how could someone vote jacko's photo a 2

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

08/11/2004 10:04:58 PM · #84

Originally posted by Dim7:

Originally posted by Sammie:

Originally posted by Dim7:
I totally agree. I seldom if ever give as low as a three! But to give Jacko`s shot lower than an 7 is a crime IMO ! How are people judging pictures. IMO there should be a filter to get rid of 1`s and 2`s, I would only give this mark if I was offended by the picture!
Neil

You must give a LOT of 4's though .........the average vote you give is 4.4702.

Yes thats not far of yours Sammy 4.8

The point of this site is not to get a 10.0 avg vote XD. However if you want to try to raise your avg, use my pictures for this.

Dim7

Canon EOS R

08/11/2004 10:09:39 PM · #85

I will try to but the kyebosh one everyone
I don`t give many tens either!The point for me is to see more in the pictures,Take a better look and from this give higher marks. Voting low or high does not matter but in the past if it did not meet the challenge ,it got a very low mark from me, I don`t give below a 4 now unless I really see no potential in the picture!No soup for you! Wacko J Rules!
Neil

Message edited by author 2004-08-11 22:21:35.

Chiqui

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

08/11/2004 10:26:16 PM · #86

We should be used to this by now. It seems like we have a similar thread every so often. I'm gonna be honest, when I vote, I vote based on technical stuff but also based on my personal taste.
As far as not counting the votes from people with an average of less than 3 or higher than 8, that's not fair. If someone is purposely voting low on images because they think they might have a better chance of winning...it's just one vote, it doesn't mean a whole lot in the big picture.
1,2,and 3 are there to be used, if not, they wouldn't be there. It is nice to get a comment so you know where you went wrong, but forcing people to comment would not make things better.
My 2 cents

June

kyebosh

Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L

08/11/2004 10:34:05 PM · #87

If you think about it, as long as the voting is consistant it's fair. If I only want to use 1 3 and 5 for possible ratings, and I do it for everyone, it's fair (only there's no vote for me in that system O_O )

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

08/11/2004 10:49:06 PM · #88

Originally posted by karmat:

So, if I flat out don't like a picture, but it is well-lit, focused, good colors (or tonal range), I have to give it a 5? I don't think so. Voting is subjective. Very subjective.

Ya know, I'm not all that great in math, but it seems that it would take a substantial amount of the so-called troll votes to really effect the overall score. It might effect the shots in the middle, but it didn't keep the winners from placing, now did it?

I have yet, in a long time at dpc, to see one shot get a blue ribbon that in some form or fashion didn't deserve it (even if I didn't like it!), and likewise, I have yet to see a brown ribbon (including my own) who's result blows my mind.

I usually arrive at conclusions by looking at the end result and then examining how it got there. I then change the equation and examine what would be required to obtain similar results.

Yes, troll voting on the innocent level is harmless. When the stakes are high and the decimals close in, and the placing is determined by a fraction then an image that may be due a ribbon could lose either the place amongst the winners or end up in 4th place.

To say that it does not stop the winners is only looking at the end without the cause. For example, look at the close calls that just took place on the miniture. If you examine this, you will agree that one of those images receiving a series of trolls will simply not score.

For this reason, I am not totally happy with members who do not participate in challenges. I am certain that many are innocent but a photographer could very easily garner a few friends to troll certain images. Of course, this is so low but consider, I am a member of Onemodelplace.com and here they solicit votes openly, even though it is prohibited. I am certain that the mathematicians are all aware of the many ways to beat a system.

Look, personally, I do not care if I get trolled. This is after all a virtual experience. Wherever you have competition you have those few that will look for ways of taking advantage.n I am not that vain nor do I think I am that hot.

My philosophy is to go on taking pictures and if I score fine, if i do not, all the same. My next effort is there. However, it begs the questions that these are the hottest threads.

To conclude, and you can check out my dpc stats, I give you permission, you will find that a 2 is a very rare vote. I may have given one or two at the start, but now I am totally against it. It serves no purpose to become emotionally charged with strong likes and dislikes and give a member a score so low that will certainly not help the overall good. We can deny and deny but these are the chains of vested voting. The object here is to judge quality of composition and technique and to help elevate the aspirations of those who try to present a good image.

The only ones' I discount are those who try to inflame by making obnoxious and political statements. These people simply need a different site.

Message edited by author 2004-08-12 00:19:59.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

08/11/2004 10:58:41 PM · #89

Originally posted by graphicfunk:

When the stakes are high and the decimals close in, and the placing is determined by a fraction then an image that may be due a ribbon could lose either the place amongst the winners or end up in 4th place. ...For example, look at the close calls that just took place on the miniture. If you examine this, you will agree that one of those images receiving a series of trolls will simply not score.

You had to bring that up? [sniff]

Canon EOS-60D

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

08/11/2004 11:07:07 PM · #90

Originally posted by scalvert:

You had to bring that up? [sniff]

08/11/2004 11:37:42 PM · #91

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by graphicfunk:
If it were that simple I would agree. The problem is that trollers do not smack all images. It goes something like this. They have an entry and they troll those images which they feel will beat them. The reason I say this, is that a voter registered me a one. Was even kind to leave a comment. After the event, I see this member giving high praise and promising a seven to an image that ended near the bottom. Of course, you can argue that maybe he dealt them also a one, but he has nothing to lose. Remember, he has to offset his marks to avoid having 2.1 voting average.

You see, we have all been around the block and we all pretty well know what is right and wrong. One popular troller puts it this way, "I vote my one's and two and that is my business and then I give images that are to my taste 7's. I do not vote with the pack."

Well, decypher this and it means. I hit down the good images and bring up the others. Because when you say that you do not vote with the pack, you do not know what the pack is voting ! What he means is that he does not vote fair on good images.

The problem is that none of us were born yesterday...you can argue subjectivity, but no one can justify the ones' and twos. We have all seen superp images get hammered with these ones' and twos'. Consider a top notch lit photo in good focus and good composition...well even those who may hate the subject will at least give a begrudging 4 or a 5.

It is simple trollers are protecting their interest by attacking images which may beat them. There is a simple way to prove this..their records are permanent with the DPC archives. But then, this will tend to develop a bad relationship. Instead, I say, eliminate the vested interest and you solve the problem.

So you'd suggest a voting scheme that runs from say 5 to 6 ? or 5 to 10 ?

It seems from your argument that no image could ever warrant a score below 4. Once more, the voting scale is Good - Bad.

Not 'good as I interpret good and everyone has to interpret it the same way or they are a troll' There are plenty of images hanging in galleries that I'd vote a '1' on if I saw them here. There are plenty of images that win here, that I've personally scored below 3.

Should I suddenly be run off the site for having an opinion that differs from yours ?

First, I am expressing an opinion, like you can express yours. This is all we can do as we do not have any authority to dictate any sort of terms. My feeling is that only a true master can rightfully vote a two or a one. With my experience, which is limited, I can not feel comfortable. I am not a master. We can express anything we wish...but once we do, we make a statement about ourselves which then invites criticism which we may not be able to offset. Again, this is only my opinion and each can follow the benefit of their experience and knowledge. For example say we give a one and they examine our port to find that our images are not so hot or so expert.

No. here is my voting scheme which continues to evolve. A bad image, poor composition, subject or whatever..gets a 3. A good image that does not fit the challenge completely...this to is subjective..you can be as unfair as fair as you like. gets a 4. All images which are well exposed and composed but lack luster, imagination or whatever you call the "wow' factor stay at 5. Six are for above average where the image hits you in the face with good comp and technique. 7 for those that are highly created and very well executed. 8 are very unusual as well as 9. The 10 os one that represents the perfect picture. I have been around a while and I do not even see them in many of the masters.

To be more specific, an image is never finished..we just quit it otherwise we do nothing else. This is the way it has always been with art.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/11/2004 11:44:44 PM · #92

Originally posted by graphicfunk:

First, I am expressing an opinion, like you can express yours.

And I have no problem with your voting scheme that starts at 3 and ends at 9. Yet I don't call you a troll for not using the entire voting range that is provided, and therefore logically, should be used. Nor do I claim your votes are unjustifable and only representative of someone motivated by self-interest. Of course you are free to express your opinion any way you like, but perhaps you might consider not randomly insulting others who participate here while you do it.

And to think - our average vote is within 0.21 of each other, yet in your view I'm a troll who only votes motivated by a desire to improve my own position.

There are many winning images that actively bore me. There was a time when I sought out and practiced hard to emulate similar styles - right now I find them very uninteresting and chase other styles that I currently have a passion for. I'm actively looking for the emotional highs and lows and rejecting the technically perfect, if lacking in any content other than deathly controlled lighting and a well placed trinket.

No doubt at some point in the future my tastes will shift again - who knows, I may again strive for the technically lifeless perfection. But for now, I am unmoved, uninspired and disinterested in those kinds of images. I've seen them before. To me, right now - they are downright bad and represent the least interesting kinds of photography. So I vote with how I feel. I vote high on images that interest me and capture the certain something I'm striving for. Occasionally those images even win.

Once more - this does not make me a troll. I'm sorry if you think that viewing images should be devoid of emotion, or likes or dislikes. I spend most days focused on technical details, working to solve technical issues. I'm mostly finding that I try to actively reject that in my photography and move away from mechanical process.

You are of course allowed to disagree - but at least grant me the respect that I am also allowed to disagree, without accusing me of only having my own interests at heart or being motivated by greed for a worthless virtual prize.

Message edited by author 2004-08-11 23:57:43.

MatrixReloaded

Sony DSC-F828

08/11/2004 11:50:31 PM · #93

08/12/2004 12:06:35 AM · #94

Originally posted by melismatica:

Originally posted by graphicfunk:
If it were that simple I would agree. The problem is that trollers do not smack all images. It goes something like this. They have an entry and they troll those images which they feel will beat them. The reason I say this, is that a voter registered me a one. Was even kind to leave a comment. After the event, I see this member giving high praise and promising a seven to an image that ended near the bottom.
It is simple trollers are protecting their interest by attacking images which may beat them. There is a simple way to prove this..their records are permanent with the DPC archives. But then, this will tend to develop a bad relationship. Instead, I say, eliminate the vested interest and you solve the problem.

I don't think it is a simple as you state. For one thing, you are coming from the assumption that because an image finishes low, it couldn't possibly be appealing enough for someone to give it a 7. I've looked through your portfolio Daniel, and your favorites and notice that you favor studio set-ups and the occasional landscape. However, there are lots of people who like photos which result from careful seeing of an existing object, moment, or sight. A photo like this may not get high marks from you but very high marks from someone else. It seems to me that studio set-ups and bug macros (it's been said a million times before) are what impress the majority of voters on DPC so this will push other types of photos toward the bottom. That doesn't invalidate those photos as your post (and other posts made by you on similar threads) implies. I've placed low with good images that have gotten decent handfuls of 7's, 8's, and the occasional 10, and 9. By your reckoning, those were all troll votes. I can't help resent that kind of thinking.

There are people who will give a 2 simply because they find originality important. Lets face it, we've all seen those giant bug eyes many times. I would have liked to have seen something different place first. I didn't vote on Jacko's image because, frankly, I was so sick of looking at bugsin this Challenge, I only voted the 20% maximum, if I even managed that. I'm sure I would have given the shot a 6 but perhaps not much more because I've seen it before in one form of bug or another.

I repectfully disagree with you. My taste in photographs run the entire gamut. I was art director and and have judged on the usage of works of all types. I look at ports daily and check my favorites, it very well spread and I am new here. Check it out.

No, i give credit to the artistic eye in any subject. Why else would I have chosen your image as a favorite. To put it simple I love all the arts and like I said else where, I never tire of seeing images where imaginations is prevalent. The pictures I do not seek are those that are merely recordings of the moments without the photographer lending the superior angle or the creative crop. These are more journalistic in nature and they have a very good market. I am interested in the artistic.

I am not a master photographer. I just love learning and the more I learn the less I know.

08/12/2004 12:21:07 AM · #95

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by graphicfunk:
When the stakes are high and the decimals close in, and the placing is determined by a fraction then an image that may be due a ribbon could lose either the place amongst the winners or end up in 4th place. ...For example, look at the close calls that just took place on the miniture. If you examine this, you will agree that one of those images receiving a series of trolls will simply not score.

You had to bring that up? [sniff]

08/12/2004 12:23:02 AM · #96

Originally posted by scalvert:

believe, this has been bothering me since this contest ended. The object here is to learn....but it is often forgotten and in place a great emotional catharsis takes place.

08/12/2004 12:49:57 AM · #97

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by graphicfunk:

First, I am expressing an opinion, like you can express yours.

And I have no problem with your voting scheme that starts at 3 and ends at 9. Yet I don't call you a troll for not using the entire voting range that is provided, and therefore logically, should be used. Nor do I claim your votes are unjustifable and only representative of someone motivated by self-interest. Of course you are free to express your opinion any way you like, but perhaps you might consider not randomly insulting others who participate here while you do it.

And to think - our average vote is within 0.21 of each other, yet in your view I'm a troll who only votes motivated by a desire to improve my own position.

There are many winning images that actively bore me. There was a time when I sought out and practiced hard to emulate similar styles - right now I find them very uninteresting and chase other styles that I currently have a passion for. I'm actively looking for the emotional highs and lows and rejecting the technically perfect, if lacking in any content other than deathly controlled lighting and a well placed trinket.

No doubt at some point in the future my tastes will shift again - who knows, I may again strive for the technically lifeless perfection. But for now, I am unmoved, uninspired and disinterested in those kinds of images. I've seen them before. To me, right now - they are downright bad and represent the least interesting kinds of photography. So I vote with how I feel. I vote high on images that interest me and capture the certain something I'm striving for. Occasionally those images even win.

Once more - this does not make me a troll. I'm sorry if you think that viewing images should be devoid of emotion, or likes or dislikes. I spend most days focused on technical details, working to solve technical issues. I'm mostly finding that I try to actively reject that in my photography and move away from mechanical process.

You are of course allowed to disagree - but at least grant me the respect that I am also allowed to disagree, without accusing me of only having my own interests at heart or being motivated by greed for a worthless virtual prize.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Gordon: you appear to misunderstand me completely. You see, it is my belief that we are here to learn. I have yet to meet anyone who knows it all. I am the eternal student. However, all fields have a technical aspect which we can not escape. We can philosophise and say that we will throw away all technichal knowledge because it is all so rigid. If this attitide is extended to the infinite...then why have any order at all. Why even have a specific telephone number? Why should there be a planetary order?

My point is that if we are here to learn, we owe each other a simple gesture of assistance. This means that we enter the site as people of good will. In other words to help each other achieve whatever level of expertise we wish to reach. Yes, there is a sense of order to the mechanics of photography which must be observe before the fanciful expression can be executed.

With such an outlook, consider how counter productive it is to troll. It does serve the higher purpose. However, whatever you do, feel free to express yourself...but I insult no one because I express these ideas that are beyond my personal ambition. I love this site and I think that it can be better. And this is my only motive.

By your very admission you are in an emotional discharge mode. That's all right, but I am addressing the core of the consequence.

Now, I respect experts in all fields. I do not shoot bugs... but I respect those that do and admire their work. I do not shoot flowers, yet I have high respect for good flower shots. The same logic follows, I humble myself to the expert in their fields.

What I do admire is good photography. I admire your work. Under no circumstance am I suggesting a witch hunt for trollers. They have no effect whatsoever on my psychic.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

08/12/2004 01:02:21 AM · #98

Yet you still imply that what I'm doing is trolling. When in fact I'm voting on the emotional value of an image to me. It is perfectly fine that you vote on only technical accomplishment or try and remove any emotion from your voting. In fact, in the aggregate, the final vote is better if you do vote as you do and I vote as I do.

The consequence of people voting emotionally is that the photographer may get some measure of the emotional content of their image. To me photography is a means of expression and communication. If a picture says nothing to me, then, to me, it is a bad picture.

If it is lifeless, meaningless and without a purpose, I don't honestly think it is any good. Technically perfect or not. I believe it is useful to know that about your photographs and that it is thus valuable to the photographer to recognise that some viewers aren't moved by their images, or consider them 'good' or even that they consider them bad.

There are many in these forums who've argued with me when I even dared to mention that photography might be art. I'm not saying you are - but if photography is an art, then emotional content isn't something you can just ignore. In fact, I'd recommend it would be something to embrace, encourage, seek out.

I also recognise that at different stages in the growth of a photographer, focus has to be placed on technical aspects. But the same is true of emotional content. The balance between these shifts and changes over time, ebbing and flowing between the two. This process of ours is both art and craft - in equal measure. To vote on the technicalities is to ignore half of what photography is about. To decry those who vote on artistic or emotional merit as somehow abhorant, is also I think diminishing the value of what many of us seek to achieve.

Message edited by author 2004-08-12 01:06:13.