| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/03/2013 11:01:30 PM · #1 |
When I see the participation levels here I sometimes feel we are on the decline, sadly as it is!
This year I got a blue ribbon for an entry which scored 6.4! In a challenge of 25 entries! Whilst I was excited about it and appreciated the result somehow I felt far less appreciative when compared to other ribbons.
I̢۪m not trying to be negative but the facts are there for everyone to see. I really do applaud the members who are promoting the site via things like TPL and other ideas like commenting 100%.
If we look back at the last 50 challenges you will see we had 72 entries on average per challenge with each receiving 6 comments on average.
Now if we look back to when the site was a first starting out without the user numbers we have now and without the exposure this place has generated we see a different story. The first 50 challenges averaged 136 entries per challenge each receiving on average 20 comments.
I suppose you could read a lot of things into these statistics as you can with all stats but the big difference from the last 50 challenges and the first 50 is the length of time. The first 50 challenges spanned over 12 months with the last 50 challenges it has been a little over 3 months.
So I̢۪m throwing it out there: Are we having too many challenges for the number of participants on the site?
I would like to hear what others feel regarding this without it getting dragged down the rant pathway!
|
|
|
|
10/03/2013 11:03:29 PM · #2 |
| i can see it your way - but i m sure people who commit to almost all of them also appreciate the frequency. I enter a challenge every other month at my convenience (don't worry league, i'll enter. promiseish!) |
|
|
|
10/03/2013 11:09:28 PM · #3 |
Not sure, Tim. If we have fewer than the usual 3 a week, there'll probably be better participation. But having said that, a crappy challenge topic will still result in fewer entries.
I may hesitate to suggest perhaps its more the nature of the topics than the frequency that is resulting in reduced participation. |
|
|
|
10/03/2013 11:44:38 PM · #4 |
Careful, Tim. People around here will attack you for using facts. They're so cold and unfeeling.
p.s. I agree that the number of challenges is too high for this number of participants. |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 12:34:03 AM · #5 |
| I concur: 3 a week seems a bit excessive at this level of participation. I'd be happy to see it go back to two per week. |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 12:48:51 AM · #6 |
| Even though the participation is down, I find it easier to get a shot entered. The diversity of the challenges lets me at least find something that I am interested in shooting! |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 01:06:38 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I concur: 3 a week seems a bit excessive at this level of participation. I'd be happy to see it go back to two per week. |
Yes. It's becoming to obsessive and time consuming... |: |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 01:11:37 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by littlemav:
Even though the participation is down, I find it easier to get a shot entered. The diversity of the challenges lets me at least find something that I am interested in shooting! |
I think this is the crux of the problem. Because we have that choice we wait for the challenge to suit which means less participation.
If you didn't have all those options you would challenge yourself to shoot for the current challenge available! which is what the original intent of the site was. |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 01:13:08 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by Stagolee:
Originally posted by littlemav:
Even though the participation is down, I find it easier to get a shot entered. The diversity of the challenges lets me at least find something that I am interested in shooting! |
I think this is the crux of the problem. Because we have that choice we wait for the challenge to suit which means less participation.
If you didn't have all those options you would challenge yourself to shoot for the current challenge available! which is what the original intent of the site was. |
Nope, I'd just not shoot! LOL |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 01:18:19 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by littlemav:
Originally posted by Stagolee:
If you didn't have all those options you would challenge yourself to shoot for the current challenge available! which is what the original intent of the site was. |
Nope, I'd just not shoot! LOL |
LOL or just shoot for the monthly free study which I know quite a few people do. Nothing wrong with that either.
|
|
|
|
10/04/2013 01:20:42 AM · #11 |
yes and no. yes: too much to choose from, though a lot of it is silly, and not all sillyness is fun/funny. and no: it makes it easier to vote and comment on a challenge.
much as I would hate to have anything interfere with what I like about things as they are - there must be a better way of saying that!, dpc is a limited venue. the digital world has changed, and will continue to change at an increasing rate, and I dare say a lot of us have changed, even if only to adjust our m.o.'s, even albeit unbeknownst to ourselves.
I hope I cannot speak more badly than that. |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 02:20:48 AM · #12 |
50x136/12=570 entries per month then
50x72/3=1200 entries per month now
570x20=11400 comments per month then
1200x6=7200 comments per month now
Number of entries is up, number of comments is down. Neither of those is necessarily good or (unexpectedly) bad. You need more data to reach either (or most any other) conclusion.
However, your problem seems to be the lack of pleasure in receiving praise, and to solve it, I believe you must first consider the following potential reasons for low turnout and lack of comments:
- the quality of images then and now
- - and the subsequent inability to provide constructive criticism
- the number of great photographers that have joined the site in the last few years, further increasing the quality and making the voting more subjective (and critical comments less justifiable objectively)
- the increased difficulty in finding time for photography or the site (with so much else on our minds!), for the hobbyists
- the decrease in time available to professionals for "pleasure shooting" or shooting for challenges or keeping up with DPC friends
- etc etc etc...
Of course, you can also consider societal changes like the obsession with bite-sized information (Why do you need a comment? A vote is plenty!); or the pressure we feel to be present on all fronts rather than active on a few (perhaps to reach more people, but with no substance, what's the point?); etc. But then you risk becoming a cynic, obsessing over what the old ways were like and being ignored by those who, rather than dwell on what the world has come to, would rather go out and effect some real change.
PS: At this point in time, more challenges works better because the more we have to choose from, the higher the chance we'll have time to shoot for the challenge.
ETA the words in bold
Message edited by author 2013-10-04 18:50:55. |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 10:11:08 AM · #13 |
The present # of challenges a week works nicely for me.
I enter if: A) I have time, B) I want to enter a specific challenge.
I skip the one's that I won't enjoy doing. If it was one challenge a week I'd be entering just a handful of challenges a year.
Nobody's going to force anybody to enter the one challenge a week so that's not going to increase participation. Lest we forget that ultimately this site is for the enjoyment of the members. |
|
|
|
10/04/2013 10:16:33 AM · #14 |
| I believe some people do not like to vote in the challenges they have entered so fewer challenges a week may result in less votes for each challenge as a consequence of these people having entered all the challenges. Not sure how many people are in this camp but definitely worth considering. |
|
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: 08/09/2025 03:01:01 PM EDT.
