by some (names not included), is that there are those in here who feel that their version of how things should go is the ONLY way and if you're not of that particular mindset, they'll let you know that you shouldn't be here. LOL

But, you're right! There ARE a lot of members in here who do have the same concerns that have been raised by you and me and others. They seem to duck out or not post, in fear of having this type of a reaction, which really isn't fair because it does get personal and it does appear like a gang of "bullies" who gather in bunches to defend each other in their particular line of thinking. It doesn't make them right but, it does tend to stop people from voicing their own personal opinions because it tends to go this way with several, attacking one or two people.

Actually, this started off on a different forum and because of a few in here who took personal swipes as a group, it ended up being put in the Rant Section, where it sits now. It didn't fit their personal opinions so, they kept going until it was considered a "rant".

Such a shame to have a few feel that their opinions rule.

Stick to your beliefs and opinions because you have that right too. Those vocal few are not the only ones with opinions. I agree with you!


But... but... but... (he sputters plaintively)... "WE* are not trying to force our version of how things should go on anybody. We are trying to explain *why* things go the way they do, and to point out the impossibility of imposing the sort of "standards" on voting that y'all are proposing. *We* recognize that every point of view is a valid point of view. *We* recognize that every voter is entitled to his/her own taste and perspective.

You guys, on the other hand, are trying to convince everyone else that *some* of us are so off-center in our perspective that our votes are no longer valid, and that for this reason we ought not to be allowed to vote, or our votes should not be counted, or the system should be set up to "punish" people who vote the way we do, or *whichever* damned flavor of fascism is in vogue at the moment, in your world.

Don't you DARE try to paint people like *us* with *your* intolerant brush, when the whole point of our position (a very realistic position, I might add) is that we believe all forms of input can be tolerated.

R.


What you are effectively doing by pointing out what is "reality in here" is saying that it's the "norm" to vote 1's and 2's when in reality, anyone who took the time to put in a half decent entry really doesn't deserve a 1. Would you say that a Yanko, or a DeSousa or any of the many time over, ribboner's works truly deserve 1's and 2's??? Honestly? Can you honestly say that their work deserves 1's and 2's and can be justified?

If you can say "yes" then, you are in effect, saying that there's no guidelines to what's good photography and what isn't. It's all about "what you like" and that's simply "the reality of it". What is that saying about photographers who are trying to improve their photographic skills then? Why bother? Why not just shoot a shot that is good "eye candy" that people might like and to heck with the technicals, composition and whatever else goes into a good photograph? By defending this line of thinking, it is akin to telling people to forget learning all of this and just go with what people like. In that case, there's no use in learning technicals or anything better.

So, if there is anyone who shouldn't "DARE" do anything, perhaps you may want to rethink what your stance truly is and how it is affecting photography in here???
02/24/2009 02:15:21 PM · #274
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by mpeters:
from K10Dguy "Breathe deep, relax, play the game, and let the voters vote."

Some of the wisest words in the thread...


"Silence is a medium in which the student slowly learns to breathe until he can shake himself loose from the spinal chord and become visible as a haze." -Wm. Burroughs


OK K10Dguy--you must now take a back seat to Wm. Burroughs, as presented by zz. ;)
 02/24/2009 02:16:13 PM · #275
Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Why not just shoot a shot that is good "eye candy" that people might like and to heck with the technicals, composition and whatever else goes into a good photograph?


Do you really think that there is no connection between good "eye candy" and good technicals? What is good technically for one person isn't necessarily good technically for another. What is "eye candy" for one person isn't necessarily "eye candy" for another.

Isn't it great that everyone's different?
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 08/04/2025 02:10:31 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 08/04/2025 02:10:31 PM EDT.