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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Why do voters assume they know more……!
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 72 of 72, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/20/2006 06:28:54 AM · #51
Did not read thread, but I also did not vote in this challenge. Admittedly, voters do not understand your intentions when you submit. I think they go based on standard rules of thumb, including realistic color and exposure. I love the photo, and I would have at least voted it an 8 because of the artsy nature of it. But my personal preferences are more inclined to artistic and creating a mood that may be surreal or otherworldly. That is why you were voted down. As to the comments, I am sure they were only trying to be helpful, thinking maybe you had erred in your post-processing, which is easy to do without calibration of your monitor. Anyway, it is hard to climb out of the box when voting, when you are voting on so many images.
 07/20/2006 09:26:09 AM · #52
Originally posted by raish:
We could have an electoral college, so that the palpably ignorant masses could apply their small wits to the election of a person whose judgement they respect, in order that a committee of such elected people could make the ultimate decision of choosing one who would be able to cope with the intellectual demands of grading a picture.
We have our solution. I would like to be one of these "committee" members...lol
 07/20/2006 11:10:39 AM · #53
Originally posted by scotthadl:
Sad that objective voting is too much to expect from some voters but true. A voter should be able to put aside what they would have done and vote based on how the image was presented by the artist. In a photography class I am taking class members are expected to act as a panel of judges. The result of the judging is the grade the image receives. One of the fundamental aspects of judging other peoples work is not to think about what you would have done if you had made the image. We are asked to look at composition, focus, quality of print, Post production and how the image makes a connection. Clearly our frame of reference will affect our perception of any given image but this method is more objective than thinking this is what I would have done each time you look at an image.


I think you may have a pretty fundamental misunderstanding of what is going on at this website. You say, in effect, that if we do not vote in the manner you, and your son, think we should we are not being objective. You are insulting the entire community, individulally and collectively.
The voters here are not asked to put anything aside. The voters are not a panel of highly trained art critics, they are photographers with a very wide variety of tastes and skill levels. They are asked to vote on an entry's quality and it's appropriateness to the theme of the competition. We are not instructed to include, nor exclude, what would be our own approach to any photo presented for our consideration. It seems to me that you and William are trying to transfer to the voters a shortcoming that rightfully belongs in the photographer's lap. We are all trying to learn, or improve, the ability to produce images that put a message across to the viewer. When we fail to do that well, it is not the fault of the voter.
07/20/2006 12:38:30 PM · #54
JmSetzler has some good points on this in his profile (worth a read)

*****
..I believe that a photographer who is asking for critique should be willing to provide his or her own personal thoughts on the image when it is presented. This serves multiple purposes, and they are good purposes. First of all, it lets the person providing the critique know what the photographers intentions are/were with the image....
****

Perhaps we need some way to work that into the notes displayed while voting ..

It also reminded me of If Great photographers were on the internet.

And I don't want to throw this off topic but I haven't had a class on art/photog history and I still don't know what special about Henri Cartier Bresson's Mario's Bike ..



Message edited by author 2006-07-20 12:47:12.
 07/20/2006 01:03:50 PM · #55
Originally posted by TheMegalomaniac:

And I don't want to throw this off topic but I haven't had a class on art/photog history and I still don't know what special about Henri Cartier Bresson's Mario's Bike ..


At the time Cartier-Bresson burst on the scene, photography like his (captured, spontaneous instants in time) basically did not exist. He is the best-known of a handful of shooters who took advantage of the new, smaller, much more portable cameras to expand the definition of what photography was "about". He was a truly great, groundbreaking photographer. The copy of "Mario's Bike" posted at Flickr is a lousy one anyway; it's not really as soft and flat as it seems there. An original print is much stronger looking. I saw one in a gallery once. It's actually a very nice picture, a terrific sense of the instant captured, all that stone and sweep of stairs anchoring the fleeting motion of the bike and rider passing through.

R.


07/20/2006 01:26:29 PM · #56
Clearly as a new contributor I made the very error I was complaining about. I certainly did not intend to insult the group as a whole but can see how my question could be taken that way, I apologize.

The comments made here are food for thought.

Thank you all.

.

Message edited by author 2006-07-20 13:39:15.
 07/20/2006 01:29:23 PM · #57
Originally posted by scotthadl:
Clearly as a new contributor I made the very error I was complaining about. I certainly did not intend to insult the group as a whole but can see how my question could be taken that way, I apologize.

The comments made here are food for thought.

Thank you all.


Thank you for this very reasonable response. You show a willingness to re-examine your position based on new information being input, and that's always good to see. No harm done whatsoever. Now go forth and prosper :-)

R.
 07/20/2006 02:03:19 PM · #58
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

At the time Cartier-Bresson burst on the scene, photography like his (captured, spontaneous instants in time) basically did not exist. He is the best-known of a handful of shooters who took advantage of the new, smaller, much more portable cameras to expand the definition of what photography was "about".

R.


Alright now that this is all settled maybe I can break away from the main topic. So his photos are good because they used a new form of technology to explore a new set of subjects ? Does this mean that they are not relevant anymore -Perhaps relevant is a bad choice of words here ... I mean - is there anything I can learn from it. For example how can I use On the banks of the Marne to improve my work ?
 07/20/2006 02:19:25 PM · #59
Originally posted by raish:
We could have an electoral college, so that the palpably ignorant masses could apply their small wits to the election of a person whose judgement they respect, in order that a committee of such elected people could make the ultimate decision of choosing one who would be able to cope with the intellectual demands of grading a picture.


Uhh... that's way too complicated.

I say the pope should decide the top3. The top3 is all that matters anyways. If you're not in the top3, then obviously you failed. Why the pope? The pope has the ultimate truth since he talks to god and he knows what's success and failure. And you should be banned from the site for beeing a failure unless you do your prayers and he forgives you.
 07/20/2006 02:23:41 PM · #60
Originally posted by TheMegalomaniac:
...his photos are good because they used a new form of technology to explore a new set of subjects ? Does this mean that they are not relevant anymore -Perhaps relevant is a bad choice of words here ... I mean - is there anything I can learn from it. For example how can I use On the banks of the Marne to improve my work ?


Just my opinion, of course, but in HCB's day, like Bear said, his moment-in-time images were groundbreaking...so you can use images like the one you've linked as a motivator to seek out images for yourself that are groundbreaking for the time in which you live. Shoot what others are NOT shooting, and in that respect, you will have learned a lot from Henri and his friends there on the the banks of the Marne. ;)


07/20/2006 03:18:30 PM · #61
Originally posted by TheMegalomaniac:
Alright now that this is all settled maybe I can break away from the main topic. So his photos are good because they used a new form of technology to explore a new set of subjects ? Does this mean that they are not relevant anymore -Perhaps relevant is a bad choice of words here ... I mean - is there anything I can learn from it. For example how can I use On the banks of the Marne to improve my work ?


Techonology has not made photographs better. It just allows photographers to be dumber (thank God).
 07/20/2006 03:20:55 PM · #62
Originally posted by TheMegalomaniac:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

At the time Cartier-Bresson burst on the scene, photography like his (captured, spontaneous instants in time) basically did not exist. He is the best-known of a handful of shooters who took advantage of the new, smaller, much more portable cameras to expand the definition of what photography was "about".

R.


Alright now that this is all settled maybe I can break away from the main topic. So his photos are good because they used a new form of technology to explore a new set of subjects ? Does this mean that they are not relevant anymore -Perhaps relevant is a bad choice of words here ... I mean - is there anything I can learn from it. For example how can I use On the banks of the Marne to improve my work ?


Well, "technically" you probably can't, in the sense that as far as craft goes, processing and such, it's unremarkable now, although THEN it was different. But that's a great image regardless, it's intensely human and it really takes us into this scene, this way of life. I lived in Switzerland (Geneva) from 1957 to 1961 and spent a lot of time over the border in France, wandering the banks of the Rhone and the countryside, and that image SPEAKS to me of a people and a place. One thing you CAN take from it, for example, is how effectively you can show all these human qualities without including a face. I think that's something useful to know & pursue...

That's not a good scan, btw; I've seen an original of that shot and it's a LOT crisper & cleaner...

Robt.
 07/20/2006 03:47:57 PM · #63
Ahh .. alright then. I've been looking at those things for the past month and wondering what I'm missing.

Thanks guys,
- Slightly more enlightened.
 07/22/2006 09:56:01 AM · #64
Just looked at Mario's Bike, and read many of the comments made before they knew who had done the image. I would not have chosen to delete it, because I love the twist of the stairs and the curve of the sidewalk, and how it creates such a perspective around the biker. It makes me happy to know that as to peoples tastes, this is not the first time they have decided a classic is a bad photo. Some time ago, and I think it might have been in the challenge high contrast, someone entered a not so well known image of an Ansel Adams. It received very low scores from the start, then he informed the council he was doing an experiment to prove a point. It was d'qd, and received scathing commentaries from the folks here about the experiment. All felt insulted by his approach. Personally, I know it was wrong to do this, but I do have to chuckle at his guts at doing this. (Can't find the image. Must have been deleted from the history.) Still, it gives me hope that there is life beyond stock photography, and there is always room for the artistic view rather than the standard tried and true. Gives me a reason to continue with entries here, no matter how much I complain about my scores, because there are enough people here who have sent appreciative comments and great support for my pics, even if they are not necessarily of the most popular topics. I can definitely learn alot from the masters, and will continue looking at these images as long as there is an internet that offers such a wonderous learning place.
Originally posted by TheMegalomaniac:
JmSetzler has some good points on this in his profile (worth a read)

*****
..I believe that a photographer who is asking for critique should be willing to provide his or her own personal thoughts on the image when it is presented. This serves multiple purposes, and they are good purposes. First of all, it lets the person providing the critique know what the photographers intentions are/were with the image....
****

Perhaps we need some way to work that into the notes displayed while voting ..

It also reminded me of If Great photographers were on the internet.

And I don't want to throw this off topic but I haven't had a class on art/photog history and I still don't know what special about Henri Cartier Bresson's Mario's Bike ..


Message edited by author 2006-07-22 10:07:56.
 07/22/2006 10:03:42 AM · #65
i agree, photography is very subjective. if not, this site (and all photography sites) would be incredibly dull.

also remember that people who vote and comment may have been in the challenge too. so their votes are a little biased because they too have images in the challenge.

lastly, aren't you here to learn from your submissions? so i suppose taking the good comments with the bad should come in your stride.

after all, nobody ever complains about compliments! :)
 07/22/2006 10:13:25 AM · #66
We all learned on our first few entries and some of still have not learned enough. One of my first entries was an old abandoned boat that was literally falling apart. I thought it matched the challenge description so I took a "good" natural photo of it. Lowest score evev, didn't even make a 4 overall. I was dissolutioned also. With yours at 5.1 it wasn't even in the bottom 25% or so. Not bad. On every photo site there seems to be a standard that does well. Take time to review the last couple dozen challenges and look at the top 10 in each. If you stay within that techniques you will do good here .... but may not do real good somewhere else. There is a guy here at DPC that sells high price stock photos, many for hundreds of dollars each, they have only scored in the mid to low 5's here at DPC. Best of luck!
 07/22/2006 10:30:30 AM · #67
Originally posted by ladymonarda:
... this is not the first time they have decided a classic is a bad photo. Some time ago, and I think it might have been in the challenge high contrast, someone entered a not so well known image of an Ansel Adams. It received very low scores from the start, then he informed the council he was doing an experiment to prove a point. It was d'qd, and received scathing commentaries from the folks here about the experiment. All felt insulted by his approach. Personally, I know it was wrong to do this, but I do have to chuckle at his guts at doing this.,.


Actually, it was the Ansel Adams challenge, and the image in question wasn't submitted by a member, it was submitted by the site administrators intentionally with the idea that it would be later DQ'd so as not affect voting results. And "all" weren't insulted, rather, there were numerous thread comments that it was a great experiment and a real eye-opener.

The shot:


07/22/2006 10:37:07 AM · #68
No it wasn't that one. I did not start entering challenges till after that date, and it was in a challenge that happened between May of last year and Mar of this year. I looked at all the dq's in the history and could not find it. Since the pic in question, we have had several people banned from the site for various sins. Maybe it was one of those folks.
 07/22/2006 10:42:39 AM · #69
Originally posted by ladymonarda:
No it wasn't that one.

I remember that ... I forget who did it though :(

A forum search (HAHAHAHA) wcould turn up the appropriate offender.

Message edited by author 2006-07-22 10:43:17.
 07/22/2006 12:17:39 PM · #70
Originally posted by alfresco:
Originally posted by ladymonarda:
No it wasn't that one.

I remember that ... I forget who did it though :(

A forum search (HAHAHAHA) wcould turn up the appropriate offender.


I remember this incident also. As I recall, the whole thing was quite controversial due to the fact that the person never said anything about it being an 'experiment' until after it was dq'd, and was taking some flack for 'ripping off' a photo. Then they came up with the experiment thing.
 07/22/2006 12:40:34 PM · #71
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=271648
 07/22/2006 01:33:15 PM · #72
Originally posted by mk:
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=271648


Wow! What a thread. I wish I had been around then for that one!

:-P
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 06:19:40 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 06:19:40 PM EDT.