| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/04/2006 09:44:33 PM · #51 |
Saj-
I was on of your "it looks like you color shifted this" comments. I wasn't in anyway meaning that you were a fraud or a cheat, or even that that was a bad thing. The blue ribbon winner was clearly 'color shifted' in that Doc changed the color temp in his raw conversion.
I was merely making the observation that to me it looked like a photo that should be white, but had been changed to a purplish hue. And I gave it a 5, initially, then bumped it to a 6. Not because of the color, but just because it didn't wow me that much. |
|
|
|
10/04/2006 09:55:46 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by margiemu:
I was merely making the observation that to me it looked like a photo that should be white, but had been changed to a purplish hue. |
While I tend to agree about the recent DNMC issue discussed in this thread, I wouldn't blame those who suspected that your snake entry was colour-shifted either. Why? On closer clook, the snake does appear to have a weird hue, as if colour was indeed shifted or saturation adjusted. Look around the snake's eyes and scales - there is an out of place tint of tangerine, which stood out awkwardly compared to the rest of the photo. Also, you choice of a purplish background is your biggest mistake - it lends to that overall feeling that the photo was indeed colour shifted, and worse, in a bad way. Hope this helps at least on that snake photo.
p/s: I did not vote on the purple challenge.
crayon
Message edited by author 2006-10-04 21:56:12. |
|
|
|
10/04/2006 10:18:20 PM · #53 |
| I'm not too worried about getting low scores. After reviewing all of our peer's photos, I figure the bad ratings come from the people that turn in horrendously bad or unimaginative shots ;) So, if they think THEIR photos are good, I'm ecstatic that they don't like mine ;) |
|
|
|
10/04/2006 10:41:56 PM · #54 |
I look at this comment made by the OP: " expect a 4.2 and and bottom 5%. "... and wonder what the fuss is all about.
SAJ, by your own admission you clearly indicate that this image will not fare well. When you consider the positive side of the "Bell Curve" your photo garnered, I truly wonder what your complaint is.
Lastly, you accuse others of "Making Suppositions" ...by generating your own unsubstantiated accusations... Surely you can see the irony of this situation.
I for one like to deal with facts, and so far, I have seen nothing that would support your contention in this instance, nor have I seen anything to support the belief that Trolls are running amok in DPC land.
Just a thought
Ray |
|
|
|
10/04/2006 11:07:54 PM · #55 |
After seeing enough of these threads it's time to reply/rant. From the original poster:
There is a growing tendency of not taking photographer's entries on good faith.
But there has always been a strong tendency to not take votes on good faith. I didn't see a single comment saying they gave you a 1 because of DNMC. Why assume that's the reason?
I expect a 4.2 and and bottom 5%.
So why are you unhappy that your photo scored 5.07 and 47th percentile? And why aren't you raging against those 4 people who gave it a 9? They're farther off your own estimate than those who voted 1.
Almost every photo on this site has at least a few very low votes and a few very high votes. People are always complaining that those who voted low must be idiots or trolls out to boost their own score by scoring others lower. Funny how now one ever complains about the outliers on the high end, though.
In the end, only one number really matters, and that's your percentile rank in the challenge. Your purple snake (which you didn't even like that much) was almost exactly in the middle, on a web site with competition from around the world. Something to be happy about, if you ask me.
Message edited by author 2006-10-04 23:08:59. |
|
|
|
10/05/2006 03:27:29 AM · #56 |
Assumptions are made only in the absence of knowledge. Both your assumption of why they gave the '1' vote and your expression of the voter's assumption it was color-shifted.
Taking this 'on faith' can't work. Taking it 'on faith' would require the voters to vote on it from your perspective -- without knowing what that perspective is. By the same taking the voter's 'on faith' would require you to view their vote from their perspective -- without knowing what that perspective is. When faced with these unknowns, both parties assume some knowledge to explain it from 'their own perspective.'
The only real solution to this is education. Many simply do not know there are other ways to shift the color than in PS. Educating the voters is the only viable solution. Explain how the shot was done, make them understand -- but so few photogs even fill in the details sections there is rarely an increase in understanding. Education is not a quick fix by any means, and has to fight the inertia of accumulated assumptions to have any effect -- but it is the only thing that is going make any lasting change for the better.
David
|
|
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: 09/01/2025 05:47:01 PM EDT.
