| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/02/2009 01:04:24 PM · #1 |
while i was voting on the free study i came across two pictures that are almost identical(difference slightly in angle), this isn't the first time though!
I'm not really sure what to do, so I'm gonna refrain from voting on these two.
So i was wondering what you guys think about this?
giving the benefit of doubt to both pictures, they probably meet all rule requirements, taken with different cameras, but it does spoil the spirit of creativity!
regards |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:10:50 PM · #2 |
| Uniqueness is important enough in my book that if one image alone would get, say, a 7, then if that image had an almost twin one will get a 6 and the other will get a 5 or less. They don't both deserve the original score due to lack of uniqueness, and I like to make it obvious that I prefer the slight difference of one over the other. Rarely the slight difference is totally inconsequential to me, and they'd both get the 6. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:11:10 PM · #3 |
| Could be two people out together shooting or could be a coincidence either way I would just vote the merits of the shot and not try to judge how it happened. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:12:01 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by ahmadbaara:
...it does spoil the spirit of creativity! |
Why? If two people have cameras and an interesting scene presents itself, why shouldn't both have an opportunity to take a photo? |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:17:58 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by freakin_hilarious:
if one image alone would get, say, a 7, then if that image had an almost twin one will get a 6 and the other will get a 5 or less. |
That's seems weird to me. There have been instances where two different photographers entered a shot from the same event without even knowing the other person was there. That should have no bearing on the quality of the photo. I'll usually rank one of the photos higher than the other one because the photo itself is better (focus, composition, expression, etc.), but deducting points just because someone else entered a similar photo is silly IMO. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:18:46 PM · #6 |
Seen it many times on this site. Could be two separate exposures from the same session, or two people out shooting together. These two entries of mine were taken 5 minutes apart from the same spot and adjusted differently.
 
I rate each near twin on it's own merits. I don't agree with what  freakin_hilarious suggests, because how can I determine which entry is more "original" than the other? It's not right to vote the other one down because it came up later in voting. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:20:06 PM · #7 |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:22:24 PM · #8 |
There are countless number of photos of landmarks that are similar in nature. Do you vote down those pics because they are not original? What about the eagles, or wolves, or flowers, or etc.. With your logic then all the Golden Gate pics, all the waterfalls, and all the lion shots etc should be voted down.
In a free study you should vote on the indivdual pic on its own. Look at the technicals,composition and execution and make your decision from there.
If you decide to vote down based on lack of originality then be consistent with all the pics that lack originality.
ETA There would be a WHOLE LOTTA voting down!
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 13:24:20. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:27:35 PM · #9 |
| I have no problem with two similar photos in the same challenge. However, I do compare them to each other when voting -- after all, I'm comparing all the other photos when voting, and I know that's going to happen. When I saw the zoo challenge, I was disappointed that I didn't pick the rhino instead -- there were other lion shots that were better than mine, and I expected people to realize it and vote accordingly. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:30:53 PM · #10 |
I think you guys might be misinterpreting what I said. The OP asked about almost identical, and I wouldn't consider either of the above examples to fit into that category.
I think you also misunderstood how I vote on twin images, Steve. It's not about original, it's about unique, and I don't vote down the one that comes later in the challenge. I vote them both lower than I would have voted just one if it was unique. If i have a clear preference between the two even though the images are practically identical, I'll vote the less preferred image lower (this is probably a case of identical image, different processing).
I'll see if I can dig up an example. I don't run into this situation very often.
Just as an aside again for Steve. Had I voted on one of those single tree shots in one challenge and then saw it again in another, if I remembered the first shot then the second would likely score less for lack of uniqueness as well. If I say to myself, "Man, that tree again?", you'll get a lower score.
Hopefully that makes more sense. If it still seems harsh, well, there ya go.
Edit: Just for kicks, I checked to see if I voted on your trees, Steve. I gave the ribbon winner a 6 and didn't vote on the other one.
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 13:36:59. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:34:24 PM · #11 |
| I've said it many times in the forums as well, but it obviously needs to be repeated here. You can vote however you want, why not let everyone else do the same? I hate the phrase "you should vote...." |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 01:56:07 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by freakin_hilarious:
I think you guys might be misinterpreting what I said... I vote them both lower than I would have voted just one if it was unique. |
No misinterpretation. Essentially you would think less of a Picasso if you saw it with a matching Bracques, rather than consider BOTH of them interesting. So, if we're out on a DPC GTG, and both of us spot an ivory-billed woodpecker, the two pictures would be deemed less worthy than if one of us left the lens cap on. As I said, that's weird. You can vote as you like, but it's still silly. Or, put another way... it's a funny way to judge the merits of an individual photo. Freakin hilarious, in fact. ;-)
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 14:05:49. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 02:09:02 PM · #13 |
Less worthy to win the challenge? Sure. If my wife and I are out shooting and we get practically identical shots and she wants to enter her's, I won't enter mine. I'll enter something else because I truly believe it would devalue both images to be in the same challenge, in the context of the challenge. To take the concept to the extreme, what if there was a really cool thing that 200 people all saw at once and they all ran over to take a picture. Being polite photographers, they formed a line and each took a practically identical shot one after the other. If you love the image (pick any one of the 200), would you give them all 10s if they were entered in the same challenge? That seems silly to me.
On a related note, haven't you ever had a great idea, got the shot, entered it, checked the thumbs after rollover and said "Dammit! Someone else thought of the exact same thing! That shot looks just like mine!" Well, I guess that's a rhetorical question after all. I'm sure that's never happened to you, Shannon!
After seeing your edit, it makes more sense where you're coming from. I'm not just judging the merits of individual photos, I'm choosing relative (to the challenge) merit as well.
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 14:10:42. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 02:20:48 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by freakin_hilarious:
what if there was a really cool thing that 200 people all saw at once and they all ran over to take a picture. Being polite photographers, they formed a line and each took a practically identical shot one after the other. If you love the image (pick any one of the 200), would you give them all 10s if they were entered in the same challenge? That seems silly to me. |
As silly as it may seem to you, yes. If they were that identical, it would not be be fair to lower the vote of one against the other. Or would they all get the same low vote for being unoriginal? |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 02:21:31 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by LVicari:
There are countless number of photos of landmarks that are similar in nature. Do you vote down those pics because they are not original? What about the eagles, or wolves, or flowers, or etc.. With your logic then all the Golden Gate pics, all the waterfalls, and all the lion shots etc should be voted down.
In a free study you should vote on the indivdual pic on its own. Look at the technicals,composition and execution and make your decision from there.
If you decide to vote down based on lack of originality then be consistent with all the pics that lack originality.
ETA There would be a WHOLE LOTTA voting down! |
I think I half agree, half disagree here...
Regarding landmarks & zoos, I will admit I am not 'wowed' by a shot unless it shows me something new - has something different about it that represents the photographer's own contribution to the landmark's "portfolio".
I get called out on just this sort of thing a lot and I understand the impulse, but I don't like that people vote down just because the SUBJECT is something they've seen before... I legitimately try to improve on past images of subjects, or try new takes on them, and so what I don't agree with is voting down just for the sake of voting down. But I suspect many times this may just be subconscious, the voter just not being 'wowed' anymore.
With regards to voting WITHIN challenges, I certainly don't think points should be deducted for similar or identical entries, 'cause you have to give the photographers the benefit of the doubt as to how they achieved their shot and that they did not plan on submitting identical entries. Much like you should not vote down based on a suspected rules violation, because you never know when you will be wrong and if the photo is not legit it will end up being DQ'd anyhow, your vote will not affect it. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 02:37:30 PM · #16 |
Isn't it great how we all have different opinions on what's silly and what's fair? I always find these discussions fascinating. For every question that starts with "How do you vote if..." there are 100s of different answers. Just in case anyone's wondering, my intention is always to simply share my opinions, never to try to convert anyone else to them. I always appreciate seeing that courtesy returned as well.
To answer your specific question about the scenario I proposed, Steve, it would depend on what else was in the challenge.
If in addition to the 200 identical shots there was 1 more amazing shot that I would give a 10 to, I would score the other 200 a 9 and give the advantage to the 1 unique shot.
If there was 1 other shot I liked a tiny bit less than the 200, I might score them all the same as above to still give the edge to the unique image.
If there was 1 other shot I liked much less, it would get less than a 10 and the 200 would all get 10s.
If one of the 200 were, say, converted to B/W and none of the others were, and I thought B/W worked perfectly for that image, I'd give that photographer the edge with a 10 and the rest 9s.
If....well, you get the idea.
I just reread your last post, Steve, and I figured I'd clarify one point. If 2 images are truly identical (shot, angle, light, processing, everything), I also believe it would indeed be unfair to give them different scores. I don't believe it would be unfair to give them both 6s when I would have given one of them a 7 if it was unique.
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 14:41:36. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 04:01:20 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by freakin_hilarious:
I also believe it would indeed be unfair to give them different scores. I don't believe it would be unfair to give them both 6s when I would have given one of them a 7 if it was unique. |
That does clarify your point a little better. (Whew, my head hurts now!) |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 05:45:14 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by PapaBob:
Could be two people out together shooting or could be a coincidence either way I would just vote the merits of the shot and not try to judge how it happened. |
My wife and I submit photos for the challenges and for one challenge (friends), we have to shoot a picture at the last minute. So we took pictures of our son playing with his friend in the park. At least 2 people referred they saw the same people on the picture in the challenge. There was even a question of doubt. While we try to avoid taking the same subject, it would be nice if votes /comments were made on the photos based on each picture without comparing the similar pictures on the challenge. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 05:58:39 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by ahmadbaara:
...it does spoil the spirit of creativity! |
Why? If two people have cameras and an interesting scene presents itself, why shouldn't both have an opportunity to take a photo? |
They can shoot the photo...they just shouldn't enter it if they know their partner is going to. |
|
|
|
07/02/2009 06:02:56 PM · #20 |
Always fun when this topic comes up. I remember what probably was the first time...
 ...
these two caused plenty of controversy, but even with some confusion, they came in 1st and 2nd
in the Challenge of June 2004
LOL - I should read the whole thread.  Scalvert beat me to this fine example.
Message edited by author 2009-07-02 18:05:43.
|
|
|
|
07/02/2009 06:36:19 PM · #21 |
In the Shapes III challenge, there were three pictures of a crescent moon and a single star - one of which was mine. I had no idea that anyone else would enter the "same" shot - let alone two others.
Gotta go with those who vote on each individual picture - especially since the presentation order is random - any of the shots could be presented to you first for voting, and you don't have access to the image info, so you don't know which was taken first. There is no way to know which is the original, and which is the "clone" |
|
|
|
07/03/2009 07:22:36 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by dtremain:
In the Shapes III challenge, there were three pictures of a crescent moon and a single star - one of which was mine. I had no idea that anyone else would enter the "same" shot - let alone two others. |
The one time I've entered a zoo shot, and the first time I had been there in over a decade, and the bird I chose to photograph was entered by somebody else.
  |
|
|
|
07/03/2009 07:42:52 AM · #23 |
|
|
|
07/03/2009 07:56:35 AM · #24 |
I am often out with other DPC'ers, especially  Brat. We try not to enter similiar images...but we have been caught out at times. Here are two images that were shot at the same time. We were out at the lake late at night...with party revellers in the distance....so safety was an issue. We both have different editing styles and without realising it, we entered an image taken at the same time and similiar composition...
Judi
Score - 5.7974
Place - 28th/86
Brat
Score - 5.7848
Place - 29th/86
Here is another situation where we entered images from the same time and place. But the most bizarre of all, was that we named them the same title....it wasn't until after voting started and we checked out each others entries, that we realised...and to this day, we still shake our heads over it. So it does happen.
Judi
Title - The Calm Before the Storm
Score - 5.8636
Place -4th/176
Brat
Title - The Calm Before the Storm
Score - 6.1290
Place - 12th/176
|
|
|
|
07/03/2009 08:12:17 AM · #25 |
My score will often go down if this is the case. If two people take the same picture because they're in the same place, then the place is taking the picture.
|
|
