| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/25/2006 05:40:55 PM · #1 |
I used to have a system I think worked well, and I still do. Only now I don't share it, because people cry about it. I can do without an inbox full of pm's about how crappy my voting system is ;-)
-Hideo |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 05:16:47 PM · #2 |
My forumla is really simple - I just look at the photo, look at the photo, look once more, and then vote.
:-)
|
|
|
|
07/25/2006 05:04:25 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
I vote '10' for nudes. '1' for everything else.
Keeps it simple. |
Honesty shines through!
;) |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 04:48:28 PM · #4 |
[grammar nazi]
moot: adj. Of no practical importance; irrelevant.
mute: adj. Expressed without speech; unspoken
[/grammar nazi]
Sorry, but it makes me grind my teeth... |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 04:45:29 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by mist:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
• I believe I already stressed the relevance of context to an image in an earlier post. My reading of the term, however, is not limited by a given challenge description.
• I really have no idea. Limiting topicality is a proven tool to foster creativity, a stance which I fully embrace. It can be there there, however, for the benefit of participating photographers and not for prejudiced voters gleefully swinging a bat. |
Indirectly labelling people who do not follow your system as prejudiced, unconscionable, or without vision, does not make you right, you know? Your tone through the past few posts has had an egde to it that I don't care for, so I don't think it's worth exchanging many more words when we clearly hold very differing views on what makes a good photo, and a good voter.
Good luck with your system, I'm happy that the pure numbers average everything out in the end anyway. |
I'd appreciate it, if you would not misconstrue my sense, deliberately or not. I was quite careful in my wording to avoid precisely this. The adjective unconscionable appeared in this context: " My view is that a voter's failing to recognize something is his own and that a photographer's failing to be topical is his. To make no distinction, in my view, is unconscionable."
Although prejudice, in my view, is hardly something to strive for, it certainly is a common human attribute. I propose that there are prejudiced voters, as there are voters who take pains not to let their prejudices sway their vote. I have already pointed the particular prejudices, that can thwart good (fair, unbiased) examination of the facts an image presents.
Nowhere have I mentioned that I am free of prejudices, nor have I pointed names or specific individuals. I have restricted myself to a discussion of practice, not of persons. To make such distinction (as I have already tried to point out in a separate context below) is not a personal quirk or a luxury. It is the only means to entertain a debate without having it sprawl into unprofitable rants and counter-rants.
Under the circumstances, it would be appropriate to contribute an equal amount of care into listening/reading, so the facts can remain what they are and no one would be forced to endlessly clarify a point already made.
If I sound edgy I apologize, if it helps. But I would expect any good debate to reveal some sharp points, particularly when the moot ones are beginning to test anyone's patience. Personally, I'd prefer a surgeon with a sharp scalpel to a butcher with a dull knife.
In the end, I can either post here freely, respectfully and in good faith to contribute what someone has quite enjoyably called a plip into an ocean of varying views or I can discuss you and him and them. The liberty to do so, however, will serve no useful purpose, even if pancakes become our salvation.
Message edited by author 2006-07-25 17:06:26.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2006 04:02:28 PM · #6 |
[quote]
That's why it's easier for me to have a system ... if the image doesn't meet the challenge outline, but is still technically a great picture then I still give it a 8-9 final mark if all the rest is top mark...
It's so easy to just give a random voting or whatever people do when they vote , but it really doesn't help and I think its just being lazy reviewing and voting pictures that way. What we want is to learn and create a photo community that can help each of us to get better... a proper voting system would help no doubt about that. [/quote]
I agree and that is why I developed a similar system. It's too lazy and cowardly to look at an image and just because it doesn't rock you, to give it a 3 or 4, yet the image can be technically good, meets the challenge, and so on - that would give it a higher score, which it ultimately deserves.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2006 03:55:17 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by hokie:
It may be "tacky" to comment on someone's child who is skipping rope in a photo and you say "Is that a rope or a leash"...But models who dare to venture in front of the camera on purpose are fair game. Photographers and models better get used to it. |
The model's attractiveness is irrelevant. The photo's attractiveness is all that matters. If the photo's attractiveness depends on the model's attractiveness, then ... yawn!! low vote from me.
A real person, acting in a real way, with a kind of openness that allows you to empathize, will always be attractive. Blame the photographer for a bad photo, not the model.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2006 09:06:27 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
If you really want to jazz someone up, criticize their model, ooh boy, and if its a nude, ooh, they will flame you and personal message you to death. |
Well, it's tacky as hell to say someone is unattractive, but once I got flamed just for saying the model didn't look like she cared. |
If a person is modeling on purpose, they better have thick skin. If they are modeling nude, especially so.
It may be "tacky" to comment on someone's child who is skipping rope in a photo and you say "Is that a rope or a leash"...But models who dare to venture in front of the camera on purpose are fair game. Photographers and models better get used to it. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:50:31 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
If you really want to jazz someone up, criticize their model, ooh boy, and if its a nude, ooh, they will flame you and personal message you to death. |
Well, it's tacky as hell to say someone is unattractive, but once I got flamed just for saying the model didn't look like she cared.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:47:04 AM · #10 |
| I rate on overall impact and ask myself " have I seen it before?" If it is a yes then rating goes down, if it is new, done well ,and fits assinment then score goes up. Simple |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:41:05 AM · #11 |
| If you really want to jazz someone up, criticize their model, ooh boy, and if its a nude, ooh, they will flame you and personal message you to death. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:34:04 AM · #12 |
I vote '10' for nudes. '1' for everything else.
Keeps it simple. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:32:28 AM · #13 |
When I judge a picture, I think, what would someone smart say about this? I say, would someone smart say this met the challenge? If someone smart would say yes, I ignore my petty little thoughts about the picture not meeting the challenge. Thats what everyone should do.
I disagree with those who say "you are marked down because you have manipulated the title to have the photo meet the challenge"
Thats simple shortsightedness. If the challenge is dogs, and there are no dogs in the picture, and the person takes a shot of mountains, and then titles it "Dog Mountain chain, West Virginia." I agree, thats pretty sneaky and irrelevant. Probably does not meet challenge. But if someone shows a man holding a dog leash and titles it "divorce:she took the dog"- thats a great title and shows that titles can really enhance an image and it should not be marked down.
Just some thoughts.
Message edited by author 2006-07-25 08:33:29. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 08:25:37 AM · #14 |
| I've noticed I vote high compared to others average voting score but it still works for me. My personal system is simple. I rarely give 4 or below. It has to be pretty faulty in execution to receive those from me. If I feel it looks like something I would see in my mothers photo album but meets the challenge=5. If it appears the photographer made a greater attempt to be creative but fell short of various flaws that would prevent it from being published=6. If it appears to be good enough to publish=7. If I personally enjoy the photo that I would buy a copy and place it in a coffee book=8. If I like it enough to put it on my wall for display=9. I save a few 10s for the ones that just say WOW. What can I say. I'm a nice guy. :) |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 07:55:14 AM · #15 |
There should also be a degree of tolerance for anyone's voting systems (or lack of them).
Some voters treat the photographers as artists, DPC's challenge titles being their muse, with potentially hidden (and sometimes undecipherable) meaning that only adds to the interest. Others treat the photographers as jobbers, trying to make an image that will spread a message. More simply "know what they like"!
Their shared characteristic is access to the Internet and the time and inclination to vote... there is no "right" way.
|
|
|
|
07/25/2006 06:34:44 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by mist:
•...I admit to not really seeing what you're getting at there....
• Again I would suggest that if you are purely voting on the photo without taking into account the context then you are somewhat missing the point.
• Why is there a need for people to continue to invent challenge suggestions if someone could take a technically perfect picture of a cornfield and get a 10 for it in a cityscape challenge? |
Yes, and I feel there's probably not much I could say to change this.
• I believe I already stressed the relevance of context to an image in an earlier post. My reading of the term, however, is not limited by a given challenge description.
• I really have no idea. Limiting topicality is a proven tool to foster creativity, a stance which I fully embrace. It can be there there, however, for the benefit of participating photographers and not for prejudiced voters gleefully swinging a bat. |
Michelangelo was a great artist. But imagine one of his paintings shown as part of a cubist exhibit. His work would not be seen as great cubist art - because it isn't.
Same with a photo on DPC that the voter doesn't think meets the challenge. By definition voting is expressing one's opinion. If the voters opinion is "that image does not belong" then of course it should receive a lower score than one that meets the challenge well. A big part of the artists skill is in identifying a concept which is clever enough to get the voters attention but not so far removed from the subject as to be considered irrelevant. The other part is bringing that concept to fruition. There are quite a few people here that do one or the other well, and only a few that excel at both. |
|
|
|
07/25/2006 02:41:41 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
• I believe I already stressed the relevance of context to an image in an earlier post. My reading of the term, however, is not limited by a given challenge description.
• I really have no idea. Limiting topicality is a proven tool to foster creativity, a stance which I fully embrace. It can be there there, however, for the benefit of participating photographers and not for prejudiced voters gleefully swinging a bat. |
Indirectly labelling people who do not follow your system as prejudiced, unconscionable, or without vision, does not make you right, you know? Your tone through the past few posts has had an egde to it that I don't care for, so I don't think it's worth exchanging many more words when we clearly hold very differing views on what makes a good photo, and a good voter.
Good luck with your system, I'm happy that the pure numbers average everything out in the end anyway.
Message edited by author 2006-07-25 02:45:55. |
|
|
|
07/24/2006 06:31:25 PM · #18 |
I use the spinner on my "Life game board. Not really. The voting is subjective and our efforts to apply numbers to it implies that perfection can be measured. A photo can be technically considered to be perfect and yet fail to connect with viewers. A less than technically perfect picture may have a dramatic impact and lead to strong reactions (good and bad) to the picture. The trick it that we are rating it relatively to the others. If someone gives it a one, so what? Did it deserve to get a one? To that person, yes. Someone may give it a ten. Does that mean that it was perfect? No. It is all relative. The numbers average out. If most people like it, then it gets a high average. If most people don't, a lower score results.
When I vote, I start at the middle. A nice picture that does not do much for me, I give a five. If it has what I consider flaws, I go lower. If it has things I like, I go higher. If I do not think it meets the challenge, I will not score it as high as a comparable picture that does meet the challenge. To get to a nine or ten, you have to wow me. That does not necessarily mean a pretty sunset with bright colors or cool reflections off a glass.
There are many people voting so we end up with what is most pleasing to the masses as the winners. I want to score well with my own pictures because I want people to like them and I also want to take what are considered to be better pictures, but in the end it is up to me if I like what I do so I am not really worried about getting a five when I thought it could be a seven. I need to have enough confidence in my own work to want to share with others and hope they like them too. But if folks don't go for it, there is another challenge coming up. Some weeks I try to get something for the challenge (that teaches me to look for other things as potential photo subjects and maybe shoot something differently) and some weeks I shoot what I find and see if anything fits the challenge later.
So to simplify, the key for me is to have any system, whether it is technical (so many points for certain things) or just emotional (I like the way this one looks more than that one so I am giving it a higher score) - whatever helps you to rank them relatlvely to each other. In the end, all the systems will balance out and the rankings will be a pretty good reflection of the general opinion about the photos. It is just in fun and a learning experience so let's enjoy it!
[/url] |
|
|
|
07/24/2006 06:28:57 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by raish:
...This reduces my contribution to the whole, but I'm a drop in the ocean, so plip. |
Yes, but the ocean is made of plips, after all.
|
|
|
|
07/24/2006 06:26:28 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by mist:
•...I admit to not really seeing what you're getting at there....
• Again I would suggest that if you are purely voting on the photo without taking into account the context then you are somewhat missing the point.
• Why is there a need for people to continue to invent challenge suggestions if someone could take a technically perfect picture of a cornfield and get a 10 for it in a cityscape challenge? |
Yes, and I feel there's probably not much I could say to change this.
• I believe I already stressed the relevance of context to an image in an earlier post. My reading of the term, however, is not limited by a given challenge description.
• I really have no idea. Limiting topicality is a proven tool to foster creativity, a stance which I fully embrace. It can be there there, however, for the benefit of participating photographers and not for prejudiced voters gleefully swinging a bat.
Message edited by author 2006-07-24 18:29:47.
|
|
|
|
07/24/2006 05:54:10 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by TooCool:
Pitchers I like I give high scores... Pitchers I don't like I give low scores... |
That's a good method. |
|
|
|
07/24/2006 05:42:26 PM · #22 |
| Pitchers I like I give high scores... Pitchers I don't like I give low scores... |
|
|
|
07/24/2006 05:28:06 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by raish:
This almost belongs in the ranting and raving section, but, I think this sort of conversation is essentially good and healthy. I don't think so very much of the idea of telling others how to vote, but I do think a fair bit of the presentation and exchange of how each of us sees the problem - which is what I see happening here.
Whoopee :)
As for Michelangelo - if it were only continents, oceans and hundreds of years that separated us, well - but the whole thing is out of our league anyway. The comparisons here are within this peer group. It's as tangible and contemporary a measure as you're ever likely to get. If you think you're the digital messiah to get the Renaissance reborn one more time, then you may well find shortcomings in the evaluations you get here. Personally, I would prefer them any day to those of Dark Age clerics or of art historians that can't take a camera out of a bag without getting their fingers caught in the zip.
Oh yes, the voting. I can't brag. I have a quick-browse tactic, with which I run through a bit rapidly and give five to the pictures that 'don't make it' - which includes failure to address the challenge description as I understand it - and six to those that do make it. I then have two groups through which to run and adjust more attentively. As I know I'm going to do that, then I can also give higher points to pictures that reach out and grab me, as well as lower ones that seem very clearly to deserve it.
It's not unusual for me to have read some forum commentaries on challenge interpretations by the time I take a second run through, and my next round of vote-adjustment will bear some influence from them if that is the case.
It's not much of a system. In any case I never make rules for myself that I can't break myself. (That even includes e.g. giving up smoking, but then I remind myself who wins and who loses). There is a strong tendency to gravitate toward the 5.5 average and the greatest failing, as I see it, for me and my 'system', is that I (it) fail(s) to use the full width of the voting spectrum - i.e. I don't give enough 1's 2's 9's and 10's. This reduces my contribution to the whole, but I'm a drop in the ocean, so plip. |
Thats about how I do it too!
|
|
|
|
07/24/2006 05:20:36 PM · #24 |
This almost belongs in the ranting and raving section, but, I think this sort of conversation is essentially good and healthy. I don't think so very much of the idea of telling others how to vote, but I do think a fair bit of the presentation and exchange of how each of us sees the problem - which is what I see happening here.
Whoopee :)
As for Michelangelo - if it were only continents, oceans and hundreds of years that separated us, well - but the whole thing is out of our league anyway. The comparisons here are within this peer group. It's as tangible and contemporary a measure as you're ever likely to get. If you think you're the digital messiah to get the Renaissance reborn one more time, then you may well find shortcomings in the evaluations you get here. Personally, I would prefer them any day to those of Dark Age clerics or of art historians that can't take a camera out of a bag without getting their fingers caught in the zip.
Oh yes, the voting. I can't brag. I have a quick-browse tactic, with which I run through a bit rapidly and give five to the pictures that 'don't make it' - which includes failure to address the challenge description as I understand it - and six to those that do make it. I then have two groups through which to run and adjust more attentively. As I know I'm going to do that, then I can also give higher points to pictures that reach out and grab me, as well as lower ones that seem very clearly to deserve it.
It's not unusual for me to have read some forum commentaries on challenge interpretations by the time I take a second run through, and my next round of vote-adjustment will bear some influence from them if that is the case.
It's not much of a system. In any case I never make rules for myself that I can't break myself. (That even includes e.g. giving up smoking, but then I remind myself who wins and who loses). There is a strong tendency to gravitate toward the 5.5 average and the greatest failing, as I see it, for me and my 'system', is that I (it) fail(s) to use the full width of the voting spectrum - i.e. I don't give enough 1's 2's 9's and 10's. This reduces my contribution to the whole, but I'm a drop in the ocean, so plip. |
|
|
|
07/24/2006 05:07:42 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by mist:
...Your view seems to be that failing to recognize a photo for its fit to a challenge is a failure of the viewer.
My view is that that is a failing of the photographer....
Either way, whatever my vote may be it doesn't ascribe worth (or lack of worth) to the picture. |
[omissions and line-breaks mine]
• My view is that a voter's failing to recognize something is his own and that a photographer's failing to be topical is his. To make no distinction, in my view, is unconscionable.
|
I admit to not really seeing what you're getting at there.
Originally posted by zeuszen:
• A vote very clearly ascribes a measure of value in the context of DPC, and as such, I prefer to vote on what I see, without registering my own lack of vision, education or finesse, however probable. |
A vote for me ascribes a relative value in the context of other pictures and a particular challenge, it does not sum up the photo as a whole. Again I would suggest that if you are purely voting on the photo without taking into account the context then you are somewhat missing the point.
Why is there a need for people to continue to invent challenge suggestions if someone could take a technically perfect picture of a cornfield and get a 10 for it in a cityscape challenge? |
|
