| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/15/2009 12:01:38 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by BeeCee:
Originally posted by kashi:
This likely would have tanked here.
Got a 99.7 there.
That 'system' seems to like darker photos I think. |
4th highest rating! |
Might not be worth anything in reality - but I'll take it !
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 12:04:41 PM · #27 |
This just posted:
"5/15/2009 Due to a slashdot exposure, we are experiencing a much larger traffic to our small Webserver. There is a possibility that your photo request may not be handled as fast as it should be. Thanks!"
R. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 12:05:42 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by jotaga:
Leonardo da Vinci´s Monalisa got 28.8 |
98.3 out of 100.
Yeah - asthetic value my...
Later,
Tom
Message edited by author 2009-05-15 12:06:17. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 12:20:41 PM · #29 |
 82.6
 74.6 |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 12:31:13 PM · #30 |
Lol, my best rated shot here :-
7/100
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 12:46:17 PM · #31 |
97.2!! (I think it is my best image too!)
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 12:53:07 PM · #32 |
7.1984 here, 81.5 on Acquine
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 01:06:15 PM · #33 |
Heh, heh......
6.7937 here, Acquine-23.4
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 01:13:17 PM · #34 |
Guess the computer was hungry, this scored an 87 |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 02:52:43 PM · #35 |
This is the highest rated of my entries that I've found so far.
 ....97.1/100
This is the lowest I've found at 0/100!
 |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 02:58:00 PM · #36 |
Machines love monsters...
84.4 |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:04:52 PM · #37 |
...and machines hate children
(blue ribbon from Table Shot III by  colorcarnival)
15.4
Message edited by author 2009-05-15 15:05:36. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:19:04 PM · #38 |
Threw a few  Whiterook photos at it.
 36.5
 30.5
 51.8
 57.4
 25.0
Message edited by author 2009-05-15 15:20:04. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:24:31 PM · #39 |
Hey, do I actually win a brown ribbon for something? :)
Can anybody worst this with a DPC entry?
 DPC score = 6.26, Computer = 2.3
Wait a minute! The new brown!
 My worst DPC image = 4.96 Computer score = 0.8
Message edited by author 2009-05-15 15:26:30. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:27:47 PM · #40 |
did my highest rated photo from here:
and it scored:
Machine Prediction of Aesthetic Value
Score predicted by Acquine : 97.5 / 100 highly rated
Message edited by author 2009-05-15 15:28:29. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:35:33 PM · #41 |
Geeze, looking for some really bad scores, and this one comes up with an astonishing 73.1:
Got a 7.2 with this one:
R.
Message edited by author 2009-05-15 15:39:32. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:41:22 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
This is the lowest I've found at 0/100!
|
I ran that one through 'cuz I couldn't believe *0* and got 22.3 — did you type wrong or is the program being arbitrary?
R. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:44:17 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I ran that one through 'cuz I couldn't believe *0* and got 22.3 — did you type wrong or is the program being arbitrary?
R. |
I also got 22.3 out of it. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 03:52:57 PM · #44 |
If you are hunting for low, according to the two low ones I found, it doesn't like noisy/busy images. You can search those out. I can't quite figure out what it does like though. I figured highly NI'd images might do well and, in fact, the highest I can find of mine is an 89.6:
But other NI'd shots don't score high at all. So I don't know. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 04:13:16 PM · #45 |
Hates Woodies.
 (DPC: 7.05)
15.3
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 04:15:54 PM · #46 |
 scored 7.21 here, only 5.7/100 there. |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 04:17:02 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
This is the lowest I've found at 0/100!
|
I ran that one through 'cuz I couldn't believe *0* and got 22.3 — did you type wrong or is the program being arbitrary?
R. |
Hmmmmm, just did it again and got 22.3, but the first time I did get 0.
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 04:20:25 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
scored 7.21 here, only 5.7/100 there. |
Holy crap! Major machine *FAIL* |
|
|
|
05/15/2009 04:31:53 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
Hmmmmm, just did it again and got 22.3, but the first time I did get 0. |
Perhaps it's this:
Originally posted by acquine website:
5/15/2009 Due to a slashdot exposure, we are experiencing a much larger traffic to our small Webserver.
We had a bug earlier that concurrently-uploaded images were mixed up. We have fixed it. About 10% of earlier results were wrong. Sorry... |
|
|
|
|
05/15/2009 04:53:49 PM · #50 |
I guess my highest photos all suck.
 = 22.8
 = 16.1
 = 50
 = 27.9
|
|
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: 08/02/2025 06:25:54 PM EDT.
