| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/09/2006 01:05:26 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by saracat:
A more practical solution (and one that I think would be easier to implement) would be to have a multi-vote system: for each entry have a vote for technical aspects, artistic impression, and whether or not it meets the challenge. Each voter would be required to vote on each aspect before moving on to the next photo. |
Great thinking Sara, works for me. There's a long discussion on the subject here
Brett |
|
|
|
01/09/2006 01:12:52 PM · #77 |
Just for the record...When I submit a photo I think it is a pretty good photo even when in hindsight..I see my errors. I think how "witty" my photo is and I am all excited about the little technique I may have picked up and used. Maybe one of my mistakes is that I never, ever ask for opinions about my photo or show my photo ..even to my family and friends, before I enter. When I enter, the voters are seeing this photo for the first time
So when I get individual votes that are really low or when my overall vote is low...I take notice, I see the scores and don't like it anymore than the next person...especially since my ego..like most photographers...is closer to Terrell Ownes than Mother Theresa :-D
If people really didn't care about their photography and how others reacted to the photos..I think it would show in the lack of emotion in their work and it would make it hard for them to refine their skills.
Anyway...I am not immune to any of the feelings expressed in this thread..not by any stretch...:-)
By the way...I have always said the simplest way to change the voting is to remove the anonymity. But that ain't ever going to happen :-/
Message edited by author 2006-01-09 13:17:46. |
|
|
|
01/09/2006 01:24:33 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
My humble opinion on this subject is as follows: we all have a different rating system for things we like and dislike. However, this is a learning site. As such, I can not conceive giving a 1 to an image, although not quite to my liking, if the image meets the challenge and the technique is good. To do so is to penalize the total effort of the photographer by cutting into whatever score advantage they hold.
There is no law that you can not give a one. The penalty goes to the member you voted on and to your average vote cast. It is a two way thing.
If your object here is to learn then vote your conscience. If you are merely a critic then perhaps photography does not mean the same to you as someone who seeks to grow in their hobby.
I always learn something when looking at some of the great efforts and studies. I learn both from the ribbon winners and from those that trail low. My vote is fair and when an image beats my image I can safely say it open and I am all to ready to congratulate the winners. They have bested me and bested my ideas. Again, if you want to learn there are a lot of lessons to win from the winners as well as lessons from the losers. |
graphicfunk You said it perfectly. And may I express how appreciative I am when I get one of your comments, such as one that i recently received on a very poor entry. Thank you very much.
--jrjr |
|
|
|
01/09/2006 01:47:21 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If we, as a community, really want to ensure that the "best", "most original" images receive the highest scores, then we need to leave popular voting behind and move to a juried system, with the jurors both skilled and objective enough to overlook personal taste and zero in on true photographic merit. This isn't gonna happen, because it's not what the site is about.
Robt. |
I would think even a panel of educated (in photography) voters would disagree on what is "best". Is it the realistic landscape, the abstract, soft focus? Portrait or candid? There are just too many styles to say "This is the best" without also including "in my opinion". |
|
|
|
01/09/2006 01:57:19 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by chaimelle:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
If we, as a community, really want to ensure that the "best", "most original" images receive the highest scores, then we need to leave popular voting behind and move to a juried system, with the jurors both skilled and objective enough to overlook personal taste and zero in on true photographic merit. This isn't gonna happen, because it's not what the site is about.
Robt. |
I would think even a panel of educated (in photography) voters would disagree on what is "best". Is it the realistic landscape, the abstract, soft focus? Portrait or candid? There are just too many styles to say "This is the best" without also including "in my opinion". |
To a degree this is certainly true, and there's no way around it. However, for the sake of argument, a "qualified" jury will have been exposed to enough different types of photography, at a high enough level, to be able to rate all entries on merit alone without personal biases factoring in. Personally, there are some sorts of photography I favor MUCH more than others, but I regularly give very high scores to images that are not "to my taste"; I try to vote on photographic merit, not emotional responses.
Many of our voters do exactly that, I am sure. But THIS thread is about "outlier" votes. Anyway, my point is NOT that I think we should shift to juried competitions, but that we should ACCEPT that the most popular image will win, and that popularity is not always (perhaps not even often) based on photographic merit and/or artistic risk-taking. With very few exceptions, the ribbon-winning photos are technically superior; I'm not arguing that. But there are many, many technically superior and artistically risky images that get hammered by the voters. I don't see any way around it.
R.
Message edited by author 2006-01-09 13:57:34. |
|
|
|
01/09/2006 02:21:46 PM · #81 |
This whole discussion always goes in circles...like a discussion on religion or politics.
I don't see one person willing to change their mind on this.
Some of the arguments I see against low voters reminds me of this show on TV..."Four Kings" I think it's called.
In one episode, one room mate is standing next to one of his other room mates and the girl his room mate is taking out. The first guy also likes the girl but..he is a bit shorter than his friend, doesn't have the "classic" good looks and obviously lost out to his room mate.
He tells the girl "I know you chose my friend over me but, if you got to know me, would you change your mind?"
He goes over multiple scenarios where they are doing this or that to get to know each other better and each time the girl says she still would choose his friend, even though he paints a nice picture of him and her having a good time.
The point...some people know what they like and no manner of logical discussion, extensive debate or analytical prowess will move that person off of their opinion.
And that is the way the world works forever!
Also, someone else said..I think it was Graphicfunk...that a vote of 1 unfairly hurts the point advantage of another photographer.
He's right..it does hurt the photographers point advantage but so, everyone lives with that, good photos, bad photos, middle of the road photos.
Just because you are a great photographer, your photo is wonderful and you are a nice person does not give you any gaurantee at a public voting site of absolute impartiality.
People share their entries with other voters, people block vote, people get their friends, relatives and schoolmates to vote. It's the american way to do this..just watch any presidential election :-/
If a more controlled voting environment is what someone wants..there are lots (meaning more than any person can particpate at in their lifetime) that woould either be a juried contest or have some other controls that might meet your needs.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 11:18:34 AM · #82 |
One idea could be to identify how many 1s, 2s and 3s are given to the ribbons, top 10 and top 20 (or similar)and present this on the individuals profile page.
That would identify people giving low scores to downgrade others.
Could also be presented as average vote cated on ribbons and average vote casted on top 10??
This would be giving these people bad cred just as DQs give you bad cred or the same way Ribbons give you cred! This would work as some kind of Karma.
This would not change any votes, just pointing out the problem (if there is any). It would be easy to implement and try on this site and maybe if it works the problem will be all gone.
Message edited by author 2006-01-11 11:26:44. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 02:28:59 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by ubique:
Sure there is, Brett. They're just dickheads who vote low for the same vapid reason that idiots spray obscene graffiti and dogs piss on trees: to mark their territory. |
I just knew you were Australian! I haven't heard the word "dickhead" used since I left Aus! hehe I have had a few raised eyebrows when I have used it on occasion though lol |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 02:58:31 PM · #84 |
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Solution: Vote for the challenge you did not enter. |
:) wonder if they will ever get it.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 03:01:55 PM · #85 |
Originally posted by elwoodsplace:
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Solution: Vote for the challenge you did not enter. |
:) wonder if they will ever get it. |
And how would you deal with the advanced challenges, where there's only one on the boards at a time?
R. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 03:08:59 PM · #86 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by elwoodsplace:
Originally posted by iamkmaniam:
Solution: Vote for the challenge you did not enter. |
:) wonder if they will ever get it. |
And how would you deal with the advanced challenges, where there's only one on the boards at a time?
R. |
Would it matter? There are always ateast 4 challengs, you just cannot vote on the one you enter. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 03:19:29 PM · #87 |
mmm... obviously I'm totally against voting certain pictures down to bump others up... I just go through all the pictures without thinking of my own picture. I just go on what I like... that said, has it occured to anyone that the odd person might not like what everone else likes...? I gave the winning picture in the "mother" challenge a 2. I just don't like it. there is no sinister plot behind it.
just like I have given high scores to pictures that end up featuring in the bottom half!
Ingrid.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 03:50:38 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by idemaerschalk:
mmm... obviously I'm totally against voting certain pictures down to bump others up... I just go through all the pictures without thinking of my own picture. I just go on what I like... that said, has it occured to anyone that the odd person might not like what everone else likes...? I gave the winning picture in the "mother" challenge a 2. I just don't like it. there is no sinister plot behind it.
just like I have given high scores to pictures that end up featuring in the bottom half!
Ingrid. |
Can we discuss that? Since you're willing to tell us how you scored it? You have every right to score as you wish, of course, but there are a lot of people discussing the issue here. I, also, don't particularly "like" the picture; I'm not a big fan of misty, soft-focus, romantic-looking shots. I didn't like that none of the eyes were visible in the shot, so it seemed to be lacking a certain expressiveness it might otherwise have. Nevertheless, it clearly meets the challenge and it's quite well-done, technically and compositionally. So I gave it a 5.
Personally, I can't imagine giving a 2 to a clearly on-topic image that's technically well-executed just because I "don't like it". That this image won the blue ribbon seems to me, personally, a vast overrating of the shot. But it IS well-made and the voters DID like it, so my opinion is just that.
I definitely don't mean to put you on the spot, but if you choose to explain the thought process that gives an abysmally low score to this image I think we'd love to hear it because it gives insight into how others vote. For example, do you disagree with me that it's technically competent?
Again, I don't want to put you on the spot; if you don't care to discuss this, by all means ignore this post. But I'm genuinely interested, and you DID volunteer your score to the thread. It's definitely an outlier vote (only 14 of 290 votes were below 5, and 8 of those were 4's) which is what this thread is discussing.
Robt. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 03:58:10 PM · #89 |
People are just gonna vote how they vote.
I don't see why it matters, nor why anyone, whether they choose to disclose how they vote or not, should have to justify their vote, low high or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 04:02:48 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
People are just gonna vote how they vote.
I don't see why it matters, nor why anyone, whether they choose to disclose how they vote or not, should have to justify their vote, low high or otherwise. |
To be fair, Bear's wording makes me believe that he's really trying to understand the thought processes, and an attempt at better understanding is never a bad thing.
Just make sure, Bear, that if the answer *is*, "I gave it a 2 simply because I don't like it.", that that's a perfectly valid thought process.. whether you understand it or not. ;) |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 04:05:27 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
People are just gonna vote how they vote.
I don't see why it matters, nor why anyone, whether they choose to disclose how they vote or not, should have to justify their vote, low high or otherwise. |
To be fair, Bear's wording makes me believe that he's really trying to understand the thought processes, and an attempt at better understanding is never a bad thing.
Just make sure, Bear, that if the answer *is*, "I gave it a 2 simply because I don't like it.", that that's a perfectly valid thought process.. whether you understand it or not. ;) |
Sure; I just wonder why people don't take technical competence and general skill into account when scoring a picture they don't "like"; that's what I'm interested in.
R. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 04:06:20 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
People are just gonna vote how they vote.
I don't see why it matters, nor why anyone, whether they choose to disclose how they vote or not, should have to justify their vote, low high or otherwise. |
To be fair, Bear's wording makes me believe that he's really trying to understand the thought processes, and an attempt at better understanding is never a bad thing.
Just make sure, Bear, that if the answer *is*, "I gave it a 2 simply because I don't like it.", that that's a perfectly valid thought process.. whether you understand it or not. ;) |
Sure; I just wonder why people don't take technical competence and general skill into account when scoring a picture they don't "like"; that's what I'm interested in.
R. |
Yes, I realize. I admit to being curious too, not every day someone *admits* a low score on a ribbon winner. lol |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 04:32:24 PM · #93 |
Alright... heres a suggestion. It would be simple to do and, i believe, would do alot to deterr unfair voting.
Have it be mandatory to comment when giving a score of 3 or less (where the voters user name would be attached to the comment). If the photo is simply that bad, then comments would be a plus. If it ends up winning a ribbon then obviously it wouldnt seem to deserve a 1-3 vote. The voter could then back up his/her reason for voting that low or be called on it...as seen by their comment.
JS |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 04:37:19 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by runin2dson:
Alright... heres a suggestion. It would be simple to do and, i believe, would do alot to deterr unfair voting.
Have it be mandatory to comment when giving a score of 3 or less (where the voters user name would be attached to the comment). If the photo is simply that bad, then comments would be a plus. If it ends up winning a ribbon then obviously it wouldnt seem to deserve a 1-3 vote. The voter could then back up his/her reason for voting that low or be called on it...as seen by their comment.
JS |
This is a suggestion that comes up all the time. The common response is that mandatory commenting wouldn't work. People would just type in 'aaaaa' or any lame thing just to record that vote, and there are simply not enough volunteers on the site to police what an "acceptable" comment would actually be.. let alone trying to standardize what an acceptable comment would be. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 04:39:29 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
People are just gonna vote how they vote.
I don't see why it matters, nor why anyone, whether they choose to disclose how they vote or not, should have to justify their vote, low high or otherwise. |
To be fair, Bear's wording makes me believe that he's really trying to understand the thought processes, and an attempt at better understanding is never a bad thing.
Just make sure, Bear, that if the answer *is*, "I gave it a 2 simply because I don't like it.", that that's a perfectly valid thought process.. whether you understand it or not. ;) |
Sure; I just wonder why people don't take technical competence and general skill into account when scoring a picture they don't "like"; that's what I'm interested in.
R. |
Because they choose not to.
I have given low scores to ribbon winners too and 10's to some near the bottom. For me, it's not all about technical execution and photographic skill. It is about creating an image that has appeal to the viewer. The most skillfully executed image can have 0 appeal. In some cases, a poorly executed image can have great appeal, perhaps by chance, but it still has it. I vote by my reaction to the image, if it moves me in some way, it's a great image, if not, it's not.
Whatever the rationale, and I'm sure that there are as many variations on rationale as there are voters, it's up to the voter.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 05:04:34 PM · #96 |
didn't think I get his must reaction! but I'm quite happy to go through it if it helps!
my voting process is as follows: first I go through all the pictures giving them a score based on whether I like or silike the picture, but also whether they meet the challenge. if they don't meet the challenge they get a low score possibly up to a 4 if it is actually a good picture but I've tried to not let myself be lead astray like that!
if the picture is technically not very good but the idea was clever, then I tend to put them in the middle 4-6. Same with picures that are technically quite good but might be a bit boring or just too obvious.
I very rarely give any scores higher than 6 or 7 at this stage.
When I have scored all the pictures I go back trought them especially the 5-6-7 categories and start comparing them. that's when I decide which ones I like best and bump up to 7 to 10, som also go back down...
If I have time I have a look abck at the low scores as well but i rarely change them. if I didn't like it the first time round, I don't seem to change my mind
As fot the mother picture, I just took an insant dislike to it. the soft focus, I find a bit sickening and sweet, the make up, the kiss, the whole set up... just didn't like it. although I agree that techically its very good. the 3rd place in that challenge, I did actually love very much.
Not sure this makes any sense to anyone.
I've not done very well with the scoring myself. I know when I'm going to get a very low vote (as in the mother challenge I was bottom 3%!!), but I'm only just above 5 with what I thought was a good picture in the burst of colour challenge...
I try to meet the challenge as best I can, and then I hope to get comments on how I can improve technically.
Ingrid.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2006 05:06:03 PM · #97 |
I don't see it as a huge problem. If you look at things statistically everything kind of works itself out. If you look at the points given to each picture they almost all fit into a pretty good statistical bell curve. Almost everyone receives some 1's and some 10's. The difference between a picture that ends up scoring a 7+ is that most of the votes they receives will be 6 - 8, and a person that ends up with a 4 has most of their votes between 3 and 5. That's one of the things that I really like about DP Challenges is that the score you receive is pretty accurate because of the number of votes cast.
Also we do not know who submitted pictures so there is no way to single out certain people to vote against.
I was in a photo club that usually had only 3 judges. The results ended up being totally skewed because of the particular tastes and and preferences of those three people. If a picture didn't fit into something the judges liked there was no way to get a good score and many excellent pictures received bad scores.
To reiterate, I believe that statistics level the playing field, especially when there are several hundred votes cast. |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 11:41:25 PM · #98 |
Did a fast analysis of the last 10 challenges (Mother to Holiday Catalog). Eliminating all the 1 votes and re-calculating the score shows NO ribbon winners would change. Even eliminating the 1 and 2 votes and recalculating, only TWO ribbon winners would change--5 place would move up to 3rd in City Life II and 4th would move up to 3rd in Holiday Catalog.
What's very surprising (at least to me) is that the greatest average percentage difference between two consecutive places is between first and second (at 3.0%); next is between 2nd and 3rd (2.7%) and next between 3rd and 4th (2.0%). Clearly, the ribbon winners deserved to win, and in the order they finished! |
|
|
|
01/11/2006 11:56:41 PM · #99 |
I think the original post was mainly aimed at people who obviously vote down good photos even though they know they are good photos. To either try to screw the scoring up or to gain an advantage or just just to be mean/stir the pot.
My response has been and always will be (regardless of stats, eloquent or impassioned speeches etc) that...
1) I agree ...YES... there are malicious voters
2) There is a %99.00 chance that their low vote affected very little other than rile somebody up..which probably was their intent.
3) To kill off these miscreants..you will have to kill off a lot of other legitimate voters who just may not like some good photos if they hate the content...I hate photos with art "woodies" in them. I don't give them 1's but I probably won't give them a 10.
4) I would be willing to bet that scores are affected a whole heck of a lot more by block voting, people getting their friends and family to vote them high, than a handfull of malcontents voting '1's"
5) The more complicated you make a voting system the less likely people will vote...and large numbers o votes is what I (and a lot of other people) like to have.
6) It's just a popularity contest with an electronic ribbon. Let's not make this out to be the nobel peace prize voting..which..by the way..is a heck of a lot more rigged than DP Challenge :-D
|
|
|
|
01/12/2006 12:59:42 AM · #100 |
Originally posted by idemaerschalk:
didn't think I get his must reaction! but I'm quite happy to go through it if it helps!... Ingrid. |
Ingrid, thanks very much for being a good sport and taking the time to explain. I guess the part I don't understand, based on what you have said, is this: you agree that the picture is technically very good, and you agree that it meets the challenge, but you don't LIKE the picture; based on your own description of your process, that looks to me like a 4 or a 5 in your system-as-described.
It doesn't matter, though. As others have pointed out, and as I'm well aware, a few outlier votes don't make any difference anyway. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and I respect it.
Robt. |
|
