| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/04/2004 12:41:12 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by moodville:
Not everything has to be pretty. Not everything is a picture of a person with no meaning other than 'hey, this is a person with a smiling face that means nothing other than recording what this person looks like on this day in history'. Granted there are some pictures that have no meanings, some pictures dont set out to have a meaning but people get one out of them anyway. At the end of the day you get what you look for. If all you want to see is a socially unattractive male holding a frame then that is all you will see. |
I agree with what you're saying, but any image that prompts voters to think, "Ewww!" will tend to suffer in the voting, regardless of the photograhper's intent (unless the challenge calls for such content, of course). |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:45:17 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by moodville:
Not everything has to be pretty. Not everything is a picture of a person with no meaning other than 'hey, this is a person with a smiling face that means nothing other than recording what this person looks like on this day in history'. Granted there are some pictures that have no meanings, some pictures dont set out to have a meaning but people get one out of them anyway. At the end of the day you get what you look for. If all you want to see is a socially unattractive male holding a frame then that is all you will see. |
I agree with what you're saying, but any image that prompts voters to think, "Ewww!" will tend to suffer in the voting, regardless of the photograhper's intent (unless the challenge calls for such content, of course). |
Yes, they will, and most people know that and so do not enter images that would suffer from it. The question is.... is that right? Not that it matters either way as it will never change and just supports the belief that you should never base your worth or that of your photography on the results of DPC.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:50:48 PM · #28 |
Yeah, the guy gives out a lot of 1's but not all his comments are bad. He does seem a bit on the racist side to me with some of his comments & the pics he likes & dislikes but that's his opinion & his right. There are no limitations on how many 1s a voter can give or how someone can offer a comment. The sarcasm is weak & if I got a comment from him, I would just over look it.
Plus, think of it this way, the dude has not entered a challenge & his average score is a 2.9. This is not someone that is here to learn or offer advice as per the purpose of this community. He's obvious just a joker.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 12:52:10.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:51:03 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by moodville:
Yes, they will, and most people know that and so do not enter images that would suffer from it. The question is.... is that right? Not that it matters either way as it will never change and just supports the belief that you should never base your worth or that of your photography on the results of DPC. |
Amen!! |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:51:50 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by Sonifo:
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
 |
Why this one? This is a bad portrait. Look at the lighting, way to bright at the right side. The background is bad. There is a shadow. hmmm...I won't mention anything about the subject. A shirt would have been more appropriate.
I will say, the frame was good idea. |
OK .. let me start with its 11:35 the night of the challenge and have no idea. Im in my basement and look to my left when i see a empty frame and say HAY i have an idea. Now remember i didnt say "I have a GOOD idea ... lol" So what do i do i take off my shirt (sorry for that) and make an atempt at a funny photo. It was not ment to win or even do well. Just ment to put a smile on atlest 1 persons face. And i think i did that. So for everyone that liked my photo Thank you and for everyone that did not like the photo well thats OK to because I thought it was funnt, creative and witty. Look forward to seeing more stuff like that.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:52:42 PM · #31 |
| Exactly. This is just one audience. An image that ribbons here might fail miserably in another setting, and vice-versa. The basic premise here is to meet a specific theme with a good concept and good execution, but it always helps to be appealing. The photos that score well tend to be shots that even a stranger might want to show others. You can either avoid submitting unpopular images or accept a lower score if you do. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:56:57 PM · #32 |
I know this has been brought up before until folks are blue in the face, but the biggest problem I am seeing is too many photos to vote properly in a reasonable amount of time.
Now, of course it's always possible to vote only 20 percent, but this really HARD to do! The way the voting is process is setup on this site you have no idea what percentage you have voted until you stop, exit, and reenter the voting area.
Also, If you vote in stages, like I do, it's difficult to evaluate the images on the second pass. When you comment, confirm or change your vote, the system forces you to an unvoted image rather than one of the 20 percent you are trying to score properly. I do wish there was a "vote X percentage option" that would make this easier to manage.
And yes, you could just get it right the first time, but I think the issue is sloppy voting due to folks trying to vote through the overwhelming numbers. I think we really need to be pushing for everyone to ONLY vote X percentage, and make this as easy as possible. Attempting to score 350+ images doesn't do the entries any favors. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:59:55 PM · #33 |
ConcreteDonkey- it IS funny, but you ran into a lot of voters wondering WWYT? You wasted an opportunity with your title. The exact same photo titled, "What is Art?" or "Pop Art" might have earned another half or full point IMO.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 13:00:34. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:00:20 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Exactly. This is just one audience. An image that ribbons here might fail miserably in another setting, and vice-versa. The basic premise here is to meet a specific theme with a good concept and good execution, but it always helps to be appealing. The photos that score well tend to be shots that even a stranger might want to show others. You can either avoid submitting unpopular images or accept a lower score if you do. |
Although it is disappointing to think that the majority via their vote have the power to dictate what images should or should not appear in challenges here. There are still some people who enter images knowing they will score low but for the most part the minority of people who enjoy the 'other side of pretty and popular shots' are missing out on viewing some good photography on this site because the imagery has been deemed 'unwelcome'.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 13:02:13.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:02:51 PM · #35 |
It really doesn't take that much time to vote, even on 350 entries. We do have an entire week to get around to it, so even people who can't vote during the day at work or work odd hours should have plenty of time to vote. It took me a total of 2 hours to vote on 100% of the minature challenge to my satisfaction, as well as commenting on many.
The blue challenge took about the same length of time, but spread over two sessions of voting.
Can you spare 2-4 hours a week for the benefit of other users?
It's not going to work to limit the number of photos people can vote on, then high-voting people vote on some images, and low-voting people vote on totally different images, so there's a skewed scale, and that's not fair. At least right now there's a semblance of fairness, or at least randomness.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:12:45 PM · #36 |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:17:07 PM · #37 |
I think my score suffered because of the ewwww factor for this picture. My worst finish yet at 291st place.
As for the Frame Picture by ConcreteDonkey, I thought it was hilarious. Not a picture I'd hang on my wall but one to show friends for a laugh. Keep up the great work Concrete! Btw, you have some excellent pictures in your profile.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:18:17 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by airatic:
It really doesn't take that much time to vote, even on 350 entries. We do have an entire week to get around to it, so even people who can't vote during the day at work or work odd hours should have plenty of time to vote. It took me a total of 2 hours to vote on 100% of the minature challenge to my satisfaction, as well as commenting on many. |
I think there should be an option to vote all images for those that want to, but I am not that person. Call me crass and lazy, but spending 2-4 hours a week evaluating images is too much for me. I'd much rather spend an hour properly evaluating 20 or 25 percent.
Originally posted by airatic:
The blue challenge took about the same length of time, but spread over two sessions of voting.
Can you spare 2-4 hours a week for the benefit of other users?
It's not going to work to limit the number of photos people can vote on, then high-voting people vote on some images, and low-voting people vote on totally different images, so there's a skewed scale, and that's not fair. At least right now there's a semblance of fairness, or at least randomness. |
I feel the photos are delivered in a random enough fashion to accomodate all users. Yes some will get more votes than others, but I don't think the variance is a big deal. I do agree that you should not "pick and choose the images you vote." You need to take them in the order the system delivers them.
There was a time when I first started on this site when you would get MORE votes than there were images entered. But I havn't seen this is a long, long, time.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:27:39 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Bassie:
I think my score suffered because of the ewwww factor for this picture. My worst finish yet at 291st place. |
Nah, there was no ewww factor. Most of the people here are either closet panty sniffers or cross-dressers at heart. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:29:15 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Nah, there was no ewww factor. Most of the people here are either closet panty sniffers or cross-dressers at heart. |
Ewwww! |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:39:53 PM · #41 |
I'm fairly new to posting, challenges and voting in this site. I've voted 2200 times with an average of 5.3 - I don't know how that compares with others. I usually only give out a few 10's per each challenge because for me, a 10 should be something that is above all others in the challenge.
Now what I can't figure out, in addition to the very low scores spoken about here, are some of the high scores given. I looked at the bottom scoring photos in the everyday objects challenge and saw a fair number of 10's. For the life of me, I couldn't see 10's in them, I voted most of them 3's - as did others. What are other people seeing that most of the rest of us are not?
Bill
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:47:21 PM · #42 |
i think the miniatures challenge will be very low, cant find a single
photo to give a 10 [usually i find a few]. hard pressed to give a
7, so dont despair.......
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:48:56 PM · #43 |
This may not be true, but my impression is that some people vote great photos low, to lower the ranking of the top scorers do their shot will do better, and vote terrible photos high, since the vote won't matter. That way the system doesn't note them scoring too many 1's, since they give 10s as well, just to undeserving photos.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:50:49 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Bassie:
I think my score suffered because of the ewwww factor for this picture. My worst finish yet at 291st place.
As for the Frame Picture by ConcreteDonkey, I thought it was hilarious. Not a picture I'd hang on my wall but one to show friends for a laugh. Keep up the great work Concrete! Btw, you have some excellent pictures in your profile. |
What you needed to do was make the panties very dirty, rip them as you pulled them over your lipstick-smeared face, pull a grimace of an expression, convert to black and white, and you have a panty version of Kiwi's ribbon winner.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 13:52:00.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:52:31 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by airatic:
This may not be true, but my impression is that some people vote great photos low, to lower the ranking of the top scorers do their shot will do better, and vote terrible photos high, since the vote won't matter. That way the system doesn't note them scoring too many 1's, since they give 10s as well, just to undeserving photos. |
Hmmmm, would be alot easier if people just voted on how they liked the photo instead of coming up with some master scheme to make there's do better. bit of a waste of time.... what's the point? Seems very very sad to me. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:53:27 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by moodville:
Originally posted by Bassie:
I think my score suffered because of the ewwww factor for this picture. My worst finish yet at 291st place.
As for the Frame Picture by ConcreteDonkey, I thought it was hilarious. Not a picture I'd hang on my wall but one to show friends for a laugh. Keep up the great work Concrete! Btw, you have some excellent pictures in your profile. |
What you needed to do was make the panties very dirty, rip them as you pulled them over your lipstick-smeared face, pull a grimace of an expression, convert to black and white, and you have a panty version of Kiwi's ribbon winner.
|
Ha Ha HA!!! That's a great comparison!! :D
** Edited for just being dumb.....
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 13:54:20. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:54:37 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by airatic:
This may not be true, but my impression is that some people vote great photos low, to lower the ranking of the top scorers do their shot will do better, and vote terrible photos high, since the vote won't matter. That way the system doesn't note them scoring too many 1's, since they give 10s as well, just to undeserving photos. |
Or it could be that their mother, husband, child, co-worker, whatever voted them a 10 because it is their's. Or it could be because in many things you scale something 1 to 10 with 1 being the best and they didn't read. Or... you can think of a thousand different ways that scores are the way they are. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:56:17 PM · #48 |
Like accidently pushing the "10" vote instead of the Forward arrow....
I can't tell you how many times I've done that, then had to go back and fix it.... Sorry 'bout that. :) |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 01:57:38 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by Bassie:
I think my score suffered because of the ewwww factor for this picture. My worst finish yet at 291st place.
As for the Frame Picture by ConcreteDonkey, I thought it was hilarious. Not a picture I'd hang on my wall but one to show friends for a laugh. Keep up the great work Concrete! Btw, you have some excellent pictures in your profile. |
I liked this image, it made it into my top 10 list for this challenge. I'm not supprised at the low score with the way people vote. My blue moon shot is getting the same treatment, lot of good comments and low scores, they either love it or hate it. Won't stop me from thinking outside the box.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 13:58:46. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 02:10:19 PM · #50 |
I hadn't thought about the possibility of some people just not realizing that 10 was good and 1 was bad. I think regardless of the wording, the left to right reading should suggest the correct rank order, but maybe I'm wrong.
|
|
