| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/04/2004 09:45:22 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
To me, it makes as much/more sense that the participants not be allowed to vote (if you're going to restrict the voting pool at all). For this experiment it's fine as it is for the multiple reasons Terry stated previously. |
I believe this would take away much of the value of this challenge to its participants. They want to know what their peers think of their work.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 09:50:56 AM · #27 |
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
Since we already see an average breakdown of votes after a challenge (by those with a camera, without, commenters, etc.), I'd suggest an additional breakdown here by members, non-members, masters, non-masters. While the final score could (in this experiment) come from ALL voters, with this new breakdown, you could at least see how the participants voted.
(BTW, I intend to get two ribbons before month's end so I can participate :-) This is going to be fun!) |
If (as I hope) this challenge becomes a permanent feature, this is something we can consider, if voting remains in any way open to all.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 09:53:00 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I agree with the premise of not allowing the entire membership to vote. I do believe it will discourage any additional creativity in techqnique and presentation from the participants in the challenge. The reasons for this have already been stated here... |
While I agree with this statement, the flip side is that closing the voting removes most of the benefit to the community as a whole. I think e301's post offers an interesting compromise (overweighting the votes of eligible participants) that still encourages creativity while allowing some degree of participation (and learning) by the community as a whole.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 09:57:56 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Sorry, but "pompous" is a perfectly reasonable connotation to be drawn from the word "master" as used here, and it is used as a title precisely to differentiate the holders from the less-skilled "rabble." |
If someone eligible for this challenge came up with the name, I might agree. As it happens, the challenge and name were suggested by someone with as many ribbons as you or I (none). Masters is used here to indicate those who have mastered the art of creating ribbon-winning entries on DPC.
Originally posted by GeneralE:
That doesn't make it unreasonable to use in this context, but I believe it was introduced in such a way as to maximize the negative rhetorical effect, and I would have suggested other language had I been part of the development process. |
Suggest away. Like I said, nothing has been finalized, not even the name. This is only a test.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 10:06:23 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Suggest away. Like I said, nothing has been finalized, not even the name. This is only a test. |
I think it will be OK once people get used to it ... I think it was the way people heard about it which created most of the negative response. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 10:09:39 AM · #31 |
Ok I see now how at least one method cheating could be done for a 'preordained' challenge. I also see your point about a long winded title, so how about a 'Ribboner's' challenge. As was stated by someone else, Masters in the context it was presented, is condescending. There are IMO a number of 'master's' here who have placed 4th through 20th consistently who may be excluded for being .02 to .1 points off in multiple challenges.
I have to say, if voting is restricted to only the masters, I find it very unlikely I'll be looking at the entries. I know prior to becoming a member, I spent very little time looking member challenge entries. Unless I had an idea for a paticular challenge, in which case I would look through the results to see if my idea was someone elses as well.
In the short time I have been on this site, I don't see the so called magic formula to a winning picture. Oher than being a well composed photo that evokes thought on the part of the viewer. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 10:35:49 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by e301:
If this challenge is to be voted on by everyone, then the criteria for producing a winning shot, as so well understood by Kiwiness, Heida, JJ, etc. etc., has not changed at all. Not one bit. |
Sure it has! In this challenge, the competition is REALLY tough. An image that might have placed in the 80-90% range in a normal challenge may well be a brown ribbon here. It will be more "challenging" to score well. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 10:53:00 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by e301:
If this challenge is to be voted on by everyone, then the criteria for producing a winning shot, as so well understood by Kiwiness, Heida, JJ, etc. etc., has not changed at all. Not one bit. |
Sure it has! In this challenge, the competition is REALLY tough. An image that might have placed in the 80-90% range in a normal challenge may well be a brown ribbon here. It will be more "challenging" to score well. |
Yes, it will be more challenging to score well. And since the entrants know how to take the dpc-style photograph that scores well, why would this challenge be a good time to try a completely new technique/style? This will ensure them the brown ribbon! |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 10:55:14 AM · #34 |
What I gather from the discussion.
1) Skilled people, who joined DPC very early, have figured out how to photograph a picture which will appeal to most of the voters and win them ribbon(s) easily.
2) This knowledge takes the challenge element out for these "masters"
and hence they feel that there is nothing much left for their creativity.
3) To retain masters out here we need to pit them against each other in an exclusive challenge called masters' challenge.
But if the voting pattern does not change (because the voters have not changed) what is the use of this challenge?
I guess what masters are interested in is the opinion of other masters.
How other ribboners think about their pictures and how it is rated by other masters.
In general, what we are looking for is, how a picture appeals to other masters. Then my suggestion is, why not open a category of new ribbon? called "Masters' Ribbon" (or some other color ribbon) which considers the votes of only masters. This will solve many problems.
a) Every one will get a chance to know how masters rank your picture.
b) Masters will have to create pictures which appeal to both general voters and masters as well and thus they have to be more creative.
c)People arguing against "Master's challenge" are happy becasue there iss no discremination between masters and them.
d) In the end if it turns out that the master's ribbon winner is mostly
from top 3 general pictures, it will be clear that masters don't vote
any different from general voters then there is no need for either
master's ribbon or master's challenge.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 10:59:33 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by srikant:
What I gather from the discussion.
1) Skilled people, who joined DPC very early, have figured out how to photograph a picture which will appeal to most of the voters and win them ribbon(s) easily.
2) This knowledge takes the challenge element out for these "masters"
and hence they feel that there is nothing much left for their creativity.
3) To retain masters out here we need to pit them against each other in an exclusive challenge called masters' challenge.
But if the voting pattern does not change (because the voters have not changed) what is the use of this challenge?
I guess what masters are interested in is the opinion of other masters.
How other ribboners think about their pictures and how it is rated by other masters.
In general, what we are looking for is, how a picture appeals to other masters. Then my suggestion is, why not open a category of new ribbon? called "Masters' Ribbon" (or some other color ribbon) which considers the votes of only masters. This will solve many problems.
a) Every one will get a chance to know how masters rank your picture.
b) Masters will have to create pictures which appeal to both general voters and masters as well and thus they have to be more creative.
c)People arguing against "Master's challenge" are happy becasue there iss no discremination between masters and them.
d) In the end if it turns out that the master's ribbon winner is mostly
from top 3 general pictures, it will be clear that masters don't vote
any different from general voters then there is no need for either
master's ribbon or master's challenge. |
An interesting, innovative solution presented in a mature manner without any whining or accusations!
We need more people like you!
Message edited by author 2004-09-04 11:01:01. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 11:18:44 AM · #36 |
It's really disheartening to see people talking about masters as those people who have figured out the particular technique or type of photo that appeals to the masses. Have a look at the top rated photos on this site. They include landscapes, portraits, B&W, non-DSLR shots... even cats. Images that appeal to the voters are simply well-exposed shots of an interesting subject with good composition. There- now you have that knowledge, too. Is it any less challenging?
...and what's with the talk of voting patterns? The only "pattern" is that better photos (that meet the challenge) get higher scores. So-called "masters" will vote better photos higher just like everyone else. If that's a pattern, then I don't want it to change.
The difference in this challenge is that you can reasonably assume that everyone will take a well-exposed shot of an interesting subject with good composition, and therefore all will get a fairly high score. How do you stand out from a relatively equal field in an open challenge? New techniques, exceptional creativity, incredible scenes... who knows? |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 11:19:53 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Suggest away. Like I said, nothing has been finalized, not even the name. This is only a test. |
I think it will be OK once people get used to it ... I think it was the way people heard about it which created most of the negative response. |
That's probable. In retrospect, an announcement probably should have been made. All was said and done by the time I got home from work, and I cannot access this site from work.
-Terry
Message edited by author 2004-09-04 11:34:23.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 11:23:25 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by srikant:
But if the voting pattern does not change (because the voters have not changed) what is the use of this challenge? |
The key here to this sentence is "if." We do not yet know what will happen. I suspect that when this challenge is complete, and people see that they gave a jjbeguen, a dsidwell, etc., a 3, they may question their voting a little.
It also remains to be seen how the voting will be structured for Masters challenges going forward.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 11:33:41 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by srikant:
But if the voting pattern does not change (because the voters have not changed) what is the use of this challenge? |
Most of the lower challenge scores are assigned to images that don't meet the challenge, have little interest, poor composition or lousy exposures. The people who routinely score well do so because they know better than to enter such a shot, and they can count on a high percentage score every time. The "use" of this challenge is to inspire such photographers to put even MORE effort into their shots in order to rise above a tougher crowd (a more challenging challenge). Simply avoiding the above mistakes will not be enough to make the top percentile. Hopefully, we'll all be inspired by the results, and everybody wins.
Message edited by author 2004-09-04 11:34:02. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 11:41:59 AM · #40 |
| There may be an added incentive (or disincentive, depending on attitude) to make something at least a bit "out of the box" or in a "new" style, since everyone will likely be on the lookout to try and figure out who took each picture ... there's the possibility of a significantly lower level of anonymity than usual in this competition. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 12:33:34 PM · #41 |
The issue of who should vote in this type of challenge -all paid members or only those eligible to enter, or only those who enter- has valid points on all sides. One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that if this becomes a regular event and the voting is restricted, those excluded will gradually lose interest; and it will, in some ways, become a spectator sport.
If someone were to crunch the numbers and extract the stats from the database I think that those eligible for this challenge, as a subset, would be shown to participate in voting at a lower level than the community as a whole. Same likely holds true for commenting and forum posts.
One thing I think we can count on for sure is that the scores will be significantly higher than a normal challenge. Anonymity will be less than usual. I'd almost be willing to bet money that there will be a new record set for Average Score. Including the results in the database will corrupt it to a certain extent. There will be very few, if any, requests for DQ. Some of the so-called Masters will pass it up for various reasons.
My biggest problem with the concept is that it values the contribution of community members, and the desirability of retaining them, on a single critera- success in the challenges. Methinks there wasn't enough thought given to the message it would send to the vast majority of our community that has not won 2 ribbons yet.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 12:39:11 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Methinks there wasn't enough thought given to the message it would send to the vast majority of our community that has not won 2 ribbons yet. |
It was put forth as an experiment to ask for the community's reactions and ideas, rather than trying to presume them ... everyone always complains that it takes to long to implement any changes around here, but when anyone tries something new everyone thinks it should languish in committee for a few weeks first : ) |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 12:49:15 PM · #43 |
I don't see what the big deal is, after all there are Masters' Golf tournament, Masters Tennis tournament etc etc...
I don't have any ribbon so that will make me strive to get that ribbon and eventually participate in the Masters.
To those who are complaining, go shoot photos and try to make them better so you can win ribbons and get to the masters challenge. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 12:52:24 PM · #44 |
| so very very very tempted dont push me |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 12:55:46 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
The issue of who should vote in this type of challenge -all paid members or only those eligible to enter, or only those who enter- has valid points on all sides. One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that if this becomes a regular event and the voting is restricted, those excluded will gradually lose interest; and it will, in some ways, become a spectator sport. |
It has been mentioned:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
While I agree with this statement, the flip side is that closing the voting removes most of the benefit to the community as a whole. I think e301's post offers an interesting compromise (overweighting the votes of eligible participants) that still encourages creativity while allowing some degree of participation (and learning) by the community as a whole. |
Originally posted by coolhar:
If someone were to crunch the numbers and extract the stats from the database I think that those eligible for this challenge, as a subset, would be shown to participate in voting at a lower level than the community as a whole. Same likely holds true for commenting and forum posts. |
How do you define the community as a whole?
Originally posted by coolhar:
One thing I think we can count on for sure is that the scores will be significantly higher than a normal challenge. Anonymity will be less than usual. I'd almost be willing to bet money that there will be a new record set for Average Score. Including the results in the database will corrupt it to a certain extent. There will be very few, if any, requests for DQ. Some of the so-called Masters will pass it up for various reasons. |
Agrred on all points. We can look at the possibility and desirability of segregating Masters' challenge stats later.
Originally posted by coolhar:
My biggest problem with the concept is that it values the contribution of community members, and the desirability of retaining them, on a single critera- success in the challenges. Methinks there wasn't enough thought given to the message it would send to the vast majority of our community that has not won 2 ribbons yet. |
Quite a bit of thought was put into that, actually. The message that we are trying to send is that we have a group of photographers here who have much to teach us, and that we are committed to keeping them around. I do not want to see these challenges become a spectator sport, because I believe their value to the site as a whole will be reduced if they do. This is why I feel that all members should be able to vote on these challenges, though the weighting of those votes for future challenges is, at this point, an open question.
Here are the top 11 ribbon-winners on the site:
1. jjbeguin (20)
2. dsidwell (16)
3. Jacko (14)
3. kiwiness (14)
5. crabappl3 (11)
5. kosmikkreeper (11)
7. arnit (10)
7. Sonifo (10)
7. heida (10)
10. timj351 (9)
10. connie (9)
Now... imagine the loss to the site if any or all of these people got bored enough to stop participating, and you begin to understand why we are embarking on this experiment.
-Terry
Message edited by author 2004-09-04 12:56:53.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 01:21:39 PM · #46 |
| Terry, you are still sending the same message- that you care more about the elite, as measured by success in challenges, than you do about the masses; that you think those 100 or so are the most important to retain. I'm not sure I agree with that. How about expressing your opinion of the Challenge Suggestion I made last night please. Do you like the idea? or dislike it? Do you think it is workable? Want to propose any modifications? It's in a thread called Special Veterans Reprise Challenge. I'd really like to know your reaction. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 01:31:42 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
How about expressing your opinion of the Challenge Suggestion I made last night please. Do you like the idea? or dislike it? Do you think it is workable? Want to propose any modifications? It's in a thread called Special Veterans Reprise Challenge. I'd really like to know your reaction. |
That's sounds like a perfectly viable challenge except for the requirement for votes cast > votes received, which may be a mathematical impossibility, and at the least is a very severe restriction, when I think the goal was to be inclusive.
The general idea of a challenge for people who have participated a lot seems fine, and your method of creating a semi-restricted "free study" topic could produce interesting results (50% of entries titled "Nude" perhaps?). I'm not sure why you then remove the restriction on considering the challenge topic though ... it seems to me if you get to pick the topic and then take a picture which doesn't represent it you should be penalized for that ... maybe I misunderstood you there. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 01:31:50 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Terry, you are still sending the same message- that you care more about the elite, as measured by success in challenges, than you do about the masses; that you think those 100 or so are the most important to retain. I'm not sure I agree with that. How about expressing your opinion of the Challenge Suggestion I made last night please. Do you like the idea? or dislike it? Do you think it is workable? Want to propose any modifications? It's in a thread called Special Veterans Reprise Challenge. I'd really like to know your reaction. |
It's the elite who make this site worthwhile for the rest of us. If the photographers I look up to disappear, I'm going to learn less and am going to be less likely to hang around. I like your other suggestion though.
Message edited by author 2004-09-04 13:32:43. |
|
|
|
09/04/2004 01:37:39 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Sorry, but "pompous" is a perfectly reasonable connotation to be drawn from the word "master" as used here...I would have suggested other language had I been part of the development process... |
I agree.
When I think of "Masters", the venerable names of Brassaî, Kertész, Stieglitz, Lange, Man Ray and Moon come to mind. I cannot help but imagine bodies of work which have inspired (and continue to do so) people from all walks of life with an interest beyond the technical.
I believe we call them masters, because each of these has left us a unique, engaged artistic vision of the world and/or the human condition. Their works appear to contain both a freshness and an enduring quality, which translate into a significant contribution toward our store of individual and collective memory.
It think it is clear that I'm not talking competent exposure, framing and sentimental choices but about genuine emotional and intellectual qualities very rarely found among those images that can be ranked so highly here.
DPC laureates have, IMHO, deserved their ribbons. Some have earned ribbons for appealing to popular tastes and sentiments alone, others for photographs prettier than most. While some continue to surprise us with capable imitations of masterly work, others encourage to reform a conventional way of seeing. There are, however, and in my critical opinion, very few images here on DPC, which are the kind of news that stays news.
These, to me, come from photographers (I'm so happy to see me use the plural) I would call Masters, despite their portfolios, experiments and laurels. ;-)
Message edited by author 2004-09-04 14:10:19.
|
|
|
|
09/04/2004 01:41:42 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
When I think of "Masters", the venerable names of Brassaî, Kertész, Stieglitz, Lange, Man Ray and Moon come to mind. |
Who? ;-)
|
|
