| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/12/2006 05:15:37 PM · #51 |
| To me (and I didn't vote in this challenge) the chariot takes away from the image. I immediately wanted to see the "sun" and then the chariot to the right draws my eye away. I would have left that out (and I hate to say that because I know it is a lot of work) but the chariot makes it look like its one of those paper things you can open up and put on your table at Thanksgiving, like one of those pleated paper turkeys. The sun by itself made of paper was really good enough. :) |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 05:25:52 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by ursula:
And please, nobody say "STUPID" again in this thread.
:) |
can we say poopie-heads instead? ;) |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 05:27:01 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by shanksware:
Originally posted by ursula:
And please, nobody say "STUPID" again in this thread.
:) |
can we say poopie-heads instead? ;) |
He, he, maybe not in this thread, maybe in another thread :))) |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 05:27:22 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
On another note - I didnt realize that creating a post like this was improper. If I am not mistaken the description of this forum section is stated as "Discuss challenge results here. Did the winner deserve to win, or did another photograph?". I guess if this type of post bothers you then just bypass it. I didnt post this to bug people. I posted it to get some feedback from the willing site users on her picture a bit beyond what was left in her comment section. |
It's not improper per se but seems to happen two or three times each week now and is a little annoying. If you really wanted more critical comments on how it scored, you could simply have asked for that in the title of the thread and nobody would have reacted the way we did. However you titled it 'Did this shot deserve...' and yes it did deserve because that's what the voters gave it...
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 05:49:28 PM · #55 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Originally posted by chaimelle:
If a voter hates a shot, for whaterever reason, and gives a one but is consistant for the entire challenge who are we (the disagree-ers) to say he/she is wrong, disrespectful, stupid, a troll, etc. |
The issue to some, is that we do not view it as "consistent" for the entire challenge.
We are ourselves. We have just as much right to say as to be criticized for saying.
Perhaps when you come up with a really creative photo or spend hours composing a shot. And then you receive a 1. And later get told. "Oh...I thought it was just a simple photoshop filter. And thought it was illegal so I gave it a '1'." You'll understand why some of us, do get pieved.
And there is no recourse. Now, I can't even use said word. So yes, I get to shrug and go away. It's annoying. |
You do have the right to feel how you feel, and I guess it is better expressed than just to privately hold others in contempt. The idea for some seems to be "vote your opinion, but it better be correct".
Just because someone spends hours creating his/her set-up does not mean it is going to come across as seen in the photographer's mind. Everybody has an idea of what they consider a good shot, and some have very different ideas than others. This does not make them wrong (or some of those forbidden words), just different. The shot in question looks to many like a crepe paper party favor, and so they voted accordingly. All the voters have to go on is what the photo looks like, and sometimes a clue in the title.
And yes, I would be upset if something I spent hours on did not come across as I thought it would, but I would not blame the voters for pointing it out to me. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 06:03:25 PM · #56 |
As an example of photog's subjectivity I'll show you this:
A while back I entered this shot in a challenge:
The shot, as I see it today, is well worthy its less-than-mediocre score. However, at the time, I went way beyond what my normal persona would do - I parked the car by a sherrif, this guy was standing there in a 90+ degrees weather, trying to manage the rush hour traffic, and I collected enough courage to walk to him in a middle of the 5-lane road and ask him to take a picture of the cars.
It is probably equivalent to you (artoole) spending hours trying to make the sun and the Appolon. But there is no way that voters can recognize this just by looking at the photo - and the photo is then valued accordingly. Photos of toys, teddy bears, etc. are not highly valued here at DPC as they are considered 'easy setups'.
This is just an attempt to explain why the 123s, not an attempt to justify them.
Peace!
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 06:35:51 PM · #57 |
Thank you everyone for your comments here. I wish folks would stop saying "you" refering to me though. I did not start this post and had planned to just whine in the privacy of my own home. I prefer to pretend that I'm not a whiner when I'm in public.
I'm not whining about my 6+ score but it was more about the tremendous inconsistency in voting. Some may not understand this but it feels great to get a 10 and it feels very yucky when it is followed by a 1 or 2 or 3...OVER and OVER and OVER again (x 23 of course - not counting the ones that I enjoyed during the challenge that got dropped during rollover). The incredible amount of high scores was evidence to me that this was not just a very poor shot that I mistakenly thought was good.
I took the pic to have fun and specifically for this challenge - hoping for a great score - front page even (top ten)- yeah baby...two Toole's on front page. I did not just take it for myself. Pictures I take for myself are usually of my two gorgeous children or my fabulously sexy husband. I didn't look at my wall one day and say..."ya know...what this wall really needs is a bright orange firey pic of the Greek god Apollo - yeah...Apollo" and "oh lucky me - it would fit a challenge this week too!".
I am wondering how any of you dare to disagree with theSAJ. I mean, have you seen his profile? He's a BRICK HOUSE! Special note to theSAJ - YOU ROCK and perfectly articulated many of my thoughts and feelings. Thanks for getting my back man!
Thanks to all of you...those who agreed that the voting was a tad confusing and those who think I deserved every 1 and 2 I got. How could I not be flattered by you all spending hours discussing my pic?
So, in the words of Mr. Gump...."that's all I have to say about that".
OK - now to take care of Tim... |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 06:39:01 PM · #58 |
Originally posted by chaimelle:
Everybody has an idea of what they consider a good shot |
The issue is that much of the time it's not about whether they consider a good shot. In the case of one of my photos. Once they realized it was not a photoshop effect they thought it was stupendous and even apologized.
I'm just rather tired of "Beautiful shot but DNMC = 1" scenario. It happens way too often.
Yes, and I like these threads, they make people suffer. I am one of those who personally lean toward 1's & 10's needing a required comment (the 1's at least). And I hope that one day something will change. Either a comment will be required. Or people will stop using the formula "DNMC = 1" and "DQ = 1 but !DQ Request the photo" cause they're too lazy. If you think a photo should be DQ'd and give it a 1 for such. Then request a DQ.
Message edited by author 2006-07-12 18:58:40. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:18:14 PM · #59 |
I do agree that DQ=1 is wrong, and I do my best to vote as if legal and request a DQ. However, I don't have a problem with DNMC=1 (my personal DNMC range is 1-3). To us low DNMC voters, meeting the challenge is of the utmost importance, and how far out of the box should be accepted is up to each individual. It is also wrong, IMO, to think a shot looks like it took hours to create, therefore it is worth a 9 or 10.
Artoole, are you serious that nobody should disagree with theSaj just because he is a talented photographer? If the best ever classical painter and the best ever modern artist got together to discuss what makes a great painting, I bet they would disagree--at least on what the canvas would end up looking like. Not wrong--just different. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:22:48 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by chaimelle:
Artoole, are you serious that nobody should disagree with theSaj just because he is a talented photographer? |
I believe you misinterpreted her quote. Looking at his profile pic, theSAJ appears to be a VERY BIG man. I don't believe the reference had anything to do with his photography skills but rather the fact that he could probably physically break most of the people on this site in half with one hand.
But I am sure that theSAJ appreciates your compliment of his skills. :) |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:28:41 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
... The issue to some, is that we do not view it as "consistent" for the entire challenge. ... |
Am I missing something here? How can you know what is consistent without knowing how a person voted all the other entries?
Originally posted by theSaj:
The issue is that much of the time it's not about whether they consider a good shot. In the case of one of my photos. Once they realized it was not a photoshop effect they thought it was stupendous and even apologized. |
That was your fault for entering a shot that appeared, at least to one voter, to be a simple filter effect. Is the shot necessarily a better one because you used a more complex, time consuming method to achieve the same resulting appearance? I woulnd't agree with that.
Originally posted by theSaj:
I'm just rather tired of "Beautiful shot but DNMC = 1" scenario. It happens way too often.
Yes, and I like these threads, they make people suffer. I am one of those who personally lean toward 1's & 10's needing a required comment (the 1's at least). And I hope that one day something will change. Either a comment will be required. Or people will stop using the formula "DNMC = 1" and "DQ = 1 but !DQ Request the photo" cause they're too lazy. If you think a photo should be DQ'd and give it a 1 for such. Then request a DQ. |
I think that DNMC automatically = 1 is slightly extreme, and I normally don't vote that way. But I respect those that do. Perhaps they do it that in reaction to their being tired of the entries that are clearly DNMC, and the people who defend such. Giving a 1 is someone's way of saying that they don't like the shot for whatever reason. Usually you don't know what the reason is, so why do you think it is OK for you to put them down just because they didn't like a particular shot. Isn't it the photographer's job to draw their interest in and give them something they will like?
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:39:56 PM · #62 |
I should probably admit here that my recent flower shot, which came 5th, took about 3 seconds to take and I photoshopped it to bits (well, heavily, though within the rules). I was genuinely (but pleasantly) surprised to see it do so well against some great competition.
If some of the sentiments in this thread were to be given any credibility, I should be slamming all the 8s 9s and 10s voters - what were they thinking?! Could they not see my lack of artistic integrity...
(I am not really slamming any of those voters - I love them all!)
Message edited by author 2006-07-12 19:41:00.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:40:38 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
I think that DNMC automatically = 1 is slightly extreme, and I normally don't vote that way. But I respect those that do. Perhaps they do it that in reaction to their being tired of the entries that are clearly DNMC, and the people who defend such. Giving a 1 is someone's way of saying that they don't like the shot for whatever reason. Usually you don't know what the reason is, so why do you think it is OK for you to put them down just because they didn't like a particular shot. Isn't it the photographer's job to draw their interest in and give them something they will like? |
Harvey, we have had some serious disagreements in the past, but on this one issue we are in complete aggreement!
Yours
TC |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:41:19 PM · #64 |
Originally posted by chaimelle:
I do agree that DQ=1 is wrong, and I do my best to vote as if legal and request a DQ. However, I don't have a problem with DNMC=1 (my personal DNMC range is 1-3). To us low DNMC voters, meeting the challenge is of the utmost importance, and how far out of the box should be accepted is up to each individual. It is also wrong, IMO, to think a shot looks like it took hours to create, therefore it is worth a 9 or 10.
|
That's not what I am saying. And I have given some blatant DNMC entries a "1". But they have to be very blatant. The difference is between "presumption" versus "no sight of evidence". I'll explain.
(Please note I am using 'you' and 'they' generically for point of reference. Please do not be offended or retort "I didn't" as that's not the intention.)
Case 1: A beautiful sunset entered in a dairy challenge. There is nothing whatsoever to reflect dairy. It's a great sunset but as hard as you look at the photo there is just nothing that you can even bend to interpret for dairy. By the way...this happened.
Had this been the case and it had a hundred ones, I would not be saying a word.
***
Case 2: In this case, we'll use the discussed entry. The challenge was stationery. If you look at the image you can see that there is paper. People have exclaimed "they" just thought it was one of those paper decorations you buy and unfold. And this is where I become bothered.
In order for you to label this image as a DNMC you had to assume something and dismiss evidence that was present. The assumption turned out to be extremely wrong. You needed to assume a fact, then vote according to a presumption you had. That presumption led you to DNMC the photo. This in light of the fact that said photo did clearly have paper (the most common element of stationery). Had you simply taken it at face value without your presumption and voted on the imagery of the photo the outcome would be different.
Essentially, what we have is "I thought you had a pretty photograph but I assumed you lied and did not meet the challenge so I gave you a '1' for DNMC."
Can anyone please tell me how that scenario is NOT offensive or rude?
Now mind you, if you honestly voted a "1" for the image (because you hate the color orange with a passion)...than fine. But if you presumed, and wrongly so, and penalized the photographer for your poor presumption; than you are indeed, in the wrong.
- Saj |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:48:22 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by timfythetoo:
I believe you misinterpreted her quote. Looking at his profile pic, theSAJ appears to be a VERY BIG man. I don't believe the reference had anything to do with his photography skills but rather the fact that he could probably physically break most of the people on this site in half with one hand.
But I am sure that theSAJ appreciates your compliment of his skills. :) |
Come on Tim, gimme a break here. She did remark about his physical stature, but she also said that he "perfectly articulated many of my thoughts and feelings". She says she agrees with him while he's articulating her thoughts. Where does it come in that we can't disagree with him? Are we to understand that you and your wife think we should be intimadated by his size to the point that we don't dare to disagree?
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:51:35 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
... This in light of the fact that said photo did clearly have paper (the most common element of stationery). Had you simply taken it at face value without your presumption and voted on the imagery of the photo the outcome would be different.
Essentially, what we have is "I thought you had a pretty photograph but I assumed you lied and did not meet the challenge so I gave you a '1' for DNMC."
Can anyone please tell me how that scenario is NOT offensive or rude?
|
Not wishing to offend but... I would hasten to point out that "Toilet Paper" is also made of paper, but that most people do not use it as "Stationery". The DNMC criteria could indeed be ascribed to this image if such was your interpretation.
There is much ado about the lower scores and no mention whatsoever about the 8,9 and 10 scores, which greatly outnumber the former. Are these scores justified... indeed they are in the eyes of those of voted them... just as are the lower scores in the minds of those who doled them out.
The opinions expressed by the myriad of players are not necessarily wrong... simply different.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 07:57:34 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
That's not what I am saying. And I have given some blatant DNMC entries a "1". But they have to be very blatant. The difference is between "presumption" versus "no sight of evidence". I'll explain.
(Please note I am using 'you' and 'they' generically for point of reference. Please do not be offended or retort "I didn't" as that's not the intention.)
Case 1: A beautiful sunset entered in a dairy challenge. There is nothing whatsoever to reflect dairy. It's a great sunset but as hard as you look at the photo there is just nothing that you can even bend to interpret for dairy. By the way...this happened.
Had this been the case and it had a hundred ones, I would not be saying a word.
***
Case 2: In this case, we'll use the discussed entry. The challenge was stationery. If you look at the image you can see that there is paper. People have exclaimed "they" just thought it was one of those paper decorations you buy and unfold. And this is where I become bothered.
In order for you to label this image as a DNMC you had to assume something and dismiss evidence that was present. The assumption turned out to be extremely wrong. You needed to assume a fact, then vote according to a presumption you had. That presumption led you to DNMC the photo. This in light of the fact that said photo did clearly have paper (the most common element of stationery). Had you simply taken it at face value without your presumption and voted on the imagery of the photo the outcome would be different.
Essentially, what we have is "I thought you had a pretty photograph but I assumed you lied and did not meet the challenge so I gave you a '1' for DNMC."
Can anyone please tell me how that scenario is NOT offensive or rude?
Now mind you, if you honestly voted a "1" for the image (because you hate the color orange with a passion)...than fine. But if you presumed, and wrongly so, and penalized the photographer for your poor presumption; than you are indeed, in the wrong.
- Saj |
I think you are overestimating how apparent, or how obvious, the paper is in that image. I have looked at it a half dozen times and don't think it is all that conclusive that the objects are made of paper.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:05:22 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by "Coolhar":
That was your fault for entering a shot that appeared, at least to one voter, to be a simple filter effect. |
No, it is not. Such effects are explicitly illegal in challenges. The rules do state that you are to vote accordingly as if the entry is valid. If you question the validity than you are to request a DQ review. That is the rules.
Originally posted by "Coolhar":
"Is the shot necessarily a better one because you used a more complex, time consuming method to achieve the same resulting appearance? |
As an image no. As a photograph entered into a photography site with explicit rules against the other methods....yes.
Originally posted by "Coolhar":
I think that DNMC automatically = 1 is slightly extreme, and I normally don't vote that way. |
Of course not. Most of us do not usually vote that way. I usually knock 2-4 points of a DNMC. Even fewer of us give DNMC = 1 for entries which are questionable.
Originally posted by "Coolhar":
Giving a 1 is someone's way of saying that they don't like the shot for whatever reason. |
If you don't like the shot, that's fine. But when people like the shot but presume it's a DNMC or DQ and then lower their vote. That bothers me.
You are essentially saying to the person made the entry "I believe you are a liar and I am going to vote accordingly...even though I do not know that you are."
Do I have respect for those? nope...no way...
Originally posted by "Coolhar":
Usually you don't know what the reason is, so why do you think it is OK for you to put them down just because they didn't like a particular shot. |
Because of experience and statistics. And you can often see trends.
Originally posted by "Coolhar":
Isn't it the photographer's job to draw their interest in and give them something they will like? |
Likewise, it is the duty of the voters to give the benefit of doubt to the honesty of those entering, the exception being when there is clearly a complete lack.
And you know what. For all the decries of these threads. I've never ever ever seen this issue arise up in situations where there was clear lack. Only in cases in which there was not lack and it was presumed.
IMHO, too many people vote with the rule-of-thumb. If there is a "reasonable doubt" of DNMC then vote as if image DNMC. But in the situation here, the "reasonable doubt" needs to be applied in the manner of, "if there is a 'reasonable possibility' that the image meets the challenge" than vote as if it does.
AND PLEASE, I AM NOT ARGUING AGAINST GIVING 1's. A bad photograph deserves a "1". But this is clearly NOT a bad photograph. And no decent photograph really deserves a "1". Even still, if someone did feel it was an atrocious photograph and voted "1". I'd accept that. Disagree with their opinion but accept it.
This was clearly a decent photograph by it's overall placement. So based on the statistical spread the scoring shows that of an image that struggled against DQ or DNMC 1's as opposed to quality 1's.
This is not the only case. And it's why I feel that if a 1 is given or a 10, that a comment should be required. Others disagree. And these threads will continue for the existance of the site or until something changes.
Originally posted by "RayEthier":
Toilet Paper
|
Totally irrelevant. If you can identify that the roll of paper is truly toilet paper. Hanging next to the bathroom wall. And that is the only object that could have been qualifying and you've disqualified it. No complaint here.
But if you just saw a roll of paper on a spool. And DNMC....and slam the photo with a "1". Now, push comes to shove, done is done, and in truth the roll was a "printer spool" for a receipt register. And the one who entered is wondering did you not see the calculator buttons on the receipt register.
IMHO, if you have to assume that x something is a y something in order to DNMC and you must do so over taking the word of the entrant (which is his submission into the challenge). Then you are in the wrong.
If there is no something for you to relate to, hey that happens.
For example: if a challenge was "Boot". And simply said "Photograph your boot." There likely would be a great many Brits with poor scores due to the fact that us Americans kept giving them 1's for photographing the trunks of their automobiles. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:09:53 PM · #69 |
It is plainly evident that the article was made out of thin rolled material. Could be paper, could be plastic.
Once again, you are forced to presume that the entry did not use paper in order to reach your conclusion. When the challenge is stationery and the use of paper, pens, paperclips, etc. is likely to be used.
There are no pens, staples, etc.
Just thin rolled stuff that could be paper but might not be. I mean, it could be foil. In fact, it could be a thin layer of graphite composite derived from nanotubes arranged by genetically modified bacteria.
Or, simply, you could accept that although it might not be paper, it probably is. And that if it's paper entered in a stationery challenge, it probably is stationery.
Which is harder?
Which is fair?
Which is more in line with the spirit of the site? presuming the entry was made honestly or going to the assumption it was dishonest. Why LOOK for reasons to? |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:20:55 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Totally irrelevant. IMHO, if you have to assume that x something is a y something in order to DNMC and you must do so over taking the word of the entrant (which is his submission into the challenge). Then you are in the wrong. |
Perhaps you misunderstood the gist of the argument. A parasol is no more a piece of stationery than toilet paper is... as a matter of fact, one could argue that the latter can and has been used for such a purpose.
Your analogy regarding "Boot" can be applied in this instance since the "Normal" affiliation to "Stationery" is not all that evident in this image, a factor which may have led to some of lower scores.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:21:55 PM · #71 |
theSaj, you are making an awful lot of assumptions, some of which I doubt you have enough data to support.
The only time a voter has a duty to give the benefit of the doubt to the entering photographer is when the rules require them to vote as if legal on an entry they think may be DQ-able. As for meeting the topic, there is no such duty, but rather, it is incumbent upon the photographer to convince the voter that the entry meets the topic.
|
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:24:44 PM · #72 |
I'm new here so still have a lot to learn about photos and votings etc.
My highest rated shot to date got 6 votes over 8 and six votes under 4. Yes the 1's annoy me as I don't think they were deserved but then I didn't think it was 10 material either - this is all based on my standards and I love the voters who vote differently and gave me 10's.
It may be that some voters like to have a proportion of 1's and 2's etc and vote on the whole range. I don't think I've ever given a 1 but i've also only given a couple of 10's so fall in the middle.
The upshot is that "it evens out" and if it's a great shot then it will win out so let's move on. Please. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:32:01 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by Nuzzer:
... let's move on. Please. |
There is nothing wrong with polite discourse where people of differing opinions can express their views. Discussions of this ilk can provide a point of view that one may not have considered before, and hence give rise to enlightenment.
Thank you, but I will pass on your generous offer... and continue to engage in friendly exchanges with fellow members.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:34:04 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nuzzer:
... let's move on. Please. |
There is nothing wrong with polite discourse where people of differing opinions can express their views. Discussions of this ilk can provide a point of view that one may not have considered before, and hence give rise to enlightenment.
Thank you, but I will pass on your generous offer... and continue to engage in friendly exchanges with fellow members.
Ray |
I didn't mean to be rude but it seems that the same thing is said after each challenge. |
|
|
|
07/12/2006 08:35:50 PM · #75 |
|
