| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/07/2006 12:49:53 PM · #26 |
| I think it's been done before, but SC should put in a professional ringer image and see how that fares. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 12:51:17 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by seenosun:
My Low Key Shot finished 12th. It had nine 1 votes. Only 5 images in the twelve that finished above mine had any votes of 1 (the most was 2 votes). 116 of 221 votes were 7 or higher.
The nine "punitive" votes were because my image contained 1/2 of a left nipple.
IMHO... That Just Sucks!!!
But i'm told DPC is about learning....so I have learned my lesson and only take colorful pictures of rainbows, flowers (with the obligatory water drops), puppies and children.
: - P |
Great example, Michael! |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 12:58:12 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Think about what you are saying! Are there as many 10s as there are 4s? For the exceptional image there may be as many 7s as there are fours. |
She actaully compared 4's with 9's not 10's so don't misquote. For your fictional 6.5 entry the voting statistics on actual 6.5 scores support her point completely.
As for top images getting as many 4's as 7's you're talking rubbish.
|
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:17:12 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Think about what you are saying! Are there as many 10s as there are 4s? For the exceptional image there may be as many 7s as there are fours. |
She actaully compared 4's with 9's not 10's so don't misquote. For your fictional 6.5 entry the voting statistics on actual 6.5 scores support her point completely.
As for top images getting as many 4's as 7's you're talking rubbish. |
I did not 'quote' anyone in my statement, I simply made a statement, right or wrong. You obviously missed the point as well. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:21:03 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Originally posted by elru21:
Originally posted by ElGordo:
... if an entry has an average of 6.5 then a vote of 4 is clearly on the low side, though still within reason. This table is an example of the effect of that low vote, not a guide for jackasses. |
What about the 'errant' high votes? In your example with a 6.5 average, a 4 will be balanced out with a single 9 vote. If the image is a '6.5 image' (which I use ironically, because I don't think it is so objective) then a 9 is just as unreasonably high as a 4 is low. And a 10 will balance a 3. The table could have been written with one 9 vote and then the five 6 votes that it takes to bring the average back down to 6.5.
The voting distributions are remarkably good bell curves, usually. We don't see ditributions like the one in your early example. Where there are a few low votes and then lots and lots of 7s to counteract. For the typical 6.5 there are lots of 5, 6, 7 and 8 votes, with a few 3 and 4s and 9 and 10s in the tails. Then, there is that peppering of 1 and 2s that everybody gets so hot and bothered about. But usually all of the top 10 have some of them, so everybody seems to get dinged by them.
Just my $.02.
Liza |
Think about what you are saying! Are there as many 10s as there are 4s? For the exceptional image there may be as many 7s as there are fours. Frequently the distribution of scores is not a bell curve but is skewed to one side or the other (that's a not necessarily bad) and when a controversial subject appears the distribution may even be bimodal.
I think many of you completely missed the point of this thread; that awareness of how votes impact an entry is useful to all, the voters as well as the entrants. I believe that a few voters vote with little or no thought about the quality or difficulty of producing a good image, but instead vote on the basis of their reaction to the subject of the photo. That is a legitimate criteria if you are selecting an image for publication. But my impression has always been that the avowed purpose of DPC is to cultivate the art and science of photography. Some of the world's most memorable photos have very unpleasant subject content but are nontheless great photos. I suspect they would not fare well at DPC. |
You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. The DPC system does not support the "avowed purpose of DPC" yet DPC doesn't care enough to change the system. But.... there sure are some pretty pictures of sunsets on this site!!! |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:32:33 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Think about what you are saying! Are there as many 10s as there are 4s? For the exceptional image there may be as many 7s as there are fours. |
She actaully compared 4's with 9's not 10's so don't misquote. For your fictional 6.5 entry the voting statistics on actual 6.5 scores support her point completely.
As for top images getting as many 4's as 7's you're talking rubbish. |
I did not 'quote' anyone in my statement, I simply made a statement, right or wrong. You obviously missed the point as well. |
Well, actually you did 'quote' someone in your statement. You quoted me. And, I can assure you that I did think about what I was saying as I typed it ;)
The thread has shifted from talking about errant low 'troll' votes on good entries to talking about whether art should evaluated on a techinal, aesthetic or emotional level. I personally vote based on all three but I respect every individual's right to pick their own viewpoint from which to vote. If someone hates my image becuase they have a negative response to the subject (or technique or whatever) I support their right to give me a 1. I realized that was a possibility when I entered the shot. And some people have negative responses to guns and some to nudity and some to flowers. It's all part of 'art' to me. And it's part of the risk (to your score, that is) that you run when you enter a gun/nude/flower shot, however fantastically techincally perfect it may be.
I realize that there are lots of differing opinions to mine on this, though. I didn't really post to this thread originally to get into this particular debate.
BTW, I thought about the contents of this post, too. :)
Liza
Message edited by author 2006-05-07 13:34:55. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:36:38 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
I did not 'quote' anyone in my statement, I simply made a statement, right or wrong. You obviously missed the point as well. |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Think about what you are saying! Are there as many 10s as there are 4s? |
Okay, so you asked a question of the person you quoted, but changed the numbers to suit your own ends. Same shady trick. Same difference.
|
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:39:46 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by seenosun:
You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. The DPC system does not support the "avowed purpose of DPC" yet DPC doesn't care enough to change the system. But.... there sure are some pretty pictures of sunsets on this site!!! |
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry
|
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:50:50 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by seenosun:
You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. The DPC system does not support the "avowed purpose of DPC" yet DPC doesn't care enough to change the system. But.... there sure are some pretty pictures of sunsets on this site!!! |
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry |
I have made suggestions in the past about improvements to the system as many others have. Those suggestions have fallen on deaf ears. What I've seen happen is some agree, some disagree and ultimately nothing changes. So why waste my time and energy trying to improve a site that doesn't want to improve. Why waste my time trying to create art for a site that doesn't appreciate art. Do you think a 12th place image deserves nine 1 votes? Here's a suggestion. How about a challenge called Guns, Nipples and Flowers?
The winner is the photo with the most 1's! |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:51:47 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by seenosun:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by seenosun:
You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. The DPC system does not support the "avowed purpose of DPC" yet DPC doesn't care enough to change the system. But.... there sure are some pretty pictures of sunsets on this site!!! |
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry |
I have made suggestions in the past about improvements to the system as many others have. Those suggestions have fallen on deaf ears. What I've seen happen is some agree, some disagree and ultimately nothing changes. So why waste my time and energy trying to improve a site that doesn't want to improve. Why waste my time trying to create art for a site that doesn't appreciate art. Do you think a 12th place image deserves nine 1 votes? Here's a suggestion. How about a challenge called Guns, Nipples and Flowers?
The winner is the photo with the most 1's! |
Why waste your time complaining then? Or ours? |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:53:31 PM · #36 |
| I say ya and so? Guess what, not everyone is gunna love it, if a 4 breaks your day those 7s should make it. Somepeople vote low, some high, just the way it is. That one 7 can really screw with my solid 4 entry:) Besides even if you win the blue ribbon its about the same as winning the high score on Pac-Man, Oh and Ahhs now and forget about it tommarrow. Worring about little things like getting a 4 is totally trivial, go out and take some pictures! |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:54:40 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by elru21:
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Originally posted by bod:
[quote=ElGordo]
|
I did not 'quote' anyone in my statement, I simply made a statement, right or wrong. You obviously missed the point as well. |
Well, actually you did 'quote' someone in your statement. You quoted me. And, I can assure you that I did think about what I was saying as I typed it ;)
Liza |
The italicised part of that response was a direct quote of your post, unaltered. My statement was standalone and did not purport to quote, or in fact quote anyone.
It is not necessary to misrepresent about my post, just express your opinion plainly, everyone can see what I posted.
I respect your opinions at least as much as you respect mine! I am sorry that you chose to be offended, it was never my intention to be offensive, just argumentive!
Now, instead of hijacking my thread with accusations, how about a discussion of the OP subject. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:56:42 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by MQuinn:
I say ya and so? Guess what, not everyone is gunna love it, if a 4 breaks your day those 7s should make it. Somepeople vote low, some high, just the way it is. That one 7 can really screw with my solid 4 entry:) Besides even if you win the blue ribbon its about the same as winning the high score on Pac-Man, Oh and Ahhs now and forget about it tommarrow. Worring about little things like getting a 4 is totally trivial, go out and take some pictures! |
Right on, MQuinn!! I get my share of those fours as well, and well deserved! |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:58:25 PM · #39 |
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry [/quote]
Why waste your time complaining then? Or ours? [/quote]
Why not require a comment on votes of 1 or 2. This way if it's a troll vote, the troll would be identified. If the image truly is poor, then the comments would go to helping that member improve their work which is, I believe, the purpose of this site. No? |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 01:59:37 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
The italicised part of that response was a direct quote of your post, unaltered. My statement was standalone and did not purport to quote, or in fact quote anyone.
It is not necessary to misrepresent about my post, just express your opinion plainly, everyone can see what I posted.
I respect your opinions at least as much as you respect mine! I am sorry that you chose to be offended, it was never my intention to be offensive, just argumentive!
Now, instead of hijacking my thread with accusations, how about a discussion of the OP subject. |
OK, I see. I am sorry for getting tangled up in the semantics. I misunderstood. I was not offended. That was what the little winking symbol was for. I was being argumentative as well, but not trying to be accusational. ;) <- *little winking symbol again*
I guess to answer your question to me, no I do not think there are as many 10s as 4s. I don't think that changes my point in my original post, which was very much an attempt to contribute to the discussion of the OP subject.
Peace,
Liza |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:02:12 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by mk:
Originally posted by seenosun:
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by seenosun:
You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. The DPC system does not support the "avowed purpose of DPC" yet DPC doesn't care enough to change the system. But.... there sure are some pretty pictures of sunsets on this site!!! |
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry |
I have made suggestions in the past about improvements to the system as many others have. Those suggestions have fallen on deaf ears. What I've seen happen is some agree, some disagree and ultimately nothing changes. So why waste my time and energy trying to improve a site that doesn't want to improve. Why waste my time trying to create art for a site that doesn't appreciate art. Do you think a 12th place image deserves nine 1 votes? Here's a suggestion. How about a challenge called Guns, Nipples and Flowers?
The winner is the photo with the most 1's! |
Why waste your time complaining then? Or ours? |
I'm not complaining. I'm agreeing with ElGordo's analysis. I was then asked why I didn't offer a solution to the problem. I've accepted what IS. You made a choice to waste your time reading and reponding to this thread. I have nothing to do with the choices you make. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:03:24 PM · #42 |
6.5 in the Window Framed challenge : 11 x 4's, 18 x 9's.
6.5 in the Complementary Colors III challenge : 18 x 4's, 23 x 9's.
6.5 in the Negative Image challenge : 7 x 4's, 12 x9's.
Maybe the trolls are just picking on your fictional 6.5 entry?
|
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:05:12 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by cislander:
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry |
Why waste your time complaining then? Or ours? [/quote]
Why not require a comment on votes of 1 or 2. This way if it's a troll vote, the troll would be identified. If the image truly is poor, then the comments would go to helping that member improve their work which is, I believe, the purpose of this site. No? [/quote]
Do you think that really would do anything? Heck if voted a 1 or 2 someone had to comment 3 is the next favorite number. Besides how many people will take the time to say "This kinda sucks, its boring, lacks any rules of the 3rds, the focal point is weak, hope you don't make a living of this." would click that helpful? Them same "trolls" are hitting all the images the same just the way it is. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:05:54 PM · #44 |
I think the real effect of a low score is that the photographer feels some injustice has been done, someone clearly doesn't get it, or perhaps has desperate motives...
When I see my score, I simply assume it will drop soon...and guess what..I am right half the time..
now sometimes those trolls get together and discuss things, band together even..I have seen it happen, and then the 4 really is more the norm, and 5's are bringing it up and well the 4 doesn't really hurt the shot..along comes a madman and gives me a 7 and it flies to unrealistic heights, only to go to close to the sun and my wings melt..okay I am being an idiot, sorry...
I am just happy that people aren't allowed to change my shots to suit their eye, that part is optional.. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:12:08 PM · #45 |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:21:20 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Originally posted by seenosun:
You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. The DPC system does not support the "avowed purpose of DPC" yet DPC doesn't care enough to change the system. But.... there sure are some pretty pictures of sunsets on this site!!! |
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry |
I'm not even convinced there is a problem with the DPC system. In making judgments about artworks, it is to be expected that there will be a wide range of assessments. The strength of an open system like DPC is that there will be a consensus expressed by the overall average vote that is a lot more reliable than the individual votes. This systems depends on the voters being free to express their honest opinions about the photos. Any pressure on voters to vote a certain way distorts the results.
My sense is that the problem lies with some of the DPC members who want the consensus view to agree with their own. They would like to pressure people to vote using their criteria for what is better or worth.
I'm not being critical of ElGordo here. The figures he cited in the original post do demonstrate that individual votes do change the results. I think that is GOOD--if my votes (high and low) did not change the results, I would not bother to vote.
It is also clear that the outcomes would be different if we had votes from groups of 1) art directors of advertising agencies, 2) photo editors of major newspapers, 3) owners of galleries selling photographic art, and 4) curators of photography in major museums. None of these groups would agree with the rankings given by the DPC voting system. But there would also be a wide spread of votes within each group--just like there is in DPC.
Since I'm primarily interested in fine art photography, I very interested in groups 3 and 4 but I don't care about groups 1 and 2.
In some ways the DPC vote is MORE VALUABLE than any of the specialized groups. It tells us about the wide public appeal of our work. If you are interested in having your photography reach a wide audience, this is exactly what you want.
Let's not try to fix a system that isn't broken.
--DanW |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:22:19 PM · #47 |
Originally posted by cislander:
What would you suggest?
It's easy to point out the problem; much harder to come up with a viable solution. Let's hear yours.
~Terry |
Why waste your time complaining then? Or ours? [/quote]
Why not require a comment on votes of 1 or 2. This way if it's a troll vote, the troll would be identified. If the image truly is poor, then the comments would go to helping that member improve their work which is, I believe, the purpose of this site. No? [/quote]
Good question and statement! Among The voters will always be people that honestly disagree about the quality of any given image and render a low vote. I would not wish to stifle their opinions anymore than those that have the opposing opinion. Then there are those that are simply malicious and vote low on images they perceive to be of higher quality. I don't know if there is any method to eliminate those troll votes, possibly not. The present mechanism will throw out low votes that have the appearance of malice.
I think that a system which detects a consistant pattern (more than one challenge and many votes) of significant deviation (how much is enough?) on the low side from the median vote would result in a warning to the deviating voter and continued abuse would result in suspension from DPC. I believe it is unlikely that anyone would maliciously vote high on an entry, but I suppose that is a possibility.
The present system is pretty good but could use some improvemnts IMO. Please share your thoughts! |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:22:50 PM · #48 |
| My guess is that if the voting scale started at 0 or even -10, there would be those for whatever reason would be compelled to click the lowest number available. I've never agreed with those that say that a low score has little overall impact, particularily when an image is scoring rather well. One or two 1's, 2's or 3's late in the game on a highly scoring image will hurt. GraphicFunk had a great opinion on scoring motives here somewhere... wish I could find it. Hope somebody does and posts it here. Makes alot of sense. In the end, we're never going to understand the true motivation of others... nor will we convince anyone to play fair if they really don't want to. Oddly enough, one of my best finishes included a gun and in fact received very few low votes. Go figure. Just when you think you've got it figured out... :) |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:29:16 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
I think that a system which detects a consistant pattern (more than one challenge and many votes) of significant deviation (how much is enough?) on the low side from the median vote would result in a warning to the deviating voter and continued abuse would result in suspension from DPC. I believe it is unlikely that anyone would maliciously vote high on an entry, but I suppose that is a possibility.
The present system is pretty good but could use some improvemnts IMO. Please share your thoughts! |
I think that any system that essentially requires you to vote like everyone else would be boring. Look at the number of already existing complaints about how it's impossible to do well with an "out of the box" shot. Then imagine getting penalized for having an opinion that was different that other people's. Why can't we just accept the fact that you're going to get some low votes, whether you like it or not? I don't think voting on photography is supposed to be a precise work of machinery. |
|
|
|
05/07/2006 02:35:51 PM · #50 |
ima get into this one as well.
i like my images that is why i submit them. ifn i thought i was submitting a 3 average image why would i do it?
the beauty of DPC is simply that there are gallons of people that make their opinion known about my image. do i like it when i get hit with gallons of 1's, absolutely not.
i agree with the earlier post that the system is not broken. there is no perfect system. some "troll" (i hate that name calling stuff) will always wanna score my images below what i think it should score.
why is is so difficult to imagine that other people are actually different with different tastes? why is it horrible that some people dont like nudity?
i have a canon, some have nikons, some have pentax, etc. some score high, some score low, some just try to mess up the system. that will always happen.
ifn the system gets changed, the people that whine about "troll" voting will still whine about it. there will always be a "troll" to them.
|
|
