| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/08/2018 09:56:18 AM · #1 |
I've been a member for a few years, but haven't been as active as I should have been. This was due to a loss of vision which required surgery (combination of cataracts and a genetic optic nerve defect plus some trauma damage that needed repair - just an explanation for those who might be curious). As I haven't been around for a while (remaining a member though) I've paid more attention to things like scoring, commentary, etc., this time around.
One thing I noticed in the recent Free Study is an apparent dichotomy between commenters scoring and participants scoring. I'm not exactly sure why, but two images that I had an interest in were scored a 10 by commenters, but a 5 by participants which dragged the score down to a 5 and change. It seems to me, and I could be wrong, that viewers who take the time to examine and share their thoughts on the image should have more of an impact on the final scoring than those who, for whatever reason, choose not to comment. If a group of commenters score an image 10, that should have more weight in the final accounting.
I like to view and comment on images and most of the time I have a particular favorite or favorites. You take the time to comment it becomes an "investment" if you will as you wish to see the image you think is outstanding do well. And when the image you think is excellent suddenly dives into oblivion based on some unidentifiable criteria it is bothersome.
Anyway, thank for reading - I appreciate everybody who participates.
Tom
Message edited by author 2018-11-08 09:57:36. |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 11:39:45 AM · #2 |
Great to "see" you again, Tom, and glad you had your sight and eyes fixed!
Scores/comments is the never-ending convo here. Why people don't vote or comment, or why the vote but don't comment, or why they comment but don't vote... I think it's the price we pay for anonymity. |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 12:27:34 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
... I think it's the price we pay for anonymity. |
When it comes to commenting with a score I think it may be the LACK of anonymity that is holding many back in the community here.
Used to be that odds were good if you commented on a photo, someone else would have also. This would, in most cases, hide the score that you gave. Now, if you're the lone comment (not uncommon) your score is visible under average per commenter.
Also, Tom - I think that when people have a great reaction to a photo, with a high score, they're likely to pop off a quick comment ("awesome", "my top pick", "beautiful", etc...) while those that may study it a bit more and find fault with the image are afraid or less likely to leave a comment that is less than positive. |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 12:29:49 PM · #4 |
| Ha! Tom! I just noticed the comment you left on my FS entry. :-) Nice average commenter score. Thanks! Now, if only others had felt the same way. LOL |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 01:47:10 PM · #5 |
The suggestion to change the system to give greater weight to votes accompanied by comments quickly leads to thoughts about the wide variety of comments. Some are single word, or tangential to the image, or frankly meaningless. An isolated "ok" or a single punctuation mark as a comment doesn't communicate much. Seems like these would deserve much less weight than insightful comments that communicate much more, even when short.
Since artificial intelligence does not exist to automatically sort comments into various worthiness buckets for appropriate weighting, we would need to resort to having a group of experts sort the comments. But then why not have this small group of experts review the images instead of the comments? Actually, juried challenges have been pretty interesting to follow.
Of course, then we'd want to reduce the impact of idiosyncratic personal bias among the jury. Predictably, the solution would be to expand the jury to include a much broader range of opinions and perspectives. Then we would need to recognize that not enough judges would volunteer if mandated to provide written explanations for every one of their opinions. So it is easy to predict that we'd need to let this broad panel of judges give input using a numeric scale from "bad" to "good," and we'd make the written input optional.
Then we'd have to deal with that odd sense of deja vu all over again.
|
|
|
|
11/08/2018 03:29:39 PM · #6 |
| While I'd like to believe that folks would take the high road, I think that if we weighted commenter's votes more heavily than others, it would just result in a flood of one-word (or one character!) comments by voters looking to maximize the impact of their opinion. There are other problems as well, but that's the big one that I see. I'm all for encouraging commenting, but not that way! |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 03:47:01 PM · #7 |
| And would a comment given along with a low score pull a photo down further than with just the score and no comment? |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 04:05:14 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by bob350:
Then we'd have to deal with that odd sense of deja vu all over again. |
To quote Harry Belefonte:
There's a hole in the bucket
Dear Liza, dear Liza,
There's a hole in the bucket
Dear Liza, a hole ...
(remaining eighteen or so verses available upon request) |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 04:16:11 PM · #9 |
Not sure whether you are familiar with this thread or not . . . but IMO it's a good one. You might like to participate here, at least occasionally.
Top Challenge Picks that failed to make top X
Message edited by author 2018-11-08 16:16:40. |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 04:46:54 PM · #10 |
For what it's worth, Tom, I like your idea and think it would work well with a "comment scrubber" for people who comment the same thing on multiple images or only comment one or two characters.
I have a feeling we're a minority, though.
And it's tough being a minority these days... |
|
|
|
11/08/2018 05:36:38 PM · #11 |
We would just absolutely LOVE to come up with/be gifted with a viable, working system that would somehow "weight" the votes based on the "seriousness" of the voter (choose your own words to go in the parentheses).
Basically what I worry about re: giving extra weight to the votes of commenters is that this would potentially lead to corruption of the system as overenthusiastic voters work to game the results. How feasible would it be for us to police the voting/commenting to ferret out deliberate "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" friend voting when it gets tied into commenting? I could be wrong but this seems like an onerous task. |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:32:27 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
Great to "see" you again, Tom, and glad you had your sight and eyes fixed! |
Thank you - it was a tough couple of years, but it all worked out in the end. I was amazed after the first operation - the colors, the clarity - and then they removed the cataracts and it got even better!! :)
[quote] I think it's the price we pay for anonymity. [/quote]
I really can't present a cogent argument to counter that - I just wonder if there isn't a better way.
Tom |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:34:22 AM · #13 |
I have in the past and there have been some spirited discussions that were a lot of fun. I'll probably do so again once I get back into the flow if you will. I'm still catching up. :)
Tom |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:35:58 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by Teafran:
I was amazed after the first operation - the colors, the clarity - and then they removed the cataracts and it got even better!! :) |
I neglected to say earlier that it's good to see you back :-) Regarding the cataracts, I just had both my eyes done in the last couple months. Amazing results. What's most startling to me is the much-greater sensitivity to blue light and how it affects colors... |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:49:20 AM · #15 |
So good to see you!! As to the cataracts, I had congenital cataracts. I had to wait until my eyes stopped adjusting as well (until I was old enough, basically) to get them taken care of. Mine didn't really affect colors. But it's amazing sitting at a restaurant and being able to see the face of a backlit person. They aren't just silhouettes anymore!
The down side is that my vision is much better -- and wow!! Noise in photos really bothers me now. I didn't really notice it that much before.
In the week between when I had my first eye and second eye done, I kept saying that I was going to go to a place with large windows, photograph the scene, and then photoshop what I saw with the cataract free eye and photoshop the same scene as I saw it with the eye with the cataract. I really wish I had done that. I wanted to show people just what I was seeing. |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:51:00 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
We would just absolutely LOVE to come up with/be gifted with a viable, working system that would somehow "weight" the votes based on the "seriousness" of the voter (choose your own words to go in the parentheses). |
Understood. It's not an easy task that's for sure. I had an idea, but tinkering with the numbers, I can't make it work so it would be fair across the board. I'm not at all sure I can tweak the process to make it fair.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Basically what I worry about re: giving extra weight to the votes of commenters is that this would potentially lead to corruption of the system as overenthusiastic voters work to game the results. How feasible would it be for us to police the voting/commenting to ferret out deliberate "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" friend voting when it gets tied into commenting? I could be wrong but this seems like an onerous task. |
And that is an issue. I took some time yesterday afternoon to look at the challenges just for comparison purposes and in general, images that I thought were very good or excellent made it to the top five or top ten. When you think about it, perhaps my original idea is somewhat flawed - the worthy images will win the day, just not at the same level of scoring that I would assign to them. Food for thought that's for sure.
And I'm not trying to put myself as the arbiter of "good taste and all things photographic" by the way - I just really enjoy looking and commenting....its fun for me. :)
Tom |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:55:17 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
So good to see you!! As to the cataracts, I had congenital cataracts. I had to wait until my eyes stopped adjusting as well (until I was old enough, basically) to get them taken care of. Mine didn't really affect colors. But it's amazing sitting at a restaurant and being able to see the face of a backlit person. They aren't just silhouettes anymore!
The down side is that my vision is much better -- and wow!! Noise in photos really bothers me now. I didn't really notice it that much before.
In the week between when I had my first eye and second eye done, I kept saying that I was going to go to a place with large windows, photograph the scene, and then photoshop what I saw with the cataract free eye and photoshop the same scene as I saw it with the eye with the cataract. I really wish I had done that. I wanted to show people just what I was seeing. |
Hi Wendy - its great to be back and participating again. I wish I had thought of that myself - it was amazing when they did the corrective surgery, removed scar tissue, some retina repair. I was amazed and thought it could't get any better, then later that afternoon they took out the cataract and replaced it with a new type of lens - I actually cried when I saw what I had been missing - incredible difference. Fortunately, the left eye only has cataract issues and that's being done in December - can't wait.
Tom |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:56:59 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Ha! Tom! I just noticed the comment you left on my FS entry. :-) Nice average commenter score. Thanks! Now, if only others had felt the same way. LOL |
Yeah - but heck, I like doing it, its fun and that is really what its about.
Tom |
|
|
|
11/09/2018 10:59:11 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
For what it's worth, Tom, I like your idea and think it would work well with a "comment scrubber" for people who comment the same thing on multiple images or only comment one or two characters.
I have a feeling we're a minority, though.
And it's tough being a minority these days... |
Yes - that is true. But, when the smoke clears and everything is over, generally the winner is the winner. I have a friend who is a Gamecocks fan and claims that a win is a win even if they were lucky to pull it out. I guess that's the spirit we need.
Tom |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 03:20:22 PM EDT.
