DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Voting as if an image were legal?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 12 of 12, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 02/16/2006 01:01:20 PM · #1
We're hopefully all aware of the following portion of the rules:

Any registered user may recommend a submission for disqualification if he or she feels that submission has violated a rule. A recommendation should be made by clicking "Recommend this photograph for disqualification" on that image's voting page, and stating the specific violation in the space provided. You should then vote on the photo as if the rule was not broken, and leave the determination up to the Site Council

Many of us have expressed the opinion that a LOT of voters ignore the bold portion of the above, and "vote down" any images they believe obviously have broken the rules. I was just checking the "broken" DQ's to remind myself which image just got dropped out out of the medals for time/date discrepancy, and noticed the following image:



This is really a very nice image, very skilfully done. "Obviously" broke the basic editing rules (and for the matter of that, the advanced editing rules), but it's nevertheless tolerably on-topic and extremely skilfully done. So I looked at the scores. SURPRISE! Neraly half the scores are 3 or below, with a whole RAFT of 1's and 2's (31 of them, to be precise).

Now, NO way this image is worth less than a 4, as an image. The only explanation I can see is that large numbers of voters voted this image down based on their perception that it was illegally done. In this particular case you might argue that it's so clearly illegal that it "deserves" these scores, but nevertheless the guidelines do not make a distinction between "obviously illegal" and "possibly illegal".

I think this is a Very Bad Thing; how many borderline images that have legally used in-camera techniques to attain sophisticated results have been unfairly penalized by vigilante voters who take the law into their own hands by voting good images down for presumed rules violations?

I'm thinking in particular of some beautiful, abstract, motion-blurred shots that were done with slow shutter speeds and camera rotation during exposure which may have received a backlash from voters who "assume" the effect was attained in post-processing...

Is there any way to keep this from happening? In the case of the referenced photo above, it is conceivable that someone with a sophisticated background in optics could have devised a prism that inverted half the image and transmitted the result to the lens. I'm not saying this DID happen, but it is conceivable it could have.

I really hate seeing nice photographs receive very low backlash scores; shouldn't we leave decisions like that up to SC, as the guidelines tell us we must?

I gave this shot a 9, knowing full well as I did so that it was doomed to DQ, but giving the photographer the benefit of the doubt.

Robt.
 02/16/2006 01:05:09 PM · #2
i think any attempt to get voters to comply with a "recommended" way to vote is akin to herding cats.
 02/16/2006 01:11:01 PM · #3
I gave it a 5. I absolutely hated that big white border. I assumed it was illegal, but I do stop and think about that whenever I have to make that assumption.
02/16/2006 07:53:17 PM · #4
Originally posted by muckpond:
i think any attempt to get voters to comply with a "recommended" way to vote is akin to herding cats.


I think Bear makes some very valid points. And I hope people listen to him.

Herding cats is also pretty cool.

Message edited by author 2006-02-16 19:54:07.
 02/16/2006 07:59:20 PM · #5
I'd have given it a 3 simply for that goddawful border. You have 640 pixels to present your photo, why mess it up with something so garish? It has nothing to do with perceived legality.

That's just me though.
 02/16/2006 08:05:36 PM · #6
I gave a 3 for DNMC. These do not appear like objects "already broken". Perhaps a large portion of the 3 or less were on those grounds and not the illegal grounds. I did check it requesting a validation, although I'm sure I'm not the only one.
 02/16/2006 08:17:23 PM · #7
I disagree that this meets the challenge. The photographer did not find something that was already broken, in fact did not even break something. To me, the kids are not broken, merely split and rearranged. I do like it as an image, but I couldn't figure out a way to get duplicates--exact same pose as far as I can tell-of the kids legally in the same picture (much less in different sizes). I do normally vote as if it is legal, but I give DNMC pics a 1-3 depending on quality. This would normally have been a 3, but I must confess to assuming illegality in this case and giving a 2.

Edit to add: I have given an 8 or higher vote and asked for validation.

Message edited by author 2006-02-16 20:19:35.
 02/27/2006 07:37:12 AM · #8
Originally posted by chaimelle:
I disagree that this meets the challenge. The photographer did not find something that was already broken, in fact did not even break something. To me, the kids are not broken, merely split and rearranged.


I agree with chaimelle, this image didn't meet the challenge.

In voting I take account: the content of the image, the execution of the image, the title and the challenge. To get a good vote from me the title and image content must match the challenge, and then it must be a quality image within the edit rules.

I think that there should be a simple check-box for 'suspect edit rules broken' rather than a dialog to fill in. After all, as soon as there is any doubt then someone must investigate. They can email me if they need a comment.

Putting this next to the scores would make the relationship of 'doubtful edit' and score more obvious. It would be clearer then that the scoring should not take this suspicion into account.
 02/27/2006 08:02:37 AM · #9
Bear, it couldn't be because everyone in the photo isn't exactly in focus, right? Or the fact that the lighting leaves something to be desired. Or that the overall composition is a bit lacking and not really anything 'photographically' to just jump out and grab the viewer, right?

I personally would have given the image, at most, a 3 -- no doubt about it.
 02/27/2006 08:38:33 AM · #10
Even though I agree with bear in the fact that it's a really cool photo, I guess when you read the rules of the challenge it doesn't really meet it! As mentioned earlier, it's not a subject that was already broken. And I agree with the border...way too big!
 02/27/2006 08:38:57 AM · #11
I voted the shot a 3 - the border ruins the shot for me. Also, the actual kids look like they are cut out from somewhere else and placed on the background as opposed to being shot as multiple exposures. It is not as clear/sharp as I would like to see for a shot like this - the faces seem distant and lack detail of feature...by that I mean the faces look flat.
 02/27/2006 08:39:11 AM · #12
I'm with Bear on this one, at least on the generalities of his statements.

My ET entry received 6 one votes and quite a few other lower votes due to obvious confusion and the "how it was done" factor. It dropped from a 7.0 to a 5.8 in less than 24 hours. Once validated by a voters suggestion early on (thank you to that voter), it began to climb steadily, only to be met side by side with the duotone bombardment of 600+ entries and the 80's took a back seat for a while. However, I think the first few votes were crucial, and surely between the comments and the scores, it was evident that others thought some editing or submission rule was broken and voted it as such. Once validated it just didn't have the time to catch up, even with 15 ten votes. Voters that had previously voted it a (1) simply never went back to see the validation.

Not sure anything can be done about it. Voters will vote as they like, and I for one happen to like that option; but timing has a lot to do with it, and the loyalty of the voters to go back and redo their votes once they see a photo has been validated would be nice. Just not practical thinking I believe. Some just vote and leave and that is it. Some never go back again to check out the status of photos they down voted previously, and that is something I always do. I reevaluate my stance as time goes on.

Oh well, nice try Bear, but I don't think any of the voting system will ever change.

Rose

Message edited by author 2006-02-27 08:42:22.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 12:26:51 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 04/19/2024 12:26:51 PM EDT.