| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/06/2003 04:12:37 AM · #1 |
Well, been lurking for a while. When "fauna" came along, I posted a pic. I know it's "just" a cat pic, but that happens to be my speciality (well, "one of"). The pic is HERE.
As you can see, it's not your every day cat pic. I tried to get "a different perspective". I think I accomplished that. The frame is filled, it's a tight crop. It's like a cat in a box (as one commenter nicely puts it). Am I bragging when I say that this pic would stand out when compared to "simple" cat shots? I think not.
But now let's look at the score: I ended on 143rd place! An average score of 5.370!
Above my pic, on the list, with a better score than me, are (to name but a few...)
-Eagles with their BACKS to the camera
-The average duck shots (nothing special; just swimming, just the head, etc...)
-A pigeon flying in front of a car
-A rhino sniffing another rhino's butt
-A "seen 1000 times before" gorilla shot from the zoo
-An eagle with a totally blown out sky behind it
and so on, and so on...
Sigh... Now this may seem as if I'm one of those "my shot is best" type of guy, but really; I'm not like that. In fact, my favorite shots are in the top 20 (they deserve to be there, and deserve to beat my score). It's just that in this case, I think my pic ended too low on the list for some reason. Do I need to be part of a club or something?
Don't agree? Let's have a look at the figures shall we?
Average Vote per Commenters:7.950
Average Vote per Users w/ Cameras: 5.380
Average Vote per Users w/out Cameras: 3.000
Strangely enough, all the pics around my pic (even up to 5 pages before and after) get a "commenters score" between 5 and 6.5. Mine almost gets an 8! My pic is on page 15, but you have to go to page 8 to find the first pic that beats that score!
But then how come that the other 2 scores are so low? Where does that big difference come from? Especially the users "without cam"; an average score of only 3!? Come on! Something smells rotten here... I really have this "PhotoSIG" feeling right now...
Ciao,
J.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 04:32:48 AM · #2 |
The challenge was fauna. That implies animals in their natural habitat. You photographed a cat, probably your own, with no supporting evidence that it was in the wild. From there it becomes just another pet picture - and there are pet pictures in just about every challenge. To get a good score with a pet picture it has to be outstanding. Don't get me wrong, I like your picture quite a bit, but I don't think it meets the challenge very well. And that's the reason for this site - meeting weekly challenges.
The pictures you listed above you are good examples of fauna to me. Some may deserve the scores they got, others may not. I don't think you did badly at all.
-Matt |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 04:42:27 AM · #3 |
That IS quite a swing in the voting. I really like the photo, but I'm afraid some people just don't like cats and some people expected non-pets to meet the challenge of fauna.
BTW, what is a "PhotoSIG" feeling?
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 04:54:34 AM · #4 |
| I like your pic and your cropping (I am a cat lover though). I also tried a somehow different fauna submission and ended up on 134th place (just short before you) I also do not agree that some of the pics before me are better than mine in senses of originality and quality. But thats how it goes, so I'm just moving on. This is a challenge site with which you have to please a lot of different (sometimes: close) minded people (allthough I would have guessed that cats do good - like kids usually are; but I tried that and didn't prevail either). So: chin up and on to the next one. |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 06:04:50 AM · #5 |
Matt,
I'm not 100% sure that "fauna" implies "animals in their natural habitat". To me it just implies "animals". But even if you are right:
-My cat is a domesticated animal, so it IS photographed in it's natural habitat.
-A lot of pics with a higher score are animals photographed in the zoo (sometimes quite obvious).
I'm just trying to say that I don't think the fact that my subject is a cat is responsible for the strange score (high commenters score vs. low other scores)...
J. |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 06:08:53 AM · #6 |
Antithesis,
Well, I left SIG a while ago, as all the so called "winners" over there are results of the "three thumbs up club" (aka. "3TU-club"); that's a club of "friends" who give each other huge scores, and completely disregard other pics, or even bring other pics' average score down by giving 1TU or 2TU...
I just had a feeling that something like that was going on here... |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 06:47:16 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by jochen:
Matt,
I'm not 100% sure that "fauna" implies "animals in their natural habitat". To me it just implies "animals". But even if you are right:
-My cat is a domesticated animal, so it IS photographed in it's natural habitat.
-A lot of pics with a higher score are animals photographed in the zoo (sometimes quite obvious).
I'm just trying to say that I don't think the fact that my subject is a cat is responsible for the strange score (high commenters score vs. low other scores)...
J. |
Here is a breakdown for ya. You had 24 comments. Almost every single one was a pat on the back and they really liked it. There were 315 photos in the contest, so hopefully 315 voters (most likely more). So...the other 291 voters were on that pretty Bell curve of votes.
Myself....I gave it a 1. Why? Every pet picture in that challenge got a one. Every zoo picture got a 3.
My take on the challenge. Something wild and basically in its natural habitat. That is how I voted on it. People may have a problem with that, but that is how I saw it. Even though I would like to have commented why on every one...I would still be commenting. Too many.
You will see that every week, no matter what the challenge, there will be a pet, child, or flower picture. It always happens and there is nothing wrong with it. Everyone sees these things and interprets them in a different manner. Some people don't have access to certain things available for a challenge, but they like to submit. I hate the challenges that I cannot relate it to a natural occurring thing or event (ie: studio shots), other people are on the other end of the spectrum. I just don't submit, then.
Everyone here has there own opinions, and they are not swayed very easily.
The main thing is...you make your interpretation, shoot it, and submit what you love. Get the comments and LEARN how to improve YOUR photography. If you want to have high scores...appeal to the masses and take the challenge very literally and keep it simple, but have a WOW factor.
My scores are continuing to increase, but I am submitting things I like (even though I try to push the envelope some)...so I think I am learning how to shoot a better photo and also (at times) get lucky that the masses like it, too. It does involve a little luck, also.
Keep shooting. Become technically adept and your artistic side will show through and (very soon) the masses will adore it also. One other thing...I rarely vote anything less than a 5. Almost everyone here takes an average photo, it is meeting the challenge in the majorities eyes that will count a lot.
Good Luck (I need to go to bed...that was way long winded and not sure it made sense) (C:
tracy
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:16:07 AM · #8 |
So Tracy... lemme get this... the challenge is FAUNA... that means animals, right? And even if they have to be "in their natural habitat" (as Matt sees it)... well... my cat is a domesticated animal, so it IS in it's natural habitat, right? So what the f*** is wrong?
I can understand that you do not like pet pictures popping up in about every contest... but this was ONE CONTEST were pet pictures ARE 100% justified. And even HERE you feel the need to throw the lowest possible scores in the face of every one who "dares" to post such a pet pic? Shame on you! You are out of line and you're being way too harch in your judgements!
I took a look at your pics. Seems like quite a few were converted to some sort of B/W and/or sepia look. You know what? I think I don't like the fact that everyone uses these popular effects to boost their scores, no matter what contest. After all, there's nothing "special" about those pics anyway. The effect is as easy to create in PhotoShop as it is to take a picture of a pet, right? I think from now on I will rate every B/W or sepia pic with a 1. In fact, I'm even gonna do that if the challenge is something like "old picture" or something.
Would you like that?
Maybe the above is not the best example, but you know where I'm getting at... |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:19:18 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
I gave it a 1. Why? Every pet picture in that challenge got a one. Every zoo picture got a 3.
My take on the challenge. Something wild and basically in its natural habitat. That is how I voted on it. People may have a problem with that, but that is how I saw it. |
This is the kind of voting I wish would be stopped, it is very unfair you are admitting you don't even take any technical merit into your voting. So sad to do this to everyone. For starters a cat in the home is in its NATURAL HABITAT as the challenge asked for. Zoo shots might not be natural habitat but then again all animals now days are born into captivity so that is the natural habitat for those animals also. Why is is so hard for so many people to be able to look at cliche photos and score them on technical merit as well?
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:26:17 AM · #10 |
[quote=OneSweetSin
Why is is so hard for so many people to be able to look at cliche photos and score them on technical merit as well?[/quote]
I think we'll need a clause in the agreement before joining this site. =-)
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:35:14 AM · #11 |
One of these threads comes up every contest. People feel slighted by their scores and they think there is some big conspiracy. There isn't, or at least there isn't enough of one to sway votes in a particular direction. Get over it.
If everyone voted just on technical merit alone, there would be no distinction between the top scores. There's plenty of pictures here that deserve 10's on their technical merits. However, choice of subject plays a very very large part in how a subject gets scored.
I gave you a 6 for that photo jochen. It's not the best cat picture I've seen but it was interesting enough. That's above your average score and below the commenters score.
-Matt |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:43:38 AM · #12 |
I havent entered a picture yet ive only been here a week but i think you enter to get feedback off people and if they only put it at 200 or what ever out of 300 then thats what you get ive looked at your picture and i would have give it a 5 not higher i say this because i look at a picture for what it is. its a cat to me not a house cat not in a zoo it could be on a plane all i care is that its a cat. if you had focuse out slightly to get a bit more of the cats head and it curling up in the picture i would be giving it a 7 or an 8 as for giving it one cos its a pet in my opinion is silly.
we are here for criticism and help and this is what you get |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:53:01 AM · #13 |
Now this is just the opinion of one person, but my interpretation, and, I truly believe, the interpretation of the majority of people, was to try to get a pic of some kind of wild, or wild-seeming animal. The point being to get people to stretch and capture subjects that are not easy to find, or easy to photograph. Hey, it's a challenge! :)
I think if it had been about pets, the challenge would have been called 'Pets' or 'Domestic Animals'. I'm sorry but 'the home as a natural habitat' is quite a rationalization. Why not do one's spouse at the TV or in the bath, then? Your shot of a pet isn't the only one that didn't do great, so it's not like you were singled out or something. The highest ranking pet shot was 124th. So apparently the voters, as a body, seemed to pick up on the 'wild animals' theme.
Re: the votes themselves, it's a well known fact that people mostly comment when they like something, so it's not surprising your commenters liked it so much. The rest of the votes were right about average (the 5.3), which is about what your score and placement was. The 'voter without camera', well, they're always a wild card but I don't think there's more than maybe like one of them, anyway, hence the perfectly round number.
I love cat pictures, especially artful ones, but we must always be mindful of the challenge. That *is* after all the name of the site! :) Good luck!
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:56:05 AM · #14 |
look at the bright side..... yours was the highest rated domestic cat photo!
Personally, I think you need to chill out a bit..... honestly, when you think of fauna is your cat the first thing that comes to mind? My first thought (rightly or wrongly) is of native fauna.
Looking at your profile you have been a member for over 12 months and entered three challenges and made two forum comments..... both of them to complain.....
Perhaps you should not worry so much about other peoples pictures and concentrate on your own.... especially seeing as you think your pics are so much better than those around you.....
The bottom line is photography is art, one person's masterpiece is another person's garbage, so just accept the fact that some people liked your photo and some people didn't. If you don't like it go to a site that is dedicated to cat pictures, you will undoubtedly do very well there.
There is no conspiricy theory here, weight of numbers here would make it difficult to coordinate anyway.
Just my two cents worth.
Todd. |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 07:56:37 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by mbardeen:
One of these threads comes up every contest. People feel slighted by their scores and they think there is some big conspiracy. There isn't, or at least there isn't enough of one to sway votes in a particular direction. Get over it. |
Here here!
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 08:19:10 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by jochen:
.
But then how come that the other 2 scores are so low? Where does that big difference come from? Especially the users "without cam"; an average score of only 3!? Come on! Something smells rotten here... I really have this "PhotoSIG" feeling right now...
J. |
You should not pay too much attention to user without cameras as they usually are 1 or 2 only (which explains the rounded figure).
There is no acounting for taste and everybody is constantly amazed at how lousy pictures get better ratings than theirs. Whats new? This is true in all artistic diciplines. A little rant is fine (everybody loves it) but learn to take the blow (will not be your last fustration, if you stay around long enough). |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 08:37:01 AM · #17 |
| I think people took the easy way out by going to the zoo or staying home with their pets. I got a shot of a beaver in the creek althouth i did not submit it i went with a goose shot. At least I went out looking . I too scored low on peoples pets, I believe Drew explained that domestic animals are not Fauna and if I could tell it was a zoo I also marked it down unless the shot was just Great! |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 08:43:17 AM · #18 |
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
Myself....I gave it a 1. Why? Every pet picture in that challenge got a one. Every zoo picture got a 3.
|
It is nice to live in the country or have the means to get there, and be able to have access to wild animals in their natural habitat. I guess that gives you the right to penalize everyone who does not have that privilege and is making the best of the opportunities they have available.
-Terry
Message edited by author 2003-05-06 11:42:01.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 08:52:08 AM · #19 |
Jochen-
Don't sweat it man. You can't put too much weight into comments or votes on here. Because the ones you get are usually never the helpful ones. |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 09:18:41 AM · #20 |
It is so BORING every week to hear people bitch and complain and call for a "conspiracy" just because their precious little shot didn't do as well as they wanted.
It is a simple fact that what the challenge means each and every week is determined entirely by the voters. It doesn't matter if you or I or anyone else thinks that "fauna" should include ANY animal; it doesn't matter if you or anyone else thinks that pets or zoo animals should be included or excluded. Three hundred plus voters make those decisions, and the majority determines what is important and what is not (the American way).
Bitch and complain privately, please; the rest of us don't need to hear it.
|
|
|
|
05/06/2003 09:29:30 AM · #21 |
| OK, some people voted pets low and zoo animals low, but if the zoo animal had been in Africa they would have voted it higher just because of location? Fauna is fauna, no matter it's present location. And maybe cats were blasted because they are pets, but I took a pet photo that didn't appear to be a pet and got a 6.5 for it (snake). It's all in appearances, nobody knows the exact situation in which you shot a photo, cats and dogs are obvious pets, but we've had Homer in a cage in our house for 13 years and took him outside and put him in a tree and it looked like fauna. There's a lot of "letter of the law" people here, be a little creative and maybe you can fool them! : ) |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 09:38:15 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by sagestudio:
OK, some people voted pets low and zoo animals low, but if the zoo animal had been in Africa they would have voted it higher just because of location? Fauna is fauna, no matter it's present location. And maybe cats were blasted because they are pets, but I took a pet photo that didn't appear to be a pet and got a 6.5 for it (snake). It's all in appearances, nobody knows the exact situation in which you shot a photo, cats and dogs are obvious pets, but we've had Homer in a cage in our house for 13 years and took him outside and put him in a tree and it looked like fauna. There's a lot of "letter of the law" people here, be a little creative and maybe you can fool them! : ) |
I hope you don't mind me doing this but, if you check out the comment I left about Homer you will find out I practice exactly what I say about voting. I gave this photo a 7
//www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=18878
Then took the time to go back and comment on it cause I think that was a great snake photo the detail was fantatic. If I had lived with my fear of snakes and how I hate to see snake photos I would have given it a 1, but hey I am objective just cause I don't have a snake and I won't have prints of snakes hanging on my walls doesn't mean I can't have enough objectivity to truly score it according to its overall merit. |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 09:41:41 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
Myself....I gave it a 1. Why? Every pet picture in that challenge got a one. Every zoo picture got a 3.
|
It is live in the country or have the means to get there, and be able to have access to wild animals in their natural habitat. I guess that gives you the right to penalize everyone who does not have that privilege and is making the best of the opportunities they have available.
-Terry |
Nicely said Terry! I live in the city, I don't have a car, I admit my fauna wasn't a great photo, and I wasn't expecting to do well with it, I probably would have done better with a photo of one of my cats or the dog than I did with circus elephants. |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 09:42:00 AM · #24 |
| I'd run fast in the opposite direction of any snake coming my way, even if they are named Homer :-) Scarey! |
|
|
|
05/06/2003 09:53:53 AM · #25 |
Todd:
The fact that so far I only posted 3 pics is because I only recently found the time and means to really participate here. And the fact that 2 out of 3 are cat pics is just a coïncidence.
And I only opened ONE thread in this forum. The very first one, and it was a simple question; I wanted a clarification on the scores I got. It was not a "complaint" as such from the beginning. I only found my numbers to be strange, and judgeing from the replies I got, other people do too.
Now, the thread turned into a "complaint-thread" only AFTER I found out that some people rated my pic purely based on prejudgements. And - again judgeing from some replies I got - a lot of people agree with me that these kind of prejudgements are not allowed.
Jak:
If you don't like these kinds of posts, why read them? And... why reply? To you - and every one else - I say: stay aware! It's not because "complaint-threads" pop up often that none of them are justified. If everyone would dispose of complaints the way you do... in the end, what will become of the challenges?
I think in this case, there are some justified remarks that were made by me and others:
-The concept "fauna" is not clear to everyone. The dictionary describes fauna as "animal life". That's it. Nothing more. So wether the animal shots were made at home or at the zoo should not affect scores.
-A lot of participants have an unfounded biased look on these challenges. This causes a lot of grief and misunderstanding.
|
|
