| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/04/2004 11:13:09 AM · #1 |
I've been noticing a worrying trend recently of good photos getting worse and worse marks in open challenges, or maybe that's just me! I realise we've had all sorts of forum comments about 'stupid voters', or conversely about frustrated challenge entrants who whine about bad marks, and I can see myself starting to slip into the ranks of the latter!
My current 'Miniature' photo seems to be suffering from people who don't want to put any effort into voting... it clearly meets the challenge but people can't be bothered to realise that for my subject to be real sized, the flowers in the frame would have to be enormous.
Anyway, here are some photos I thought deserved to do better in the Everyday Objects challenge:
   |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:24:18 AM · #2 |
I think the "frame" photo did poorly because it crossed the line from common to unpleasant. The flab hanging over the frame and the expression made me say, man, I don't like this image. It was technically ok, spec-wise, but not only did it not have "wow", it actually had "ugh" factor. definitely not something I would hang on my wall, or expect to see on someone else's wall (except maybe in a college dorm room)
I liked the other two and scored them pretty high, the fork one was a little too flat looking for my taste.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 11:25:12.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:28:02 AM · #3 |
well at least they did not receive a comment like I got on a recent photo
javascript: do_vote(1)
1
from this user //www.dpchallenge.com/comment_browse.php?USER_ID=23648
James
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:34:20 AM · #4 |
Originally posted by airatic:
I think the "frame" photo did poorly because it crossed the line from common to unpleasant. The flab hanging over the frame and the expression made me say, man, I don't like this image. It was technically ok, spec-wise, but not only did it not have "wow", it actually had "ugh" factor. definitely not something I would hang on my wall, or expect to see on someone else's wall (except maybe in a college dorm room) |
BUT, in addition to being technically good, wasn't it creative? I don't particularly enjoy looking at unattractive bodies, but you work with what you have. I'd have a difficult time enlisting slim models for any of my images, but even "ugliness" (!) can be interesting and 'photo-worthy', right? Can't we learn to rate images on their own merit vs. our prejudices??
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:38:15 AM · #5 |
Jab, that user should be barred from the site. What an asshole. Any administrators watching?? Talk about ruining the commenting/voting process.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:42:39 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by airatic:
Jab, that user should be barred from the site. What an asshole. Any administrators watching?? Talk about ruining the commenting/voting process. |
I agree, just look at his stats, it is people like this who fustrate me to no end.
Challenges Entered: 0
Votes Cast: 581
Avg Vote Cast: 2.9639
Votes Received: 0
Avg Vote Received: N/A |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:42:51 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
but even "ugliness" (!) can be interesting and 'photo-worthy', right? Can't we learn to rate images on their own merit vs. our prejudices?? |
lenk, I didn't want to imply that my comments had to do with the model, but rather with the composition. The man appears to be normal looking in life, but is posed to appear unappealling to the viewer. He could be standing up straight, with a normal expression, or in a crazy costume, and this would have done better. The "ugh" was not intended as a comment on the relative attractiveness of various models, but rather on the pose eliciting that response.
As far as voting on the merit, one of my commenters said to me that he couldn't see my photo hanging on a wall (Chocolate challenge) and I feel that way about this image. Aren't we all kind of trying to make photos that would be hung on walls?
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:44:10 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
...Anyway, here are some photos I thought deserved to do better in the Everyday Objects challenge...
|
Thanks Bob, the zipper is mine. I've noticed that the more artistic or open to interpretation a photo is the more it seems to suffer from low votes. Everyone has different voting habits; I try to vote on a handful of entries about three times a day over the course of the contest. I'd imagine that people who try to get though all 250 entries in one sitting don't take the time to examine the entries and appreciate the work that went into them. The more artistic photos can be hard to evaluate with a 5 sec. glance.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:50:45 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by airatic:
Jab, that user should be barred from the site. What an asshole. Any administrators watching?? Talk about ruining the commenting/voting process. |
here here!!! |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:53:26 AM · #10 |
I got slammed to...12 1's and 21 2's I had a everyday object..in a setting of it's own.
I vote like this
Not on topic good photo = 3
On topic = 4 No matter what
On topic with good quality photo = 5
On topic good quality and the photograph has class =7
All the above and the photo tells a story about the challenge = 9 or 10 |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:56:22 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
Can't we learn to rate images on their own merit vs. our prejudices?? |
Voting has to be subjective for it to be worthwhile. If we try and ignore our personal reaction to an image, how much we subjectively like it, and attempt to vote purely on whether it's a technically well produced image or not, the results would be meaningless.
For an image to get a high score it has to connect with the viewer and connect in a positive way. It's not just about technical merit. In fact an image that does this well can succeed even if it's not technically perfect.
A technically well taken image that just fails to appeal to the viewer will not do well no matter how well it's taken.
And that's as it should be. The images that win are images that many people admire and LIKE enough to want to look at them again and again and again.
And content doesn't always have to be "nice" to achieve that positive connection - it can be quite dark and show an unpleasant side of life and yet make an emotional connection.
But, whether we like or not, or agree with societal values or not, an image that is simply unattractive to viewers will not (and should not) score that highly.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 11:57:06 AM · #12 |
I think your point is valid. Here are some more images where the photographer clearly used focus, shadow, tone, and composition to communicate some aspect of an everyday object and make it more interesting. They may not be challenge winners, but I think they are all good examples of solid photographic expression.
 = 5.835
 = 5.654
 = 5.396
 = 4.664 (yes.. that's mine)
 = 4.640
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:01:08 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by airatic:
...
As far as voting on the merit, one of my commenters said to me that he couldn't see my photo hanging on a wall (Chocolate challenge) and I feel that way about this image. Aren't we all kind of trying to make photos that would be hung on walls? |
Yes, I'd love to see some of my photos hanging on walls (...and some do, but those are my own walls ;-)), but there are other images that are captured for a variety of reasons, including photo-journalism, humor, and other emotive effects (even 'ugh'). Those latter images typically do not hang on walls.
If we're expressing our personally tastes, then by all means vote accordingly. I believe that my personal feelings should play a lesser role when I judge an image. I know - one can never be totally objective. But I also believe that one can try to see the intent and execution of that intent somewhat independently of personal prejudices (NOT meant to imply that you're prejudiced, of course).
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:04:12 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by airatic:
Aren't we all kind of trying to make photos that would be hung on walls? |
No, at least not me. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:06:27 PM · #15 |
   Agreed Agreed 
Just some that I really liked....
PS - Thank you David! and thanks for the great comment as well! :-)
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 12:47:45. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:06:36 PM · #16 |
I really liked this one but it's placed just after my entry. I think this one is much better than mine and also it should have done way better.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 12:07:08. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:07:18 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
|
Why this one? This is a bad portrait. Look at the lighting, way to bright at the right side. The background is bad. There is a shadow. hmmm...I won't mention anything about the subject. A shirt would have been more appropriate.
I will say, the frame was good idea.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:10:19 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Originally posted by airatic:
Aren't we all kind of trying to make photos that would be hung on walls? |
No, at least not me. |
But Shroom, take a look at your ribbon photos, they are not all upbeat or pretty, but they are definitely photos I could see hanging on someone's wall. Look at almost any ribboned photo on the site, and you'll see what I mean.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:12:25 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
If we're expressing our personally tastes, then by all means vote accordingly. I believe that my personal feelings should play a lesser role when I judge an image. I know - one can never be totally objective. But I also believe that one can try to see the intent and execution of that intent somewhat independently of personal prejudices (NOT meant to imply that you're prejudiced, of course). |
I think this is the crux of the issue.
YOU believe that the best way to vote is to place your emphasis on as objective as possible an assessment of the image.
MY belief is that I should take into account when voting how much I like an image myself. I judge that by considering sheer appeal of content/ image, how well the image fits the theme, technical issues such as focus, image quality etc. After all I'm being asked for my personal opinion on each photo in terms of how high I'd like to see it rank in a competition. And I'm not sure I CAN really look at these images in a true objective fashion as humans are inherently subjective creatures.
I think trying to separate how much one really likes the image from how good it is on a purely technical level, is impossible and, furthermore is futile.
BUT I stress that this is MY personal opinion on the point of voting.
A strength of DPC is that each voter is permitted to use their own judgement on how best to vote provided they don't try and vote on an agenda of skewing results to give preference to their own or their friends' images.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:23:42 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
Can't we learn to rate images on their own merit vs. our prejudices?? |
Voting has to be subjective for it to be worthwhile. If we try and ignore our personal reaction to an image, how much we subjectively like it, and attempt to vote purely on whether it's a technically well produced image or not, the results would be meaningless.
For an image to get a high score it has to connect with the viewer and connect in a positive way. It's not just about technical merit. In fact an image that does this well can succeed even if it's not technically perfect.
A technically well taken image that just fails to appeal to the viewer will not do well no matter how well it's taken.
And that's as it should be. The images that win are images that many people admire and LIKE enough to want to look at them again and again and again.
And content doesn't always have to be "nice" to achieve that positive connection - it can be quite dark and show an unpleasant side of life and yet make an emotional connection.
But, whether we like or not, or agree with societal values or not, an image that is simply unattractive to viewers will not (and should not) score that highly. |
I agree that the voting should include a strong subjective element... what impact does the object have on you. But, do you really feel that this is happening? Is it possible that people voting on their notion of what a good photograph is or looking for "errors" rather than accessing the impact of the image.
I don't have any answers here, but the voting on everyday object does not appear to be very consistent.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:25:01 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
...
I think trying to separate how much one really likes the image from how good it is on a purely technical level, is impossible and, furthermore is futile.
|
Kavey, I do believe that one can look at a photo, rate its technical execution, and attempt to surmise the intent of the photographer. I have absolutely no interest in flowers, for instance, and am bored by photos of them (although have made a few, myself, ...under duress from my wife...), but try to recognize good execution.
I also think judging is (for me) an exercise in empathy - again, trying to see and feel the intent of the photographer.
I disagree that it's impossible and futile. |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:26:25 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Sonifo:
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
|
Why this one? This is a bad portrait. Look at the lighting, way to bright at the right side. The background is bad. There is a shadow. hmmm...I won't mention anything about the subject. A shirt would have been more appropriate.
I will say, the frame was good idea. |
It isnt suppose to be a portrait, at least not as far as I could see. Just because it has a person in a shot in a studio setting does not mean it is trying to be a serious portrait, nor does everything have to be serious. I thought it had an interesting message. On one hand it is humorous, on the other it potentially has commentary on the points that people are bringing up about it. Had it been a slender naked woman or a guy with a six pack then the commenary would have been completely different. You also have an expensive-looking frame and what could be viewed as a 'slob' - is that a commentary on the value of art and what deserves to be hanging and what not?
Not everything has to be pretty. Not everything is a picture of a person with no meaning other than 'hey, this is a person with a smiling face that means nothing other than recording what this person looks like on this day in history'. Granted there are some pictures that have no meanings, some pictures dont set out to have a meaning but people get one out of them anyway. At the end of the day you get what you look for. If all you want to see is a socially unattractive male holding a frame then that is all you will see.
The look, dont think, click, next mentality of voting on DPC is never going to change for the majority of voters.
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:27:25 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Sonifo:
"What is wrong with this shot" you ask?
Take a deeper look, not just at his nekkid body and his expression, but the lighting, shadows, background. Not a very well set up portrait in my oppinion.
What was his point with the expression? Is he grossed out by his looks and wants everyone else to gross out too? Not sure why he took this shot. |
I will say, the frame was good idea. [/quote]
Kinda Harsh don't you think |
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:29:30 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Nusbaum:
I agree that the voting should include a strong subjective element... what impact does the object have on you. But, do you really feel that this is happening? Is it possible that people voting on their notion of what a good photograph is or looking for "errors" rather than accessing the impact of the image.
|
I try not to worry about how others are voting and concentrate my energies on giving fair time to the images I vote on myself...
After all, we'll never know, nor will a discussion here likely have much impact on other peoples' voting habits...
|
|
|
|
08/04/2004 12:33:00 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by lenkphotos:
Originally posted by Kavey:
...
I think trying to separate how much one really likes the image from how good it is on a purely technical level, is impossible and, furthermore is futile.
|
Kavey, I do believe that one can look at a photo, rate its technical execution, and attempt to surmise the intent of the photographer. I have absolutely no interest in flowers, for instance, and am bored by photos of them (although have made a few, myself, ...under duress from my wife...), but try to recognize good execution.
I also think judging is (for me) an exercise in empathy - again, trying to see and feel the intent of the photographer.
I disagree that it's impossible and futile. |
Trying to see and feel the intent of the photographer is all part and parcel of my assessment too - and it has an impact on how much I (subjectively) like the image.
I understand too your point about giving fair play to content that doesn't appeal to you. I will score a well executed and clever thematic entry reasonably high - but I won't give it quite as high a score as a similarly well executed and clever thematic entry which I personally like more.
Empathy is all very well but this is a competition and I assume the idea is to have those images that best appeal to the most people rank at the top of the heap?
As I said, we are all free to vote as we see fit (within reason).
As for images that "should have ranked higher" - my feeling on that is that the only way this can happen in such a way to satisfy each voter (as we all have different tastes and preferenes) is for the ranking to reflect only their own votes.
Each image ranks as it deserves according to the views of the entire community.
I would agree that there are always images which I am surprised haven't ranked more highly but appreciate that my tastes obviously don't match the majority in those instances.
Message edited by author 2004-08-04 12:35:29.
|
|
