| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/07/2010 02:17:34 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Someone earlier brought up Louis' low entry count as some sort of indictation of being out of touch and not understanding how difficult it is to shoot out of your comfort zone. Putting aside the BS directed at Louis, if it is true that shooting out of your comfort zone is harder then why on earth would we expect higher scores? Ansel Adams was happy to get just ten worthy photographs each year and he was shooting in his friggin' comfort zone!
You can learn far more from Louis' 27 entries then the last 200 or so ribbon winners combined, but that's assuming you want to learn about what makes a photograph and not a commodity. |
That would have been me. And I brought it up in reference to his high average score received.. Oh, and I did include a smiley in the intent that it was to be taken as a friendly statement.. Clearly, that was misplaced.. I was in effect pointing out that Louis clearly does know a good photo from a bad one, and that he was the type to enter only the stuff he feels is really, really good... Well, that's great, but there are many, many people here who try to enter most challenges, this presents a difficulty that I do not suspect that Louis really appreciates. This is no way detracts from his skill and talent, he has some amazing work.
As for why would we expect higher scores? You're confusing two different arguments.. The first is related to the issue above. The second is entirely related to the quality of the work being produced here compared to the quality of the work that was produced here in the beginning... Today's work is much prettier and in many cases more technically competent... Yet we're seeing lower average scores... That just doesn't add up in my mind.
And please be clear on this.. Louis was on the attack from the moment he first posted in this thread, so I'm not sure how that translates into "BS" being directed at Louis.. Quite frankly I've tried to be nice and understanding, until the last couple of posts.. Even the supposed "calling him a dick" never really happened.. The exact quote of mine was: 'I would, admittedly, see an average of 3 on a profile and think "hmm, what a dick.."' shortly after which Louis accused me of calling him a dick, but in reality that wasn't directed at him as he has an average over 5, he, for whatever reason, choose to read that as an attack on him..... Of course, at that point (I shouldn't have done it.. But I had already downed about half a bottle of a nice red..) I just agreed.... But please, do go back and give a read of the thread, I think you'll see that while I do disagree with Louis, I haven't actually been attacking him, in fact, the reality of the situation is much the opposite..
Message edited by author 2010-06-07 14:24:17. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:38:52 PM · #77 |
No, your exact quote was: "Louis...You're welcome to vote an average of 3 if you please.. I would, admittedly, see an average of 3 on a profile and think 'hmm, what a dick..'.. But you are certainly welcome to vote as you see fit."
As I said, it was a back-handed way of calling me a dick.
And I still contend that it's pretty immature to equate an opposite opinion with an "attack". Are you that delicate, that someone who disagrees, however forcefully, must seem to be automatically attacking you? |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:43:46 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
I hope one day we'll meet up and I can express my thanks through my piss poor sign language :) |
I hope we'll meet too, but best trim your moustache; I'm a lipreader, I don't know any sign at all...
R.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:46:25 PM · #79 |
We're seeing lower scores today because the stuff entered isn't original, isn't creative enough, isn't emotive, etc, etc. Anybody can show pretty. Software is making things easier by the day and equipment is becoming more affordable and accessible. Why reward what a 9 year old can be taught? The reason why shots like the 8 ball, the grasshopper macro and all those other 8+ shots from the past did so well is because the few who voted back then were seeing those types of shots for the first time. If you study photography most of what you see today simply isn't impressive. Photography should be getting harder not easier but that's just my opinion.
Message edited by author 2010-06-07 14:49:29.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:46:41 PM · #80 |
Guys, we have been over this/similar discussions before. It's just not worth arguing.
If it makes sense to some to vote a relatively higher average, let them do so. To others, they have a right to vote as they like.
In general, any new idea that talks about any alterations to voting etiquette (read 'not rules') apparently raises hell on DPC. Voting etiquette seems to be a delicate and a very intimate part of DPCer's personality and existence ;-) |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:51:19 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Anybody can show pretty. Software is making things easier by the day and equipment is becoming more affordable and accessible. |
While I have had disagreements with  Yanko before about stuff, I do generally agree with these quoted statements. I used to be a purist when I started learning photography, so much so that photography to me ended when the interaction of light with matter was captured on a medium. Slowly I extended this (personal) interpretation to include basic 'pre' processing. But any heavy processing beyond that IMO only adds 'makeup' to an otherwise 'raw' face, which (the face) may or may not be naturally engaging, but becomes worth-a-look a few layers and button pushes later;-)
Message edited by author 2010-06-07 14:52:20. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:51:34 PM · #82 |
| I think it raises hell because some believe it to be tampering with the integrity of the site, particularly the quality of images. Purposely increasing one's voting average isn't good, any more than consciously decreasing it. I actually believe that the only true voting average is around 5.5. Everyone should have that average. Anything drastically above or below that value should indicate something about the person's intent, that the full scale probably isn't being used -- and I believe this despite the fact that I also believe it to be nobody's business, and should not be grounds for a judgment call about voting habits one way or the other. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:52:22 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by yanko:
The reason why shots like the 8 ball, the grasshopper macro and all those other 8+ shots from the past did so well is because the few who voted back then were seeing those types of shots for the first time. If you study photography most of what you see today simply isn't impressive. Photography should be getting harder not easier but that's just my opinion. |
Certainly some logic to that. I do find I have been giving lower (though still positive side) votes to those outstanding mountain landscapes, water drops and wine glasses. I seem to now be reserving the highest votes for things that strike me as not only well done, but different. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 02:57:48 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I think it raises hell because some believe it to be tampering with the integrity of the site, particularly the quality of images. Purposely increasing one's voting average isn't good, any more than consciously decreasing it. I actually believe that the only true voting average is around 5.5. Everyone should have that average. Anything drastically above or below that value should indicate something about the person's intent, that the full scale probably isn't being used -- and I believe this despite the fact that I also believe it to be nobody's business, and should not be grounds for a judgment call about voting habits one way or the other. |
Or, in the case of me, where I consider a MAJORITY of the shots entered in challenges to be pretty much average, using 5 for my average contributed to a votes-given-lifetime average of 5.1 or so. But 5 is a full half-point below the actual average. Now I'm trying bumping my score for an "average" image to 6, and it's giving me a voting distribution that looks more "right" to me. I don't think this change has anything to do with the integrity of the site. Except perhaps to preserve it, by acknowledging to myself that i was underscoring the middle-of-the-road entries the past few years.
R.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:00:50 PM · #85 |
| Cory, are you saying that we should vote higher because someone might be entering every challenge and so cannot produce quality work on a weekly basis? If I enter just to be entering (and I have done that) I usually get the score I deserve. When I put time and effort into it my scores actually mean something, and I learn from whatever score I get. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:02:22 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Or, in the case of me, where I consider a MAJORITY of the shots entered in challenges to be pretty much average, using 5 for my average contributed to a votes-given-lifetime average of 5.1 or so. But 5 is a full half-point below the actual average. Now I'm trying bumping my score for an "average" image to 6, and it's giving me a voting distribution that looks more "right" to me. I don't think this change has anything to do with the integrity of the site. Except perhaps to preserve it, by acknowledging to myself that i was underscoring the middle-of-the-road entries the past few years.
R. |
Is it that important to you that your average score given be 5.5? |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:11:52 PM · #87 |
What people don't realize is (if they understand the basic of statistics):
- If one voter raises the average score he/she awards to each picture in a challenge so the minimum vote now becomes a 4 and the maximum becomes a 10, he/she is essentially restructuring the 'distribution function', BUT the relative ranking of images won't change. So a blue ribbon winner will still be a winner 'for that voter', albeit now at a score of 10 as opposed to a '7' before he/she shifted the votes.
I inadvertently started doing this lately. Earlier, a winner from me would have gotten a 6 or a 7, and everyone below had votes all the way to 1. Now, in all fairness (with my changed 'etiquette'), I personally do not think anyone deserves a score of 1 or a 2 unless it's a clear attempt to get a brown.
In short, lighten up guys. It's all about 'relativity'. An absolute average score on DPC does not (and should not) mean anything. These scores are meaningless without something to compare with, and are thus valid only within the context of a given challenge, and only on DPC. As long as the relative ranking remains the same 'within a given challenge's context', it really doesn't matter if someone rates pictures in [1...10] or [4...10] or [1...5].
I have my 'voting style'/'etiquette', feel free to develop your own, as long as you stay fair.
So go out there and vote as you like!
|
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:16:12 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by Louis:
No, your exact quote was: "Louis...You're welcome to vote an average of 3 if you please.. I would, admittedly, see an average of 3 on a profile and think 'hmm, what a dick..'.. But you are certainly welcome to vote as you see fit."
As I said, it was a back-handed way of calling me a dick.
And I still contend that it's pretty immature to equate an opposite opinion with an "attack". Are you that delicate, that someone who disagrees, however forcefully, must seem to be automatically attacking you? |
Louis, I'm sorry you took it that way.. It was intended to convey that you are welcome to do whatever you please, however, at some level, there is a point where people might think you are a snob or worse. For the record, I do not think your 5+ average qualifies you as a dick... I do think you might have somewhat unfair standards, but other than really "forcefully" making your point, you haven't shown any (IMHO) strongly negative traits.
And, no I don't think it's immature.. Your posts from the start lacked the civility I expect from a friendly conversation... I'm afraid I responded poorly to that. Once again, my apologies.
Originally posted by Louis:
I think it raises hell because some believe it to be tampering with the integrity of the site, particularly the quality of images. Purposely increasing one's voting average isn't good, any more than consciously decreasing it. I actually believe that the only true voting average is around 5.5. Everyone should have that average. Anything drastically above or below that value should indicate something about the person's intent, that the full scale probably isn't being used -- and I believe this despite the fact that I also believe it to be nobody's business, and should not be grounds for a judgment call about voting habits one way or the other. |
As per this, there is a flaw in your logic... You are assuming that there should be an equal distribution of 1's and 10's... I disagree. I feel now that there are almost no shots entered into DPC challenges that deserve a 1, and very, very few that deserve anything less than a 4..
Since that is the case, I argue that the curve distribution should be a standard bell curve, with the lower extreme being a 3 or a 4 and the upper extreme being a 10 , therefore I feel that the average score should really be either a 7 or a 7.5.. Now that's radical, I know... But I do think my logic is sound.
Message edited by author 2010-06-07 15:17:11. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:20:56 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by yanko:
The reason why shots like the 8 ball, the grasshopper macro and all those other 8+ shots from the past did so well is because the few who voted back then were seeing those types of shots for the first time. If you study photography most of what you see today simply isn't impressive. Photography should be getting harder not easier but that's just my opinion. |
Certainly some logic to that. I do find I have been giving lower (though still positive side) votes to those outstanding mountain landscapes, water drops and wine glasses. I seem to now be reserving the highest votes for things that strike me as not only well done, but different. |
A good bit of logic..
Here's my thoughts.. I agree :) There are far too many cliche shots. So, reward those that are innovative.. Look to some of my earlier posts... This is all about appreciation - that's a very subjective thing. So if you appreciate the photograph, show it!
Now that's not intended to say that voting all cliche entries low is ok... It's not.. Please do try to appreciate what they are sharing with you, as even though it might be horribly cliche to you, remember that for them it may well be new and exciting. But, do vote on your appreciation, if you simply can't find it... Then go with your conscience, vote low... :) |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:21:19 PM · #90 |
| The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:21:49 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by Prash:
What people don't realize is (if they understand the basic of statistics):
- If one voter raises the average score he/she awards to each picture in a challenge so the minimum vote now becomes a 4 and the maximum becomes a 10, he/she is essentially restructuring the 'distribution function', BUT the relative ranking of images won't change. So a blue ribbon winner will still be a winner 'for that voter', albeit now at a score of 10 as opposed to a '7' before he/she shifted the votes.
I inadvertently started doing this lately. Earlier, a winner from me would have gotten a 6 or a 7, and everyone below had votes all the way to 1. Now, in all fairness (with my changed 'etiquette'), I personally do not think anyone deserves a score of 1 or a 2 unless it's a clear attempt to get a brown.
In short, lighten up guys. It's all about 'relativity'. An absolute average score on DPC does not (and should not) mean anything. These scores are meaningless without something to compare with, and are thus valid only within the context of a given challenge, and only on DPC. As long as the relative ranking remains the same 'within a given challenge's context', it really doesn't matter if someone rates pictures in [1...10] or [4...10] or [1...5].
I have my 'voting style'/'etiquette', feel free to develop your own, as long as you stay fair.
So go out there and vote as you like! |
Yes, exactly! Well said. :) |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:23:14 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
You seem to be having a fight with yourself here... |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:25:35 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
You seem to be having a fight with yourself here... |
Really? Where's the conflict in my statement? |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:26:58 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Louis... |
Lessee... you're sorry I reacted, I am a potential snob (or worse), I have unfair standards, and I've acted with no civility.
I'm glad I'm apparently in attack mode. I think I'd look like hell coming out of a scrap if I was just giving an opinion. :/
Message edited by author 2010-06-07 15:28:28. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:29:32 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
You seem to be having a fight with yourself here... |
Really? Where's the conflict in my statement? |
:) The first argument states that increasing(or decreasing) one's voting average is tampering with the system(thus implying unfairness or inappropriateness.).. The second argues that everyone is free to vote how the feel, as long as it's fair.
|
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:30:50 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
You seem to be having a fight with yourself here... |
Really? Where's the conflict in my statement? |
:) The first argument states that increasing(or decreasing) one's voting average is tampering with the system(thus implying unfairness or inappropriateness.).. The second argues that everyone is free to vote how the feel, as long as it's fair. |
The first says superficially, meaning without merit. The second implies merit. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:35:11 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
You seem to be having a fight with yourself here... |
Really? Where's the conflict in my statement? |
:) The first argument states that increasing(or decreasing) one's voting average is tampering with the system(thus implying unfairness or inappropriateness.).. The second argues that everyone is free to vote how the feel, as long as it's fair. |
The first says superficially, meaning without merit. The second implies merit. |
I can certainly understand your logic. I failed to understand the implication of superficially..
However, you certainly don't think that I'm advocating wholesale slathering of 10's on every image do you?
Message edited by author 2010-06-07 15:36:08. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:45:00 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
You seem to be having a fight with yourself here... |
Really? Where's the conflict in my statement? |
:) The first argument states that increasing(or decreasing) one's voting average is tampering with the system(thus implying unfairness or inappropriateness.).. The second argues that everyone is free to vote how the feel, as long as it's fair. |
The first says superficially, meaning without merit. The second implies merit. |
I can certainly understand your logic. I failed to understand the implication of superficially..
However, you certainly don't think that I'm advocating wholesale slathering of 10's on every image do you? |
No. I do not think you are advocating anything of the sort.
By superficial I mean just adding one to every vote cast. It is not logical to think every image you thought was a 5 yesterday now deserves a 6. I will agree that you may change your mind on a few. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:45:02 PM · #99 |
I've only been with DPC for a few years, and have only entered into a handful of challenges - but have voted on plenty of them. For the most part, I find the work on this site to be very good and I have discovered that my pictures have improved over time from the experience of voting on this site.
When I vote on a picture, 6 is my middle range, then I go up and down from there. With that said, from this point forward I pledge to comment on all 1, 2, 3, 4, 9,and 10 votes. |
|
|
|
06/07/2010 03:52:25 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
The thing is every challenge is different. Superficially increasing one's votes to me is tampering with the system just as much as superficially lowering one's votes. Everyone has their own thoughts of what deserves each number in the range and that's the way it should be. As long as their criteria is applied fairly to all images then there's nothing wrong with it. |
You seem to be having a fight with yourself here... |
Really? Where's the conflict in my statement? |
:) The first argument states that increasing(or decreasing) one's voting average is tampering with the system(thus implying unfairness or inappropriateness.).. The second argues that everyone is free to vote how the feel, as long as it's fair. |
The first says superficially, meaning without merit. The second implies merit. |
I can certainly understand your logic. I failed to understand the implication of superficially..
However, you certainly don't think that I'm advocating wholesale slathering of 10's on every image do you? |
No. I do not think you are advocating anything of the sort.
By superficial I mean just adding one to every vote cast. It is not logical to think every image you thought was a 5 yesterday now deserves a 6. I will agree that you may change your mind on a few. |
Ok :) Then perhaps we at least kind of agree... Essentially there is nothing unfair or underhanded about moving your vote up one (or more) on the scale... Unless of course, you do it in a way that affects where you are placing images.. See post 87 for clarification :)
The only problem I see is that you are assuming that the bell curve should be a normal curve starting at 1 and going to 10... That is what I feel was a mistake in my logic earlier... Now I think the results should be more of a bell curve starting at 4 and going to 10, leaving the peak (average) at about 7.5 or so....
Message edited by author 2010-06-07 15:56:08. |
|
