| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/02/2003 10:09:52 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
that's not how it works any more. you see them appear in real time now.
Originally posted by autool:
Just forty minutes into the Speed challenge my entry had 4 votes, and that means that each of them had voted on at least 20% of the entries. Is that right? If it is, then those people just clicked away without much thought going into their decision. |
|
I stand corrected. |
|
|
|
07/03/2003 01:06:58 PM · #27 |
|
|
|
07/03/2003 01:47:28 PM · #28 |
My voting method:
Does this have anything to do with the challenge topic?
YES -> vote on a scale of 1-10.
NO -> Are you sure, because it REALLY isn't fair to mark people down just because they don't see things in exactly the same way you do? Okay then, vote on a scale of 1-5.
I then pick a mark based on my first impression of the shot and spend the next 2-3 minutes evaluating why I chose that number, and whether it deserves to be higher or lower - based on the quality of the photograph/message put across/impact of the shot.
|
|
|
|
07/03/2003 01:53:25 PM · #29 |
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=13050
Was scanning the forums for tutorials/info on home studio setup and came across this thread. The first post by FranziskaLang is great and might be beneficial to some of the new people around here.
|
|
|
|
07/03/2003 03:40:01 PM · #30 |
I dont have strick guidelines, I just think about what I would have done to improve the photo, and if I think it fits in well with the challange.
Gideon
Link |
|
|
|
07/03/2003 11:48:47 PM · #31 |
Thanks to those who have posted so far, I hope we will hear from others, especially those who have been on this site for quite a while, and still manage to vote almost every week! It'd be great to know what those long standing people think as well. Hope to hear from a lot more people... maybe it's my weird title (yes, I know it doesn't make sense) that keeps people away? LETS HERE WHAT YOU VOTE ON...
|
|
|
|
11/03/2003 06:12:07 PM · #32 |
| It is an amazing place isn't it. You've taken some beautiful pics. I was there on a whirl wind tour last year. My pics aren't as nice but take a look. //www.synapse-d.com/clients/carthage |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 06:39:45 PM · #33 |
I basically go along these lines.
The exception is the meeting the challenge thing is important to me, or at least an attempt to.
As I have posted before, I have a theory people can use to test if OTHERS might see their pic as meeting the challenge. Do a word association on the photo, imagining you do not know what the challenge is (or better still, get someone else to who really doesn't know).
Take Grace as an example. You took a photo of a ballet dancer, someone might word associate the word "Grace" within a few words, neat. Take a picture of someone doing a perfect dive into a pool, grace would still come up, maybe further down the list. etc etc etc. Have a photo of your cat, because it is called "Grace" ..... would anyone ever realistically word associate that? If not then maybe consider others will not see it meeting the challenge.
I do mark down for entries I can not see making an attempt to meet the challenge. However, if I have any doubt at all I post a comment and ask. In grace I posted 3 such comments. Two people bothered to reply and in both cases I then saw what they meant, and remarked them accordingly. The third person .... I have no idea, so their score stayed where it was.
People need to consider how OTHERS will see their photo. Would a magazine editor who sent you on an assignment to get photos of something dangerous accept a photo of your cat on your lawn? (But yes, as if a car swerved onto the lawn it might run over the cat, which is dangerous).
Meeting the challenge to me is an important part of voting.
Originally posted by hortopth:
(1) composition
(2) light
(3) focus (use of it- not necessarily IN focus)
(4) the subject- basically if I find it appealing
(5) does it fit the challenge?
(6) obvious flaws? an intruding object, a careless background, something that doesn't belong--
BUT of course, its basically how I feel, these things probably just shift my initially score, which is completely subjective |
|
|
|
|
11/03/2003 07:58:27 PM · #34 |
| To me meeting the challenge is the first thing I look at and then mark accordingly from there. Doesn't matter how awesome your photo is if it doesn't meet the challenge. On the other hand you are not getting a great mark just because you met the challenge with a horrible photo either. |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 08:49:20 PM · #35 |
Hey Talya,
I you said it all quite well. I really begin with, "does it meet the challenge", then I scale from there. If it doesn't meet the challenge in my eye, it begins at 4 or less, depending on how good it is. A four not meeting the challenge, would be 9 or 10 if it did. I my opinion, this is a weekly challenge/assignment, kind of like a news or school assignment. Van |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 09:06:32 PM · #36 |
Wow, Talya, that was a good post (to start this thread). I am very impressed with how much thought you put into it, and into voting - I'm afraid that for myself I've never really thought that much about it (voting, I mean).
To me, it is incredibly helpful to find out how others look at pictures, because I think that I tend to "fall in love" with my own creations, and I lose sight of how they (my creations, or pictures) might be perceived by others. And, without others liking my pictures, it becomes frustrating for me to take pictures (duh!!!). Actually, the whole world is so frustrating that one more thing isn't going to hurt :)) Anyway.
I just think this is a very good post.
Ursula
|
|
|
|
11/03/2003 09:50:20 PM · #37 |
I think you should judge by the results more than by weather they followed your rules.
And as far as "I’m very into looking at the difficulty of the photo."
"Photographic quality doesn't equate in any way whatsoever to the time and effort you've expended in taking the picture. Perhaps it took you three hours to get close enough to those ducks to photograph them; meanwhile you had to crawl through muddy ditches filled with stagnant water dragging 50 pounds of equimpment. So what? Does that make an out-of-focus underexposed photograph any better? No." John Shaw
Tim |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 10:02:16 PM · #38 |
Great post! It was definitely worth the read.
I consider many of the same things as mentioned above. Basically, I like a photo that looks like some thought (more than 30 seconds!) went into it. I hate photos that look like people just snapped the picture, couldn't get out of the car and shot through the windshield, couldn't move over 10 feet to avoid a distracting object, etc...
In most cases it should follow The Rule, be sharp, the colors should be vibrant, the subject of the photo should fit the challenge (this is a biggie!), and it should be intriguing. I kind of always ask myself, "Is this something that someone would like hanging on their wall? ..use for a brochure or other media?" If it's not something I believe could be used for public viewing then it must really suck and/or is a snapshot.
|
|
|
|
11/03/2003 10:42:08 PM · #39 |
I look at the quality first. Then, is it different from all the other pictures in the challenge. Then at the imagination used to create the picture. Then if it meets the challenge. I don't mark down so much because I don't think it meets the challenge. A photo only has length and width, the photographer might have had wonderful thoughts at the moment the picture was being captured and was not able to translate the thought to the flatness of the photo.
I tend to vote a lot of 4s, 5s and 6s. Sevens are getting into more precise visualization of the challenge and technically superior pictures. And 8, 9, 10 are for really nice ones that have a wow factor. I have given 1, 2, 3 but mostly for massive flaws like being unfocused and such, technical things that are wrong with the picture.
I have a special score I give to the ones that make me laugh. They almost always get an 8. |
|
|
|
11/03/2003 10:51:44 PM · #40 |
With apologies to those who have read this before in other threads:
This is how I try (very hard) to vote:
1 > a technically (composition, focus, lighting, balance, effects, focus etc.) incompetent photo or an entirely unintelligible one (sometimes due to the size of an image) , an 'offensive' one to civilized nature or (even) a technically apt photo which 'clearly' demonstrates a 'failure of feeling'
2 > a technically lacking photo with little or no 'perceivable' artistic merit and/or interest, even when generously considered; a somewhat 'offensive' photo or a gross and inappropriate sentimentalization of feeling in the context of the challenge; the pursuit of cliché without room for even a latent interpretation (irony, persiflage etc.)
3 > a photo of mixed or questionable merit, both artistically and technically; a technically 'acceptable' one without marked artistic or journalistic interest; a sentimental or highly 'commercialized' image designed to 'sell' a product or (worse!) person of reasonable or considerable technical merit; a potentially 'interesting' or 'promising' photo (subject matter/perspective) with 'severe' technical flaws
4 > a 'pretty' photo reminiscent of many; an otherwise captivating image with one or more clearly distracting elements, either within the capture itself or via border and/or title; a technically accomplished photo relying predominantly on an idea and/or title for impact; an artistically 'promising' capture with clearly noticeable technical defects; a technically 'stunning' capture bare of 'feeling' or aesthetic 'sense'
5 > a 'good' photo by most standards; one that communicates capably without teaching or exhilarating us; an artistically interesting photo pointing an unusual view, perspective or matter, even if it suffers from technical 'flaws'; a technically 'stunning' capture with limited human or artistic 'range'
6 > a remarkable image, well executed by most standards while allowing for some technical shortcomings not easily prevented or corrected; an ordinary or simple shot, perfectly timed or 'found' that tells an old story in a new way; a very personal take, a 'fresh' controversy with commotive qualities, but aesthetically 'exciting'; an image in the 'classic' fashion, well executed (i.e. landscape/portrait)
7 > an outstanding photograph fit for both study and pleasure, while allowing for minor technical shortcomings, an accomplished imitation of a mode of seeing or rendering drawn or alluding to another medium
8 > same as 7, but one that stimulates awareness and taxes the senses, technically accomplished, with near-imperceptible flaws, if not entirely flawless
9 > same as 8, technically without a fault, but a photo which commotes 'perceived' reality to the point of restlessness and action
10 > a photo that challenges the order of gods and the world, one holding its own alongside any other. |
|
|
|
11/04/2003 12:29:29 AM · #41 |
I see merit in many of the comments here. I would probably come closest to zeuszen's grading system except that I don't expect to see any '1's or '10's. My average score is a five. If it's better than average, it works its way up to a '9', worse, down to a '2'. A '1' is intentionally offensive; a 10 is heart-stopping, and possibly does re-arrange the order of the (photographic)gods.
If a photo does not seem to meet the challenge, I try to see it from the photographer's perspective, hoping that a different viewpoint will help me make sense of it. If it doesn't, I skip the photo and wait for it to come up again, hoping it will make sense. I give it three views, then dock it from 1 to 2 points.
As St. Ansel said, "There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs." It's a matter of taste, once the basics are assumed to be mastered and met. |
|
|
|
11/04/2003 01:21:39 AM · #42 |
Originally posted by f-32:
I see merit in many of the comments here. I would probably come closest to zeuszen's grading system except that I don't expect to see any '1's or '10's. My average score is a five. If it's better than average, it works its way up to a '9', worse, down to a '2'. A '1' is intentionally offensive; a 10 is heart-stopping, and possibly does re-arrange the order of the (photographic)gods.
If a photo does not seem to meet the challenge, I try to see it from the photographer's perspective, hoping that a different viewpoint will help me make sense of it. If it doesn't, I skip the photo and wait for it to come up again, hoping it will make sense. I give it three views, then dock it from 1 to 2 points.
As St. Ansel said, "There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs." It's a matter of taste, once the basics are assumed to be mastered and met. |
Wow f-32, that's pretty much my view on voting as well. Thanks for saying it much better than I ever could.
|
|
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: 04/24/2024 03:08:50 AM EDT.
