| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/02/2009 11:33:24 AM · #26 |
| Definately didn't deserve anything below a 5. I think the dark tones added to the photo. It is a great emotive photo. I know how you feel though. I just think the holidays are making the voters pissy. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 11:34:24 AM · #27 |
| 2 is pretty harsh and i don't think it's deserving of a 2, i gave it a 6. i liked the moodiness of it. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 11:35:04 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by bvy:
Strange score breakdown. Too dark, but not 2 dark. Don't know... |
I've taken a closer look, and I'm not sure it's even too dark. Certainly low key and somber, appropriate to the subject matter at hand. Some brighter highlights in the sky might have provided better balance, but overall a worthy, somwhat off-the-beaten path offering.
The fact that the two's fall off of the bell curve make me think they're an anomaly anyway. |
Saying that that image is too dark is as foolish as someone telling me a Times Square image is too cluttered or busy..."too many distractions". It's really mind boggling... |
Care to give me your definition in this sentence of "too dark" are you speaking metaphorically or in the realm of the tones and histogram?
Matt
ETA I think another thing that hurts the image is how soft the building and person appears compared to the trees on the back left which appear to be really sharp and the building/person is soft or slightly out of focus. I did not vote on this but given the challenge and the photo entered probably would have given it a 4 or 5.
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 11:40:54. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 12:50:35 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
I think it's a great image. It's hard to explain the 2's but keep in mind when you enter a Basic Open Challenges it's kinda like swimming in public pool as opposed to a posher setting at a nice country club. It's louder, noisier..not quite as clean and you have to put up with a little more riff raff...but it's free.
;) |
Probably the absolute best description I've ever heard of the open challenges. Brilliant.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 01:02:16 PM · #30 |
Gave it a 4 because for me it was too boring.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 01:03:58 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Care to give me your definition in this sentence of "too dark" are you speaking metaphorically or in the realm of the tones and histogram? |
If that's for me, I was speaking in the tonal sense of the word. I don't think the image is flawed in any way because it's (too) dark. On the contrary, I think its subtle beauty is lost on the trigger happy voter who needs instant gratification. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 01:07:12 PM · #32 |
Wooo those who give low votes, be average or above average or else burn in the deepest pit of hell.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 01:12:04 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by MattO:
Care to give me your definition in this sentence of "too dark" are you speaking metaphorically or in the realm of the tones and histogram? |
If that's for me, I was speaking in the tonal sense of the word. I don't think the image is flawed in any way because it's (too) dark. On the contrary, I think its subtle beauty is lost on the trigger happy voter who needs instant gratification. |
That is for Steve. Since anyone who has a thought on it that varies from his is foolish.
Matt
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 13:12:38. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 01:39:47 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by MattO:
Originally posted by bvy:
Originally posted by MattO:
Care to give me your definition in this sentence of "too dark" are you speaking metaphorically or in the realm of the tones and histogram? |
If that's for me, I was speaking in the tonal sense of the word. I don't think the image is flawed in any way because it's (too) dark. On the contrary, I think its subtle beauty is lost on the trigger happy voter who needs instant gratification. |
That is for Steve. Since anyone who has a thought on it that varies from his is foolish.
Matt |
I think the image is dark because it's a dark message that's being sent. Look at the title Foresaken. This person is being left out, disavowed, stranded, left in the lurch, cast aside, thrown over, abandoned, shut out...
It's a dark and somber note so, if you think about it, beyond technical nitpicking the photographer actually did a wonderful job packaging that message. I'd challenge any photographer to produce a completely rounded image where most of their artistic choices make as much sense, as they do here. Keep in mind this isn't a shot taken for a box of cereal or a vacation package offering and it shouldn't be judged that way. That's what's foolish...judging images by the wrong criteria.
Again, I can't explain the 2's but most of the technical things that people have pointed out here in the thread seem so irrelevant. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 01:53:14 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
It's a dark and somber note so, if you think about it, beyond technical nitpicking the photographer actually did a wonderful job packaging that message. I'd challenge any photographer to produce a completely rounded image where most of their artistic choices make as much sense, as they do here. Keep in mind this isn't a shot taken for a box of cereal or a vacation package offering and it shouldn't be judged that way. That's what's foolish...judging images by the wrong criteria.
Again, I can't explain the 2's but most of the technical things that people have pointed out here in the thread seem so irrelevant. |
I think you should keep in mind who is voting on the image. The OP asked if we could see flaws that might cause the 2's. We are giving a critique on every aspect of the image in hopes of giving him some insight into it.
If this were the art world I would agree with you on your account of this image, however this is a site set around technicals and anal retentive voters. If you want to score well you pander to their wishes, if you don't do that, do you really have any place to complain knowing going in what you are up against?
I also think that each voter can judge the image how they want too, and calling everyone foolish because they don't agree with your thought process might be foolish as well.
Matt |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 02:04:32 PM · #36 |
I don't think it has anything to do with the technicals. It's not a feel good story for religion so some people are put off by it hence the low votes. My opinion of course.
ETA: Case in point, just look at the top rated shots. They all steered far away from ruffling any feathers. That's like ribbon winning 101.
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 14:08:04.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 02:14:57 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by MattO:
I also think that each voter can judge the image how they want too, and calling everyone foolish because they don't agree with your thought process might be foolish as well.
Matt |
I didn't call everyone foolish. What I said or at least what I meant was that people shouldn't judge images or artistic representations with a commercial criteria or set of rules in place. That's what would be foolish.
So, what's the message of this thread? If you have an artistic vision...abandon it and pander if you would like higher votes. I agree with that.
Anyway, I don't mean to argue but trying to get into the minds "2" voters seems like a futile pursuit and playing down to them IMHO, is shooting in the wrong direction. Look upward and don't smother your vision in A-1 Steak Sauce.
eta: I agree with Yanko. It's a not a feelgood image and that might be more of the battle.
All for now...
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 14:16:26. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 03:08:24 PM · #38 |
I waffled on giving this image a 5 or 6 and settled on a 6. 11 2s seems really odd, but at least it didn't get the 4 1s that mine did - though it finished about where I had expected it to.
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 15:08:35. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 03:44:57 PM · #39 |
| what?!?!? that is baffling that you got those votes. Hmm. I gave it an 8, if that's any consolation. This happens to be exactly my "style" and I loved it. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:01:08 PM · #40 |
For me this one would have likely scored a 6-7, I like the mood the darken tones and subject set up and it reflects an opinion of religion that evokes emotion.
For the record I get a kick out of threads like this, everyone's comments say they gave the image above average scores which I am sure they did but where are the 2's? This is your time to tell us what you really thought about the image. I think it is perfectly fine to not like an image and all the OP wants to know is what you did not like. I personally gave a ribbon winner a one once because I felt it did not meet the challenge and if someone was asking about that image I would have shared my thoughts. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:04:20 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by MattO:
I also think that each voter can judge the image how they want too, and calling everyone foolish because they don't agree with your thought process might be foolish as well.
Matt |
I didn't call everyone foolish. What I said or at least what I meant was that people shouldn't judge images or artistic representations with a commercial criteria or set of rules in place. That's what would be foolish.
So, what's the message of this thread? If you have an artistic vision...abandon it and pander if you would like higher votes. I agree with that.
Anyway, I don't mean to argue but trying to get into the minds "2" voters seems like a futile pursuit and playing down to them IMHO, is shooting in the wrong direction. Look upward and don't smother your vision in A-1 Steak Sauce.
eta: I agree with Yanko. It's a not a feelgood image and that might be more of the battle.
All for now... |
The thing is, people will judge photos the way they want to. If that's with commercial criteria, then so be it and so what if it's against how others vote. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:17:05 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by PapaBob:
For the record I get a kick out of threads like this, everyone's comments say they gave the image above average scores which I am sure they did but where are the 2's? |
I suspect that (with some exceptions), the bulk of the people that usually vote like this don't participate in the forums, so they will never see this thread and you will never hear their reasons. I think this happens more in open challenges. Some think it is clever to low vote others to improve their own placement. I have taken to calling them "tactical voters".
That's my theory and I'm sticking to it. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:26:11 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by BJokerud:
There will always be 2's and 1's (as well as 10'2 and 9's). I heard something about making a surprise for the troll voters so they won't be able to leave a sub 4 score without commenting or something like that. that would be nice! |
That would be nice! Explanation for the low scores will be a great learning experience. I know I need all the explanations I can get. :) |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:28:17 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by yanko:
I don't think it has anything to do with the technicals. It's not a feel good story for religion so some people are put off by it hence the low votes. My opinion of course. |
I had this thought as well. And the blue, which makes the beautiful St. James Cathedral look entirely menacing, throws in a dash of fire n' brimstone to boot. ;) |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:35:05 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by Louis:
[quote=yanko] I don't think it has anything to do with the technicals. It's not a feel good story for religion so some people are put off by it hence the low votes. My opinion of course. |
I like the pictures that push buttons, that don't make everyone feel good. I gave your pic a 6. I liked the moodiness and the dark feel it gave. I would of scored you higher if the focus was bit more clear and if the sky bit lighter.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:39:16 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by sonniejake:
Originally posted by Louis:
[quote=yanko] I don't think it has anything to do with the technicals. It's not a feel good story for religion so some people are put off by it hence the low votes. My opinion of course. |
I like the pictures that push buttons, that don't make everyone feel good. I gave your pic a 6. I liked the moodiness and the dark feel it gave. I would of scored you higher if the focus was bit more clear and if the sky bit lighter. |
Finally figured it out. You're responding to yanko, ignoring my post, and critiquing Hipychik's photo.
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 16:39:44. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:51:33 PM · #47 |
As background to what follows, I gave it a 5...
Don't know how much of this is repeat, but my thoughts are:
- Yep, it's dark, and I recognized that as intentional, but to me it is also muddy. I liked the sky, but the foreground detail was lost in the darkness, and that detracted for me.
- The framing was uninspired. Not bad, mind you, just nothing special. Also see next comment.
- I know this was Basic, but the perspective bothered me (the converging vertical lines of the building) and again detracted. You probably would have been better off shooting at wider angle, with camera level thus getting proper perspective on the building. That would have incorporated more of the foreground, which might not have been a bad thing, and in any case could be cropped if so desired.
- The photo did a pretty good job at conveying the intended message, and I thought the title worked well
FWIW, I'm actually a little surprised at the anomalous number of twos on this photo. More than I'd expect from a "normally distributed" voting pattern, and in fact suggestive of some voters trying to manipulate the system without tripping the "vote scrubber." Not saying that it couldn't have occurred by chance, it certainly could have...
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 04:56:27 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
...most of the technical things that people have pointed out here in the thread seem so irrelevant. |
I couldn't agree more. I was just hazarding a guess as to what the *voters* were thinking, who gave this such a low score.
R. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 05:32:48 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by sonniejake:
Originally posted by BJokerud:
There will always be 2's and 1's (as well as 10'2 and 9's). I heard something about making a surprise for the troll voters so they won't be able to leave a sub 4 score without commenting or something like that. that would be nice! |
That would be nice! Explanation for the low scores will be a great learning experience. I know I need all the explanations I can get. :) |
Sondra - A point I've made (or have tried to make) a few times over the years is that you probably won't learn anything from knowing why voters vote low.
I look at it this way and assume this analogy could be correct...
Suppose you cook an absolutely perfect, wonderful Duck a l'Orange and as the plate come back from the dining room you notice 5 out of the 25 people you served didn't take a bite or hardly ate a thing. So, you ask yourself why...or what was wrong with the meal...?
1. Perhaps the person just doesn't like duck?
2. Perhaps the person wanted a Steak or Seafood?
3. Perhaps the person really hates Liver and won't eat Liver under any circumstances?
To possibility 1. It doesn't matter or is irrelevant what a person that doesn't like Duck has to say about the dish because the meal was fine and there's not much you could do to have made them like it better, correct?
To possibility 2. Again, not much you can do there and if they returned the dish it doesn't say much about the dish itself or the job you did preparing it.
To possibility 3. Trying unravel the thinking of someone who won't eat Duck because they hate Liver...is a real waste of time. I'd bet that's the case more times than you can count and again, not worth the energy. Some folks just don't have a clue what's going on. It's just the nature of things.
Usually there's at least one or two comments left on every image that should steer you in the right direction or give you enough of a clue as to why something isn't scoring well.
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 20:27:18. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 05:57:22 PM · #50 |
| So everyone who likes to cook duck, keep serving it until they learn to like it. LOL |
|
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: 07/20/2025 04:36:00 PM EDT.
