| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/07/2004 11:14:50 AM · #76 |
All jokes aside, I vote for only 3 ribbons.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 11:20:15 AM · #77 |
Originally posted by Jacko:
All jokes aside, I vote for only 3 ribbons. |
me too |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 11:40:02 AM · #78 |
Originally posted by karmat:
We are discussing/pondering it.
Back to your regularly scheduled discussion. |
Please nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!
Message edited by author 2004-10-07 11:40:23. |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 12:03:11 PM · #79 |
It amazes me how when you suggest a change for ANYTHING, how many folks come out of the woodwork against it. Not just on DPC but just about everywhere. DPC folks seem to be the worst though. Perhaps it has something to do with the "Artsy" side of the brain. After the maelstrom of the Masters Challenge and now the seemingly lame reasons against this it just blows my mind. I feel like I am back in grade school and that was a LONG LONG time ago.
The extra two ribbons just seems like such a natural to me that I can't believe anyone could find reasons against it other than stubborness or obstinance. Giving two more worthy competitors recognition certainly wouldn't water down anything. Take a minute and look how this site has grown in numbers and quality and the additional ribbons are virtualy screamed for. I think it would benefit the site as well in a number of ways that have previously been mentioned and I won't rehash them. Sometimes I think there are folks that join DPC because of the great forums and they just like to argue.
I am leaving in a few minutes for a relaxing trip to the Great Smoky Mountains National Park with what I hope is an infinite number of photo ops for my October Free Study. For that reason I won't be able to read all of the flaming towards my post until I return on Sunday. But have fun and have at it!
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 12:08:30 PM · #80 |
i would be in favor of adding a forth and fifth ribbon, mostly because it would mean that those pictures would be displayed on the front page as well. Even if there wasnt an actual medal awarded to these places it would be nice to see them on the front page.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 12:18:33 PM · #81 |
I like this idea and would be a "YES" if voted on.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 12:33:52 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by DougPaz:
It amazes me how when you suggest a change for ANYTHING, how many folks come out of the woodwork against it. Not just on DPC but just about everywhere. DPC folks seem to be the worst though. Perhaps it has something to do with the "Artsy" side of the brain. After the maelstrom of the Masters Challenge and now the seemingly lame reasons against this it just blows my mind. I feel like I am back in grade school and that was a LONG LONG time ago.
The extra two ribbons just seems like such a natural to me that I can't believe anyone could find reasons against it other than stubborness or obstinance. Giving two more worthy competitors recognition certainly wouldn't water down anything. Take a minute and look how this site has grown in numbers and quality and the additional ribbons are virtualy screamed for. I think it would benefit the site as well in a number of ways that have previously been mentioned and I won't rehash them. Sometimes I think there are folks that join DPC because of the great forums and they just like to argue.
I am leaving in a few minutes for a relaxing trip to the Great Smoky Mountains National Park with what I hope is an infinite number of photo ops for my October Free Study. For that reason I won't be able to read all of the flaming towards my post until I return on Sunday. But have fun and have at it! |
Not a flaming post, but your post sure seems strange...
Essentially, you're saying:
Paragraph 1:
"When an opinion is expressed, it's incredible to find that not everybody agrees with it."
Paragraph 2:
"Look at these great reasons to agree with my opinion. The reasons that have been presented which support the status quo are just silly so I'm concluding that people don't really have an opposing opinion, they're just being argumentative."
That sounds like elementary school to me... |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 12:38:41 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by DougPaz:
It amazes me how when you suggest a change for ANYTHING, how many folks come out of the woodwork against it. Not just on DPC but just about everywhere. DPC folks seem to be the worst though. Perhaps it has something to do with the "Artsy" side of the brain. After the maelstrom of the Masters Challenge and now the seemingly lame reasons against this it just blows my mind. I feel like I am back in grade school and that was a LONG LONG time ago. |
Not a flaming post, but your post sure seems strange...
Essentially, you're saying:
Paragraph 1:
"When an opinion is expressed, it's incredible to find that not everybody agrees with it."
|
I don't agree with this interpretation of Doug's post at all.
It's certainly impossible not to notice how reactionary many people in DPC are when even the smallest changes are suggested. It's as though, because DPC is such a great site, to suggest any potential improvements is sacrilege.
I'm all for the adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" but there's also a lot to be said for growth, development, improvement.
It can be frustrating to see so many good suggestions knocked back by those who essentially seem to be arguing for DPC to remain in a time bubble, never to change, never to move forward.
As it happens, this particular change is one I'm not really bothered about. I think it's a nice idea and is more than justified by the increase in entrants to each challenge compared to the early days BUT I certainly won't be disappointed if it's not implemented either.
But I can certainly empathise with Doug's frustration having watched many proposals get shot down in flames with little more than an argument of "this is how it's always been around here".
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 12:58:29 PM · #84 |
I think it's good to ponder on change. I think it's better to gather information from both viewpoints before making a decision to change. So to me, these discussions are productive but annoying to read peoples reasons for not wanting what you want.
Some of these challenges have grown to 400 entries!
Are some folks really concerned about diluting the worth of the first second and third place winners by praising and sharing the limelight with 4th and 5th place entries?
And for those who worry about the clutter on the home page, we have options to display more or less on our profile page. Can the options be added to modify the home page too?
I don't think anything bad can come from praising and acknowledging a job well done. Spread the wealth! |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:03:33 PM · #85 |
I'm all for more people being acknowledged for their good work. I can't see where it would take anything away from the top 3 ribbon winners to have a 4th and 5th place too.
The only difference I see is that it will give two more folks in each challenge, a greater sense of satisfaction/acheivement. Lets change that "pain of 4th place" into "the joy of 4th or place" (hmm we can deal with "the pain of 6th place" later) :)
Because of the increase in entries, I really do think this is a necessary next step.
Faye
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:15:16 PM · #86 |
I don't really care that much either (it wouldn't ruin the site for me), and I certainly haven't been here long enough to be stuck in a time bubble but I understand that it could be frustrating for people to be opposed to change in general which is probably what Doug was trying to say.
The fact remains that there are great reasons not to do this and they've been discussed here. Doug can't blow them off by venting his frustrations and stating that all opposing viewpoints are simply a result of an argumentative individual.
To illustrate how silly this is, all I would have to do is start a thread stating "Let's always keep the ribbons limited to the top 3 finishers" and wait for people to react to that. Then, like Doug, I could complain that whenever an idea is presented there are people who disagree with it.
Um...of course.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:37:06 PM · #87 |
I'd prefer to keep the 3 ribbon system. I think it makes it that much more of an honor to get top 3. Doesn't affect me either way, but thats just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:42:44 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by Maverick:
I'd prefer to keep the 3 ribbon system. I think it makes it that much more of an honor to get top 3. Doesn't affect me either way, but thats just my opinion. |
same here. 3 ribbons just works... why change it? its not like if you dont look at 4th and 5th place, and all competitions always have 3 winners.
if the system works, and people got used to it, why mess around with it? leave it at 3 would be my vote |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:48:03 PM · #89 |
| Why not just show 4th and 5th place (without ribbons) on the DPC Home Page? That way, the ribbons still retain their value per se, and the "almosts" get a little extra recognition. The top-5 are validated anyway, so there would be zero extra work for the SC. Wouldn't this make both sides happy? |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:49:28 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Why not just show 4th and 5th place (without ribbons) on the DPC Home Page? That way, the ribbons still retain their value per se, and the "almosts" get a little extra recognition. The top-5 are validated anyway, so there would be zero extra work for the SC. Wouldn't this make both sides happy? |
yes, yes it would... |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:51:17 PM · #91 |
With 5 on the homepage for each challenge, it might get a bit crowded (10-15 pics). I'm for keeping it the way it is. I'm not opposed to change, I just think in this case, it is more aesthetic (imho) the way it is. With 3 per challenge shown, people viewing the home page aren't immediately overwhelmed with a lot of pictures (albeit very good pictures). Just a personal preference.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:53:17 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Why not just show 4th and 5th place (without ribbons) on the DPC Home Page? That way, the ribbons still retain their value per se, and the "almosts" get a little extra recognition. The top-5 are validated anyway, so there would be zero extra work for the SC. Wouldn't this make both sides happy? |
Now THIS is an setup I'd vote for!
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 01:56:32 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by Maverick:
With 5 on the homepage for each challenge, it might get a bit crowded (10-15 pics). |
I hear ya'- could be a problem on smaller screens, too. Maybe just add fourth place, to show the one that got away? That way, 5th has already been validated as a backup. |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 02:31:41 PM · #94 |
Those for it have basically presented one arguement for doing it -- there are more entries now. They seem to feel they will never measure up to the talent at the top, and wish for top to be enlarged so they don't have to do better than those at the top to still ribbon.
That is not me being argumentative, that is me opposing a change that is not beneficial. More ribbons for less stellar work is not going to be beneficial for the site. This is really the flip-side of the same perceived issue the ill-implemented Master's Challenge was suppose to fix -- that those at the top have been recognized for being there, but there is no real way to recognize them further. So how about a real solution for both sides of this perceived problem.
And a real solution has been suggested before (i'm just in too much of a hurry at the moment to look it up), but since it takes an effort to implement it hasn't seen the light of day in a while. A tiered system of contests would satisfy both sides of this issue; those wishing to recognize those at the top and further allow them to expand their capabilities, as well as those feeling dejected at the thought of never being able to ribbon as long as those that have climbed to the top are still there.
I think a 4-tier system would work well:
- the first tier for those just learning the technical skills of the craft (everyone starts here)
- the second for those who have learned (but not necessarily mastered) the technical skills but are struggling to give their photos impact (this would be those stuck in the dreaded 5's)
- the third tier for those that have learned how to give their images impact but could use some help with consistency (this would be the top 10% in most single challenges)
- and a fourth tier for those who have that consistency but would like to be able to explore their abilities further without the constraints that can not be removed while they are competing against those in the lower tiers.
The 'entry requirements' for each tier (rank?) would need to be hammered out, but once a person has achieved rank they don't go backwards. Also, I think that once a person has gained the requirements to advance to the next rank, it is completely voluntary for them to do so -- I see no benefit in forcing someone into a position they do not feel they are ready for.
Also, each tier would not require a challenge each week; the lowest would benefit from the freaquent feedback, but more time is needed to ponder, prepare and perfect an entry for each of the higher tiers. I think a good starting place would be a week to work on the entry per tier it is to be submitted for -- but that would likely need to be hammered out as well.
This satisfies the 'we want a ribbon too, damn it!' crowd, as well as the 'we can never compete against them' crowd. It also gives the 'I want to see what can really be done' crowd a place to do it free of distractions.
The biggest argument against this in the past was that people would only comment and vote on the top tier, but that has not been the case with the past free studies. It has been my observation (with no numbers to back it up, so may be mistaken) the number of comments per entry only goes down with there are a large number of entries in a single challenge. This does not add more entries, just spreads them out a bit. Furthermore, each tier has a different focus, so the commenting can be much more direct and helpful -- for example, the tier three people don't want to hear about a different cropping to fit the rule of thirds better, they know that already.
And finally, this seems at first to be a lot of work to set up, but if the Master's challenge showed anything it was that the code to implement it is largely in place already; it just needs turned to this purpose and tweaked a bit. I don't believe it would actually be as much work to implement as it initially appears.
Well, I'm off to work. See you in 10 hours.
David
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 04:56:12 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by Britannica:
I think a 4-tier system would work well:
- the first tier for those just learning the technical skills of the craft (everyone starts here)
- the second for those who have learned (but not necessarily mastered) the technical skills but are struggling to give their photos impact (this would be those stuck in the dreaded 5's)
- the third tier for those that have learned how to give their images impact but could use some help with consistency (this would be the top 10% in most single challenges)
- and a fourth tier for those who have that consistency but would like to be able to explore their abilities further without the constraints that can not be removed while they are competing against those in the lower tiers.
David |
Reading the discussions has been great in this thread and its a great way to get the ideas flowing. The tiered system appeals to me although I think it your catagories would be a dfficult one to design with many grey zones.
One of the reasons I like the Tiered system is that it offers encoragement to people who have not yet reached the highest level while still maintains the integrety of the overall ribbon winners.
As an alternative to the tiered catagories you have outlined I'd like to put this forward.
Tiered by Camera Type
DSLR
Prosumer
Point & Shoot
Challenge results would then have 4 catagories, Overall winners, DSLR, Prosummer and Point & Shoot. (That is the only types I can think of at the moment)
There are a couple of reasons I think this would work.
It is easy to control as a catagory would be placed on all cameras and you would automatically be placed in that catagory when you select the camera when submitting an entry.
As peoples skills increase they tend to want better cameras with extra options so they would be moving through the 3 camera types over time.
Those who cannot afford cameras in a higher catagory can still compete against those with similar camera types in a kind of mini challenge within a challenge.
Any camera type can win the overall catagory and therefore maintain the integrety of the ribbon winners.
What do you think could this work as an alternative? Bob
EDIT: It would increase traffic in the lower ranked photos as people would be looking through to see who has won the various catagories.
Message edited by author 2004-10-07 17:01:27.
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 04:56:57 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
no |
Agreed
|
|
|
|
10/07/2004 04:57:29 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by Sonifo:
YES!!
The give 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th at the fairs. |
Problem though is that DPC is not a fair. |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 05:13:02 PM · #98 |
| Hmmmmm. I wonder if we could give 4 & 5 an honorable mention ??? Maybe not even a ribbon, but just recognition for placing so high in such difficult competition ??? |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 05:23:06 PM · #99 |
I guess I don't understand what more "recognition" there needs to be. When you place anywhere in the top 10, when somebody clicks on a challenge name from anywhere on the site, your picture is displayed, right along with the ribbon winners. Seems to me like a lot of "recognition" already exists for the 4th-10th place finishers who get to "share the limelight" with the ribbon winners whenever somebody looks at the challenge results...
Displaying more thumbnails on the "home page" would definitely clutter things up. Personally, I dislike web pages that force you to have a "wide" browser window. I run in 1600x1200, and keep my browser window between 800-1000 pixels wide. (It amazes me how many people run with their browser "Maximized" when running at high resolutions. Running maximized at 800x600 is one thing...) If I have Firefox any wider, text becomes difficult to read on a liquid site like DPC that reflows depending on width. (Remember, newspapers have columns for a reason -- the brain can follow text flow from line-to-line much easier when the eye only has to travel a short distance to the beginning of the next line.)
Finally, I see no benefit to adding purple/green/whatever GIFs to the 4th/5th place images. All that does is shift 4th to 6th. In a few more years, would there be a similar thread saying "let's give ribbons to 6th and 7th"? (Lookup GeneralE's reference to "Grade Creep". It doesn't accomplish anything positive in the long run.)
Message edited by author 2004-10-07 17:32:22. |
|
|
|
10/07/2004 05:25:19 PM · #100 |
I vote YES for 5 ribbons.
|
|
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: 07/20/2025 12:26:36 PM EDT.
