| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/02/2004 12:34:15 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Gordon:
How 'doesn't meet the challenge - 1' or 'I don't like it - 1' communicate anything more useful than just voting 1 ? |
"Doesn't meet the challenge" might mean that the subject was GOOD, but inappropriate for this challenge. The other suggests that the subject or technique was bad, but may have met the challenge. With a vote only, there is no guidance at all. |
my point, which seems to be getting universally ignored, is there is on real, meaningful guidance in the other two in this case either. Superficially it might look useful - but it isn't, in my opinion. In fact it just wastes time and detracts from where the focus of attention should be.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 12:35:00 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by joebok:
Originally posted by Gordon:
How 'doesn't meet the challenge - 1' or 'I don't like it - 1'
communicate anything more useful than just voting 1 ? |
I think Scalvert had already answered that:
Originally posted by scalvert:
...
Even a simple "I don't like it," while non-specific, suggests the need to improve subject choice or technique. "Doesn't meet the challenge- 1" might prompt me to consider how well I'm communicating my intention.
...
|
He further qualifies that such comments can be useful to certain people.
Originally posted by scalvert:
... A photographer genuinely struggling to improve can find direction in nearly any comment... |
And not so much to others:
Originally posted by scalvert:
... while even the most considered critique is wasted on those who don't value the opinions of others... |
By your remark earlier,
Originally posted by Gordon:
Learning in this art comes from within.
|
you appear to be putting yourself in the second category, so for you the comments are useless and so this whole thread seems academic, just like graphicfunk has been saying. |
No, but you've entirely missed my point. Actually, the original point is quite simple. A one vote is not a troll. It also carries as much value as the vast majority of comments I've seen on this site during voting. Comments are not useless. The comments handed out anonymously during voting on very low scoring images are in the most part, useless, for both the person giving them and getting them. There are far, far better ways to learn.
I'm merely suggesting I have a right to my opinion, without users accusing me of being an elitist troll.
Message edited by author 2004-12-02 12:39:36.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 12:46:50 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
No, but you've entirely missed my point. Actually, the original point is quite simple. A one vote is not a troll. It also carries as much value as the vast majority of comments I've seen on this site during voting. Comments are not useless. The comments handed out anonymously during voting on very low scoring images are in the most part, useless, for both the person giving them and getting them. There are far, far better ways to learn.
I'm merely suggesting I have a right to my opinion, without users accusing me of being an elitist troll. |
I don't mean to accuse anybody of being an elitist troll - sorry if it came across that way, but I'm struggling with understanding your point. Comments aren't handed out anonymously during voting? From an information theory point of view, one byte of data (a number 1 for example) is less information than that byte plus many more bytes of data that would comprise a comment. In general, those extra bytes are going to be more useful than not. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 12:52:14 PM · #79 |
How can somebody make a statement that a one vote is not a troll? It may not be in all cases, but the troll vote appears under images which are beyond question above a one. We have all beat this to death, along with out subjective viewpoints and the babble of the tatse of the masses.
Look, each of us will go our way. You can play the master and expect all to pick themselves up by their bootstraps and while this is more a Zen approach, it does not work for everybody. As a matter of fact, this attitude inhibits further progress from the master himself, since he now stands as authority.
Fine, you think that words are meaningless and that comments are superflous and the king is the numerical value. Fine. My approach is the opposite. The words trump the numerical value. You think members can not be helped with the comment, I think many are helped. And if you take a survey, you will find that your opinion, while dictating a truism, can benefit greatly by the weight of the intelligent comment. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 01:23:12 PM · #80 |
I'm outta breath from reading this whole thread and enlightened I hope by the conversation. While I tend to lean towards Dan's point of view here that comments are really what help many of us beginners to see the things others are seeing (and maybe not liking at all), I also find Gordon's perspective intriguing and if not out of line my understanding is that Gordon is saying specifically a) not all 1 votes are trolls, and b) sometimes the 1 vote needs nothing as far as a comment to back it up simply because the image/composition really truely is a 1.
What I find difficult to understand without considering the 'troll-factor' is how an image, shot quite well, with an overexposed corner, what some would consider meaningless text (not me by the way, but I will accept that some do) and a symbol that may or may not have been artistically shadowed rated a one on a voter's scale.
Did the viewer consider at all that the image could not in any way fit the challenge?
Did the viewer consider that the overexposure was so detrimental to the actual picture that it completely ruined any worth that this image had to even some people?
Was it that the viewer simply found the picture so boring that any technical achievement captured in the image itself was overshadowed by the fact that the image meant nothing to them?
Or was it simply that the viewer's bias on the subject matter chosen warranted an immediate slap in the face to the artist, because to do anything else might reward that person for choosing something that they could never embrace as a 'worthy' subject matter.
I'm fine with the scores I'm getting lately, some ones, some 4's some 10's, but am much more thrilled by the comments that some have left stating that my image was far too grainy or that the sharpness on xxxx should have been directed to yyyy. It has made me go back to those images and consider. The art I was trying to achieve here has missed the point because something was so drastically distracting to the viewer. What can I do to still maintain that art I was striving for while minimizing the distraction? And from these things I spent 3 hours working on one image and learned something very new about noise reduction and will be reshooting another submission so that I can achieve the better result.
But lets face it people. There are some here - and I make no insinuations to any already in this thread - but there are some here who vote who would view {a wide angle image of a mountain top with three crosses on it, desaturated and exquisitely composed} a 1 soley on the subject matter or do the same if the scene {was a mosque} or {the Capital Building in the US} - just imagine, giving Ansel a one for choosing to present one of those pictures. Imagine later why you could make no comment on that image to say WHY it deserved a 1.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 01:41:40 PM · #81 |
You think you are hard done by in 'authority' takea look at my entry , comparedc to me you did well.Originally posted by Russ:
This was my entry for Authority, entitled "The highest Authority" I was hoping for a 6 as I felt this was my best entry so far. This isn't a moan about my overall total, but can somebody please explain how this photo scored seven 10's and ten 9's as well as seven 1's and seven 2's. Like it or loathe it, I don't think this photo is a 1. (Sorry, end of winge) |
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 01:45:33 PM · #82 |
| Gordon, think of it this way... a score only tells me WHAT you voted; a comment only tells me WHY you voted. A single score without a comment is completely meaningless (maybe the voter was just in a bad mood, or clicked the wrong button by mistake). Only in aggregate can the scores alone provide any useful info. On the other hand, a single comment without a score listed gives me something I can learn from- maybe it's just a hint or maybe it triggers an epiphany that will change how I approach all future shots (try getting that from a vote alone). It's true that beyond a certain level many of us can understand from our own self-critiques why a particular image is scoring low, but every once in a while even the best can be surprised. Sometimes it's ONLY through comments that we truly understand what the viewer sees. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 02:08:03 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by joebok:
I don't mean to accuse anybody of being an elitist troll - sorry if it came across that way, but I'm struggling with understanding your point. Comments aren't handed out anonymously during voting? From an information theory point of view, one byte of data (a number 1 for example) is less information than that byte plus many more bytes of data that would comprise a comment. In general, those extra bytes are going to be more useful than not. |
No, from an information theory point of view, that isn't true at all.
For example, 'man bites dog' has a much higher information content than 'dog bites man'
More characters do not automatically imply a higher entropy, if we want to talk about information theory. The amount of new information or 'surprise', essentially, in each new code bit defines the value of the information. If you already know it, more bits telling you the same thing has no additional information content.
Comments are handed out anonymously, in that you have no knowledge of the person you are giving the comment to.
Message edited by author 2004-12-02 14:17:18.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 02:10:27 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
How can somebody make a statement that a one vote is not a troll? It may not be in all cases, but the troll vote appears under images which are beyond question above a one. We have all beat this to death, along with out subjective viewpoints and the babble of the tatse of the masses. |
yes - they are beyond question in your mind. But as you've often stated, no images are worth a one or a two in your view. Given your starting point that no possible image is bad, then I can certainly agree that no image deserves a one in your view of the voting scale. However, there is nothing to say your view is universally correct. It would just be pleasant if you could give others the same respect on their views that you want on your own.
and I certainly don't consider myself a master though you seem to keep trying to accuse me of that too.
Message edited by author 2004-12-02 14:12:38.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 02:15:26 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Gordon, think of it this way... a score only tells me WHAT you voted; a comment only tells me WHY you voted. A single score without a comment is completely meaningless (maybe the voter was just in a bad mood, or clicked the wrong button by mistake). Only in aggregate can the scores alone provide any useful info. On the other hand, a single comment without a score listed gives me something I can learn from- maybe it's just a hint or maybe it triggers an epiphany that will change how I approach all future shots (try getting that from a vote alone). It's true that beyond a certain level many of us can understand from our own self-critiques why a particular image is scoring low, but every once in a while even the best can be surprised. Sometimes it's ONLY through comments that we truly understand what the viewer sees. |
Maybe I've overstated my point - it is simply this, short, superficial comments from people who know nothing about your experience, interest, technical level or equipment are about the worst way to learn and get better at photography there is. There are many much more effective, enjoyable, enlightening and faster ways to learn.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 02:28:01 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
short, superficial comments...are about the worst way to learn and get better at photography there is. |
Even if that were true, aren't they still better than the faceless, nondescriptive feedback of votes alone? You yourself have marked many such comments as helpful. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 02:53:31 PM · #87 |
One minor lesson I have learned is that if you attempt to structure your perception of life from within, you stand the chance of being totally off base. What I mean are the conclusions of what you find useful and useless. While they work for you, they do not work for all.
Take an example: I watch a movie only once and very rarely twice. Like most of you, I have peculiar ways with certain things. I was offered a golden opportunity at the start of the video craze. Turned it down because of my opinion on the subject. My friend scored high, because he watches movies over and over again.
My point is that if you feel something is useless or redundant, and you do not take a concensus of how other people feel, your observation is not a truism. Applies only to you.
I have been on this site entering the 6th month and like many of you I am a self starter and I can therefore learn from a short comment. Yet, I feel guilty that I have not been more helpful. And yes, while my comment score is high, the majority are of no help to anyone. Of the small amunt that are, even a smaller number gets accepted, because as you know, some members are not ready to benefit.
Well, the easiest thing to do is to stop the comments and just give the score. However, when I tell you that I benefit from a comment more than the score, and when I see this sentiment expressed by many others in the forums, I do not see the virtue of arguing against it.
Consider, you want to explore other facets of photography. Even masters, explore and need the comment, not to learn but to fine tune their direction. Where there is dead certainty in a consistent basis there is danger of a downfall. Take an artist who has earned his merit and turns around to explore a diffrent new style. These bold souls, many in history, either make it and advance the art form or just fall by the wayside. Those that listen could take advantage of the comment.
So, to dismiss the comment on the grounds that the responsibility to produce a good image is incumbent on the member, makes no sense. We accept the fact that that is our reponsibility, however, some ideas and some concepts and executions benefit from the comment to a high degree. Again, we must be careful not to fool ourselves that from this moment every move we make is sacred. The very best have laid turds along the way. Art always needs two to tango, the artist and the viewer and the comment is the only real form of communication. You can say the numerical does the same but like Shannon says: there is a what and a why that begs a reply.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 02:54:11 PM · #88 |
Proof that not all 1 votes are trolls. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:01:35 PM · #89 |
| You're right. Sometimes they're 10 votes. ;-) |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:03:06 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Proof that not all 1 votes are trolls. |
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And proof that sometimes they are. 
Message edited by author 2004-12-02 15:04:02. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:08:13 PM · #91 |
Wow, Dan, I liked that first shot you dug up. It hadn't seen that one before, but into the favorites it goes!
 |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:08:29 PM · #92 |
I think it was rhdecker, who wrote the following comment for that magnificent photo:
Fantastic shot. Lighting and framing is spot-on
1
...okay, I know...typo! |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:12:39 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I think it was rhdecker, who wrote the following comment for that magnificent photo:
Fantastic shot. Lighting and framing is spot-on
1
...okay, I know...typo! |
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ROFL |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:16:14 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Fantastic shot. Lighting and framing is spot-on
1 ...okay, I know...typo! |
Maybe so, maybe not. Despite the words on either end of the scale, I'll bet that some newbies assume that 1 is good (1st place) and 10 is bad. These mistaken votes would look for all the world like trolls freshly emerged from under a bridge, yet an automated voting pattern recognition system would accept them as legit. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:29:57 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
One minor lesson I have learned is that if you attempt to structure your perception of life from within, you stand the chance of being totally off base. What I mean are the conclusions of what you find useful and useless. While they work for you, they do not work for all. |
I agree entirely with you. That is why I strongly disagree with your view that anyone who votes a 1 is a troll or a elitist snob. However, I don't tend to try to insult or degrade people who use too many 10s as often you try to do in the opposite regard.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:31:04 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Fantastic shot. Lighting and framing is spot-on
1 ...okay, I know...typo! |
Maybe so, maybe not. Despite the words on either end of the scale, I'll bet that some newbies assume that 1 is good (1st place) and 10 is bad. These mistaken votes would look for all the world like trolls freshly emerged from under a bridge, yet an automated voting pattern recognition system would accept them as legit. |
Good point...in Germany, grades are given as numbers and a '1' is equal to an 'A'. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:32:44 PM · #97 |
I think the low votes on the fantastic shots is a programing bug Langdon put in so no one ever steals his highest rated image of all time title
 |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:33:11 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Gordon:
short, superficial comments...are about the worst way to learn and get better at photography there is. |
Even if that were true, aren't they still better than the faceless, nondescriptive feedback of votes alone? You yourself have marked many such comments as helpful. |
I mark pretty much any comment as 'helpful' as a way of noting that I've read it. Makes it easy to spot the new comments. The only ones I don't tend to be the ones that are factually incorrect. (and please don't go trawlling through all my comments trying to find one that 'disproves' this - it ain't worth the effort)
|
|
|
|
12/02/2004 03:50:21 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
I mark pretty much any comment as 'helpful' as a way of noting that I've read it. Makes it easy to spot the new comments. |
Me too. Maybe D&L could code it so the background of new comments is a different shade of gray until the photographer reads the comment? Though I sometimes hesitate on the factually incorrect ones, I eventually mark all comments as helpful with the assumption that the author wrote in good faith, and would likely edit the comment if I bothered to point out the error. |
|
|
|
12/02/2004 05:31:29 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
One minor lesson I have learned is that if you attempt to structure your perception of life from within, you stand the chance of being totally off base. What I mean are the conclusions of what you find useful and useless. While they work for you, they do not work for all. |
I agree entirely with you. That is why I strongly disagree with your view that anyone who votes a 1 is a troll or a elitist snob. However, I don't tend to try to insult or degrade people who use too many 10s as often you try to do in the opposite regard. |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here, you invert 180 degrees. It is the troll vote that cripples the newcomer, the 10's do not have anything because they do not adversely affect the outcome. I simply believe that a little mercy and understanding will go a longer way to educate the beginner than the troll vote. While it is there to use, it should be used with great judgment. The troll voters and elitists snobs exist and their votes are visible to all who study the top images in most challenges. But this is not to say that all trollers are elitists and snobs, simply that most of them are. A 1 is a terrible and horrid picture and while these exists, they are not that common to waste all this energy. According to you this is a very common occurance and I simply disagree, especially if the object is to help the photographer.
Your position is clear, you expect for members to have gems of beauty before you and those that offend your aesthetic senses you troll, period. Yes, you already said it, they should have done their homework and master their art before posting. I look at it more like encouraging those that may otherwise walk away. A different philosophy, that is all. |
|
