| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/03/2003 04:29:02 AM · #1 |
I may state that I am a little dissapointed in the Shadows challenge quite alot and on that I dont mean the fact that my shot came last ! ( I knew I would place towards the back but didnt expect to come last ! )
I saw a thread on there last week about Anastacia ( spelling wrong i think - sorry ! ) Kiwiness's better half stating exactly what I am thinking here now. I saw some very good images that I gave a good mark and in my opinion were great but placed badly. One for instance was Jon Lucas's Carland Shot !
There were many shots that in my mind weren't even that shadowy really and yes my shot was very dark - was intended to some degree but perhaps darker than it should have been.
I am new here and still cant understand why some pictures that are clearly very good get scored badly, surely the shots in this challenge that weren't very good first of all should score better than the few shots in the challenge I didn't really deem to be a shadow show ( seeing as mine included a shadow to meet the challenge criteria ) secondly the not so great shots should get some more constructive criticism ( I have received a few comments of late just saying the likes of "wow great not much thought into this" ).
PS This is not me complaing I come last please understand this its just some of the voting is being complained about somewhat of late and it can be annoying as I like to see others do well too but only when merit derserves it !!! |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 04:44:27 AM · #2 |
It's always a tricky one Palendrone, but I for one found it got easier when I'd been here a little.
If you look at the balance of votes on any given photo you usually get one of the normal probability type "curves", the peak (if curve is unskewed) being around your average score.
In the case of your photo, for instance, there is the normal curve, if we ignore the 2 outlayers at 10 as there is a gap of 0's before them. Standard sort of feelings overall, with the peak lower than it might be. Overall, with a curve of that shape it has to be a function of people basically didn't like the photo much, sorry mate. However, it is not all lumped highest in the 1's and 2's, as I have seen in the past, and for last place in a competition it's not a bad score :)
Overall, and I mean photos in general, because so many people vote I think the score comes out pretty fair. I've been very disappointed in some of my scores, but looking back later, with more experience here, I can see the scores were about right.
As for the "why low scores and no comments?" That gets debated constantly, and I agree with you, it is a real shame. I think it may boil down to a lot of people not liking to say anything unless it is nice, and if they don't like a photo they are more likely to say nothing than say they hate it. Human nature. It's a shame though as it would help us lower scorers improve.
|
|
|
|
11/03/2003 04:58:51 AM · #3 |
| For what it's worth very dark or light images tend to do badly due to, in the main, monitor calibration. You can enter an image which is a great example of low-key photography and will receive many "too dark" comments from people. If you want to score well, appeal to the masses with a perfect exposure, if you want to shoot for yourself you'll have to take the flak. |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 05:06:13 AM · #4 |
Hi. I gave you a 5. Your picture had some technical problems but it did meet the challenge and I liked how you had it set up. The guy didn't look too scared. And it was dark.
I don't understand why people give 1's and 2's or even 3's for that matter unless the quality is really bad, and I mean reallllly bad. Some people take their voting responsibilities way too seriously. Most of the people that visit the forums are pretty ok though, and you can amuse yourself here for hours.
So, what Natator said. |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 07:40:12 AM · #5 |
Yeah cheers folks ! ;0)
I do understand where your coming from and I noticed this week how dark it actually was as I upgraded my monitor to a loverly Viewsonic VP171b from a crappy 5 years old 15" Monitor that produced awful colours.
pcody has summed up the bit I was generally a lil miffed about as I got 11 (1) Votes ! Now if I had of had 11 comments stating why when a photo met the challenge they deemed it worthy of a 1 then I would be more happy than placing in the top 30 ! Its constructive criticism that makes a the artist get better, merely just giving a one vote for a shot that does meet a challenge in all aspects is not what I thought this site is about and why I joined up.
I do also agree that the folks on the forums are the ones who dedicate alot of there time to helping others and leaving comments - Good on you folks :0) |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 08:07:58 AM · #6 |
I'll fess up, I gave your shot a 2 and here is why. The title was "Laughing in the face of death" yet the victim was neither laughing or terrified or anything really, just kind of like a smirky teenager saying, "Whoa dude, BIG KNIFE!" It was just way to dark for my taste personally though the shadow of his hand was very well defined, the one of the attacker was less defined and didn't really seem to pose a threat. Perhaps if the arm was half bent as if to strick out instead of stiff looking and it just doesn't, honestly, look that threatening to me overall. Maybe if you had someone dressed as death with the (I know I'm going to spell this wrong) scicle and the boy was was opening laughing at him and it was a bit lighter and not so grainy. Does that help?
I really like some of your other shots and hey, I'm only 2 slots above you myself. Not a bad place to be while learning.
Deannda
|
|
|
|
11/03/2003 11:38:01 AM · #7 |
Yeah now thats a great comment ! ;0)
thats the sort of spirit DPC needs and yeah I have had a comment or two from you in the past which I have genuinaly taken into account - At DPC everyone in my eyes is always learning and if your not then what ya doing here ! ! !
I personally think that its just a few people that probably spoil it now and again by leaving silly comments but overall there great - I even admire you fessing up that yuou gave it a 2 :) That takes real guts and I do admire that ( dosnt mean to say I want 2's tho :0P )
anyhow you all know what I mean, I just wanted to re-itterate nmy own view of this as others have stated but not to start a flaming thread like the one going on 2 weeks ago about someone getting 72 (1's)...
PS If you had to of worked my my two models for my shot you would have understood my dilemma - you ought to see the other disasterous shots I got of em both ... LOL !
One other thing that annoys me is some pictures that you think what the heck is it ? You have to read this huge long wided title to half understand the shot - when I was at art college the image had to represent itself and not the essay you put for a title, one example here and I dont mean to get ant anyone in particular but for the scince challenge I had a shot of a electric pylon and I got the commetn similar to " I dont understand what its got to do with science or technology " ? huh ! Electricity - Structure ! and its called "Edisons Skeleton" ! Which says to me that this person thinks I have not met the challenge and will knock a few marks off it ! perhaps im wrong but does this happen alot as everyone votes according to how they understood the challenge !
Anyhow thats the whole fun of it I know and will respect this artistci license we all have :0) Ill just try to be a little more creative from now on and get back on track with some interesting shots...
Thanks folks I feel much better now thats off my chest anyhow - Heres to more contests.
Message edited by author 2003-11-03 11:45:22. |
|
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: 08/05/2025 02:04:29 AM EDT.
