| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/13/2009 04:14:06 AM · #51 |
 scarbrd Dealing with as in having a different opinion with? I am really against any one starting to vote in a negative way, When I look at a picture, I intend first to have a neutral feeling, keep my score average 5-6 and take it from there, 7 ..8 .. 10 .. maybe couple of 1,2,3 but this is rarely done. He might be the best person in the world, I don't have anything against him in person, but I simply don't agree ..
yanko Reading this from you really surprises me, this is not National Geography yet we see wild life photos, This is not commercial/marketing agency yet we see tons of pictures under this theme .. photography is photography, including stocks .. or pictures that doesn't have a background, nothing against posting it here!! You really don't have a point.
If you say it Lacks the context, this is your opinion, and I really respect it, I don't agree with you, but I respect your opinion.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2009 04:58:30 AM · #52 |
| Nothing like the scoring commenting system to get a thread going. I posted are we going to need topaz to win (inspired by the sheer beauty of the lines winners) expecting to have started a long running debate thread but it didn't. |
|
|
|
09/13/2009 10:21:27 AM · #53 |
As a totally hamfisted amateur, I do look at the entries tho' I don't always vote (don't think I know enough) but sometimes I wonder How some of the entries actually fit the parameters of the challenge. What is even more amazing is that some of those entries get SCORED!!
I'm looking forward to the 9 challenge!!!
PS yes I think the scores for this challenge were a wee bit lower than usual!
Message edited by author 2009-09-13 10:22:06. |
|
|
|
09/13/2009 02:06:29 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
Actually, just by reading this, I would say yes, you are very qualified to be a be a troll. |
If a picture has no redeeming qualities, it gets a 3 from me. We are allowed to agree or disagree on that. There is no fixed policy here about what a 3 means, in spite of you thinking that there is:
"Starting by 3 means all the pictures are DNMC, out of focus with poor composition,"
I've given 7s or higher to pictures that are DNMC. I've given ribbons to pictures that are out of focus. Poor composition is a problem, however... and your picture does have a poor composition, imho.
I don't blame you for thinking that I am a troll. I got this 3 idea from  ubique and I liked how it grabs one's attention. It would be hypocritical of me to complain about being called a troll. I was fully aware that I was opening myself up to that accusation. However, my *complete* methodology, which is not as easily or as quickly expressed, falls well within site guidelines, imho.
But I think controversy around voting is good. I enjoy defending my reasoning for voting a certain way. I do *NOT* defend it with my qualifications, of which I have none. I defend it solely on the basis of it being my best attempt to *fairly* convey my personal opinion on photography, based on the criteria I feel are important.
There's an inherent contradiction in a lot of the voting talk I hear on this site. People accept that this is an open democratic system, yet they feel they must somehow compensate for their own lack of qualifications by trying to apply objective standards. But because they don't fully understand the reasoning and history behind those standards, they misapply them. We therefore get neither an informed nor an authentic vote. My own belief is that if we can't be informed, we can at least be authentic. Let's refine our senses, develop our appreciation in an internalized, organic way, in other words, let's learn about our own feelings and responses, and come up with a fair way to correspond those feelings to a scale of 1 to 10.
The scoring of art is almost fatally problematic anyway, but we might as well give it our best shot.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2009 03:09:58 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
If a picture has no redeeming qualities, it gets a 3 from me. We are allowed to agree or disagree on that. There is no fixed policy here about what a 3 means, in spite of you thinking that there is |
My only issue is I would like to get explanations from yourself and others who give an entry such a vote. Even if it is a short line to say "nothing special here". I also realize your perspective is that such entries are not worthy of any more time invested. I feel the high votes I give are the ones where I can click a number and press on, while the low votes often deserve some time spent explaining. I will also say that I have begun appreciating some styles that would not have appealed to me a couple of years ago. You and I see eye to eye on some things and completely different on others.
Vive Le difference?
Message edited by author 2009-09-13 15:11:26. |
|
|
|
09/13/2009 04:23:07 PM · #56 |
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
yanko Reading this from you really surprises me, this is not National Geography yet we see wild life photos, This is not commercial/marketing agency yet we see tons of pictures under this theme .. photography is photography, including stocks .. or pictures that doesn't have a background, nothing against posting it here!! You really don't have a point.
If you say it Lacks the context, this is your opinion, and I really respect it, I don't agree with you, but I respect your opinion. |
The point is the challenge didn't say show us your best stock photo. You explain why you used the white background but the justifications are for stock usage, not for appealing to the voters.
When I first joined, I thought since this was a community of photographers that photojournalism would be respected, if not put on a pedestal. So two of my first three entries were of that variety. I learned quickly that this isn't the place to get your photojournalism properly evaluated. Same goes for any industry. If you're an outdoor wildlife photographer submitting a photo of that rare bird you're probably going to be sorely disappointed with your score if that rare bird doesn't look like an eagle or other cool looking bird of prey shot up close. Now why is this? For starters you have to realize just how diverse this community is. Not only do we have novice and pros alike but we also have people from all walks of life with different cultures and radically different views on just about everything. Expecting voters at large to pick up on your industry specific technique and award you for it is like expecting Brett Favre to retire once and for all. It just doesn't happen.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2009 07:07:43 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
yanko Reading this from you really surprises me, this is not National Geography yet we see wild life photos, This is not commercial/marketing agency yet we see tons of pictures under this theme .. photography is photography, including stocks .. or pictures that doesn't have a background, nothing against posting it here!! You really don't have a point.
If you say it Lacks the context, this is your opinion, and I really respect it, I don't agree with you, but I respect your opinion. |
The point is the challenge didn't say show us your best stock photo. You explain why you used the white background but the justifications are for stock usage, not for appealing to the voters. |
OK seriously, Not sure where you are getting your info from, white background photography is not stock photography either you like it or not. It applies to everything, Portrait, Fashion, Even street photography .. take a look at this video that might help interpreting the idea. //www.wired.com/video/street-portrait-photo-how-to/27609165001
Its street photography, it is portrait, and it has white background.
|
|
|
|
09/13/2009 07:12:22 PM · #58 |
Not that I had great expectations on my photo, but I definitely would appreciate a few more comments. I only got one during the voting and quite a few 1-4's, so it would be nice to know what people were thinking.
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=818755
Message edited by author 2009-09-13 19:56:41. |
|
|
|
09/13/2009 07:43:45 PM · #59 |
I think that posthumous is starting off pretty well, I mean he could be starting off with a 1.
Myself, I go the opposite direction. From 10 downwards.
Out of focus, not sharp = -1
DNMC = -1
Boring subject (to me) = -1
Colours flat and boring =-1
Colours over saturated = -1
etc etc
Everyone votes differently, I used to vote from 1 upwards,
In focus adn sharp = +1
Meets challenge = + 1
Interesting subject = +1
Colours Vibrant = +1
Colours nicely in place and natural = +1
~~~~
so as you can see, it doesn't matter whether you start at 10 or start at 1, it all comes out as the same score. And those votes are how WE vote, regardless of what other people think.
If we all vote the same way, what is the point of voting
|
|
|
|
09/13/2009 07:56:57 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by rcollier:
Not that I had great expectations on my photo, but I definitely would appreciate a few more comments. |
Left a comment and a quick edit. |
|
|
|
09/13/2009 10:10:51 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
yanko Reading this from you really surprises me, this is not National Geography yet we see wild life photos, This is not commercial/marketing agency yet we see tons of pictures under this theme .. photography is photography, including stocks .. or pictures that doesn't have a background, nothing against posting it here!! You really don't have a point.
If you say it Lacks the context, this is your opinion, and I really respect it, I don't agree with you, but I respect your opinion. |
The point is the challenge didn't say show us your best stock photo. You explain why you used the white background but the justifications are for stock usage, not for appealing to the voters. |
OK seriously, Not sure where you are getting your info from, white background photography is not stock photography either you like it or not. It applies to everything, Portrait, Fashion, Even street photography .. take a look at this video that might help interpreting the idea. //www.wired.com/video/street-portrait-photo-how-to/27609165001
Its street photography, it is portrait, and it has white background. |
You're missing the point. You're the one who brought up the notion that an isolated background is widely used in commercial/advertising/stock photography. I replied saying don't expect voters to pick up on that. Whether it's used in other forms of photography is a moot point. The only thing that matters to the voter is if it is used well. To put it bluntly, your portrait/composition isn't up to par with what you just linked me to. Also, none of those images were entered in this challenge nor do they require context. YOURS does. Think about it. Or don't.
This is just my opinion. Take it as such.
|
|
|
|
09/14/2009 08:02:40 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by rcollier:
Not that I had great expectations on my photo, but I definitely would appreciate a few more comments. |
Left a comment and a quick edit. |
Thanks.
Your comments reflected the same thing as a couple of others pointed out but I had failed to notice. I didn't pay much attention to the background. I definitely need to pay more attention to the small details, especially those that are not the focal point since they become a distraction. Your simple edit was a nice improvement, probably would have pulled me over the 5 mark at least. (I don't have high ambitions at this point :-) |
|
|
|
10/20/2009 04:49:19 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by Judi:
I agree. My image disappointed me in the results. I got 3x1's, 3x2's and 6x3's...WHY!!!!
 |
Dirty feet?
|
|
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: 05/11/2025 06:42:24 PM EDT.
