| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/29/2002 03:19:52 PM · #1 |
I have to confess I was baffled at the results I obtained with my entry this last week (Texture). I honestly didn't entertain the illusion as a real possibility of ending in the top 10, but I do not understand ending this low in the list, trying hard to be objective about the other pictures presented. With my previous submissions I considered the results acceptable, even a little surprising in one of them, but for me the voting process and criteria applied has become an utter mystery. Can anybody offer me some means to understand it?. Quite discouraging, at first. I'll leave this behind me for now and wait for this week's results.
text |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:29:08 PM · #2 |
The mystery is what makes it fun... it's no mystery really... everyone simply has different taste and different perspectives on the photos. Everyone also has their own unique way of casting votes... 5 doesn't mean 5 to everyone :)
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:32:02 PM · #3 |
I'll start by saying I scored your photo a 5 this week. Not bad by any stretch, but it didn't really jump out at me either.
As for constructive suggestions, probably the most useful comments you received were about the banding of the light and the lack of a focal point. Also everything that jmsetzler said in his comment was right on the mark.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:38:28 PM · #4 |
| I agree with you on your texture entry, and just about every week I'm also a little baffled. If you look at a lot of the challenge entries for any week, you'll see that the comments only have a weak correlation with the final score. I think a lot of people just vote on a gut reaction and some of them probably even vote before the page gets done loading. One thing I have noticed though is that the photos that do best are technically great, don't do much if any social comentary, and don't make the viewer think too much. I really liked your shot, but I'll bet it was thought to be too restrained to score at the highest level on this site. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:39:17 PM · #5 |
The true mystery is that there is no mystery. I myself have only recently become enlightened.
I offer the following link on the parable of the three blind men and the elephant.
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/29/2002 3:39:03 PM. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:40:32 PM · #6 |
I'm always baffled by the results, but never more so than this week. Last time I submitted (Shadows) I felt the shot pushed things too much, and I expected it to tank. I loved it, so I submitted it anyway, and it came in fourth. This time, I thought it was right on topic and fairly well done, so expected it to do well. I'm well on my way to the worst score ever. I give up trying to understand.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:49:36 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by mcmurma:
I offer the following link on the parable of the three blind men and the elephant.
Gee, there''s no mention of the part of the elephant everyone thought MY entry was :)
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/29/2002 3:49:54 PM. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:51:52 PM · #8 |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 03:55:18 PM · #9 |
I am generally confused as to the results each week. In my own photos when I think I have a better picture the score gets worse. However I am usually less confused about my own work, as it is quite average at best, than I am about others work.
Each week I watch Photographs I expect to be in the top ten either be outside of it some, or greatly ourside.
A few examples this week:
Katydid (21)
Shy (167)
Architexture (27)
Peppers (58)
Other weeks I have seen larger surprises, but overall I simply do not understand the overall trends.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:00:03 PM · #10 |
I don't know if this has ever been suggested, but it might be fun to close voting for a week to only those who submitted photographs. I'm not sure what would happen, but I think maybe we'd see less "confusing" scores and placings. I think it's the whole unknown passerby vote that mucks up a lot of our expectations.
- Mike |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:02:18 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by mci:
I don't know if this has ever been suggested, but it might be fun to close voting for a week to only those who submitted photographs. I'm not sure what would happen, but I think maybe we'd see less "confusing" scores and placings. I think it's the whole unknown passerby vote that mucks up a lot of our expectations.
- Mike
I think a 'photographers only' challenge would be very nice too :) |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:04:12 PM · #12 |
| Well, I have noticed most photo scores are close (camera and non-camera) so i doubt it would effect that much. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:06:57 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Agamemnon:
Each week I watch Photographs I expect to be in the top ten either be outside of it some, or greatly ourside.
A few examples this week:
Architexture (27)
This was one of my two tens for last week. I couldn't believe it finished that low.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:07:13 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by mci:
it might be fun to close voting for a week to only those who submitted photographs.
Interesting! I like it... But maybe it would be nice to have a third breakout of the votes... We currently have
Voters without cameras =
&
Voters with cameras =
Maybe D&L could add
Voters with submissions =
Of course that might lead to calls for
Voters that are left handed female bowlers that have Canon cameras =
Just a thought...
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:07:33 PM · #15 |
I actually think (If it was something that could be done) it would be interesting to put together a small 'Judging Board' of the most experienced 4-5 people you can get together to award another ribbon or set of ribbions. Pehaps one marked J (Judges Award) or something.
I don't think that the voting should exclude people even if it becomes confusing but this might be a nice addition. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:08:24 PM · #16 |
Sometimes its just the theme of all the entered photos that pull folks around too. A multitude of reasons really.
Actually, I find the whole process fascinating to watch. But then I am getting what I want from the site. I am sure it is maddening for folks who may be getting a little less than they bargained for each week. :-/ |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:09:57 PM · #17 |
| I think it is more interesting than maddening.... an equal number of comments suggesting things that directly contracdict each other is maddening. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:11:31 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by Agamemnon:
I am generally confused as to the results each week. In my own photos when I think I have a better picture the score gets worse. However I am usually less confused about my own work, as it is quite average at best, than I am about others work.
Each week I watch Photographs I expect to be in the top ten either be outside of it some, or greatly ourside.
A few examples this week:
Katydid (21)
Shy (167)
Architexture (27)
Peppers (58)
Other weeks I have seen larger surprises, but overall I simply do not understand the overall trends.
I have yet to be surprised by a winner, but I will admit to having "overlooked" a few outstanding photos. For instance, this week I completely missed "She Sells Sea Shells." What a shame, I would have rated it higher than the 7 I initially scored if I had reviewed it again. Oh well, sorry Karen ' - (
But the biggest surprise for me this week was "Fettucini Feeling." I simply cannot believe that this photo came in at 143. It's absolutely criminal, imo.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:25:47 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by mcmurma:
But the biggest surprise for me this week was "Fettucini Feeling." I simply cannot believe that this photo came in at 143. It's absolutely criminal, imo.
See, thats the beauty and the horror of this site. I didn't get turned on by Fettucini Feeling but Smooth as Grass was a photo I liked a lot more than others.
The shot worked for me because the fuzzy factor helped establsih the texture of the shot in my eye.
It takes a lot of guts to post a photo like that on this site and guts or risk taking makes me take notice. He has more guts thean me because I don't think I have the guts to post an obviously fuzzy focus photot that is so interesting to look at.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:27:09 PM · #20 |
Focus is a tough issue to work with on DPC for sure... I have also seen some beautiful photos that had beautiful OOF elements that got hammered in the comments...
* This message has been edited by the author on 7/29/2002 4:26:40 PM. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:36:32 PM · #21 |
hokie, i really liked that one too
it was dreamy and sort of pulled you into the internal mindset of the kitten in this field of grass..
that's exactly what I'm talking about. .
Originally posted by hokie:
Originally posted by mcmurma:
[i]But the biggest surprise for me this week was "Fettucini Feeling." I simply cannot believe that this photo came in at 143. It's absolutely criminal, imo.
See, thats the beauty and the horror of this site. I didn't get turned on by Fettucini Feeling but Smooth as Grass was a photo I liked a lot more than others.
The shot worked for me because the fuzzy factor helped establsih the texture of the shot in my eye.
It takes a lot of guts to post a photo like that on this site and guts or risk taking makes me take notice. He has more guts thean me because I don't think I have the guts to post an obviously fuzzy focus photot that is so interesting to look at.
[/i]
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:39:41 PM · #22 |
Focus is a tricky subject.
I like "Smooth as Grass" too, but then I try and evaluate out of focus images to see if thats what I felt the photographer was after...then decide whether or not I like it. I thought "Smooth as Grass" was a great photo, didn't do it for me texture wise, though.
I also really enjoyed "Chains R Us." Another criminally underated photo this week. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:45:26 PM · #23 |
Chains R Us is one of the photos where *I* thought that more depth of field would have been better. The depth of field in that image forces my eye into the narrow gap on the center links of the chain. My eye wanted to look at the textures in the foreground of that image rather than deep inside.
I think this is a case of my own dislike for large pieces of the foreground being out of focus. I haven't seen many examples of it that work well for me.
|
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:48:06 PM · #24 |
Chains 'r Us and Revelation are good examples of 'if people knew who took those photos' they would have scored much higher. Those were incredible.
The quality of the photographers previous work would have merited a second look and even given them a benefit of the doubt to some prhotographers. I gave a 9 and a 10 to those respectively. |
|
|
|
07/29/2002 04:58:10 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by hokie:
Chains 'r Us and Revelation are good examples of 'if people knew who took those photos' they would have scored much higher. Those were incredible.
The quality of the photographers previous work would have merited a second look and even given them a benefit of the doubt to some prhotographers. I gave a 9 and a 10 to those respectively.
Revelation is another photo where i had trouble with the DOF. The image concept was indeed phenomenal, but the strip of focus across the center of the photo bugged me a little... i would have rather seen focus in the foreground fading out of focus in the depth of the image...
|
|
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: 08/27/2025 04:11:37 PM EDT.
