| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/03/2009 06:45:06 PM · #1 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I finished one spot below the picture in question. Both our pictures take a heavy approach to the subject. Hipychik got a total of 19 1-3 votes. I got a total of 19 1-3 votes (but 7 1s instead of 2 1s). I think "statistical fluke" is just as likely an explanation now (as others have mentioned). |
Yeah, but you don't look like Jesus... |
How do you know? |
Everybody knows Jesus was a black man. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 12:16:33 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
That was pretty funny. Anyway, it wasn't supposed to be Jesus in the picture. Read the title. :) It was supposed to be me. And I look like me. |
I've seen him, he does look exactly like himself. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 11:45:00 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
That was pretty funny. Anyway, it wasn't supposed to be Jesus in the picture. Read the title. :) It was supposed to be me. And I look like me. |
Well, it *should* have been you, anyway :-)
R. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 11:36:08 AM · #4 |
That was pretty funny. Anyway, it wasn't supposed to be Jesus in the picture. Read the title. :) It was supposed to be me. And I look like me.
Message edited by author 2009-12-03 11:36:18. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 11:31:59 AM · #5 |
I prefer a blond haired blue eyed lightly bearded (or clean shaven), almost Swiss looking Jesus, over the probably more historically accurate middle eastern Jesus. I prefer the jesus that shows up to a party wearing crocs and drinking a diet slice, and making people wonder if there is diet slice at the party, but there isn't, Jesus brough his own, that kind of Jesus.
(stolen and butchered from Will Ferrelllelell |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 11:21:00 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I finished one spot below the picture in question. Both our pictures take a heavy approach to the subject. Hipychik got a total of 19 1-3 votes. I got a total of 19 1-3 votes (but 7 1s instead of 2 1s). I think "statistical fluke" is just as likely an explanation now (as others have mentioned). |
Yeah, but you don't look like Jesus... |
How do you know? |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 11:16:21 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I finished one spot below the picture in question. Both our pictures take a heavy approach to the subject. Hipychik got a total of 19 1-3 votes. I got a total of 19 1-3 votes (but 7 1s instead of 2 1s). I think "statistical fluke" is just as likely an explanation now (as others have mentioned). |
Yeah, but you don't look like Jesus... |
That would have taken a miracle... ;) |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 11:14:04 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
I finished one spot below the picture in question. Both our pictures take a heavy approach to the subject. Hipychik got a total of 19 1-3 votes. I got a total of 19 1-3 votes (but 7 1s instead of 2 1s). I think "statistical fluke" is just as likely an explanation now (as others have mentioned). |
Yeah, but you don't look like Jesus... |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 11:11:49 AM · #9 |
| I finished one spot below the picture in question. Both our pictures take a heavy approach to the subject. Hipychik got a total of 19 1-3 votes. I got a total of 19 1-3 votes (but 7 1s instead of 2 1s). I think "statistical fluke" is just as likely an explanation now (as others have mentioned). |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 10:52:53 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I got 11 2's with this one, not to mention 8 1's and 8 3's... And I thought it was a thoughtful image, not entirely out of the box, that might garner some bemused respect from the voters as a group, but apparently that was wishful thinking :-) Can't say I'm surprised by that, wishful thinking is my nominal state of mind...
R. |
I thought this one was particularly well done. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 10:40:18 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by AJSullivan:
I like that a troll has become anyone that doesn't like an image, or votes under a 5. How dare they use the full voting scale and not love everything I create! |
Yeah, I have to agree with that. It's pretty tiring seeing people bandy the word "troll" around, especially considering the poor quality of the majority of photos in the open challenges. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:42:10 AM · #12 |
I beat you : 11 1's , 14 2's and 23 3's
And I didn't got the brown ... :(
 |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:39:21 AM · #13 |
I got 11 2's with this one, not to mention 8 1's and 8 3's... And I thought it was a thoughtful image, not entirely out of the box, that might garner some bemused respect from the voters as a group, but apparently that was wishful thinking :-) Can't say I'm surprised by that, wishful thinking is my nominal state of mind...
R. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:35:35 AM · #14 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
So were you talking about this photo of mine (not sure though)? It received 16 votes of 3 or less, which I think was kind of harsh.
Hipchick's picture got a 6 from me. I liked the starkness of it.
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by yanko:
I don't think it has anything to do with the technicals. It's not a feel good story for religion so some people are put off by it hence the low votes. My opinion of course. |
I had this thought as well. And the blue, which makes the beautiful St. James Cathedral look entirely menacing, throws in a dash of fire n' brimstone to boot. ;) |
|
In fairness there's nothing that shouts 'religion' about this photo other than the title. That could be a state building like a treasury or a museum - anything. So for that reason, I don't think low scores are unwarranted as some stick to the challenge theme more strictly than others.
I originally had this down as a 6 but later changed to an 8 after I'd had time to reflect on the image and moderate the scores. To get more it would have need to convey something more about religion other than the scale and grandeur of the building. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:25:57 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by Azrifel:
It is a boring, blah lightened, tight cropped center focused image that looks to be neatimaged to hell.
While that may sound harsh, it is exactly how I see it and it is actually not insulting.
In the past I used to say this in the comments, but nobody marks it useful and causes some people to send PM's. Which leads me to simply leave a low vote and say nothing. |
I've never gotten one of those nasty PM's and I leave as many critiques as anyone else does. Either I have just been fortunate or you and I are doing something differently when we leave those critiques. |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 09:16:43 AM · #16 |
| I like that a troll has become anyone that doesn't like an image, or votes under a 5. How dare they use the full voting scale and not love everything I create! |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 08:16:57 AM · #17 |
| I didn't vote in the challenge, but scrolled through the results yesterday ... I loved this one and would have given it a 7 ... I don't know where the 2's came from, I think it's great |
|
|
|
12/03/2009 01:16:36 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
So were you talking about this photo of mine (not sure though)? It received 16 votes of 3 or less, which I think was kind of harsh.
|
This one got a 4 and that was lucky.
It is a boring, blah lightened, tight cropped center focused image that looks to be neatimaged to hell.
While that may sound harsh, it is exactly how I see it and it is actually not insulting.
In the past I used to say this in the comments, but nobody marks it useful and causes some people to send PM's. Which leads me to simply leave a low vote and say nothing.
|
|
|
|
12/02/2009 10:25:06 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by bvy:
The more I look at this, the more I think we're bickering over a statistical curiousity and nothing else. (I majored in math -- sorry.) Here's the breakdown:
1 -- 2
2 -- 11
3 -- 6
Of the eleven 2-voters, if two of those had voted a 1 and two of those had voted a 3, the breakdown would like this:
1 -- 4
2 -- 7
3 -- 8
No one would think anything of this. It's still nineteen sub-4 votes which isn't unheard of with a high 5 finish.
Nineteen 1's and NO 2's or 3's would have been something to ponder. This just isn't. |
More numbers. :D
9% of voters gave you a 3 or less. 91% of voters gave you a 4 or better. 62% of voters gave you a 6 or better. 37% gave you a 7 or better.
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 22:27:27. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 08:49:20 PM · #20 |
The more I look at this, the more I think we're bickering over a statistical curiousity and nothing else. (I majored in math -- sorry.) Here's the breakdown:
1 -- 2
2 -- 11
3 -- 6
Of the eleven 2-voters, if two of those had voted a 1 and two of those had voted a 3, the breakdown would like this:
1 -- 4
2 -- 7
3 -- 8
No one would think anything of this. It's still nineteen sub-4 votes which isn't unheard of with a high 5 finish.
Nineteen 1's and NO 2's or 3's would have been something to ponder. This just isn't. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 07:52:01 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
A really bad photo for one person is a really good photo for someone else. This will always be the case. Not all low votes are from trolls or tactacle voters. I would hazard a guess that most of the ones available to be viewed are not since the vote scrubber runs at the end of every challenge to get rid of the rest. |
Thats very true of course. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 07:49:26 PM · #22 |
double post
Message edited by author 2009-12-02 19:49:43. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 07:49:21 PM · #23 |
| A really bad photo for one person is a really good photo for someone else. This will always be the case. Not all low votes are from trolls or tactacle voters. I would hazard a guess that most of the ones available to be viewed are not since the vote scrubber runs at the end of every challenge to get rid of the rest. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 07:48:03 PM · #24 |
| I let the untold story intrigue me and draw me in, believe I gave it a 6 or 7. Sadly didn't cast enough votes in that challenge, so it got scrubbed. |
|
|
|
12/02/2009 07:40:14 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
Hum, i think i must belong to the polar opposite school of thought then. With regards to art and literature i sometimes tend to think that the artist should be last person to ask about what their art means. They often don't know themselves sometimes. Regardless of that though, why should the artist have to convey a clear message? You ask all those questions as if it is somehow bad that a piece of art may raise questions in its audience. I tend to think that a piece of art that answers all questions and is just laid out is often nothing more than shiny eye candy. There is a place for beautiful images, of course, but for myself i sometimes like to be challenged and have to work a bit when it comes to art. |
Well, this school of thought is fine too, but it's one where the question "why did I get eleven 2s?" makes no sense. The answer is 11 people didn't like what they got out of the picture and gave it a 2. How can you question them with this ideology in mind? (I'm asking in general, maybe you personally aren't asking this). |
Good point and one that i don't really have an answer to to be honest. I assume all those 2s were trolls and tactical voters. Don't get me wrong, i'm not being all wishy-washy and saying there is no such this as a bad photograph, there clearly is and i give out my fair share of 4s and sometimes 3s when voting, but a really bad photo, for me , tends to be one where there is nothing there shining through, no inspiration or 'art' really. This is certainly not one of those. |
|
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: 04/25/2024 10:32:51 AM EDT.
