Low votes suggestion - DPChallenge Forums

02/26/2009 02:06:32 PM · #351

It's Dudette, Mousie....not dude. :)

Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.

Bertrand Russell

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/26/2009 02:11:05 PM · #352

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

This thread has diverged from reality a bit too far.

I totally and unequivocally agree.

Mousie

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/26/2009 02:12:35 PM · #353

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

It's Dudette, Mousie....not dude. :)

Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.

Bertrand Russell

I'm from California. Everyone is dude. Even the ladies.

And dude, you just CAN'T stop with the digs, can you? Or should I assume that little quote about fear and herd instinct is NOT an implicit judgment of my (our) motivations?

He was, I believe, not in the least an ill-natured man: very much the opposite, I should say; but he would not suffer fools gladly.

George Bernard Shaw

I included MY quote completely by random!

Message edited by author 2009-02-26 14:21:03.

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

02/26/2009 02:14:58 PM · #354

Originally posted by Mousie:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
It's Dudette, Mousie....not dude. :)

Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.

Bertrand Russell

I'm from California. Everyone is dude. Even the ladies.

LOL!

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

02/26/2009 02:27:00 PM · #355

Originally posted by Mousie:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
It's Dudette, Mousie....not dude. :)

I'm from California. Everyone is dude. Even the ladies.

I thought that meant everyone was a dudette, even the guys ... ;-)

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

My tilted entry just finished with a 6.1224.....and it got 9 comments.

That's not a thrilling reception, and I'd pretty much say that's a squeaker as a 6+.

The one thing that made my day was that someone liked it enough to fav it.

My latest Brown Ribbon winner

got 24 ones and a couple of Favorites during the voting -- pretty close to an ideal (and expected) result to me ... to really "reach" a couple of people with an image which most of the people speeding through the challenge dismiss as garbage is more satisfying than getting a high-five or low-six score with something boring which fits the DPC mold ... :-)

Message edited by author 2009-02-26 14:39:55.

02/26/2009 02:41:15 PM · #356

Originally posted by Mousie:

Or should I assume that little quote about fear and herd instinct is NOT an implicit judgment of my (our) motivations?

Why don't we all just assume that it was meant to put PEACE and tolerance to one another's points of view and stop the sniping from all sides? That's how it was meant. :)

Pentax FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited AF

02/26/2009 03:28:18 PM · #357

Originally posted by Mousie:

Or should I assume that little quote about fear and herd instinct is NOT an implicit judgment of my (our) motivations?

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

Why don't we all just assume that it was meant to put PEACE and tolerance to one another's points of view and stop the sniping from all sides? That's how it was meant. :)

See....that's giving me actual hope.

I'd really like for you to think that everyone is genuinely just offering their viewpoints, and how they arrive at certain conclusions.

I certainly do NOT want others to change their style ESPECIALLY if it reflects their true feelings.

If someone says my image sucks, the only thing I'd like to know is on how many levels.

If I can ascertain that, then *I* get to make the choice as to whether I'm creating my image for me, or to reach someone else.

That's what led me to the conclusion that I need to be comfortable with any image I enter.....that way I see critique as meaningful rather than hurtful.

I'm getting slapped around pretty well right now on my Puzzled entry.....the only reason I entered it is because I'm in DPCO IV.

It's a pretty lame shoehorn, and I'm unhappy about it. I would NOT have entered either of this week's open challenges were it not for DPCO. And I seriously doubt that I'll ever do this again.....I'm just not creative enough on the spur of the moment to get a decent entry on command.

Can I say that the voters don't understand me? Maybe.......but isn't that a reflecion on my inability to convey my message?

Does it count that I *REALLY*tried like heck to get a decent entry? Nope! Doesn't matter one whit!

Should I get any points for a technically clean image? At 4.7 for a DNMC entry, I believe that I am.

Would my image elicit ANY comment from

ubique,

posthumous, or

zeuszen????

Gawd, I hope not......'cause it'd be grim! LOL!!!

Sorry.....rambling.....

I guess what I'm trying to share is that I've learned sooooooo much from the members here who have the skills and intuitive, discerning taste to teach me about my own limitations.

I pretty much made the same mistakes as so many here do in thinking that somehow it was personal or mean that my mediocre entries got, well.....mediocre scores.

Now I've learned to interpret so many factors, from the actual score, to comments, both number and content, and after-the-fact discussion in what I want from my entries in the future.

I really hope you get something out of this discussion......there really have been people here honestly offering their particular insight.

eamurdock

Pentax KP

02/26/2009 03:45:55 PM · #358

Originally posted by eamurdock:

I've asked it before and I don't expect an answer this time, but for those who think 1-3 votes should be somehow discouraged, can you tell me why? Not, "this pic or that pic doesn't deserve a 1" but rather "this pic/photographer was harmed in some substantive way by getting a 1".

'coz honestly I've gotten a ton of 1's yet have to date not been hurt by it.

PhotoInterest, I'm going to push you on this question before it gets buried again, because I think it's the crux of the question. The way I read your comments on this subject you get upset when you get a 1-3 vote because you don't think your photo deserves it. I don't think that protecting people's feelings is enough of a reason to change the voting system.

Personally I don't believe the trolls, such as they are, have enough of an effect to warrant mentioning. They don't effect the order of the results significantly. The few of them that exist want to get a rise out of someone - why do you give them what they want?

02/26/2009 04:44:38 PM · #359

Jeb...do you want to know what the ironic part of all of this is?

(I likely should keep my mouth shut because I sense that there's going to be something else I've said in here that someone will start in on! LOL But, I really would like to say this in as honest a manner as I can muster to say it.)

I have really been finding myself walled in over the past year or so with the constant sort of "style" that seems to have dominated the regular challenge front pages. I have felt my creativity go to zilch because I'd tried to emulate what was winning the ribbons. In actual fact, I felt that my style of photography fit more or less what Posthumous has been lauding. I've always agreed that technicals should not be the only criteria by which a photo should be judged. When Don awarded one of my shots a blue Posthumous, I was TOTALLY thrilled! I still am over that one. I was involved in threads (much earlier on) where members *at that time* were arguing for the technicals and where I saw brilliant pieces being voted low simply because they didn't fit in with the "norm" of what that wanted "look" was. (And, ok, please...no one start on that point because I'm sure that there are points that could be made about all of that too but, it's not part of what I'm trying to say here.) I have seen very meaningful, deep and stunning emotive pieces be bottom rank while wonderfully technically brilliant pieces that have very little depth or meaning but, have been great "eye candy" for lack of a better phrase, have hit the front pages or top 20. THAT, to me was stifling and "unfair" (again, for lack of a better word to use at this moment). It may have been a child's playful glance or an elderly woman's face that captured me in rapture but, whatever it was...it hit my core. Yet, it went down to the 7% bottom because it lacked the technicals that the front page or top 20 finishers of a bee on a flower or, another wine glass with splashes or different background had. That, to me was a shame. It still is. (Again, please...no one start on the technicals because I'm not meaning it as a put-down on the technicals in any way!) However, I also found myself involved in threads where this type of thing was harped on to death and those who felt that the technicals were the most important aspect of a photo won out. I was also trying to learn to both be a better photographer as well as to produce images that were thought of as "best", according to the trend at that time. I also voted according to what I had been taught in my schooling and between the two ideals, voted higher on the ones that were higher on the technical scale. Unless it was a total DNMC to me or a really horribly shot photograph or an "in your face snub" type of photo, I couldn't bring myself to vote any photo a 1, 2 or even a 3. And, as I started off *in this thread*, that little pop-up box that appeared on a low vote, made me stop and re-think what I was doing when I went to hand out those 1 to 3 scores. It made me re-look at that photo and think about it more. Did it really deserve that 1 to 3 score. If it did, it still got it and I tried my very best to hand out a reason as to why I was giving it that low a score with as kind a set of words as I could.

As time has gone on, I've seen the different "movements" as a way to phrase it. I've seen a movement, such as in Team Suck, that has been trying to move away from the traditional shots that win these challenges. I, myself, have started to revolt against those original styles of photos that consistently win the regular challenges and once that box was removed, I honestly started voting any bees on flowers or drops of water down in the 1 to 3 categories out of pure and embarrassedly, revolt/rebelliousness. This is where, to get back to the original point behind this thread, I felt like a "Troll" and realized that the little pop-up box had made me stop and think about what I was doing and re-evaluate that shot and why and made me accountable for the 1 to 3 scores that I was really just handing out because I was rebelling against the "usual" and pulling for the "unusual" to start to win out. That's when I stopped and thought. That's when I realized that there is no criteria by which to judge a photo *in my mind anyways...not speaking for anyone else in any way*. BUT...I also saw and felt that others were doing the same thing and had the same set of thoughts, confusion as well as "rebel" in them and I heard it on other threads in the forums. I saw the frustration that others were having with the 1 to 3 votes, the not knowing what was right and what was wrong anymore.

Now, keep in mind that I don't belong to any teams, or groups (I did when I first started and was involved in DPL but, didn't have the time to constantly keep up with the challenges and didn't want to let the team down) so in seeing differing "movements" happening, I also saw a split in opinion and that there is division amongst what is good and what isn't. There IS "safety" in belonging to a group who has the same beliefs and styles as you do, as you well know. It gives you a sense of grounding to something....to a goal, or an aim, be it personal or for a team. Without that, it's akin to walking blindly through a tunnel, trying to figure out which direction to go in. I'm sure that there are many in here, new or who never joined a group or can't due to all kinds of reasons, who feel the same way. It's frustrating and it's confusing. All of this (to tie it into what I'm trying to say) is that with so much polarization in different directions, just kind of puts everything into a halt, even personal growth. It feels *speaking only for self here* as though one either has to conform to mainstream tastes, styles and techniques or one has to belong to a group/team to which your particular styles match. Anyone trying to go it "alone" is pretty much going to find this entire thing, confusing, frustrating and at times, infuriating and those 1 to 3 scores are going to hit harder than others who are part of a group/team or who are masters in technicals and can pretty much hold their own no matter what.

To get to the bottom line here with all of this and what I'm trying to say with this long winded post....

I really and truly don't disagree with the idea of doing your own thing. Not at all! It's quite the opposite actually. I love being able to do that and I do, on other sites where I seem to flourish creatively in my shots, score or no score. What I am having trouble with in here is the idea that there are very diverse movements happening and no one really knows what way to think anymore because while one group of members for instance, MIGHT pull for the technicals, technicals, technicals...another might be pulling for emotive, meaningful, deep while yet another, will go for somewhere in between. And, ok....that's fine...everyone has their freedom of choice. Agreed. But, where this really becomes a problem are for those who are trying to understand WHY their photos are sitting constantly in the 4's and 5's. The voting with 1 to 3's and no comments doesn't help that fact. And, as much as I admire Zeuzen's work, it doesn't help to know any further WHY he didn't think someone's shot was less than engaging to him when the only comments or scores are to those that he likes. And, yes, I know what's been said. I see the point about how one knows that they have a great shot when Zeuzen or Ubique has commented on your shot. But, what made Zeuzen NOT like that shot? What made Ubique pass it by and give it a 3? Not that I'm pointing directly at these two men for that answer...it's a rhetorical question that I'm sure plenty of people have. And, why a baseline of a 3 score for most? (Sorry, Ubique...you should be used to me by now...:)) That's another rhetorical question but, again, one that I'm sure a lot of people have asked too. That's a pretty low score, I think in a number of people's minds and they want to know why (as evidenced by the constant and pesky threads as they've been called :) that keep popping up over and over again in the forums).

So, given all of this...and to get BACK to the original points that I was making...that is what is behind my thinking and my meaning and my drift in everything. That's about as open and honest as I can possibly get. I don't know how else to say what I've just said here. I'm frustrated. Plain and simple. And, I also think that I will stay out of the regular challenges and participate in the side challenges because the regular challenges are far too confusing and the scoring really off the wall *for me*.

Ok...Please...I'm trying SO hard. Let's keep it peaceful. Please don't rip everything I've said to shreds. There's just far too many of you to deal with! :)

02/26/2009 04:46:03 PM · #360

Originally posted by eamurdock:

Originally posted by eamurdock:
I've asked it before and I don't expect an answer this time, but for those who think 1-3 votes should be somehow discouraged, can you tell me why? Not, "this pic or that pic doesn't deserve a 1" but rather "this pic/photographer was harmed in some substantive way by getting a 1".

'coz honestly I've gotten a ton of 1's yet have to date not been hurt by it.

PhotoInterest, I'm going to push you on this question before it gets buried again, because I think it's the crux of the question. The way I read your comments on this subject you get upset when you get a 1-3 vote because you don't think your photo deserves it. I don't think that protecting people's feelings is enough of a reason to change the voting system.

Personally I don't believe the trolls, such as they are, have enough of an effect to warrant mentioning. They don't effect the order of the results significantly. The few of them that exist want to get a rise out of someone - why do you give them what they want?

It's really NOT about MY scores. There's much more to it and a much deeper reasoning.....I HOPE that somewhere in my ramblings above...I've answered what lays beneath my statements. *Fingers crossed* :)

Message edited by author 2009-02-26 16:49:56.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/26/2009 05:42:41 PM · #361

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

Jeb...do you want to know what the ironic part of all of this is?

So, given all of this...and to get BACK to the original points that I was making...that is what is behind my thinking and my meaning and my drift in everything. That's about as open and honest as I can possibly get. I don't know how else to say what I've just said here. I'm frustrated. Plain and simple. And, I also think that I will stay out of the regular challenges and participate in the side challenges because the regular challenges are far too confusing and the scoring really off the wall *for me*.

Honetly and truthfully? I think you've gotten to a burnout point that would indicate that side challenges are just what the doctor ordered to give you a different sense of purpose and take the anonymity out of it in such a way that you'll get the creative feedback that you so desire.

I know I have to break periodically, and the side challenges are what I always go to for R&R.

For that matter, start one of your own.....pick a topic (or six), announce what you'd like to do, and how you'd like to go about it; you get to make the rules, and you also get to set the whole purpose and tone of what you'd like to have happen.

You'll have a ball, and you'll learn.

You'll also get to know people here that you may not already, and you'll find yourself in one of those "Groups"......a bunch of happy photographers working together on the same theme offering up their different views on the topic, and what each other brings to them.

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

02/26/2009 06:17:04 PM · #362

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

...it doesn't help to know any further WHY he [zeuszen] didn't think someone's shot was less than engaging to him when the only comments or scores are to those that he likes....

I don't vote/comment only on images I like. I fish for interesting images, some of which I may not like at all, at least not in the way one may fall for either blonde or brunette. Instead, I try to ask myself what it is or might be about an image that should interest me as much as anyone else, i. e. what are the universal qualities of a photo, what range does it have, etc. I do acknowledge subjective appeal, particularly with regards to aesthetics, but... aesthetics (to me) are a little thin...

02/26/2009 06:58:03 PM · #363

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
Jeb...do you want to know what the ironic part of all of this is?

So, given all of this...and to get BACK to the original points that I was making...that is what is behind my thinking and my meaning and my drift in everything. That's about as open and honest as I can possibly get. I don't know how else to say what I've just said here. I'm frustrated. Plain and simple. And, I also think that I will stay out of the regular challenges and participate in the side challenges because the regular challenges are far too confusing and the scoring really off the wall *for me*.

Honetly and truthfully? I think you've gotten to a burnout point that would indicate that side challenges are just what the doctor ordered to give you a different sense of purpose and take the anonymity out of it in such a way that you'll get the creative feedback that you so desire.

I know I have to break periodically, and the side challenges are what I always go to for R&R.

For that matter, start one of your own.....pick a topic (or six), announce what you'd like to do, and how you'd like to go about it; you get to make the rules, and you also get to set the whole purpose and tone of what you'd like to have happen.

You'll have a ball, and you'll learn.

You'll also get to know people here that you may not already, and you'll find yourself in one of those "Groups"......a bunch of happy photographers working together on the same theme offering up their different views on the topic, and what each other brings to them.

Oddly enough, that's exactly what I've done, Jeb. I've joined a couple of side challenges and I started one several days ago..."Childhood Memories". Perhaps, my creativity will be revived and my frustration levels diminished. :)

ETA: At the worst, the shots that I take, serve as great references for my paintings and murals...so, can't go wrong there.

Message edited by author 2009-02-26 19:00:01.

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko

02/26/2009 07:03:12 PM · #364

Originally posted by zeuszen:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
...it doesn't help to know any further WHY he [zeuszen] didn't think someone's shot was less than engaging to him when the only comments or scores are to those that he likes....

I don't vote/comment only on images I like. I fish for interesting images, some of which I may not like at all, at least not in the way one may fall for either blonde or brunette. Instead, I try to ask myself what it is or might be about an image that should interest me as much as anyone else, i. e. what are the universal qualities of a photo, what range does it have, etc. I do acknowledge subjective appeal, particularly with regards to aesthetics, but... aesthetics (to me) are a little thin...

Sorry about misspelling your name. Thank you for the correction.

I've quickly glanced at the type of photos that you tend to comment on so that I could have more clarity to what you have just said. You explanation is understood and accepted.:)

ubique

Olympus PEN-F

02/26/2009 07:24:57 PM · #365

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

What made Ubique pass it by and give it a 3? ... And, why a baseline of a 3 score for most? (Sorry, Ubique...you should be used to me by now...) )

I have explained my voting system to you a couple of times lately. I'm sure everyone who has read it has understood it (including those who disagree with my approach). Everyone but you (frankly, I think that you do understand it; you just don't accept it).

Quick summary: I mark every shot that I think is of no consequence as a 3. The rest are 5s and I look at those again in more detail. Some I change to 7-10s, and I try to comment on most of those. The two keys to understanding my system are these:
a. If a shot is of no consequence to me then its technical qualities are irrelevant, as is the amount of time and effort it took. It's a 3.
b. A shot I score as a 10 is not necessarily 'better' than one I score as 8, 7 or even 5. The 5-10 range is just a measure of the strength of my impulse to offer a comment.

I think 'scoring' art is absurd, and I'm interested in art, not photography. I could as easily not give my 3s any score at all ... but I prefer to make some mild protest at their banality. Why not make them 1s then? Because of my naturally mild and benevolent nature; a 3 makes the point, while a 1 labors it.

Footnote: 'Lack of Consequence':
Absence of feeling; pointlessly imitative or derivative; lacking in apparent imagination or originality.
I ask myself these questions:
-Is this photograph memorable or stimulating in any way?
-Does it add anything to my perception of the subject, or of any subject?
-Am I better off for having seen it, for having reacted to it?
If I answer "no" to all three of those questions, then I judge the photograph to be of no consequence.

Olympus 17mm f/1.8 M.Zuiko

02/26/2009 11:08:17 PM · #366

Originally posted by ubique:

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:
What made Ubique pass it by and give it a 3? ... And, why a baseline of a 3 score for most? (Sorry, Ubique...you should be used to me by now...) )

I have explained my voting system to you a couple of times lately. I'm sure everyone who has read it has understood it (including those who disagree with my approach). Everyone but you (frankly, I think that you do understand it; you just don't accept it).

Quick summary: I mark every shot that I think is of no consequence as a 3. The rest are 5s and I look at those again in more detail. Some I change to 7-10s, and I try to comment on most of those. The two keys to understanding my system are these:
a. If a shot is of no consequence to me then its technical qualities are irrelevant, as is the amount of time and effort it took. It's a 3.
b. A shot I score as a 10 is not necessarily 'better' than one I score as 8, 7 or even 5. The 5-10 range is just a measure of the strength of my impulse to offer a comment.

I think 'scoring' art is absurd, and I'm interested in art, not photography. I could as easily not give my 3s any score at all ... but I prefer to make some mild protest at their banality. Why not make them 1s then? Because of my naturally mild and benevolent nature; a 3 makes the point, while a 1 labors it.

Footnote: 'Lack of Consequence':
Absence of feeling; pointlessly imitative or derivative; lacking in apparent imagination or originality.
I ask myself these questions:
-Is this photograph memorable or stimulating in any way?
-Does it add anything to my perception of the subject, or of any subject?
-Am I better off for having seen it, for having reacted to it?
If I answer "no" to all three of those questions, then I judge the photograph to be of no consequence. [/quote]

*She says with at HUGE SIGH*.......

Did you not read the next sentence that I wrote? Quote: (Not that I'm pointing directly at these two men for that answer...it's a rhetorical question that I'm sure plenty of people have.Sorry, Ubique...you should be used to me by now...:))

Honestly, you really didn't have to type all of this out. :) I DID understand you the first time around. I was speaking purely metaphorically and in generalities. Perhaps, if you care to re-read that, you'll see where I was talking about things in general, using your scoring method as an example of what others MAY wonder. Nothing more. :-)

Message edited by author 2009-02-26 23:18:34.

ubique

Olympus PEN-F

02/27/2009 02:25:33 AM · #367

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

*She says with at HUGE SIGH*.......

I'm sorry I have obliged you to SIGH. You appear to not know the correct meaning of the words "rhetorical' and 'metaphorically'. A question is not rhetorical simply because you do not wish to hear the answer. Nor is it rhetorical simply because you say that it is. 'She says with a HUGE SIGH' is rhetoric, but the questions you asked, in the context in which you asked them, are not. Similarly, there is no meaning of the word 'metaphorically' that could reasonably apply to your remarks. A metaphor is the application of a word or phrase to something to which it is emblematically but not literally applicable.

Perhaps you wish to be like Humpty Dumpty, and have words mean just what you choose them to mean?

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

02/27/2009 04:09:25 AM · #368

Originally posted by ubique:

A metaphor is the application of a word or phrase to something to which it is emblematically but not literally applicable.

Perhaps you wish to be like Humpty Dumpty, and have words mean just what you choose them to mean?

There ya go! And what was the other wonderland/looking glass character (the Red Queen?) who insisted that reality was what she said it was, and if she changed her position then reality also changed? Or something to that general effect? It's really hard to pin someone like that down :-)

R.

02/27/2009 06:44:29 AM · #369

Originally posted by ubique:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

I'm just hoping that our friend

PhotoInterest got something usable from this thread.

It amazes me how much easier and more comfortable it is for me here at DPC every time one of these discussions rolls around because I invariably am delighted to find great depth and meaning from this community that has the most interesting meld of real world pragmatism and artistic freedom.....often in the same person!

Thanks, people!

02/27/2009 11:40:03 AM · #370

Dear Robert and Ubique:

My deepest apologies that I wasn't sitting with a dictionary and thesaurus at the time of my response. I didn't feel it necessary as I felt that what I had explained would and could be well understood by most. But, I can see that those who wish to find fault somewhere, will find the most ridiculous of tid-bits in order to have some soapbox to stand upon.

The bottom line here is that I wasn't asking for any answers for those questions, period. They were being used in the rhetorical sense ("used for persuasive effect"...check the dictionary if you doubt the meaning of it). I was using yours and Zeuszen's stated scoring and voting as examples of questions that others may be asking as they've stated in many of the "pesky threads" as some have labelled them that have shown up in the forums. They were questions that I, personally, did not ask for an explanation for and stated that they were being posed rhetorically (for persuasive effect) only.

Re-read what I wrote in that paragraph in its ENTIRETY where it should be a lot clearer as to what I really said. :)
Here...I'll paste it in right here....

"But, where this really becomes a problem are for those who are trying to understand WHY their photos are sitting constantly in the 4's and 5's. The voting with 1 to 3's and no comments doesn't help that fact. And, as much as I admire Zeuzen's work, it doesn't help to know any further WHY he didn't think someone's shot was less than engaging to him when the only comments or scores are to those that he likes. And, yes, I know what's been said. I see the point about how one knows that they have a great shot when Zeuzen or Ubique has commented on your shot. But, what made Zeuzen NOT like that shot? What made Ubique pass it by and give it a 3? Not that I'm pointing directly at these two men for that answer...it's a rhetorical question (meant for persuasive effect only) that I'm sure plenty of people have. And, why a baseline of a 3 score for most? (Sorry, Ubique...you should be used to me by now...:)) That's another rhetorical question (meant for persuasive effect) but, again, one that I'm sure a lot of people have asked too. That's a pretty low score, I think in a number of people's minds and they want to know why (as evidenced by the constant and pesky threads as they've been called :) that keep popping up over and over again in the forums). "

ETA: I've added in bolded brackets where the meaning of "rhetorical" fits in.

As for the word, metaphorical...yup, you're right...the dictionary/thesarus should have come out. "Example" might have been a better choice but, then again, I've asked for your acceptance of my apology for this grievous error in terminology. :)

Message edited by author 2009-02-27 14:46:22.

LizzyH

02/27/2009 03:21:11 PM · #371

I'm pretty new here so, I'm still finding my way around here but, I've been perusing the boards and keep seeing this discussion come up over and over again. I've read pretty much all of this discussion and, I won't get involved in the topic at hand because I'm far too new to all of this to be able to enter my opinion on this topic with specifics.

What I can say is that the last couple of comments to Photointerest appear rather childish to me. I see that she has made her points in an open and honest manner. I cannot agree or disagree with anyone on the points or the topic being discussed but, I can say that from the perspective of another humanbeing in this world, the type of responses and criticsms given to Photointerest (in regards to the words that she used in expressing her thoughts), appears totally unnecessary and simply a matter of someone not liking the idea of being wrong in some way or another and another being immature enough to follow suit in backing that type of thinking. Are you not grown adults?

With these types of responses, I may not ever post again to these boards. Wow.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

02/27/2009 04:06:14 PM · #372

02/14/2009 07:20:44 PM

Originally posted by PhotoInterest:

... In short, the mainstream challenges are a game. They are not to be taken seriously as a judge of your ability, talent or merit as a photographer. Please don't fall into that trap. ...

Sounds like good advice.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

02/27/2009 04:07:22 PM · #373

Originally posted by LizzyH:

... With these types of responses, I may not ever post again to these boards. Wow.

Lot's of banter, much of it going back and forth - this is in 'Rant'...don't be too quick to judge.

Oh, and Welcome to DPC! :-)

02/27/2009 04:49:18 PM · #374

Originally posted by LizzyH:

Be careful not to fall into that trap. You're certainly not too new to have your own style, know what you like, and you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

Originally posted by LizzyH:

What I can say is that the last couple of comments to Photointerest appear rather childish to me. I see that she has made her points in an open and honest manner. I cannot agree or disagree with anyone on the points or the topic being discussed but, I can say that from the perspective of another humanbeing in this world, the type of responses and criticsms given to Photointerest (in regards to the words that she used in expressing her thoughts), appears totally unnecessary and simply a matter of someone not liking the idea of being wrong in some way or another and another being immature enough to follow suit in backing that type of thinking. Are you not grown adults?

With these types of responses, I may not ever post again to these boards. Wow.

Well....like you say, you're new, so you wouldn't have any idea of how far two of the latest contributors were pushed before they got anything resembling snarky.

The bottom line is that it did get beaten to death on a couple of levels and some felt frustrated with PhotoInterests seemingly being unwilling to entertain anyone else's point of view while hers was to be generally accepted.

You truly do have to look at the other side of the discussion to make any genuine conclusion.

Welcome to the lion pit of DPC Rant.

Please try not to make any rash generalizations about the temperament of the community at large from one volatile discussion.

That would hardly be reasonable, would it?