| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/11/2024 01:04:34 PM · #1 |
Boo!!!! to whoever the voters were that gave me 1 four and 4 fives in the "Twisted" challenge. Sorry to say but it looks like you were voting strategically to boost the chances of your own image which is not a nice thing to do. One can see it is probably strategic voting by looking at the participants score vs non-participants score.
Avg (participants): 6.1333
Avg (non-participants): 7.3000
That's a massive difference, not one of the other entries has such a big difference between their participants score vs non-participants score.
Message edited by author 2024-11-11 13:06:54. |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 01:10:17 PM · #2 |
Your processing was somewhat unusual and some folks likely did not like it and voted it down a few spots. Personally I did like the approach but it was a risk by making it so yellowed in tone. I was not entered in the challenge and rewarded all entries higher scores simply for entering a challenge I could not find a suitable subject .
Message edited by author 2024-11-11 13:12:37. |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 01:15:59 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by bassbone:
Your processing was somewhat unusual and some folks likely did not like it and voted it down a few spots. Personally I did like the approach but it was a risk by making it so yellowed in tone. I was not entered in the challenge and rewarded all entries higher scores simply for entering a challenge I could not find a suitable subject . |
Yeah maybe but the difference in participant scores vs non-participants scores suggests otherwise.
Anyway I specially chose that style as it was quite prominent during the 19th century in the Wild West and was called "Albumen Print and I wanted to try and recreate that look." Egg whites were used to achieve that look. Here is a link to how it was done. Very interesting:
Quote"To create albumen prints, paper was floated in a mixture of fermented chloride and egg white, dried and then floated on a solution of silver nitrate. The paper would then be placed in a frame in direct contact with the negative. Sunlight was used during the exposure process. Albumen can sometimes be one of the easier print formats to identify in our holdings. Image tones will sometimes change towards yellow brown with yellow highlights due to deterioration."Unquote
https://unwritten-record.blogs.archives.gov/2020/05/14/19th-century-photographic-processes-and-formats/
Message edited by author 2024-11-13 13:00:27. |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 01:55:14 PM · #4 |
I'll chime in and say I was one of your 5s. The subject and composition are fine but the processing just isn't my favorite.
My highest vote in this challenge was a 7 though, if that gives you any perspective.
And who knows. Participants had a lower vote average on mine as well. I was actually surprised that mine fared as well as it did. Hahaha!
Average Vote (Participants): 5.867
Average Vote (Non-Participants): 6.800 |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 02:14:41 PM · #5 |
| Fives are not strategic anything. |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 02:19:22 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by skewsme:
Fives are not strategic anything. |
well but how do you explain the big difference between the participants vs non-participants score then?
Message edited by author 2024-11-11 14:25:55. |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 02:22:30 PM · #7 |
The people that entered the challenge didn’t like it as much as those that didn’t. It is that simple.
I
Originally posted by ThingFish:
Originally posted by skewsme:
Fives are not strategic anything. |
well how do you explain the big difference between the participants vs non-participants score then? |
|
|
|
|
11/11/2024 02:28:00 PM · #8 |
It's not a big difference. With so few voters, there aren't many differences that are statistically significant, i.e. can't be attributed to random skew.
Embrace the votes you get towards the edges of the spectrum. It means someone felt something. Fives are a shrug.
;-) |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 02:28:04 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by bassbone:
The people that entered the challenge didn’t like it as much as those that didn’t. It is that simple.
I
Originally posted by ThingFish:
Originally posted by skewsme:
Fives are not strategic anything. |
well how do you explain the big difference between the participants vs non-participants score then? |
|
Well I don't know...maybe....you are probably right....anyways it is what it is now. Just thought I'd bring it up. I'm not going to overthink it.
It's not actually a trainsmash I guess and besides I got some really lovely comments and those mean a lot more then score 😎
Message edited by author 2024-11-11 14:40:17. |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 02:29:01 PM · #10 |
[quote=skewsme] It's not a big difference. With so few voters, there aren't many differences that are statistically significant, i.e. can't be attributed to random skew.
Embrace the votes you get towards the edges of the spectrum. It means someone felt something. Fives are a shrug.
;-)
You are right and I got some really lovely comments and those mean a lot more than score.
👌😍😃
Message edited by author 2024-11-11 14:41:23. |
|
|
|
11/11/2024 11:08:48 PM · #11 |
My theory on participant vs non-participant is like an extension of what bassbone said - if you really tried hard to meet the challenge, you'll have a tendency to judge that aspect more harshly.
But that could also apply to other aspects on which you worked really hard - lighting, composition, processing, etc. Even sharpness could be a factor: if you threw out 20 images that were perfect except they were a bit blurry, and instead chose a sharp one that maybe isn't as interesting or whose color isn't quite right or whatever, you might be more harsh on soft images from others - after all, you were harsh with yours.
As far as simulating a rudimentary processing technique (or a faded print, or light leaks, or...), I think the gradient is too even, and the affected parts of the image are too contrasty, making it obvious that it's a digital technique; I also find the contrast in the blown out grass a bit bothersome. I gave it a 7, and would've probably given your alternate edit an 8. |
|
|
|
11/12/2024 03:34:26 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by George:
My theory on participant vs non-participant is like an extension of what bassbone said - if you really tried hard to meet the challenge, you'll have a tendency to judge that aspect more harshly.
But that could also apply to other aspects on which you worked really hard - lighting, composition, processing, etc. Even sharpness could be a factor: if you threw out 20 images that were perfect except they were a bit blurry, and instead chose a sharp one that maybe isn't as interesting or whose color isn't quite right or whatever, you might be more harsh on soft images from others - after all, you were harsh with yours.
As far as simulating a rudimentary processing technique (or a faded print, or light leaks, or...), I think the gradient is too even, and the affected parts of the image are too contrasty, making it obvious that it's a digital technique; I also find the contrast in the blown out grass a bit bothersome. I gave it a 7, and would've probably given your alternate edit an 8. |
Thanks for your feedback George. That is a fair and very helpful assessment and one I can appreciate.
Message edited by author 2024-11-12 03:35:05. |
|
|
|
11/12/2024 03:37:02 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
I'll chime in and say I was one of your 5s. The subject and composition are fine but the processing just isn't my favorite.
My highest vote in this challenge was a 7 though, if that gives you any perspective.
And who knows. Participants had a lower vote average on mine as well. I was actually surprised that mine fared as well as it did. Hahaha!
Average Vote (Participants): 5.867
Average Vote (Non-Participants): 6.800 |
Thanks Penny I appreciate your feedback.Yes it gives me a better perspective now. |
|
|
|
11/12/2024 03:39:46 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by bassbone:
Your processing was somewhat unusual and some folks likely did not like it and voted it down a few spots. Personally I did like the approach but it was a risk by making it so yellowed in tone. I was not entered in the challenge and rewarded all entries higher scores simply for entering a challenge I could not find a suitable subject . |
Thanks very much for your balanced feedback as well Peter. I can appreciate it fully and it is helpful in many ways. |
|
|
|
11/12/2024 11:32:31 AM · #15 |
| FWIW, if you'd entered the outtake as is instead of the doctored one you went with, you'd have had a 9 from me instead of a 6. I don't think the processing helped you at all. To the degree that you scored well, IMO, it's because the *perfect-for-the-challenge* subject overcame the overwrought processing... |
|
|
|
11/12/2024 02:04:37 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
FWIW, if you'd entered the outtake as is instead of the doctored one you went with, you'd have had a 9 from me instead of a 6. I don't think the processing helped you at all. To the degree that you scored well, IMO, it's because the *perfect-for-the-challenge* subject overcame the overwrought processing... |
Cool thanks for the feedback Robert, I appreciate it and I learned something from it too. I must stop getting too enthusiastic with my processing...that old adage still holds true...sometimes times less is more 😎
Message edited by author 2024-11-13 07:31:42. |
|
|
|
11/12/2024 02:31:02 PM · #17 |
| an interesting discussion. thanks, all. |
|
|
|
11/12/2024 08:23:47 PM · #18 |
| I scored your entry higher (I was one of your 8's) than I would have scored your outtake (probably a 6, just doesn't grab me the same way). It seems it really is a matter of taste. |
|
|
|
11/13/2024 01:47:33 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by noraneko:
I scored your entry higher (I was one of your 8's) than I would have scored your outtake (probably a 6, just doesn't grab me the same way). It seems it really is a matter of taste. |
Thanks that's good to know as well :) |
|
|
|
11/13/2024 05:36:35 AM · #20 |
| 8 from me. I think I probably would have given your outtake a 7. The processing made the entry more interesting to me. |
|
|
|
11/13/2024 07:21:18 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by jomari:
8 from me. I think I probably would have given your outtake a 7. The processing made the entry more interesting to me. |
Thanx good to know...so it seems then after all it was just a matter of personal taste as far as the processing is concerned. Everyone likes the image/subject/composition itself, it's just on the processing that opinions differ.
Message edited by author 2024-11-13 07:23:50. |
|
|
|
11/13/2024 11:27:48 AM · #22 |
| I also liked the processing of your entry. |
|
|
|
11/13/2024 12:59:11 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
I also liked the processing of your entry. |
Thanx Gina👌😎 I see you once had a challenge entry that was processed in such a way that it had a very similar tint. 
Message edited by author 2024-11-13 13:17:22. |
|
|
|
11/13/2024 02:48:14 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by ThingFish:
Originally posted by GinaRothfels:
I also liked the processing of your entry. |
Thanx Gina👌😎 I see you once had a challenge entry that was processed in such a way that it had a very similar tint. |
Well, I clearly like this type of processing because had I voted in the challenge where Gina entered that photo I would have given it high marks. Sorry I didn’t vote in that one, Gina! Great entry! |
|
|
|
11/13/2024 10:02:29 PM · #25 |
| For the record, it's not the TINT that bothers me, it's the blown-to-white vignette and the harsh contrast. |
|
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: 07/30/2025 01:20:40 PM EDT.
