| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/29/2010 01:54:27 PM · #276 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
100 vote check in -
Votes: 100
Views: 184
Avg Vote: 6.2800
Comments: 13 |
Votes: 91
Views: 219
Interestingly different at this point in time... you have a good 10% more votes than I do. That seems like a lot within the range of standardized distribution. |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 01:57:08 PM · #277 |
Votes: 100
Views: 201
Avg Vote: 6.1100
Comments: 12
Favorites: 1
I'm now at 100 votes, too. |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:15:43 PM · #278 |
Votes: 94
Views: 168
Avg Vote: 4.8085
Comments: 3 |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:17:17 PM · #279 |
Originally posted by mycelium:
Interestingly different at this point in time... you have a good 10% more votes than I do. That seems like a lot within the range of standardized distribution. |
True. But there are a lot of images to vote on. I've only voted on 25% of them so far. So if your image is towards the end it might work better. It might make more sense if the images were selected randomly. Although, perhaps it's a perk of submitting early.
Votes: 90
Views: 185
Avg Vote: 6.0111
Comments: 2
|
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:19:21 PM · #280 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Originally posted by mycelium:
Interestingly different at this point in time... you have a good 10% more votes than I do. That seems like a lot within the range of standardized distribution. |
True. But there are a lot of images to vote on. I've only voted on 25% of them so far. So if your image is towards the end it might work better. It might make more sense if the images were selected randomly. Although, perhaps it's a perk of submitting early.
Votes: 90
Views: 185
Avg Vote: 6.0111
Comments: 2 |
They are random! LOL |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:19:23 PM · #281 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
It might make more sense if the images were selected randomly. Although, perhaps it's a perk of submitting early. |
I'm pretty sure they are. Also, I think I was submission #39 :)
Message edited by author 2010-07-29 14:19:34. |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:43:29 PM · #282 |
I've found this to be one of the most interesting challenge's I've seen since I joined. I usually find a few on my preview that I go WOW at, but this time there are sooo many Great shots! Glad I didn't enter anything!! Not even close to done voteing yet...
I do have a question, I've seen a couple that have a fairly sharp line before the subject, and then behind the subject is out of focus, On a shallow dof, could this happen? Or have they used perhaps a guassian blur in front of the subject to make the forground appear also out of focus??? Haven't voted on any of these yet because it confuses me as to whether it is really a total shallow dof... Any advice?? |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:47:41 PM · #283 |
Originally posted by littlemav:
I do have a question, I've seen a couple that have a fairly sharp line before the subject, and then behind the subject is out of focus, On a shallow dof, could this happen? Or have they used perhaps a guassian blur in front of the subject to make the forground appear also out of focus??? Haven't voted on any of these yet because it confuses me as to whether it is really a total shallow dof... Any advice?? |
We are not supposed to discuss outtakes in the scores thread, so I will PM you with an example that I think may be what you are describing. |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:49:07 PM · #284 |
Originally posted by littlemav:
I've found this to be one of the most interesting challenge's I've seen since I joined. I usually find a few on my preview that I go WOW at, but this time there are sooo many Great shots! Glad I didn't enter anything!! Not even close to done voteing yet...
I do have a question, I've seen a couple that have a fairly sharp line before the subject, and then behind the subject is out of focus, On a shallow dof, could this happen? Or have they used perhaps a guassian blur in front of the subject to make the forground appear also out of focus??? Haven't voted on any of these yet because it confuses me as to whether it is really a total shallow dof... Any advice?? |
shallow dof is all about where you focus, if you are shooting at an fstop of say 1.8 and there is something in right in front of you, but you focus on a subject 10 feet away then the foreground and b/g behind your subject will be out of focus. if i understand what you are asking then here is a shot that somewhat demonstrates that, notice the logo of the piano in the middle of the shot is in focus while the f/g and b/g are not:
 |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:51:44 PM · #285 |
Originally posted by mycelium:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
100 vote check in -
Votes: 100
Views: 184
Avg Vote: 6.2800
Comments: 13 |
Votes: 91
Views: 219
Interestingly different at this point in time... you have a good 10% more votes than I do. That seems like a lot within the range of standardized distribution. |
Oh, that's just my 10 other accounts I use to vote up my pictures..
(..)
------
(just kidding, don't kill me!) LOL |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:52:53 PM · #286 |
100 vote check-in:
Votes: 100
Views: 185
Avg Vote: 5.8100
Comments: 3
|
|
|
|
07/29/2010 02:57:00 PM · #287 |
You mean they're in a random order for every voter?
|
|
|
|
07/29/2010 03:03:15 PM · #288 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
You mean they're in a random order for every voter? |
yes, everyone sees the images in a completely different order. |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 03:05:01 PM · #289 |
Originally posted by salmiakki:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
You mean they're in a random order for every voter? |
yes, everyone sees the images in a completely different order. |
Damn. That blows away my theory then.
It's probably down to sunspots in that case.
Votes: 91
Views: 186
Avg Vote: 6.0330
Comments: 2
|
|
|
|
07/29/2010 03:09:34 PM · #290 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Originally posted by salmiakki:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
You mean they're in a random order for every voter? |
yes, everyone sees the images in a completely different order. |
Damn. That blows away my theory then.
It's probably down to sunspots in that case.
Votes: 91
Views: 186
Avg Vote: 6.0330
Comments: 2 |
Two words... Cherry Pickers.. :)
ETA: congrats on breaking that 6 barrier
Message edited by author 2010-07-29 15:10:06. |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 03:14:25 PM · #291 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
ETA: congrats on breaking that 6 barrier |
Danke.
I'm telling you though. If you saw my score trend you'd see it has been jumping above and below 6 for a while. I think this is the fourth time it's been over 6. Hopefully it'll stay! It'd be awesome!
|
|
|
|
07/29/2010 03:19:13 PM · #292 |
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
ETA: congrats on breaking that 6 barrier |
Danke.
I'm telling you though. If you saw my score trend you'd see it has been jumping above and below 6 for a while. I think this is the fourth time it's been over 6. Hopefully it'll stay! It'd be awesome! |
Well, now that I look at your score trend, you're right.. Let's hope it gets higher! |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 03:19:54 PM · #293 |
100ish vote check in...
Votes: 103
Views: 183
Avg Vote: 5.7670
Comments: 5
Favorites: 0 |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 03:47:26 PM · #294 |
| geez...I'm still back at 90 votes...sigh...I'll never catch up... |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 04:18:54 PM · #295 |
Votes: 92
Views: 169
Avg Vote: 4.3261
Comments: 6
Hmm.. Wouldn't complain. It's getting what it deserves anyway :( |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 04:22:13 PM · #296 |
Originally posted by salmiakki:
Originally posted by NiallOTuama:
You mean they're in a random order for every voter? |
yes, everyone sees the images in a completely different order. |
Well, I think they are random for each person. I doubt there is a check like DNA or fingerprints to insure that no two identical combinations exist.
Now the odds are strongly against it of course... |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 04:28:13 PM · #297 |
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Well, I think they are random for each person. I doubt there is a check like DNA or fingerprints to insure that no two identical combinations exist. |
I think it may use cookies to manage the order in which they are presented. I find if I am voting during lunch at work, the order of images is not the same one I get at home. |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 04:46:57 PM · #298 |
Votes: 98
Views: 184
Avg Vote: 4.7245
Comments: 3 |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 04:52:29 PM · #299 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Well, I think they are random for each person. I doubt there is a check like DNA or fingerprints to insure that no two identical combinations exist. |
I think it may use cookies to manage the order in which they are presented. I find if I am voting during lunch at work, the order of images is not the same one I get at home. |
I just logged in on two different machines at work... got the same order. So I doubt it's cookies. Might use the IPAddress as a seed key? |
|
|
|
07/29/2010 05:00:53 PM · #300 |
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by klkitchens:
Well, I think they are random for each person. I doubt there is a check like DNA or fingerprints to insure that no two identical combinations exist. |
I think it may use cookies to manage the order in which they are presented. I find if I am voting during lunch at work, the order of images is not the same one I get at home. |
I just logged in on two different machines at work... got the same order. So I doubt it's cookies. Might use the IPAddress as a seed key? |
Yeah, this had got me thinking about seed keys... and wondering why the code doesn't just use the user ID. |
|
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 06:53:42 AM EDT.
