| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/26/2004 11:55:29 AM · #26 |
| oh well, everybody should indeed vote the way they think is fair............... |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:11:29 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by dsidwell:
Although some photos do not very clearly communicate how they meet the challenge, I have only seen TWO photos in my entire time here on DPC that did not meet the challenge.
That's right. TWO. In 88 challenges in which I've voted.
TWO. |
But photography is about communication. Should we not give higher scores to those people who have taken photos that communicate the challenge well compared to those where the link is far to week for most of us to see? Should we assume that we are the ones at fault for not seeing how the photo meets the challenge and just vote on the photo? A large part of the challenge is to take a photo that speaks to the challenge. Another large part is to READ the details and not just go by the tittle of the challenge.
Message edited by author 2004-04-26 12:11:50. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:11:50 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by dsidwell:
Although some photos do not very clearly communicate how they meet the challenge, I have only seen TWO photos in my entire time here on DPC that did not meet the challenge.
That's right. TWO. In 88 challenges in which I've voted.
TWO. |
I'm with David on this one. If the photographer says it meets the challenge, I am not arrogant enough to say that I know better than the person who took the shot.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:22:14 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by StevePax:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
Although some photos do not very clearly communicate how they meet the challenge, I have only seen TWO photos in my entire time here on DPC that did not meet the challenge.
That's right. TWO. In 88 challenges in which I've voted.
TWO. |
I'm with David on this one. If the photographer says it meets the challenge, I am not arrogant enough to say that I know better than the person who took the shot. |
By extension should we also trust the photographer that it not only meets the challenge but is a great photo and rate it a 10? |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:23:30 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
But since he asked... I would give it a 1 |
You should just skip them rather then giving them a lower score. Maybe YOU'RE the one that just doesn't get it. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:25:59 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by scottwilson:
By extension should we also trust the photographer that it not only meets the challenge but is a great photo and rate it a 10? |
I'm glad someone got there before me. :)
Originally posted by thelsel:
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
But since he asked... I would give it a 1 |
You should just skip them rather then giving them a lower score. Maybe YOU'RE the one that just doesn't get it. |
So your opinion should only count when you think highly of the photo? |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:30:30 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by thelsel:
You should just skip them rather then giving them a lower score. Maybe YOU'RE the one that just doesn't get it. |
If you don't get it, then maybe the photo doesn't communicate its message very well. I always try to see the link to the challenge, but if I don't get it I don't get it. And vote it (slightly) down. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:40:12 PM · #33 |
| If the photographer cannot make me understand why their picture meets the challenge, then the photographer has failed to communicate with me. Plain and simple. I admittedly give a lot of leeway, but If I don't see a connection I dole out low scores. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:46:56 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by lockjawdavis:
If the photographer cannot make me understand why their picture meets the challenge, then the photographer has failed to communicate with me. Plain and simple. I admittedly give a lot of leeway, but If I don't see a connection I dole out low scores. |
It takes two to communicate. If he/she communicates clearly and if I have the facilities to perceive his/her essence, all is fine. If I lack those facilities, all is lost, no matter how articulate and topical his entry.
I'll be damned if I judge someone's action based on my own ignorance.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:52:08 PM · #35 |
I simply rate those that don't meet the challenge on a different scale--1-5 rather than 1-10.
I understand there is the risk that I may misperceive the image, but I am being a "judge" in a contest, where I am asked to hold important the communication of the challenge theme as well as the technical and aesthetic elements of the photo.
If I were to simply score on aesthetics and technical merit, assuming every photographer has met the challenge perfectly to his/her abilities, then in fact, I wouldn't be taking into account the challenge theme at all, which is not what the instructions say.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 12:53:49 PM · #36 |
I like when people give higher scores for meeting the challenge. That's usually the one thing I can do. :-)
That said, I usually don't have a lot of complaints about how anyone of you votes. As long as you do it consistently, I figure it is fair and equitable.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:00:44 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by scottwilson:
Originally posted by StevePax:
Originally posted by dsidwell:
Although some photos do not very clearly communicate how they meet the challenge, I have only seen TWO photos in my entire time here on DPC that did not meet the challenge.
That's right. TWO. In 88 challenges in which I've voted.
TWO. |
I'm with David on this one. If the photographer says it meets the challenge, I am not arrogant enough to say that I know better than the person who took the shot. |
By extension should we also trust the photographer that it not only meets the challenge but is a great photo and rate it a 10? |
While I save 9s and 10s for photos that really WOW me, I do give many photographs the benefit of the doubt. As Willem noted (I admire his work a lot), he spends more than 2 seconds on a shot. I try to do the same, and when I look, I see all kinds of things I would not notice--things that the photographer used to make her or his photo communicate. Invariably, the winning photos are those that both clearly communicate the challenge (in 2 seconds!), and are good quality. I have noticed that many photographs are more subtle--and I don't find anything wrong with subtlety, even if it doesn't win ribbons. In fact, I wish more subtle photos would win ribbons once in a while.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:04:13 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
...I understand there is the risk that I may misperceive the image, but I am being a "judge" in a contest, where I am asked to hold important the communication of the challenge theme as well as the technical and aesthetic elements of the photo.
If I were to simply score on aesthetics and technical merit, assuming every photographer has met the challenge perfectly to his/her abilities, then in fact, I wouldn't be taking into account the challenge theme at all, which is not what the instructions say. |
The instructions ask for consideration while voting, not more than this. Besides, any instruction, may they come from DPC administrators or from the state, shall pose a substitute for my own thinking, sense and actions.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:07:19 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by dsidwell:
...I have noticed that many photographs are more subtle--and I don't find anything wrong with subtlety, even if it doesn't win ribbons. In fact, I wish more subtle photos would win ribbons once in a while. |
Yes, I, too, feel this way.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:13:59 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
The instructions ask for consideration while voting, not more than this. Besides, any instruction, may they come from DPC administrators or from the state, shall pose a substitute for my own thinking, sense and actions. |
Isn't a basic assumption that all photos meet the challenge a substitution for your own thinking, sense and actions? |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:28:12 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
The instructions ask for consideration while voting, not more than this. Besides, any instruction, may they come from DPC administrators or from the state, shall pose a substitute for my own thinking, sense and actions. |
Isn't a basic assumption that all photos meet the challenge a substitution for your own thinking, sense and actions? |
I wouldn't know. I'm not a fundamentalist.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:31:20 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
|
It takes two to communicate. If he/she communicates clearly and if I have the facilities to perceive his/her essence, all is fine. If I lack those facilities, all is lost, no matter how articulate and topical his entry.
I'll be damned if I judge someone's action based on my own ignorance. [/quote]
I don't really care to perceive anybody's essence here. Simply put, the photographer has failed if the viewer doesn't understand the entry. I haven't seen too many entries here that are so advanced in thought that I feel unequipped to judge them. But, like I said, I'll definitely give the benefit of the doubt. To a point.
Message edited by author 2004-04-26 13:35:22. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:46:22 PM · #43 |
I remember something from Communication 101 that went something like this: "The success of the communication rests in the response you get." In other words, doesn't much matter how clearly YOU think you communicated (as a sender), what matters is what happens in terms of the receiver. If you take a picture (sender) that YOU think clearly communicates the theme, but we don't get it (receiver), then you haven't met the challenge -- you haven't communicated your vision of the challenge. Makes no difference whether we're smart, dumb, responsible, irresponsible, whatever. The burden is on the photographer to communicate the theme.
That in no way doesn't mean you haven't taken a fine picture, or that people can like it, or that it is something you could sell, or any of that. It just means you haven't communicated the theme, as far as those who judged it are concerned.
Message edited by author 2004-04-26 13:47:05. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:51:00 PM · #44 |
Problem is, somethng which the photographer can "clearly communicate" to someone who studies a photo for 30 seconds, may not be as successful at achieving that communication in a 5-second view. This forces a certain superficiality in topic interpretation if one wants high scores, with a consequent convergence on safe, obvious shots, which then score low because they are cliche or trite or overused ...
I sincerely doubt that there are more than 5 photos in any challenge which don't meet the challenge topic in some way .... |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 01:55:40 PM · #45 |
GeneralE, I do agree. <>
That said, what else can it be but an imperfect system?
By the way, I'm getting HAMMERED on my entry because to many voters, it doesn't clearly communicate the theme. Guess what -- they're right! <> I even tried pulling them in with a long, convoluted title that would explain the image, but once again, the judges (viewers) rightly ignored that ploy.
This was the hardest challenge I've entered to date, by golly. I'll be glad when it's over. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 02:11:43 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by boomer:
I remember something from Communication 101 that went something like this: "The success of the communication rests in the response you get." |
Success and quality are not identical in meaning. I can't judge success while voting.
Message edited by author 2004-04-26 14:12:23.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 02:28:28 PM · #47 |
Boomer's statement isn't asking anyone to judge success. It's simply stating that the public's reaction to what is being communicated is the barometer of success. If the public 'doesn't get it,' then clearly that piece of communication was not successful.
Message edited by author 2004-04-26 14:29:30. |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 02:37:09 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by boomer:
GeneralE, I do agree. <>
That said, what else can it be but an imperfect system?
By the way, I'm getting HAMMERED on my entry because to many voters, it doesn't clearly communicate the theme. |
Well apparently mine meets the challenge so obviously everyone's bored with it ... I don't always take the daring edgy route after all, and still can't get it right. :) |
|
|
|
04/26/2004 04:15:32 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by lockjawdavis:
Boomer's statement isn't asking anyone to judge success. It's simply stating that the public's reaction to what is being communicated is the barometer of success. If the public 'doesn't get it,' then clearly that piece of communication was not successful. |
Which I am simply qualifying for the context in which it is found.
|
|
|
|
04/26/2004 04:50:44 PM · #50 |
I have just noticed that several/many voters have a very narrow definition of a challenge subject, and images that don't meet this narrow criteria are scored low/er by these voters. Inevitably, the ribbon winners are those that meet the lowest common denominator of voter perceptions with the highest possible score.
It has been said before in many similar threads, but it actually would be nice to just assume that almost all photos meet the challenge in some way. The effectiveness and clarity may be at issue, but I just haven't seen very many photos that have not met a particular challenge.
For example, take a look at this image:
The challenge was 'In the Garden' and, while this photo was taken in the garden--there I was with dirt stains on my jeans after taking it, it was not CLEAR that it was 'in the garden.' I think it's an okay shot--one of my personal favorites even, but the clarity was not there, so it deserved a lower score, even though it met the challenge.
If voting lower scores is based on CLARITY rather than on some black and white / on-off criterion, voting becomes more fun and challenging as one looks for the clues that lead to both a good photograph and its effectiveness in meeting a challenge topic.
|
|
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: 08/03/2025 12:18:56 PM EDT.
