| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/27/2004 08:16:46 AM · #26 |
Some of us have to keep a separate subfolder
in our portfolios to house the huge number of sub-5 and sub-4 challenge entries...
....BUT I have hope for us all.....I have **StAtIsTiCaLlY** proven (in my lunch-break)that DPC is helping my photography! I plotted my scores and percentiles on a scatter graph (in Excel) and fitted a trend line to them. On average my score increases by +0.0125 points every challenge and my percentile by +0.1446. At this rate, I should be getting straight 10s 363 challenges from now!!!! Bingo! Drew and Langdon may use the information contained in this post for advertising purposes.
By the way, can anyone beat a standard deviation of 0.6784 for their scores? Consistency isn't my strong-point. |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 08:28:10 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by bpickard:
...By the way, can anyone beat a standard deviation of 0.6784 for their scores? Consistency isn't my strong-point. |
0.691 here. "Scattergun" is my middle name.
O yeh,
4.742
and
4.955
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 08:39:43 AM · #28 |
This is my worst score. a "2.916" actually, if you look at the shot from a perspective of motion blur- its really no worse than a 3.2...lol ;.)
Message edited by author 2004-08-27 08:41:21. |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 08:45:58 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by skiprow:
i don't remember which thread it was, but shannon had a great summary of how his approach had evolved to where it is now: consistent top 10's with images he enjoys. |
Thanks, Skip (wish that were true). The thread was HERE. My current Hope entry had a heart-stopping 3.6667 average after the first few votes, but has since risen to a less-embarrassing 5.6 (I knew I wasn't following my own rules and posted anyway).
This entry for the Out of Place challenge received my second-worst score, and I'm still shaking my head over that one. Several commenters didn't see anything out of place. Helloooo?
 |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 08:56:47 AM · #30 |
focus...focus |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:22:06 AM · #31 |
this photo really sucks and nobody even noticed the ear right in the middle of the shot! I can NOT believe it got this high!
HA
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:23:29 AM · #32 |
First challenge - This challenge.. 4.1 average so far... Its a start :)
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:23:34 AM · #33 |
Mine was too out of the box for the "word" challenge, so a well deserved low score for a fairly good shot. But I couldn't resist my daughters effort.
 |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:27:54 AM · #34 |
 Vanishing Point, can u find it!?! |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:30:38 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
Since the current challenge is my *first* challenge.. my worst score is also the current one.. currently sitting at 4.3ish
I like saying the word current. |
Same Here, Arty... Exactly the same, actually.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:31:03 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
(I knew I wasn't following my own rules and posted anyway) |
with the trend you're reporting, you should hit a 10 pretty soon...
from the other thread:
Originally posted by scalvert:
I spent many months marveling at these photographers (and others), trying to figure out how they can be so consistently successful in the challenges, when equally competent photographers might get a more pedestrian score for technically excellent shots of the same subject. Then it finally dawned on me... the winners don't just have a photo, they have an idea.
With few exceptions, the best-scoring images have a strong concept behind them. The idea might be a particular technique, a visual game, an emotional message, a joke or some other story, but the image has meaning. Too many people enter "a picture of X," without any real central thought, then wonder why others find their shot boring. I get it now, and four of my last six entries have placed in the top 5. Guess which two didn't have a strong concept? |
the only other thing i can offer is rather than take a low score personally, try to glean some insight from the comments/score and redo the shot better.
my lowest scoring shot seems to be due primarily to a lack of sparkle on the diamond. well, there were 3 problems with my entry: 1) i didn't know squat about photoshop, so i didn't apply any sharpening. 2) i hadn't cleaned my sensor and there were some serious spots that i had to crop around due to it being a basic editing challenge, and 3) i had failed to allow enough time to go back and reshoot.
original, retouched, and reshot
  
Message edited by author 2004-08-27 09:37:00. |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:31:11 AM · #37 |
:-) Fun thread.
Aside from a complete joke -  - that failed,
my lowest is 4.266 for  . Twice a favourite though, which has to be good for one's lowest scored shot?
E
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:32:54 AM · #38 |
Learned my lesson about flower shots...
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:44:31 AM · #39 |
Lowest score, was for Neon (4.242) and lowest percent (14%)
I thought it really captured the old Route 66 post card look. But, then, that would only appeal to people who liked that nostalgia idea.
I really should have entered THIS one.
My second lowest, I think lost points because of the border.
 |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:51:35 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by skiprow:
my lowest scoring shot seems to be due primarily to a lack of sparkle on the diamond. well, there were 3 problems with my entry: 1) i didn't know squat about photoshop, so i didn't apply any sharpening. 2) i hadn't cleaned my sensor and there were some serious spots that i had to crop around due to it being a basic editing challenge, and 3) i had failed to allow enough time to go back and reshoot.
reshot
[/url] |
Oh, yeah. The reshot is SOooo much better.
I think it is too easy to stop as soon as you get an idea. You have to look an idea over from all angles, just like you have to look an object over.
That little more development of the idea really makes it. |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 09:57:52 AM · #41 |
It scored 4.619 |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:07:59 AM · #42 |
That would be this one:
Silly me, waited to the last minute to do it, then didn't think about the fact that my monitor at home is VERY bright... arg!
This version is a little better:
But as time goes on I'm getting better and better. At this rate, I might hit a 6 one day :) |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:21:17 AM · #43 |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:22:18 AM · #44 |
People didn't think my photo meet the challenge with this shot...
I recieved a 4.4 from it, along with a lot of comments explaining to me that it didn't fit the Miniture challenge.
The guidelines were: Compose and photograph something "miniature" in such a way that it conveys to the viewer that the subject of your photo is a tinier version of something that is normally larger.
I see what everyone was saying, but in my eyes I was thinking: "Miniture Cathedral", it's normally larger, but when viewed through a window it looks tinier.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:23:35 AM · #45 |
Yeah didn't think my monitor needed calibrating! Yeah right! for "Words" challenge but no one else could see the words.
Score 3.672 6%
Now my monitor is ok but others arn't suffering again in "Hope".
Edit added score... Duh!
Message edited by author 2004-08-27 10:28:57.
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:28:18 AM · #46 |
4.8 |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:38:33 AM · #47 |
4.296 with my Kodak
4.297 with my Sony
Call me stupid. I still like them.
Message edited by author 2004-08-27 10:45:30. |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:53:32 AM · #48 |
4.206
I still like the shot even though everyone felt the sky was too blown out. But what do you expect when you shoot almost directly into the sun. With this image I started to realize that on this site it does not pay to try something different. Not that it has stopped me, I have had many other 4.whatevers to follow. Strange enough, alot of them have been pretty recent challenges. Maybe it is time for a break. |
|
|
|
08/27/2004 10:58:04 AM · #49 |
Don't wanna talk about it... :p
|
|
|
|
08/27/2004 11:27:26 AM · #50 |
I thought this would do better
4.729
|
|
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: 07/19/2025 06:09:49 PM EDT.
