| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/13/2006 11:34:56 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by ralphnev:
"who is the average DPC user to give me a mark" we are .. thats the challenge part of DPC, they are Joe&Jane Q. Public that have a inkling of what makes a good photograph |
In other words, a person who doesn't know the meaning of creatively correct exposure, and who is incapable of ignoring the subject and voting for the composition? I generally don't care to know what they think about my images; forget about the gradation. :)
In any case, the Joe&Jane's vote is very likely to be skewed either towards 10 (if the image "wows" them), or to 4/5 (if the image doesn't). They are afraid to give marks lower than 4/5 (unless they think that the image doesn't fit the challenge) because they are not sure of themselves. My idea is to simplify this: "wow" or "not wow". This is a lot simpler to understand for Joe&Jane, doesn't require them to come up with silly marking scheme. Yay or nay. The point is - this is what is happenning anyways, the way I see it.
Originally posted by ralphnev:
certainly you can appeal to them look at the repeat ribbon winners they are GOOD, they obviously have a clue what is required .. |
IMO, most repeat ribbon winners are shooting mediocre, boring (but technically perfect) images. They don't inspire me even one bit. The only two things that differs them from the average Joe's pictures is (1) the understanding of what subject matter wows the masses, and (2) technical excellency. They are businessmen and skilled craftsmen, and they are not afraid to say it aloud: they call the general masses their "clients". :) |
|
|
|
07/13/2006 11:39:28 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by agenkin:
IMO, most repeat ribbon winners are shooting mediocre, boring (but technically perfect) images. They don't inspire me even one bit. The only two things that differs them from the average Joe's pictures is (1) the understanding of what subject matter wows the masses, and (2) technical excellency. They are businessmen and skilled craftsmen, and they are not afraid to say it aloud: they call the general masses their "clients". :) |
One thing I like to do at the ends of challenges is to look at the last few pages of entries and see what types of things are there that, while not appealing to the clients/masses, do inspire me. |
|
|
|
07/13/2006 11:43:00 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by klstover:
Nobody is forcing anyone to stick around. If people don't care about what the voters here at DPC think, they can take their image elsewhere. |
Lordy girl, you're average vote cast is so high, I could care less what you actually THINK about it. ;)
Just kidding.
I don't think anyone said that though, but we're generally a community of photographers, not voters vs. photographers. The point of the site is learning. Many times, people who come in with these rigid ideas usually give up on them as soon as they actually start entering challenges instead of just handing out barely educated votes.
Usually, a person with some knowledge is more dangerous than a person with none at all.
Consider a gossip with only half the information about you, and only the parts that look bad. Would you trust them to "vote" on you as a person.
The voting scale here is as much of a learning tool on the giving end as the recieving end. The commenting tool is much more of a learning mechanism. Giving full critiques can be enlightening for both the giver, and the reciever.
It's when people start using these tools for purposes other than what the site was founded on that things get ugly. Everything you do on this site, posting, submitting, voting, commenting, participating... everything should have the same end purpose. Learning.
We're all here to learn... What do I have a to learn from a person who thinks that the average vote should be 3?
|
|
|
|
07/14/2006 12:00:24 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by klstover:
Nobody is forcing anyone to stick around. If people don't care about what the voters here at DPC think, they can take their image elsewhere. |
I don't think anyone said that though, |
I guess to clarify, I should say that I was responding to a general idea, not anything that was specifically said. It is the general idea that I notice, and am saddened by, that some people's opinions are less important.
I mean, sure - if my style of photography is 100% different from yours, and you leave a critical comment on my entry, I may be inclined to take it to heart less than if it had come from someone who had a style like mine. But am I going to go up in arms about the fact that you can't or shouldn't vote the way you did? No.
And I also do understand that some people just... well, there are those out there who do not understand what voting fairly means. And that isn't right.
But to think that everyone should conform to a certain standard of voting... I'm not sure that's right, ether.
I agree totally with what you said about learning. One awesome - frustrating, sure, but still awesome - part of participating here, for me, is learning how other people view the world, and photography, differently.
edit: I'm probably not going to be paying much attention to this thread from now on so if anybody would like me to see/respond to something, PM me.
Message edited by author 2006-07-14 00:30:19. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 12:45:52 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by Beetle:
As to your voting an average of 3 - if you think we are THAT useless, what could you possibly gain from being here? |
I've voted in 3 challenges and I cast a vote for every photo in them. Two of the challenges were stationery/stationary. While I don't think anyone here is useless, a lot of people submitted photos of immobile objects to the office supplies challenge and I voted a lot of 1's accordingly.
I'm also willing to admit that before I started reading the forums, I didn't realize the heart rending anguish people apparently go through when they submit their shot for public review and don't get the level of kudos they obviously feel entitled to. Having been made aware, I up'd my votes a couple points across the board just to keep the shitty pm's out of my inbox.
I am sure once the current challenges close my average will rise.
What I could possibly gain from being here is some tips into taking better photos. I have a slightly above average (by your scale) score on my first submission which is nice, but I only have 1 comment out of 100+ votes so that is a bit of a bummer. Still, the site is interesting and there are some true artists here. Typical bitchy WWW forums notwithstanding, it's a nice place.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2006 12:49:31 AM · #31 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
a lot of people submitted photos of immobile objects to the office supplies challenge and I voted a lot of 1's accordingly. |
Your office must be very different to mine...... most of the things in my office ARE in fact immobile - and I'm glad I don't have to chase my gear around the room. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 12:59:37 AM · #32 |
Originally posted by Beetle:
Originally posted by routerguy666:
a lot of people submitted photos of immobile objects to the office supplies challenge and I voted a lot of 1's accordingly. |
Your office must be very different to mine...... most of the things in my office ARE in fact immobile - and I'm glad I don't have to chase my gear around the room. |
By office supplies I meant stationery. Grats, you get a 10 for pedantry. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 01:03:04 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Originally posted by agenkin:
All voting scales that I've seen here are stupid (and, yes, yours is far from perfect too). But most people are voting without any system at all. |
Frankly though, Hideo, how in the world do you fully judge focus on a 640p image? And how do you judge focus but by intent and effectiveness? You left a comment on my current entry judging focus 1/2, yet in your comments you spoke almost exclusively on what I wanted you to see. Seems to me my focus achieved the desired effect, but you're so focused on the numbers you can't see the forest for the trees.
Bah. |
"FOCUS will take things into account things like blur both intentional and unintentional, sharpness, depth of field, and the use of all those things. Generally if you get a 0 in focus, it means there was no area in your photo that was 100% in focus OR that the main subject is not entirely in focus. If you get a 1 it means the main subject is in focus, the entire image is in focus, or possibly that focus was intentionally (and obviously) avoided. A 2 simply means your focus was perfect in every way for me. Generally you will get a 2 if the main subject is exceptionally sharp, not just basically "in focus", meaning that if you view your image at original resolution, it is probably still sharp. "text
-Hideo
Message edited by author 2006-07-14 01:16:17. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 01:26:05 AM · #34 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I've voted in 3 challenges and I cast a vote for every photo in them. Two of the challenges were stationery/stationary. |
This is a rather interesting comment, particularly when we consider that the total number of entries for the "stationery/stationary" challenges consisted of some 403 entries I believe... Guess I best go back and find that elusive challenge of 3 entries. Too bad I didn't notice it before the challenge ended... I might have had a chance.
Originally posted by routerguy666:
While I don't think anyone here is useless, a lot of people submitted photos of immobile objects to the office supplies challenge and I voted a lot of 1's accordingly . |
The mere fact that stationery is stationary ought not be a reason for it falling within the realm of a DNMC. While I do agree that not adhering to the challenge criteria is indeed an issue of consideration, I am not of the opinion that it warrants a score of 1.
Originally posted by routerguy666:
I'm also willing to admit that before I started reading the forums, I didn't realize the heart rending anguish people apparently go through when they submit their shot for public review and don't get the level of kudos they obviously feel entitled to. Having been made aware, I up'd my votes a couple points across the board just to keep the shitty pm's out of my inbox. |
There is nothing I find more admirable than a person who stands by their conviction. Nobody is asking you to change your votes to soothe bruised egos. Rather, what is being suggested to you is that your scores would tend to indicate that from your perspective, your ability to ferret out truly remarkable images far exceeds that of the general populace in DPC. Considering that by you readily admit to being a "Rank amateur", it does make one wonder just how severe your judgement will become once you have garnered the requisite knowledge.
Originally posted by routerguy666:
... I have a slightly above average (by your scale) score on my first submission which is nice, but I only have 1 comment out of 100+ votes so that is a bit of a bummer. Still, the site is interesting and there are some true artists here. Typical bitchy WWW forums notwithstanding, it's a nice place. |
Your slightly above average is certainly not by Beetle's scale, but rather that of the general DPC population. If indeed you do find that there are "some true artists here", I would be curious as to the scores these glorious few managed to garner from you.
I truly am sorry you find the forums "bitchy", but my general perception of life is that one essentially reaps what one sows. As my dear departed father used to say: "It truly isn't the best of ideas to spit into the wind".
Do stick around with us, enjoy the venue, the people and learn along with us.
Ray
edited for typos and the like.
Message edited by author 2006-07-14 01:43:19. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 01:57:26 AM · #35 |
One of them hasn't closed yet, genius.
Thanks for the warm welcome. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 02:41:25 AM · #36 |
Etiquette and decorum dictate that...Some things are best left unsaid.
Ray
Message edited by author 2006-07-14 02:52:21. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 04:58:03 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by redsunphotography:
I've recently taken some harsh criticism on my voting scale.
...Furthermore, I have less than 600 votes. That is hardly a good number to decide I am a "jerk" as I have been called by some. |
Vote how you want to - it is your prerogative.
Ignore the people who call you a jerk - people who resort to name calling reveal an immaturity and inability to express their opinion that only reflects badly on themselves.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2006 08:47:25 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by agenkin:
In other words, a person who doesn't know the meaning of creatively correct exposure, and who is incapable of ignoring the subject and voting for the composition? I generally don't care to know what they think about my images; forget about the gradation. :) ... |
agenkin, I don't know the meaning of "creatively correct exposure". Would you please explain what that means.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2006 08:53:31 AM · #39 |
Hideo, thanks for putting so much thought into your voting.
My only advice would be: 1) to use the whole scale. This means that your voting should have some one's and some ten's in it; and 2) don't skip over entries. If you pass over the shots that you feel don't meet the topic, you are helping them to score higher.
Message edited by author 2006-07-14 08:53:46.
|
|
|
|
07/14/2006 10:50:07 AM · #40 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Originally posted by agenkin:
In other words, a person who doesn't know the meaning of creatively correct exposure, and who is incapable of ignoring the subject and voting for the composition? I generally don't care to know what they think about my images; forget about the gradation. :) ... |
agenkin, I don't know the meaning of "creatively correct exposure". Would you please explain what that means. |
I mean by this the ability to differentiate between the consquences of choosing one of the many combinations of technically correct exposures (i.e. all possible combinations (aperture, shutter speed, ISO) that deliver the same amount of light to the sensor) from the point of view of creative intent of a photograph. |
|
|
|
07/14/2006 11:00:12 AM · #41 |
Everyone should vote how they like to vote.
I was amused to see that my average vote is very, very close to 5.5. Not through any planning - just turned out that way!
I'm really responding to some of the comments about winners being lousy and how the masses don't appreciate "art."
I'd say the winners have produced some stunning photos. I'd also say the winners have produced some incredibly creative photos.
And yes, the winners have produced some photos that look like 10 million other photos. But ya know why they look like so many others? Because so many people like the way those photos look!
The one thing I'd recommend that everyone keep in mind is this: constructive criticism helps you get better, while uncritical praise makes you feel good. As I used to tell a friend of mine whom I was teaching to rockclimb: if you never fall, you never improve.
It's up to each of us to decide which one we prefer. But know that you'll get some of each if you participate here.
For me, I'd much rather get RedSun's scale with a comment why he voted that way than uncommented-on praise.
And judging from my current entries, I'm not getting much of the latter. :)
One last thought: several people in this thread have looked at another's average vote given and then said "if you think your average should be that low ..."
How did the votes given turn into a presumption about the votes that should've been given?
And if all the photos are bad, why should the average be 5.5? If all of the photos are good, why should the average be 5.5? We can all suck or excel; the average need not be the middle of the scale on any individual challenge.
Edited for grammar, etc.
Message edited by author 2006-07-14 11:23:45. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/06/2026 01:07:53 PM EDT.
