| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/12/2009 10:20:59 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by bcenu:
My "suggestion" was only posted to:-
a) try to deter people from boosting their own scores
b) deter the time wasters from bothering to upset people who are genuinely trying to benefit from this site.
c) not upset people |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I wasn't sure I wanted to be a part of something that people would go and slam you just to raise their votes or to be cruel. |
The problem is that youâre placing your stigma on low votes. Not all voters use the 1-10 scale the way that you (or the average voter) does.
An even bigger mistake is assuming that you know what votersâ motives are for their score. For some people a âone is just a oneâ not a slam or insult. And if theyâre were doing it enough to boost their own score theyâd be doing it enough to be caught by the vote scrubber.
Itâs not the responsibility of the voter or the site to be sure people arenât âupsetâ. Participant need to learn to listen to all of the voices of the choir without being insulted.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:30:41 PM · #52 |
Ok, I just wrote a long thought, and erased it all.
This is what I would like to see-- for votes at the 1 & 2 level, I'd like to see the average that voter gave in the challenge. If I received a 2, but the person gave, on average, a 5.8--something about my photo really bothered them. If they gave an average of 3.5, he/she was a very harsh voter.
For something that far out of range, I'd just really like to know why. |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:32:46 PM · #53 |
Hello, I too am a newbie to this site with 2 challenges under my belt.
I have one suggestion to offer.
Let someone smarter then I make a calculated guess at the number of bogus votes on average.
Then find that percentage and at the time of final calculation remove that percentage of votes from the high end and the low end of the scale.
I'm pretty sure some one will find a good reason why this is a bad idea, but its just like voting and art appreciation we all like different stuff.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:33:56 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by DJWoodward:
Itâs not the responsibility of the voter or the site to be sure people arenât âupsetâ. Participant need to learn to listen to all of the voices of the choir without being insulted. |
That's my whole point.
I'm fine with someone giving me a 1 but it's the voice I would like to hear giving some sort of explanation to avoid making the same mistake, or falling into the same trap again.
Just giving a 1 says nothing. |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:35:52 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
As a newcomer to the site, I'd like to see comments required on 1's and 2's. In my mind, if someone is averaging a high 5 or a low 6 in a challenge, and the receive some 1's and 2's, someone is abusing the system. If they are giving what seems to be the forerunner in the competition a 1 or a 2, what are they giving the so-so photos, or the ones that are completely out of focus and you can't tell what in the world they are photos? (I wasn't in the top tier, but people on the forums, who were averaging over 6 would announce when the 2's were being given out)
....
It's now my third challenge, and I'm getting a little thicker skinned. But I still can't help but wonder whether I'm getting slammed for a valid reason or not. I think it's cowardly to slam a person and not explain.
|
How is it abusing the system if you are voting based on your own views? Some people love and/or hate different genre's of photography. There are folks on DPC that will instantly vote ANY nude a 1. That's their choice, because they hate that genre. There are those who will likely vote all abstract photos lower. There are those who will vote all minimalist photos lower, all landscape photos lower..... ad nauseum. To say they are "abusing the system" is totally off the mark. Abuse of the system would be to vote everything but the photos from your friends a 1.
In regards to commenting when slammed- as has already been said, that would just reduce the range votes people use- instead of 1-10, the voters would vote X-10, the X being whatever threshold before a vote is required.
We can pick voting apart and complain infinitely. What it all comes down to is that any rules for voting or commenting defeat the purpose of both- forced voting controls the outcome and negates the point of voting. Forced commenting negates the idea that comments are supposed to contain the impact of a photo on somebody, their opinion, and should contain any thoughts that they have when voting or that the image draws from their mind. Perhaps it will force people to take more time, but people hardly ever respond to force with thought, but will eagerly choose resentment in its place.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:37:03 PM · #56 |
I find this whole thread eye opening--if nothing else, seeing that someone with an average vote received a 5.4 giving an average vote given of 3.8423
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:38:08 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Also....to everyone that has chimed in......look at your average vote given.....is it higher than your average vote received?
If not, then you're part of the problem that you perceive, and are unhappy about. |
My average Vote given is lower than received, but it is also warped by me only voting/commenting on some images in some of the challenges I have voted in recently. Due to a lack of tuime, i have commented/voted only on some of the lower images recently (giving feedback) and hence, my average has dipped below 5 (briefly)
Peoples average vote given around 5 is not a problem. People whose average vote given is well below 4 becomes a little suspicious. There was one person a while ago whose average vote given was below 3, and that is a major problem (i believe they didn't stick around) |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:43:41 PM · #58 |
As soon as I sent the message, it sounded sarcastic, but it wasn't meant that way--it really was an eye opener to see someone having an average votes given as 3.8423 receiving a 1 or a 2 from that person doesn't say as much as a 1 or a 2 from someone giving an average of 5.7
The problem is, when the low votes come in, you have no idea what they mean. |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:53:41 PM · #59 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
The problem is, when the low votes come in, you have no idea what they mean. |
Which is why I believe commenting is more important than sheer vote count. some people believe it is neccessary to vote the entire challenge to be fair. I think the votes even out. I usually vote 20-25%, and not all challenges. But I try to comment on everything that I give a 4 or less to, and many of the 5's. I have noticed on the challenges I give high averages to, I have a smaller comment ratio. The fantastic shots are already getting loads of comments. |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:56:42 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
I find this whole thread eye opening--if nothing else, seeing that someone with an average vote received a 5.4 giving an average vote given of 3.8423 |
Yes, but if they've cast 15,000 votes over a couple of years, then they're consistent, and what you do not understand is the method being used to ascertain the score.
That certainly doesn't make it wrong.
I'd bet the farm if you asked the person how they arrived at their average (assuming that it is someone with a long history here) I think you'd be surprised at what you'd learn.
Here's an excerpt from a previous thread from someone who I have come to greatly admire, if for no other reason that he is scrupulously honest, and really knows what he's looking for in an image.
"In the Single Tree challenge I have voted on 208 entries (if I vote at all on a challenge I always vote on 100% of the entries):
Score 10 = 1
Score 9 = 2
Score 8 = 2
Score 7 = 6
Score 6 = 0
Score 5 = 29
Score 4 = 0
Score 3 = 168
Score 2 = 0
Score 1 = 0
By my standards, that's a perfectly rational distribution, although if you're just looking at the end of this thread (and hopefully the end is near) then you'll have to flick back a few pages to see why I have no 4s and 6s.
I consider 168 (i.e. 81%) of the entries in that challenge to be of "no consequence", so they get my default score of 3. In spite of the OP's relentless determination to insist otherwise, the 'technicals' of those 168 photographs are entirely irrelevant. They all fell at the first hurdle; lack of consequence. You must bear in mind that I really do mean what I say in my profile biography ... I am not a photographer; I am not particularly interested in photography. I am interested only in photographs.
But I'm not saying that technical execution has no place at all for me. If a photograph does not fall at the first hurdle, then the quality of its rendering does become a factor in my reaction to it. 'Technical execution' does not mean superficial nonsense like sharpness of focus, lack of distractions, rule of thirds, 'wow' factor, and all that nauseating pap. It means that the nature and quality of the rendering is appropriate to the purpose. It can be blurry; it can be eccentrically lit or composed; it may have great void areas of dark or light; the focus may be uncertain or even absent entirely; the horizon can be wonky if that seems apt. Or it may be what the undiscriminating observer would unhesitatingly call technically 'flawless'. It all depends what fits the photographer's purpose."
I find this system to be brutally honest, full of integrity, and pretty damn incisive.
Truth be told, I don't have the guts, nor do I think I've got the skills and perceptions to vote in this manner.....I'm way too sappy, moody, and visceral.
I'd rather have this guy looking, and commenting, on my images than almost anyone I can think of.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 10:56:56 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by Lad:
Hello, I too am a newbie to this site with 2 challenges under my belt.
I have one suggestion to offer.
Let someone smarter then I make a calculated guess at the number of bogus votes on average.
Then find that percentage and at the time of final calculation remove that percentage of votes from the high end and the low end of the scale.
I'm pretty sure some one will find a good reason why this is a bad idea, but its just like voting and art appreciation we all like different stuff. |
That would be the "vote scrubber." |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:11:22 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
As soon as I sent the message, it sounded sarcastic, but it wasn't meant that way--it really was an eye opener to see someone having an average votes given as 3.8423 receiving a 1 or a 2 from that person doesn't say as much as a 1 or a 2 from someone giving an average of 5.7
The problem is, when the low votes come in, you have no idea what they mean. |
I'm gonna play devil's advocate here......let's say for discussion that 1s & 2s really and truly are unrealistic, and judging by the numer of 8+ scores there have been won here over the site's history, then the 9s & 10s are pretty unrealistic as well.
Let's take two challenge entries:  
Now these two entries scored 5.5 & 5.5481 which puts them dead-on in the middle of the scale, so by rights, they should be balanced as far as the ends of the scale, right?
Okay, so between the two, we have 0-1s, and 4-2s.....you guys see this coming, don'tcha?????
Yep! 2-10s & 10-9s!
This strikes me as HORRIBLY skewed! LOL!!!
After a while you realize when you look at the big picture, it is fair and equitable, and the odd votes here and there really don't mean much.
BUT......if you are going to grumble and want to put restrictions on the low votes, it HAS to apply to the high ones as well, or it really isn't fair.
FWIW, I would have easily voted both of those shots a 6, possibly even a 7, but for visceral reasons rather than on their merits as images that were quality and met the challenge........LOVE your kitty!....8>)
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:13:35 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by vawendy:
I find this whole thread eye opening--if nothing else, seeing that someone with an average vote received a 5.4 giving an average vote given of 3.8423 |
Yes, but if they've cast 15,000 votes over a couple of years, then they're consistent, and what you do not understand is the method being used to ascertain the score.
That certainly doesn't make it wrong.
I'd bet the farm if you asked the person how they arrived at their average (assuming that it is someone with a long history here) I think you'd be surprised at what you'd learn.
Here's an excerpt from a previous thread from someone who I have come to greatly admire, if for no other reason that he is scrupulously honest, and really knows what he's looking for in an image.
"In the Single Tree challenge I have voted on 208 entries (if I vote at all on a challenge I always vote on 100% of the entries):
Score 10 = 1
Score 9 = 2
Score 8 = 2
Score 7 = 6
Score 6 = 0
Score 5 = 29
Score 4 = 0
Score 3 = 168
Score 2 = 0
Score 1 = 0
By my standards, that's a perfectly rational distribution, although if you're just looking at the end of this thread (and hopefully the end is near) then you'll have to flick back a few pages to see why I have no 4s and 6s.
I consider 168 (i.e. 81%) of the entries in that challenge to be of "no consequence", so they get my default score of 3. In spite of the OP's relentless determination to insist otherwise, the 'technicals' of those 168 photographs are entirely irrelevant. They all fell at the first hurdle; lack of consequence. You must bear in mind that I really do mean what I say in my profile biography ... I am not a photographer; I am not particularly interested in photography. I am interested only in photographs.
But I'm not saying that technical execution has no place at all for me. If a photograph does not fall at the first hurdle, then the quality of its rendering does become a factor in my reaction to it. 'Technical execution' does not mean superficial nonsense like sharpness of focus, lack of distractions, rule of thirds, 'wow' factor, and all that nauseating pap. It means that the nature and quality of the rendering is appropriate to the purpose. It can be blurry; it can be eccentrically lit or composed; it may have great void areas of dark or light; the focus may be uncertain or even absent entirely; the horizon can be wonky if that seems apt. Or it may be what the undiscriminating observer would unhesitatingly call technically 'flawless'. It all depends what fits the photographer's purpose."
I find this system to be brutally honest, full of integrity, and pretty damn incisive.
Truth be told, I don't have the guts, nor do I think I've got the skills and perceptions to vote in this manner.....I'm way too sappy, moody, and visceral.
I'd rather have this guy looking, and commenting, on my images than almost anyone I can think of. |
I agree completely with you--It's a very rational vote. There were no 1's and 2's in there, either. I have no problem with a 3. When I receive them, I assume there's a reason. A 1 on the other hand says that your photo is the worst it can be--nothing else can be lower. It seems unreasonable in many cases (considering some of the other photos in that challenge) |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:14:51 PM · #64 |
oops, your comment snuck in while I was sending my post, I have to go back and read it!
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:21:23 PM · #65 |
| I'm still trying to figure out how that member decides the quality of "consequence". I've had some exchanges with him and he is reasonable in his approach. I'd just like to get the feedback when he leaves my image that 3, even if it's a copy and paste that the other 167 also got. Just to know my image didn't speak to him in any way. That's different than sucking. |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:21:50 PM · #66 |
Actually, in my two entries, it is a nice, bell shaped curve. In the current one, it doesn't seem to be. I didn't receive any 1's in the first two challenges. I've received a couple in this one. And perhaps it's because I really do want to improve that the 1's and 2's without comments bother me. They are obviously coming from someone with a strong opinion on my photo, and it seems like it could be so helpful knowing what caused that strong opinion.
By the way, your last train to clarksville is majorly cool (do I sound like my 13 year old?)
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:26:26 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Or you could continue to be snide, sarcastic, and denigrate their work. |
Come on man. There's enough senseless, unwarranted back patting on the site and a little sarcastic, denigration keeps things in balance. A little ying for the yang. |
You mean yang for the ying ;) |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:30:54 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Actually, in my two entries, it is a nice, bell shaped curve. In the current one, it doesn't seem to be. I didn't receive any 1's in the first two challenges. I've received a couple in this one. And perhaps it's because I really do want to improve that the 1's and 2's without comments bother me. They are obviously coming from someone with a strong opinion on my photo, and it seems like it could be so helpful knowing what caused that strong opinion.
By the way, your last train to clarksville is majorly cool (do I sound like my 13 year old?) |
Just the fact that your image evokes strong opinions means that you're hitting a mark.....maybe not the one you went for, but still getting the reaction.
After you do this for a while, and make yourself nuts worrying about the lesser things like some low votes, then you'll start to wonder what it is that you don't have that prevents you from getting solid higher scores all the time. It'll make you think you're average.
Then you'll get one of those shots that when you screen it up looks exactly like what it looked like in your mind's eye when you banged the shutter.....and it'll ALL be worthwhile 'cause your score will scream right into the stratosphere.
Heck, it took me two years to break 6 in a Free Study (They're always judged more harshly.....better selection, and ya had all month to do this right, dammit! LOL!!!
Thanks for the "Majorly Cool" vote on Last Train.....if you were another decade or so older, you'd know who did the song! LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:33:16 PM · #69 |
| I know the monkees!! (of course it was on re-runs...) |
|
|
|
02/12/2009 11:35:35 PM · #70 |
That's I'm here. I'm tired of taking "nice" pictures--I want to take it to the next level, but I have no idea how to do that. I sat outside of a gas station today, and had no clue how to make it interesting.
But anyway, I'll have to figure that out other night. good night all!
Message edited by author 2009-02-12 23:36:10. |
|
|
|
02/13/2009 12:05:05 AM · #71 |
[quote=NikonJeb]
BUT......if you are going to grumble and want to put restrictions on the low votes, it HAS to apply to the high ones as well, or it really isn't fair.
Keeping an open mind on this topic and yes, you have opened my eyes to several good points.
I understand what you are saying with the above quote but would like to mention that giving a random high vote does no damage to another's overall score whereas a low vote may influence, be it only marginally, the voter's score. That's my point in starting this thread.
I'm not advocating restictions on low votes but to help us wannabe's become like the cream here, maybe introduce a system so that a low vote (1 or 2) has some sort of reasoning behind it which, at the same, time might eliminate or deter others from trying to manipulate their own scores, or just be non interested participants.
Message edited by author 2009-02-13 00:07:29. |
|
|
|
02/13/2009 12:36:45 AM · #72 |
Originally posted by yospiff:
I'd just like to get the feedback when he leaves my image that 3, even if it's a copy and paste that the other 167 also got. Just to know my image didn't speak to him in any way. That's different than sucking. |
If your photo doesn't produce a reaction from a particular viewer than it's safe to say it didn't speak to them at the very least. If your photo doesn't produce a reaction from anyone than it's safe to assume it sucked regardless of its score/placing.
|
|
|
|
02/13/2009 12:47:52 AM · #73 |
Originally posted by yanko:
If your photo doesn't produce a reaction from anyone than it's safe to assume it sucked regardless of its score/placing. |
I can't argue with that logic. Some of my best entries are ones that scored low but got fantastic reactions. |
|
|
|
02/13/2009 01:05:38 AM · #74 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by olbol:
Some photographers post complete rubbish just for the hell of it. I've just gone through 95% of the apple challenge with some real time wasters posing for participants. Why should I waste my time on elaborating when they obviously don't give a damn on trying to make at least a stab at doing a half-decent pic? |
What may be complete rubbish just for the hell of it to YOU, may be an honest effort from a complete beginner that really doesn't know much better. |
Rubbish is rubbish.
It does not matter what photographer did or what his/her intentions were. If you are voting on a photo that is presented to you, you just vote on it. And should not based vote on other things like who the photographer is, how he got the photo, is he a beginner etc etc. (or he really tried etc etc).
If voter thinks a photo deserves 1 he shall vote 1 on it.
A beginner would benefit a lot from correct judgment of photo rather than someone feeding him a lie (something like its a great or so so when in reality its a garbage).
Honesty is much more important than you think .
|
|
|
|
02/13/2009 01:15:52 AM · #75 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by olbol:
Some photographers post complete rubbish just for the hell of it. I've just gone through 95% of the apple challenge with some real time wasters posing for participants. Why should I waste my time on elaborating when they obviously don't give a damn on trying to make at least a stab at doing a half-decent pic? |
What may be complete rubbish just for the hell of it to YOU, may be an honest effort from a complete beginner that really doesn't know much better. |
Rubbish is rubbish.
It does not matter what photographer did or what his/her intentions were. If you are voting on a photo that is presented to you, you just vote on it. And should not based vote on other things like who the photographer is, how he got the photo, is he a beginner etc etc. (or he really tried etc etc).
If voter thinks a photo deserves 1 he shall vote 1 on it.
A beginner would benefit a lot from correct judgment of photo rather than someone feeding him a lie (something like its a great or so so when in reality its a garbage).
Honesty is much more important than you think . |
You've not read what I was responding to. I wasn't responding to voting, I was responding to considering it a waste of time based on deciding, without consideration, that the person submitting it was doing so without any effort whatsoever.
I vote very honestly and I, unlike many, tend to leave comments on the votes of 1 - 3 that I make. Not all of them, certainly, but enough.
In the future, please try to comprehend what I'm replying to. |
|
