| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/18/2007 11:14:50 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Originally posted by hopper:
forum rule #11 |
I don't believe I was hostile. Can I draw your attention to the following voting rule:
You may not:
-offer or cast biased votes for any other user
I believe voting an image down because it is not "original" is being biased. |
I believe that "biased" in this case refers to voting higher (or lower) on entries where the voter knows the entrant. e.g. the whole Rikki scandal, WPL etc.
Trying to extend the definition of "biased" further than that is attempting to regulate voter opinion, which is impossible. Who's going to regulate that opinion? You? the SC?, D&L? At that point, why even have votes? Just submit entries and the committee will decide the winner.
Message edited by author 2007-04-18 11:16:04. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:21:43 AM · #27 |
Hey.. I said that the image wasn't original, because really, it wasn't.
Someone took a picture of the same thing that 'cioncidentally' ribboned not long ago.
I didn't vote it down because of that, but I did comment on it.
I'm aware that people shot at that location before that photo ribboned, but creativity is part of shooting as well. It isnt just the relevence and quality of the image. Take your own shots, don't mimic them..
I never said it was a bad image either, but I'm sure it would've scored a bit higher if it was at a location not so popular as this one? Or even from a different angle. It's like.. An exact replica of the photo that ribboned.
That was my issue. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:23:42 AM · #28 |
I'm really surprised at MK reaction. A couple of the voters assumed that the photo was from the photographer that won the Spinning entry. They seemed a bit harsh in the comments. We all know what "assume" means. When I vote I don't vote on what I like, I look the technical aspect of the photo. A photo might be of a subjust I don't like but I have to look past my "bias" and vote on how well the subject was done. I have seen so many Northern Lights shots, the silver statue in Iceland, the Grand Canyon, flowers, macros etc but I never assume they are done by the same persons, because just when I guess who did it, its not them. Voters need to be more open minded. I really thought this was a teaching site...maybe I assumed wrong.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:25:34 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Hey.. I said that the image wasn't original, because really, it wasn't.
Someone took a picture of the same thing that 'cioncidentally' ribboned not long ago.
I didn't vote it down because of that, but I did comment on it.
I'm aware that people shot at that location before that photo ribboned, but creativity is part of shooting as well. It isnt just the relevence and quality of the image. Take your own shots, don't mimic them..
I never said it was a bad image either, but I'm sure it would've scored a bit higher if it was at a location not so popular as this one? Or even from a different angle. It's like.. An exact replica of the photo that ribboned.
That was my issue. |
The photo wasn't an exact replica.
"take your own shots"....I do believe they did.
Message edited by author 2007-04-18 11:27:37.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:28:14 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Hey.. I said that the image wasn't original, because really, it wasn't.
Take your own shots, don't mimic them..
Or even from a different angle. It's like.. An exact replica of the photo that ribboned.
|
 
A vast amount of photos on this site are "mimic"ed, it's nearly impossible to shoot something that hasn't been done before, somewhere. Then again, "mimic"ed or not, each shot is unique because of lighting - that's never the same.
I'm curious. What "different angle" would you use to take a photo at this location? p.s. - good luck with the trees! :) |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:32:14 AM · #31 |
Rofl.. Way to get particular about it.
I'm pretty sure everyone knows in the back of their mind that this person was making a futile attempt at ribboning using the location of someone else's ribbon.
As i said before.. Even shooting from a different area or angle would've given it SOMETHING.
If I recall correctly.. I rated the image a seven.
I didn't rank it down because of it not being original, but in all reality, it isn't original.
Simple thing: If you're afraid of your image 'not being original' according to the voters, than don't shoot in such a popular location!
What the hell do you expect?
XD |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:34:51 AM · #32 |
I read this thread somewhat guiltily because I have a tendency to take photographs of my favorite places (Malibu Pier) and my favorite subjects (my children and my cat Sammy)...over and over again.
To my surprise, I have yet to receive any unrewarding or negative comments regarding the repetitiveness of my subject matters...and I've been waiting for one.
I can only conclude that my photos are so creatively dull and boring that no one has noticed OR I try to take photos with different qualities (lighting / angle /sky patterns etc.) albeit the same subject matter.
In my brief experience, DPC voters will reward technical quality and artistic impression independent of original subject matter (I love those Northern Lights!!!). The key is to make your favorite subject...a DPC voter favorite subject too.
Your photo is so close on the heels of a ribbon winner. The timing is unfortunate for your lovely photo, but the lesson here is to learn what is an original experience for you as a photographer...and not worry about others. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:35:10 AM · #33 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
I really thought this was a teaching site...maybe I assumed wrong. |
Hey great post I agree with the whole thing....
and for  KarenNfld that was a awesome photo you took.
I also got kind of the same comment on one of my photos I entered from an older challenge, and like you I never saw the previous challenge picture. The person left a comment and gave me a one because they felt I copied the previous challenge photo. Its not fair especially if its a landmark or something known to people that you photograph outside.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:36:49 AM · #34 |
I don't mean to be unfair to  k4ffy as it is a nice image, but  pixelstate's ribboner is far better.
If I were in London in the night and saw the wheel from this angle, sure I would try and capture an image like pixelstates and compare my accomplishment with his. This is a good way to learn for many people.
If there happened to be a "Nightshot" challenge on at the time I shot my "Replica", then yes I would enter it - why not?
Too many people make nasty or harsh comments for the wrong reasons. It puts me off entering challenges a little as it does wind me up. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:37:17 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
I'm really surprised at MK reaction. A couple of the voters assumed that the photo was from the photographer that won the Spinning entry. They seemed a bit harsh in the comments. We all know what "assume" means. |
I don't see any comments that assume that it's the same photographer, just that it's basically the same image.
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
When I vote I don't vote on what I like, I look the technical aspect of the photo. A photo might be of a subjust I don't like but I have to look past my "bias" and vote on how well the subject was done. |
That's fine if that's how you want to vote. That doesn't mean it's the only correct way, though. I don't really happen to think that viewing images is as mechanical as simply judging technical merit.
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
I have seen so many Northern Lights shots, the silver statue in Iceland, the Grand Canyon, flowers, macros etc but I never assume they are done by the same persons, because just when I guess who did it, its not them. Voters need to be more open minded. |
It doesn't really matter who did it. The point was that this image brought nothing new for the viewers who judged it. It's not the fault of the photographer as he apparently didn't know and photographing things that have been done before certainly isn't off limits but it's also not the fault of the voters. Having seen a very similar image just recently, this one lacked impact. They noted that. Why do we make claims that other people need to be more open-minded so that their opinions fall closer in line with our own?
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
I really thought this was a teaching site...maybe I assumed wrong. |
This is first and foremost a competition site. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:39:34 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Rofl.. Way to get particular about it.
I'm pretty sure everyone knows in the back of their mind that this person was making a futile attempt at ribboning using the location of someone else's ribbon.
As i said before.. Even shooting from a different area or angle would've given it SOMETHING.
If I recall correctly.. I rated the image a seven.
I didn't rank it down because of it not being original, but in all reality, it isn't original.
Simple thing: If you're afraid of your image 'not being original' according to the voters, than don't shoot in such a popular location!
What the hell do you expect?
XD |
you're amazing! You should read her comment at the top of this thread. What I do expect is that someone would vote on my ability of being a photography/editor. I expect that voter vote on the technical aspect of my photograph. I don't want comments saying that my title doesn't match or why didn't I photography 2 ducks instead of 1. I think that the majority of the photos that when are technically sound, that's why they win, not because of the subject all by its self.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:39:45 AM · #37 |
It isn't a bad photo at all.
It's quite good.
It's just.. Don't complain about those comments when shooting at a popular location. Either accept them, or ignore them.
It's the same way with that giant.. Ferris wheel? With the "R" in the middle.. When several people photograph the same thing, they aren't all going to come out with award-winning scores.
When you shoot at a popular location, you're going to get questioned about originality. It's a giving.
It's not a bad image. I quite like it. There are some things about it I like more than the photo that ribboned. Perhaps it was just a bit soon to try one of these pictures.
In short: There isn't much to complain about here. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:39:47 AM · #38 |
Originally posted by mk:
The point of the challenges is to enter a photo that the majority of people like better than any other photo. Nowhere does it say why they have to like it. The winner isn't just the most technically perfect shot in the bunch - it's the photo that most people liked the most for any reason.
When you see something new for the first time, or something you've seen a million times in a new way, it impacts you in a certain way. There's a little something extra. When you see it again, it's not as special (except in cases like the northern lights which I think always have some magical appeal). Once you've seen it, future viewings aren't apt to be as special, especially if they also lack the technical impact.
There's nothing wrong with voting something down because it lacks personal impact. There aren't any rules about how to vote and there's no requirement to vote solely on technical merit. Yes, everything has been done before but there are a million new ways to look at everything. The commenters are basically saying that, having seen practically the same image already, this one does nothing for them. Now the photographer knows why they got the votes they did. This subject, apparently, isn't one that consistently holds the same sort of magic that northern lights or librodo or the Oregon Coast do. So be it.
What's silly and childish is calling out commenters and directing folks to go look at the awful comments they've left so that they can be harangued in the forums, just because someone doesn't happen to agree with their opinion. |
Agree 100%.
Adding: Had this shot scored in the 4s, people would be screaming for people to say *why* they voted it low. And then people wonder why nobody says why.
This is why. Because if they're honest about it, they get attacked. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:44:57 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Rofl.. Way to get particular about it.
I'm pretty sure everyone knows in the back of their mind that this person was making a futile attempt at ribboning using the location of someone else's ribbon.
As i said before.. Even shooting from a different area or angle would've given it SOMETHING.
If I recall correctly.. I rated the image a seven.
I didn't rank it down because of it not being original, but in all reality, it isn't original.
Simple thing: If you're afraid of your image 'not being original' according to the voters, than don't shoot in such a popular location!
What the hell do you expect?
XD |
you're amazing! You should read her comment at the top of this thread. What I do expect is that someone would vote on my ability of being a photography/editor. I expect that voter vote on the technical aspect of my photograph. I don't want comments saying that my title doesn't match or why didn't I photography 2 ducks instead of 1. I think that the majority of the photos that when are technically sound, that's why they win, not because of the subject all by its self. |
That's hardly true in most cases. A technically sound photo without emotional impact will hardly ever win. There are exceptions, but they're rare. The majority of *only* technically sound photos fall into the middle of the pack in challenges, and it is those that give something *else* to the viewers at large that tend to place higher. Technicals are one part of photography, out of very many. Some voters consider technicals higher on their scale than others. Nobody is *wrong*. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:48:42 AM · #40 |
If this is "first and foremost" a competition site, why post tutorials on how to edit photos like the winners do? I think this is a teaching site, ALSO. I have learned plenty and feel that I'm getting better with my photography. But you are only voting on what you "like" then what are you learning?
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:50:16 AM · #41 |
Blargh..
No, nobody is wrong.
But I have strongly stated my opinion, and nothing will phase me from it.
Feel free to shoot at a popular location, go ahead and do it,
but do not post trash upon these forums complaining about the comments you receive!
This image was the photographer's highest rated image.
He should be plenty happy.
If you shoot at a popular location, expect comments like these!
It's simple!
Lmao..
Alright guys. Go ahead and get your scores by riding on other peoples past images. I'm done with it.
XD |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:51:08 AM · #42 |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:52:02 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Rofl.. Way to get particular about it.
I'm pretty sure everyone knows in the back of their mind that this person was making a futile attempt at ribboning using the location of someone else's ribbon.
As i said before.. Even shooting from a different area or angle would've given it SOMETHING.
If I recall correctly.. I rated the image a seven.
I didn't rank it down because of it not being original, but in all reality, it isn't original.
Simple thing: If you're afraid of your image 'not being original' according to the voters, than don't shoot in such a popular location!
What the hell do you expect?
XD |
you're amazing! You should read her comment at the top of this thread. What I do expect is that someone would vote on my ability of being a photography/editor. I expect that voter vote on the technical aspect of my photograph. I don't want comments saying that my title doesn't match or why didn't I photography 2 ducks instead of 1. I think that the majority of the photos that when are technically sound, that's why they win, not because of the subject all by its self. |
That's hardly true in most cases. A technically sound photo without emotional impact will hardly ever win. There are exceptions, but they're rare. The majority of *only* technically sound photos fall into the middle of the pack in challenges, and it is those that give something *else* to the viewers at large that tend to place higher. Technicals are one part of photography, out of very many. Some voters consider technicals higher on their scale than others. Nobody is *wrong*. |
I didn't say technially sound only photos always win its the subject also but not completely by itself. But please, don't fault a photographer because they want to photography a landmark or popular site that someone else has photographed, that's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:52:04 AM · #44 |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:54:36 AM · #45 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
If this is "first and foremost" a competition site, why post tutorials on how to edit photos like the winners do? I think this is a teaching site, ALSO. I have learned plenty and feel that I'm getting better with my photography. But you are only voting on what you "like" then what are you learning? |
First and foremost means primarily. It doesn't mean in totality. Obviously there are ALSO learning aspects to the site. But it's still a COMPETITION.
If you're only going to vote on technical merit, why bother taking a photo of anything inspiring? We could just sit in our rooms and take technically perfect photos of spoons. |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:54:45 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Blargh..
No, nobody is wrong.
But I have strongly stated my opinion, and nothing will phase me from it.
Feel free to shoot at a popular location, go ahead and do it,
but do not post trash upon these forums complaining about the comments you receive!
This image was the photographer's highest rated image.
He should be plenty happy.
If you shoot at a popular location, expect comments like these!
It's simple!
Lmao..
Alright guys. Go ahead and get your scores by riding on other peoples past images. I'm done with it.
XD |
I'm sorry but that's absurd that you are assuming that someone is riding on the coat tails of someone else and that they should expect the comments. No they shouldn't. Treat the photo as an individual photo, taken by an individual who got the chance to take it and didn't have alterior motive. You can't shoot the same photo twice, it just doesn't happen.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:55:55 AM · #47 |
Message edited by author 2007-04-18 11:58:22.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:56:03 AM · #48 |
Perhaps its a bit late for this, considering the way things are going in this thread, but in response to the OP, what we have demonstrated here is a common occurrence in marketing to a mass audience.
What wows people one week is considered mundane the next.
"Yes, that was pretty, now show me something new."
|
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:56:45 AM · #49 |
|
|
|
04/18/2007 11:59:50 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by Buckeye_Fan:
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:
Rofl.. Way to get particular about it.
I'm pretty sure everyone knows in the back of their mind that this person was making a futile attempt at ribboning using the location of someone else's ribbon.
As i said before.. Even shooting from a different area or angle would've given it SOMETHING.
If I recall correctly.. I rated the image a seven.
I didn't rank it down because of it not being original, but in all reality, it isn't original.
Simple thing: If you're afraid of your image 'not being original' according to the voters, than don't shoot in such a popular location!
What the hell do you expect?
XD |
you're amazing! You should read her comment at the top of this thread. What I do expect is that someone would vote on my ability of being a photography/editor. I expect that voter vote on the technical aspect of my photograph. I don't want comments saying that my title doesn't match or why didn't I photography 2 ducks instead of 1. I think that the majority of the photos that when are technically sound, that's why they win, not because of the subject all by its self. |
That's hardly true in most cases. A technically sound photo without emotional impact will hardly ever win. There are exceptions, but they're rare. The majority of *only* technically sound photos fall into the middle of the pack in challenges, and it is those that give something *else* to the viewers at large that tend to place higher. Technicals are one part of photography, out of very many. Some voters consider technicals higher on their scale than others. Nobody is *wrong*. |
I didn't say technially sound only photos always win its the subject also but not completely by itself. But please, don't fault a photographer because they want to photography a landmark or popular site that someone else has photographed, that's all I'm saying. |
Personally, I'll "fault" a photo I'm looking at for whatever reason I feel I must due to the impact it has on me at the time of viewing. That's *my* perogative. This is a competition, and if you, the photographer, cannot find some way to get me, the voter, to be grabbed by a photo above and beyond the 100s of other photos in the challenge, that is *your* fault (as a photographer, not your as in you personally), not mine.
What I am tired of around here is the whining period. If it isn't about people voting you low for whatever reason, it's about people not telling you why they voted low in the first place. A person can't win around here. You're shit if you do, and shit if you don't.
Enough already.. people can't even bitch about their *own* photos anymore, but seem to have to take up causes for other people that may or may not want it. The owner of the photo in the OP here should be the one to be outraged, if they wish to be (and I get the feeling they're pretty happy with the score, fuck.. I would be)... know what I'm saying?
Ai yi yi people.. either you want people to be honest, or you don't.. make up your mind. |
|
