| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/12/2010 07:27:47 PM · #26 |
| Nothing about scoring is "automatic" for me. If a subject I don't normally like is presented in a particularly clever way, it gets a higher score. The inverse is also true. I make it my mission to consider things on a case-by-case basis. |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 07:40:29 PM · #27 |
1.) You will get an automatic 1 from me if you have entered the same shot (although a different frame) in two different challenges. I see this one allot actually. I'll vote on two challenges and see the exact same scene with different editing, or just a slight variation but it makes it completely obvious that the same photographer took both photos... That is an IMMEDIATE 1 for both shots...
2.) Snapshots of children... Not all kids are cute, in fact, most are not, said the late George Carlin, and he was accurate. I have seen some fabulous shots of children on this website, and I always give them an 8-10... but a snapshot of a child always gets a 1.... Kids do not make a great photograph, a photographer does...
3.) If the intent is clearly to go against what the challenge was... I'm not talking about an outside the box shot, I'm talking about a shot where the challenge was "cars" and the photo is of a dog... That gets an automatic 1...
1's really are rare for me though... I only gave out 2 1's in the 3 current challenges, and that's because the same shot appears twice... So I don't think I'm that picky... but who knows, maybe I am :P |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 07:40:38 PM · #28 |
As an art teacher, the most important thing in marking was always objectivity and impartiality. I score that way here too. I try to look at the quality of the image alone, rather than whether or not I like the subject matter.
Of course, that 'quality' has a wide range of interpretations. I basically score on a few passes. First pass, I score quite quickly, looking at the basic image quality. Most scores given are between 5 and 7, with a few at 4 and 8 (for obviously poor work and obviously outstanding). A reasonably well composed and exposed image will always get a 5 from me, even if it's a subject matter I find egregious.
Then I take each section, and decide which to score up, down, or leave. This takes more time. This is the more subjective part of the process. Here my own style and taste influence, but I'm more than willing to give high marks to subject matter I find disturbing, or distasteful, as long as it's done well.
I don't knock the score down for poor grammar or spelling, even though that does drive me batty. Many people here are using English as their second or third language, so I think we need to be aware of that. I will offer corrections in the comments, but make it clear that it didn't affect the score.
I don't think I've ever given either a 1 or a 10.
Message edited by author 2010-12-12 19:44:03. |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 08:24:30 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
Originally posted by alans_world:
SeEmS I nEAd TwO rEtidAl mI sUbmIsShion |
Uhmm might not be a bad idea...guess you're a little rusty after being away for so long! :-) |
ETA: In general my scoring range is from 5-8, so even if I do ding someone for a peeve, it's rare that they'll go less than 4. Unless the photo is truly horrible and even then I can't think of a single 1 I've given out. This is a photo site, after all, so as long as the image is good, or a brave attempt is being made, I'll give it a worthy score :-) |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 08:37:40 PM · #30 |
Titles? Some of you are bothered by titles? I have to admit I seldom even look at the titles. Generally the image connects with the topic and/or description well enough so that a title isn't really necessary. Sometimes if the image is a bit more abstract or I'm having a hard time connecting it with the topic, I'll look to the title for a bit of clarification. I admire and enjoy a good title, as most of us aren't too creative in that area, but I don't reward any extra points for it or deduct points for a poor one. Some wonderful images here are untitled. I look at this as a photography challenge, not a creative writing challenge. :-)
|
|
|
|
12/12/2010 08:45:45 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Sirashley:
1.) You will get an automatic 1 from me if you have entered the same shot (although a different frame) in two different challenges. I see this one allot actually. I'll vote on two challenges and see the exact same scene with different editing, or just a slight variation but it makes it completely obvious that the same photographer took both photos... That is an IMMEDIATE 1 for both shots... |
I am truly intrigued as to how you could possibly know that the shots were taken by the same individual and how it is that the photographer could enter the same shot in two different challenges, particularly when we consider that the images have to have been taken within a specified time frame.
Ray |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 08:53:20 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
1.) You will get an automatic 1 from me if you have entered the same shot (although a different frame) in two different challenges. I see this one allot actually. I'll vote on two challenges and see the exact same scene with different editing, or just a slight variation but it makes it completely obvious that the same photographer took both photos... That is an IMMEDIATE 1 for both shots... |
I am truly intrigued as to how you could possibly know that the shots were taken by the same individual and how it is that the photographer could enter the same shot in two different challenges, particularly when we consider that the images have to have been taken within a specified time frame.
Ray |
I can P.M. you the two images... I don't want to bring it out in public...
Upon edit, PM sent
Message edited by author 2010-12-12 20:57:29. |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 08:56:45 PM · #33 |
I see this a lot too, Ray. It's not that hard to do. Most consecutive challenges have overlapping dates, so it is possible to go out shooting on one day for two challenges. The other is the FS. That makes three challenges you can enter from one shoot. The "identical" images are so close in pov, processing, model, etc., that it would truly be a statistical impossibility for two different people to have taken them. Most of the time, they are so marginally different, you have to compare them side to side. The most recent example of this was  bcrants's two gorgeous entries:
 for Jump II
and
 for the FS
ps - I'm not calling anyone out for cheating or doing anything wrong, but simply as an example of how it is possible to enter similar images for different challenges. Apologies if this was interpreted differently.
Message edited by author 2010-12-12 20:58:19. |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:01:06 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Sirashley:
1.) You will get an automatic 1 from me if you have entered the same shot (although a different frame) in two different challenges. I see this one allot actually. I'll vote on two challenges and see the exact same scene with different editing, or just a slight variation but it makes it completely obvious that the same photographer took both photos... That is an IMMEDIATE 1 for both shots... |
I see many photographers doing this. For instance they will enter a challenge with one shot and put another one in the free study. However, I don't see why this should warrant an automatic 1??? If you know this and their identity wouldn't it be better to just not vote on that image? I think most of us have limited subject matter, we don't have access to limitless scenery and models we have to make the best of what we have. I don't think this warrants a 1. |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:10:25 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by sjhuls:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
1.) You will get an automatic 1 from me if you have entered the same shot (although a different frame) in two different challenges. I see this one allot actually. I'll vote on two challenges and see the exact same scene with different editing, or just a slight variation but it makes it completely obvious that the same photographer took both photos... That is an IMMEDIATE 1 for both shots... |
I see many photographers doing this. For instance they will enter a challenge with one shot and put another one in the free study. However, I don't see why this should warrant an automatic 1??? If you know this and their identity wouldn't it be better to just not vote on that image? I think most of us have limited subject matter, we don't have access to limitless scenery and models we have to make the best of what we have. I don't think this warrants a 1. |
I agree. Just because similar shots are entered, doesn't make the shot a bad shot and deserving of a 1.
However, I have given a shot a lower score the second time I've seen it (usually only by a point) simply because it doesn't have the same impact it had the first time around. If you score it high on the first go-around, because it's fascinating and unique, somehow it's not quite as unique the second time around.
|
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:14:41 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by sjhuls:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
1.) You will get an automatic 1 from me if you have entered the same shot (although a different frame) in two different challenges. I see this one allot actually. I'll vote on two challenges and see the exact same scene with different editing, or just a slight variation but it makes it completely obvious that the same photographer took both photos... That is an IMMEDIATE 1 for both shots... |
I see many photographers doing this. For instance they will enter a challenge with one shot and put another one in the free study. However, I don't see why this should warrant an automatic 1??? If you know this and their identity wouldn't it be better to just not vote on that image? I think most of us have limited subject matter, we don't have access to limitless scenery and models we have to make the best of what we have. I don't think this warrants a 1. |
I definitely see your point... I don't know the photographers identity, I just recognize the image from another challenge that is still in voting, so the photographers themselves are anonymous. I vote a 1 because I personally don't see the point of entering practically the same shot in multiple challenges (and I say multiple because I have seen some photographers enter the same shot -composition wise- in 3 or more challenges by returning to the same location, and when that's the case, I do know the identity of the photographer) Anyway, I have NO access to models, and there isn't much around here for Landscapes other than the Everglades. I practically live in the Everglades, and I have entered multiple landscape shots from the Everglades... HOWEVER... and a big HOWEVER... I have walked for miles through the Everglades to get a different and unique landscape shots. I haven't taken the same shot and entered it multiple times... In fact, I've gone to great lengths not to do that, and in turn, I've learned allot on how get creative. So when people simply enter the same shot multiple times, I 1 them for their lack of creativity... After all, this thread was about pet peeves right??? LMAO... and that is my biggest pet peeve :) |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:16:50 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
I see this a lot too, Ray. It's not that hard to do. Most consecutive challenges have overlapping dates, so it is possible to go out shooting on one day for two challenges. The other is the FS. That makes three challenges you can enter from one shoot. The "identical" images are so close in pov, processing, model, etc., that it would truly be a statistical impossibility for two different people to have taken them. Most of the time, they are so marginally different, you have to compare them side to side. The most recent example of this was bcrants's two gorgeous entries:[ |
While it is true that challenges do overlap, the themes don`t, except of course that the FS is open to anything.
In the example given there is no doubt that these are two different images albeit probably only a few frames apart. Regardless, they are two distinct images entered in two challenges and I truly cannot find myself voting either one of these images down. They are unique relative to the challenge entered and may or may not appeal to the voters in each of these challenges.
In an nutshell, I have no problems with that, and most certainly would not vote either of these a 1.
That is what is nice about this site, you vote according to your conscience and personal tastes.
Ray |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:23:17 PM · #38 |
The only one that I know of for sure is scantily clad women. I feel like a lot of people enter those photos hoping to get a good score just because the model is attractive, and that bugs me.
Unless it is a super well done photo, or 'classy' in some way I tend to vote them down pretty badly.
I don't even do it on purpose, its just a reaction.
I know I definitely give them lower scores than the quality of the photograph probably deserves |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:27:19 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Fiora:
The only one that I know of for sure is scantily clad women. I feel like a lot of people enter those photos hoping to get a good score just because the model is attractive, and that bugs me.
Unless it is a super well done photo, or 'classy' in some way I tend to vote them down pretty badly.
I don't even do it on purpose, its just a reaction.
I know I definitely give them lower scores than the quality of the photograph probably deserves |
Funny thing is that I pretty much feel the same about anything involving religions, but I don`t vote them down because of it... if anything I probably look at the image closer and it ends up have a better score because of it.
Ray |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:39:00 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Fiora:
The only one that I know of for sure is scantily clad women. I feel like a lot of people enter those photos hoping to get a good score just because the model is attractive, and that bugs me.
Unless it is a super well done photo, or 'classy' in some way I tend to vote them down pretty badly.
I don't even do it on purpose, its just a reaction.
I know I definitely give them lower scores than the quality of the photograph probably deserves |
Funny thing is that I pretty much feel the same about anything involving religions, but I don`t vote them down because of it... if anything I probably look at the image closer and it ends up have a better score because of it.
Ray |
I can certainly see both of these points... I have seen numerous images of scantily clad women score far higher than they should have. Don't get me wrong, there are numerous images on this site of scantily clad women that practically reached photography perfection... at the same time, I have seen shots of sexy women that are snapshots score way higher than they should have... Although I don't vote these images lower than I would have just because they have scantily clad women in them, I certainly understand why you do.
Ray, as an Atheist, I can relate to wanting to score religious photos lower. This one I've worked hard at not to do, and to see these photographs as a representation of art, not the religion... Its not easy, and many times, I come back to those images after I've finished voting.
Message edited by author 2010-12-12 21:40:49. |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 09:47:53 PM · #41 |
I often only get to shoot one day a week, if that, so I will quite often have two similar photos in challenges. I did this week, though very different frames. I believe I did the week before, too.
I'm not fond of guns, particularly when they point at me, but will either try to vote what I think the shot deserves or skip it. Not fond of dead animals. Not fond of gratuitous nakedness, though shirtless Nico Blue shots are always welcome. :-) |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 10:00:19 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by Sirashley:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
...Funny thing is that I pretty much feel the same about anything involving religions, but I don`t vote them down because of it... if anything I probably look at the image closer and it ends up have a better score because of it.
Ray |
...Ray, as an Atheist, I can relate to wanting to score religious photos lower. This one I've worked hard at not to do, and to see these photographs as a representation of art, not the religion... Its not easy, and many times, I come back to those images after I've finished voting. |
Snap. |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 10:02:42 PM · #43 |
I think it's most fun to use the full spectrum of scores, and that includes 1s. I don't use them nearly enough.
Any photo worth its salt should engender a wide variety of reactions, from 1s to 10s.
Let's all stretch our keypads to the limit! |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 10:15:40 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by xianart:
Originally posted by Sirashley:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
...Funny thing is that I pretty much feel the same about anything involving religions, but I don`t vote them down because of it... if anything I probably look at the image closer and it ends up have a better score because of it.
Ray |
...Ray, as an Atheist, I can relate to wanting to score religious photos lower. This one I've worked hard at not to do, and to see these photographs as a representation of art, not the religion... Its not easy, and many times, I come back to those images after I've finished voting. |
Snap. |
Umm... Not sure what you meant by that, but I am half in the bag...LOL... In case it was misinterpreted... I was agreeing with Ray and stating that I do the same thing he does. Which is examine the image closer with the intent of giving it the score it deserves... |
|
|
|
12/12/2010 10:34:09 PM · #45 |
| I generally vote portraits lower. Not because I hate them, but because there are so many that you need to do a lot to separate yourself. This goes for any type of shot that is oft repeated, especially in a particular challenge. If there are 5 photos of a similar subject in a challenge, the last example will probably be looked at most critically, and I may revise votes. Crooked horizons bug me if it strikes me as accidental. Disregard for the challenge prompt bugs me a lot too. I'm pretty lenient in my interpretation but sometimes there is just no connection. Photos that hinge upon their title for relevance or message. Generally I don't put much weight into titles though. |
|
|
|
12/13/2010 08:08:26 AM · #46 |
| I hate HDR and Topaz! Ugh. |
|
|
|
12/13/2010 09:56:24 AM · #47 |
A title can really make an image - especially when it is set up like a caption. I tend to think that the words assigned to a picture lend as much to the complete composition as choosing the light or background used to create it . . . Many of the pictures I look at here are enhanced by the caption - it helps the artist finish conveying his or her work. In this last challenge (horizons) there is an image that I struggled to appreciate until I read the title and it altered my own perception of what I was looking at so much that it was an instant favorite for me. I find the caption helps me explore the image further, too, and in looking deeper, I will catch something new.
The recognition of beauty through art is not anything I am practiced at nor have I spent any time nurturing or acknowledging that within myself; these are new horizons for me. I do love the pun, entendre and the linguistically clever and the captions of these photos tend to be a gateway that help bridge the gap between me and things beautiful. I don't score lower for lack of a title, but my appreciation for a good caption often reflects in a higher score . . .
Oh, and I am not a big fan of what I have come to learn is called "eye candy" photos.
My scoring is based largely on how an image makes me react. I don't know enough about the technicalities of this world to honestly critique the picture or post processing, but if I am moved by a photo, I generally leave a comment that includes the score I chose.
Message edited by author 2010-12-13 15:40:10.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2010 11:09:58 AM · #48 |
Well, I think we've finally answered the question of where all those anomalous 1's come from....
There are some seriously anal retentive folks around here... |
|
|
|
12/13/2010 11:38:47 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Well, I think we've finally answered the question of where all those anomalous 1's come from.... |
Yup. But I appreciate people being honest about it. We have discovered the trolls and it is us.
Now I'm wondering how I can offend the maximum amount of people with a single entry.
|
|
|
|
12/13/2010 11:43:33 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Now I'm wondering how I can offend the maximum amount of people with a single entry. |
That should be easy - A photo of a naked woman holding a gun and a bible at a beach with tilted horizon and some camera shake with the title being "Nekkid WoMN". Guarantee you nothing but 1s :) |
|
