| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/25/2006 02:28:09 AM · #76 |
Originally posted by sir_bazz:
Originally posted by David.C:
Yes those all have a set level for qualification -- but they are also seasonal. Each one of them have a set time qualifications begin and a set time the qualifications end -- nothing done before or after that time period matters.
David |
Yep I agree....but imagine the uproar if the invitation criteria was changed to people with 2+ or 3+ ribbons in the past 12 months only, (seems a fitting analogy to a "season").
Just another can of worms that would need to be analysed, discussed and dissected.
cheers,
bazz. |
Your missing my point. All participants in the sporting events mentioned about go into the season knowing the criteria. A good analogy would not be the last 12 months, but the next 12!
David
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 02:52:38 AM · #77 |
Originally posted by David.C:
Your missing my point. All participants in the sporting events mentioned about go into the season knowing the criteria. A good analogy would not be the last 12 months, but the next 12!
David |
Maybe your point wasn't clear. ;)
But considering that the previous Masters Challenge, (and it's criteria for entering) was run and won 18 months ago it's difficult to argue that the criteria is/was unknown. I myself have only been a member here for around 5 months but have been aware of the existence of a previous Masters Challenge and also its entry requirements.
Hopefully the results of this current poll will confirm if the invitational requirements remain the same,(fingers crossed), or not.
cheers,
bazz. |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 03:44:39 AM · #78 |
I remember when the first Masters challenge was announced I thought it was a good idea although I didn’t like the term Masters and I was ineligible to enter. I little later I won a ribbon and a short time after that we had a challenge that was exclusive to non-ribbon winners I was then also ineligible to enter. But who cares it was the rules of the site.
As soon as the voting started for the Masters challenge I knew what a great idea it was the images from that challenge were fantastic although I didn’t agree with the ribbon winners which were more your mass appeal images. Just look what that challenge produced
      
I would probably be eligible to enter a Masters challenge now but doubt I would enter if I couldn’t produce something that was extraordinarily good.
Currently I really struggle to vote through challenges with a multitude of medico to poor images for at least one challenge a year it would be good to really enjoy the voting.
The site admin have done the right thing and have allowed a vote on this issue so I will leave it up them but what is usually the case in these issues the vocal minority beat the drum the loudest.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 04:21:35 AM · #79 |
I hated the idea of a challenge for ribbon winners only and I was very vocal about this when the first 'Masters'' challenge was announced. I went on to win it. This further made me unhappy about the idea, as I'd have rather won the challenge against 'everybody'... previous ribbon winners are not necessarily the best photographers here.
Why restrict the people who can take part in a challenge? Doesn't it make winning one of these challenges less of an achievement for the winner?
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 04:27:58 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I hated the idea of a challenge for ribbon winners only and I was very vocal about this when the first 'Masters'' challenge was announced. I went on to win it. This further made me unhappy about the idea, as I'd have rather won the challenge against 'everybody'... previous ribbon winners are not necessarily the best photographers here.
Why restrict the people who can take part in a challenge? Doesn't it make winning one of these challenges less of an achievement for the winner? |
One has to ask if you hated it why did you enter ???
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 04:40:39 AM · #81 |
I was entering all the challenges back then, and besides there was a lot of name calling in the forums dealing with that particular challenge. The main response I had to the fact I was unhappy with the challenge was that people questioned whether I was afraid of the competition. Taking part was one way of answering that accusation.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 04:45:45 AM · #82 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I was entering all the challenges back then, and besides there was a lot of name calling in the forums dealing with that particular challenge. The main response I had to the fact I was unhappy with the challenge was that people questioned whether I was afraid of the competition. Taking part was one way of answering that accusation. |
Fair enough...but you didn't have to enter such a great submission did you? ;)
bazz. |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 04:54:40 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I was entering all the challenges back then, and besides there was a lot of name calling in the forums dealing with that particular challenge. The main response I had to the fact I was unhappy with the challenge was that people questioned whether I was afraid of the competition. Taking part was one way of answering that accusation. |
Bob I remember you did speak out against it but thats not really my point. I don't see the so call masters as the best photographers on the site maybe they are the most popular, if you have a look at the images I selected they mostly finished outside the top ten. Wouldn't be great to see heida enter a challenge again ?
I know it sounds like it is selective but really all the challenges can be selective in a way. Maybe if you look at your self and ask when was the last time you voted on all the images in a challenge and enjoyed it, I really struggle and it frustrates me voting these days.
I just can't see the harm in a challenge that we know all the images are going to be good to very good.
Message edited by author 2006-03-25 08:43:59.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 07:02:02 AM · #84 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
...To me there's enough competition going on with the challenges, but lately even the forums have turned into an Ali-Frasier trash-talking competitive "fight" moreso than a cooperative venue. I know it's all in fun, and yes, I can ignore those threads easily, but does anyone else see how it changes the "character" here?...
...but all the tournaments and fun trash talk worry me a bit....
|
Me 2.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 07:09:11 AM · #85 |
I really don't see why restricting an entry to any group is so much of a great thing. When you start dividing people up into groups you introduce animosity from those excluded.
If you start this again I predict another round of negativity, and after the recent period surrounding the rules rewrite and dq 'interpretation' it doesn't feel like the best time to introduce such a scheme.
Don't do it please.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 07:25:01 AM · #86 |
Yes, 2+ ribbons
(176 members eligible)
Yes, 3+ ribbons
(112 members eligible)
Seems fairly exclusionary if you ask me. If these people have already won multiple ribbons why do we have to have a challenge just for them to win more? Do we need to feed their egos that much? Only 176/112 members elgible out of thousands...so if we do this the site is catering to the few and not the many. Do we really need to segregate the community like this?
Message edited by author 2006-03-25 07:26:27. |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 07:50:48 AM · #87 |
WHAT?!?! You mean DPC is only allowing multiple ribbon winners to enter Challenges anymore?!?
Oh.
You said One Challenge.
Sure.
That would be great!
(It just one challenge...not big deal)
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 07:54:32 AM · #88 |
Invitational challenges based on past performance are an opportunity to bring together a limited group of particularly skilled people to showcase their work, and are IMO a value-added component of the site. They don't take anythign away from anyone, because they are run in addition to the normal challenges.
I don't recall any negativity when some months ago we ran a challenge limited to those who had a positive ratio of comments made to comments received. I'm sure we'd all be reasonably happy with other challenges based on community controbutions. I don't understand this negativity against invitationals based on performance. I really don't.
And this is coming from a member who believes he's "good enough" to "deserve" to be in a Masters Challenge yet does not meet the past criteria for entry; I only have one ribbon.
R.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 08:05:10 AM · #89 |
I doubt the thrill of the challenge lies in ego. It lies in the fact that ribbons are few and far between. Those who have 2 certainly have achieved something to be admired. If that is not the case and to have ribbons is exclusionary and generally contemptuous, then why participate in this site vying for ribbons week after week.
Message edited by author 2006-03-25 08:05:31. |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 08:08:20 AM · #90 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Invitational challenges based on past performance are an opportunity to bring together a limited group of particularly skilled people to showcase their work, and are IMO a value-added component of the site. They don't take anythign away from anyone, because they are run in addition to the normal challenges.
I don't recall any negativity when some months ago we ran a challenge limited to those who had a positive ratio of comments made to comments received. I'm sure we'd all be reasonably happy with other challenges based on community controbutions. I don't understand this negativity against invitationals based on performance. I really don't.
And this is coming from a member who believes he's "good enough" to "deserve" to be in a Masters Challenge yet does not meet the past criteria for entry; I only have one ribbon.
R. |
As usual bear I think you have clarified the situation.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 08:28:02 AM · #91 |
Well, there are Masters and then there are DPC Masters.
Would calling it "The DPC Masters Challenge" keep things more in perspective and not offend the many "Masters" here who have not ribboned and may never ribbon?
Has anybody suggested keeping this sort of Challenge separate, statistically for those concerned about the fairness of the stats? Maybe even award different looking ribbons (like the duck challenge)?
I don't think that this sort of thing brings out better images or "ups" the game of the photographers as much as it simply concentrates the images they normally would shoot(that will be in any free challenge or regular challenge)into one clean package.
I can't shoot for it, so outside of a nice viewing experience it doesn't interest me much.
Message edited by author 2006-03-25 09:31:55. |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 08:29:58 AM · #92 |
How about a process where the votes of the select few allowed to enter the challenge were kept apart from the remainder the masses and then we could compare their preferences to those of the general public... we might be surprised at the results.
Ray |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 08:56:49 AM · #93 |
Why is everyone making such a big deal of this. Its another challenge, that's all. Yes, its different than other challenges but it won't eat you or bite you or make your hair fall out. Go take pictures!
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 09:01:10 AM · #94 |
Originally posted by Alienyst:
Yes, 2+ ribbons
(176 members eligible)
Yes, 3+ ribbons
(112 members eligible)
Seems fairly exclusionary if you ask me. If these people have already won multiple ribbons why do we have to have a challenge just for them to win more? Do we need to feed their egos that much? |
Yeah! Don't we all agree this smacks of elitist, snobbish, uppity photographers finding more new ways to stroke their insane, self-centered, greedy lust for adding to their already top heavy ribbon collections???
Wait... wait... hold on...
Does that mean at most in a 2+ ribbon invitational there would be under 200 max entries? And for 3+ ribbons it would be down to under 120? There would not be hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of entries to go through in a challenge vote? Hmmmmmmm...
Uhhhh... Errrr... Never Mind!
I'm all in favor of it! :)
Message edited by author 2006-03-25 09:02:13.
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 09:41:25 AM · #95 |
Originally posted by idnic:
Why is everyone making such a big deal of this. Its another challenge, that's all. Yes, its different than other challenges but it won't eat you or bite you or make your hair fall out. Go take pictures! |
Good question. Good statement. Good suggestion. |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 10:12:37 AM · #96 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
If for some reason you feel the need to pit subgroups of the population against each other, then why not use the mechanism of the exclusive challenge to make sure everyone is included (ironic sounding, isn't it).
Here's a thought that's been circulated before.
E.g.,
Exclusive Open Challenge 1: Ribbon Winners.
Exclusive Open Challenge 2: Non-Ribbon Winners
Exclusive Open Challenge 1: Over 30 years
Exclusive Open Challenge 2: 30 years and under
Exclusive Open Challenge 1: Left Handed People
Exclusive Open Challenge 2: Right Handed People
etc.
Always doing it at the same time, making sure everyone is included, avoid class labels, make the division a challenge split and not a "permanent" class split (by defining labels such as "master"). |
I really like this idea!!! That way it is exclusive and noone is left aside!!
Good thinking!!
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 10:51:18 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by agenkin:
I think that this is not a good idea (forcing myself not to use a stronger word :) ). I can see some usefulness in a master-free challenge (i.e. where ribbon holders can not participate) so that beginners would feel less intimidated and have a greater chance of winning a ribbon, but what's the point of a challenge for the masters? If you are a master, then you should feel confident competing any challenge. |
Very good points here! If such a challenge is to take place, how about making another at the same time! exclusively for member who have not yet won ribbons.. |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 11:10:35 AM · #98 |
Well it certainly would be a way to honor the few extremely accomplished photographers on this site. I think its a great idea and those challenges are so inspiring to vote on! They blow me away! I'm just sad because I have 1 ribbon, but have come in 4th twice and have been in the top 10 5 times in my last few challenges :(
|
|
|
|
03/25/2006 11:37:01 AM · #99 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Invitational challenges based on past performance are an opportunity to bring together a limited group of particularly skilled people to showcase their work, and are IMO a value-added component of the site. They don't take anythign away from anyone, because they are run in addition to the normal challenges.
I don't recall any negativity when some months ago we ran a challenge limited to those who had a positive ratio of comments made to comments received. I'm sure we'd all be reasonably happy with other challenges based on community controbutions. I don't understand this negativity against invitationals based on performance. I really don't.
And this is coming from a member who believes he's "good enough" to "deserve" to be in a Masters Challenge yet does not meet the past criteria for entry; I only have one ribbon.
R. |
Thank you Robert. My sentiments exactly! I don't even understand the backlash against the title 'Master'... It's just a freakin' word after all... |
|
|
|
03/25/2006 11:47:03 AM · #100 |
It's not even called a Masters' Challenge anymore, as the poll states, it's an invitational challenge. It's only the name of the thread which is called Masters', and the thread wasnt created by an admin or SC member.
|
|
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: 08/03/2025 02:22:30 PM EDT.
