| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/15/2003 11:55:30 AM · #1 |
Seems odd to me this demographic votes quite a bit lower than those of us 'with cameras', anyone have any takes on why/how this is?
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 11:56:53 AM · #2 |
Often that 'demographic' is actually one or two voters so its tough to draw any real conclusions on how they vote compared to those 'with cameras' which are typically in the hundreds
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 12:23:22 PM · #3 |
| Gordon-I think there are more than 1 or 2 voters without cameras that participate in the voting. I would imagine that their votes are strictly on what pleases their eyes which might not have to do with meeting the challenge or the technical aspects of the photo. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 12:25:05 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by sonnyh:
Gordon-I think there are more than 1 or 2 voters without cameras that participate in the voting. I would imagine that their votes are strictly on what pleases their eyes which might not have to do with meeting the challenge or the technical aspects of the photo. |
No big deal - that's what I do, too. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 12:41:20 PM · #5 |
The number of voters without cameras is relatively low, I believe. Also, when looking at results, for almost every picture I have noticed that had a lower score from this demographic, there is one that also had a higher score.
I would imagine this number is lower simply because most people without cameras aren't going to seek out sites that deal primarily with photography and spend a lot of time. Some of the voters, no cameras, may be film enthusiasts, who may know a lot more than some of us here, or people considering digital, but haven't taken that leap, yet.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 01:20:37 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by sonnyh:
Gordon-I think there are more than 1 or 2 voters without cameras that participate in the voting. I would imagine that their votes are strictly on what pleases their eyes which might not have to do with meeting the challenge or the technical aspects of the photo. |
Actually I do think there are only 1 or 2 voters without cameras, and this is borne out by the numbers. If you look at the scores broken out by 'voters without cameras' they indicate that the number of votes in each of those averages is very small. Maybe 3 but not many more than that. The values after the decimal point on those scores are almost always simple fractional values - only possible with a very small voting sample size, or extremely consistant opinions. My bet is on the former rather than the later.
Message edited by author 2003-10-15 13:21:30.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 01:36:00 PM · #7 |
the voters with out cameras could be the significant other, family member, friend or relative of one of the photographers here at DPC.
I just hope they are honest and not here just to bump up the score for 1 particular image.
James
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 02:08:48 PM · #8 |
I admit it...I am one of the voters without a camera. And I will also admit that my brother is the reason I found this site. However, to keep things clean (and to make it more fun for myself), he usually doesn't tell me which shot is his until AFTER I have already voted. In fact, I enjoy the challenge of trying to pick his shot out from the gallery (it's not always easy but I did get it right on first try once! Woo Hoo for me! LOL!).
Personally, my votes are based on what I find appealing in the shot, not so much on what the photographer might have gone through to get it. No, I don't know technical aspects of photography any more than I know how to sculpt, but I think I can give you a pretty fair representation of what the general public might like (or dislike), and if you're a serious photographer interested in maybe one day selling your product, isn't that what you want to know? To this end, when I do comment, I try to make them fair and impartial and as constructive as possible.
I think it's rather unfair to generalize that just because we don't take pictures ourselves that those of us without cameras know nothing of art. If that were the case, then there would be very few people qualified to like or dislike a movie or a book or a painting or a sculpture or....
Pidd |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 02:09:23 PM · #9 |
gordon's right.
alot of experience with this phenomenon bears out this theory.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 02:32:03 PM · #10 |
I particularly welcome the non-camera users votes. They are usually less hung up about how a shot was taken, or what equipment was used. They also tend to care less about picky technical issues like perfect exposure or slightly out of focus regions.
They vote on if the image actually looks good or not. There is a danger that you get too close to how to make the photograph that you forget how to actually say if you like it or not. Some of the non-camera using/ non-entering voters have the advantage of not being encumbered with that baggage.
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 02:47:23 PM · #11 |
Perhaps it is unfair to think that the non-camera voters might be 'photographically ignorant'. I do believe that the implication is that they don't have a "digital" camera. They might otherwise, be quite photographically sophisticated in the uh, film media. (sorry)
I am a fairly accomplished film photographer and am still agonizing about going over to digital entirely. I probably wouldn't be in digital now except for a 'gift' (read: they were going to throw it away) of a Sony Mavica-81. So, I know better than to consider myself a digital photographer by any means- at least as far as image quality goes- the camera just can't do anything I'm used to doing with film. It sure ain't a medium format image, which is more my avenue.
Yes, I am shopping around. The new Canon EOS Rebel 300D is in my price range, barely, and I think I'll buy it. I like the idea of going into digital, for serious, at 6.3 MPix. Works for me.
Anyway, I digress... yes, there are purely "fans" of photography out there and I really like their feedback as well. I like any feedback, positive or negative. There are also some non-camera folks that are very serious photogs as well, so don't 'dis 'em too hard.
Message edited by author 2003-10-15 14:47:48. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 03:07:59 PM · #12 |
Any idea about another possible voting trend?
I had the impression that the average never raises but always goes down (and maybe it has a sensible raise at the very end after removing the invalid votes).
This morning I was close to 7 (risking an heart attack) and now I am at 6.0000 (incredible precision) having lost nearly one point since the start.
No intention to rant about it. Just asking if it is very common, as it looks like reading other threads, that the average just falls down during the voting week (with the exception of the final adjustment) and which could possibly be the reason. |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 03:11:03 PM · #13 |
it depends - some weeks my average has risen over 1 point too.
Your score is only meaningful at the end, not as its being added up anyway.
If you didn't look at all during the week and ended up with a 5, would
it be really different if at the start of the week you were at 4 and rose to 5, or were at 6 and fell to 5 ?
|
|
|
|
10/15/2003 03:15:09 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
it depends - some weeks my average has risen over 1 point too.
Your score is only meaningful at the end, not as its being added up anyway.
If you didn't look at all during the week and ended up with a 5, would
it be really different if at the start of the week you were at 4 and rose to 5, or were at 6 and fell to 5 ? |
Well, your philosophy is perfect, but the site traffic would lose from it!! =) |
|
|
|
10/15/2003 11:46:08 PM · #15 |
| Thanks everyone for your thoughts, everyone makes a lot of sense in this thread. |
|
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: 10/14/2025 07:10:14 AM EDT.
