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

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Do VOTERS have a system on how they rate?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 69, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/24/2006 10:20:59 AM · #1
I was wondering how many of you do actually have a system when it comes to rating a challenge entry ? Is it just a random vote to get the required 20% of all the entries one needs to have before the votes are registered, or do people rate on a system?
For this purpose I have come up with a system that I feel is fair, and I would like to know what everybody else feels or whether I can improve it?

Meeting the Challenge 0-1-2 = 2
Overall look, feel and composition 0-1-2 = 2
Creativity 0-1-2 = 1
Quality and execution 0-1-2 = 2
WOW effect and first impression 0-1-2 = 1

Final : 8

I do hope for the sake of this challenge website that other members use a similar approach voting !!

Message edited by author 2006-07-24 10:57:47.
07/24/2006 10:23:20 AM · #2
Just curious, how can you give 0, 1 or 2 on 'meets challenge'. It either meets the challenge or doesn't, I'm having a hard time seeing how something can sort of meet the challenge.

No I don't use a system. I can't count past 4 and I live under a bridge. These factors make it difficult to come up with a system. ;)
07/24/2006 10:27:05 AM · #3
Originally posted by diner24:

... Is it just a random vote to get the required 20 votes one needs to have before the votes are registered ...

Just to clarify this point for you. It's 20% of the number of entries that you need to vote on to have your votes counted. For example, if there are 200 entries you would need to vote on at least 40 for your votes to count.
07/24/2006 10:30:55 AM · #4
I have no system whatsoever. I look at the shot, I give it a score. It's usually pretty easy to decide what I think is fair.

Interesting system you've developed, however.
07/24/2006 10:49:57 AM · #5
Originally posted by routerguy666:

Just curious, how can you give 0, 1 or 2 on 'meets challenge'. It either meets the challenge or doesn't, I'm having a hard time seeing how something can sort of meet the challenge.

No I don't use a system. I can't count past 4 and I live under a bridge. These factors make it difficult to come up with a system. ;)


Well its pretty easy on how I can chose between 0-1-2 for meeting the challenge. 2 is obviously when your image clearly meets the challenge outline.
I have notices that a lot of members twist the title of the image to fit the challenge. [example removed]

I don't think this pictures can be rated a 2 ! I would have to decide on how close those pictures match and then give them a rating of 1 or if it doesn't fit the challenge a 0 ( I hope you understand that everything has to add up to 10 even though you say you can't count past 4)

Message edited by frisca - removed reference to current entry.
07/24/2006 10:52:46 AM · #6
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by diner24:

... Is it just a random vote to get the required 20 votes one needs to have before the votes are registered ...

Just to clarify this point for you. It's 20% of the number of entries that you need to vote on to have your votes counted. For example, if there are 200 entries you would need to vote on at least 40 for your votes to count.


Sorry of course that was what I meant with the 20 votes .... it's 20% of the entries !!!
07/24/2006 11:00:52 AM · #7
I got to thinking about it and here is what I came up with for me. If my logic is faulty please let me know :)

The following are not based on if it meets the challenge

1. Size = 1
2. Quality = 1
3. Makes a strong statement = bonus point just for having the guts (even if I do not agree)

The following depend on meeting the challenge

Meets Challenge = 2
Creativity = 1-3
Composition/Message/Feel = 1-3
07/24/2006 11:04:24 AM · #8
Originally posted by ltlmschrisss:

I got to thinking about it and here is what I came up with for me. If my logic is faulty please let me know :)

The following are not based on if it meets the challenge

1. Size = 1
2. Quality = 1
3. Makes a strong statement = bonus point just for having the guts (even if I do not agree)

The following depend on meeting the challenge

Meets Challenge = 2
Creativity = 1-3
Composition/Message/Feel = 1-3


It looks good to me and you have come up with a fair way of voting ! if you give your best marks then its a 10
07/24/2006 11:05:21 AM · #9
Originally posted by diner24:


It looks good to me and you have come up with a fair way of voting ! if you give your best marks then its a 10


Thanks!
07/24/2006 11:34:58 AM · #10
Originally posted by routerguy666:

Just curious, how can you give 0, 1 or 2 on 'meets challenge'. It either meets the challenge or doesn't, I'm having a hard time seeing how something can sort of meet the challenge.


I can't see in black and white only, there are always shades of grey in between. A picture can clearly meet the challenge, and clearly DNMC; but there are some pictures that depend on interpretation to do so. These are the ones deserving a 1 in this system.

Personally I think that the voting page should be modified to make a better judgement while doing so. This system is quite simple and would be great to give it a try in the near future. Thumbs up to diner24!!
07/24/2006 11:38:39 AM · #11
I'm a big believer in if it works for you, go with it.

However, even these 'systems' are still highly subjective. You limit your subjectivity to a few categories, but ultimately you are still voting on a purely subjective basis.
07/24/2006 11:41:58 AM · #12
I pretend I am an editor of a magazine who has asked for a specific assignment (challenge). If what I get back is not what I asked for, I get upset. Sometimes I reward something that does not meet the challenge, but not very often. I don't really like images that look like something on istock, so those get taken down a point or two. I want an image with impact, but I like to reward the quiet and mundane as well. If something doesn't deserve a 5, I usually don't vote on it (I use to score lower). I like voting because it is up to me what scores I give out and the score, however justifiable, is a reflection of my own tastes and esthetics.

Message edited by author 2006-07-24 11:42:59.
07/24/2006 12:16:44 PM · #13
I think having a system just makes things complicated. I mean if you have to decide between 0-1-2 for "Wow factor", it will not work if the photo does not have a "Wow" factor. What if it is a subtle, emotional, and very good photograph. It won't exactly jump off the page, and you need to decide on many levels. Having a system just makes you break down the photo into a million bits and vote within those bits and then compile the total to get the vote. "this+that=vote" doesn't make sense to me.
07/24/2006 01:01:12 PM · #14
Originally posted by ignite:

I think having a system just makes things complicated. I mean if you have to decide between 0-1-2 for "Wow factor", it will not work if the photo does not have a "Wow" factor. What if it is a subtle, emotional, and very good photograph. It won't exactly jump off the page, and you need to decide on many levels. Having a system just makes you break down the photo into a million bits and vote within those bits and then compile the total to get the vote. "this+that=vote" doesn't make sense to me.


I think it actually makes it easier to vote having a system. A break down let's you concentrate on key elements and then gives you a much better understanding on how you vote the picture. Anyone can vote how they want, but I have a feeling that some people on here would benefit from such a voting system, because I have seen some voters voting 1 for a fantastic image, and that is just beyond me and it doesn't help this site at all.
07/24/2006 01:06:42 PM · #15
Originally posted by phayanak:

Originally posted by ignite:

I think having a system just makes things complicated. I mean if you have to decide between 0-1-2 for "Wow factor", it will not work if the photo does not have a "Wow" factor. What if it is a subtle, emotional, and very good photograph. It won't exactly jump off the page, and you need to decide on many levels. Having a system just makes you break down the photo into a million bits and vote within those bits and then compile the total to get the vote. "this+that=vote" doesn't make sense to me.


I think it actually makes it easier to vote having a system. A break down let's you concentrate on key elements and then gives you a much better understanding on how you vote the picture. Anyone can vote how they want, but I have a feeling that some people on here would benefit from such a voting system, because I have seen some voters voting 1 for a fantastic image, and that is just beyond me and it doesn't help this site at all.


Well that will happen. There will always be one or two voters who will give out random 1's and 2's... The thing that bothers me is how people continue to vote according to their system, even if the first criteria fails. Does it meet challenge? If no, do people keep on adding votes for other things, or is that just a 1 straight on? How do you decide if an amazing photo that does not meet the challenge will get a 1, or a proper vote calculation, minus a point or 2 for DNMC?

Edit : Just for the record, a photo will have to be frikkin horrible for me to give it a 1 ;-)

Message edited by author 2006-07-24 13:08:09.
07/24/2006 01:16:20 PM · #16
Originally posted by ignite:

Just for the record, a photo will have to be frikkin horrible for me to give it a 1 ;-)


That's the beauty of the system, it'll be less likely for a picture to have a "1" score based solely on the voters mood, as it happens right now without a system.
07/24/2006 01:21:46 PM · #17
I start at five and either add or deduct points depending on what I like and don't like about the pictures.

07/24/2006 01:25:19 PM · #18
There's a fair amount of people here, myself included, who vote on a 'bucket system'. I start with a initial pass through all the entries, voting each one 4, 5, or 6, depending on my reaction of bad, good, or great.

Then I go through all the 4 photos, giving them a final vote of 1, 2, or 3. Things in this bucket are usually either horrible technicals (nothing is in focus, postal stamp sized photo, etc.) or way DNMC.

Then I go through all the 6 photos, rating them 7, 8, or 9. Then all the 5 photos get another vote, either 4, 5, or 6. Finally I go through the 9's and pick a few special ones that scream "10" at me and bump them up a final time.

And it's all totally subjective. :)
07/24/2006 01:25:59 PM · #19
Originally posted by ignite:

Originally posted by phayanak:

Originally posted by ignite:

I think having a system just makes things complicated. I mean if you have to decide between 0-1-2 for "Wow factor", it will not work if the photo does not have a "Wow" factor. What if it is a subtle, emotional, and very good photograph. It won't exactly jump off the page, and you need to decide on many levels. Having a system just makes you break down the photo into a million bits and vote within those bits and then compile the total to get the vote. "this+that=vote" doesn't make sense to me.


I think it actually makes it easier to vote having a system. A break down let's you concentrate on key elements and then gives you a much better understanding on how you vote the picture. Anyone can vote how they want, but I have a feeling that some people on here would benefit from such a voting system, because I have seen some voters voting 1 for a fantastic image, and that is just beyond me and it doesn't help this site at all.


Well that will happen. There will always be one or two voters who will give out random 1's and 2's... The thing that bothers me is how people continue to vote according to their system, even if the first criteria fails. Does it meet challenge? If no, do people keep on adding votes for other things, or is that just a 1 straight on? How do you decide if an amazing photo that does not meet the challenge will get a 1, or a proper vote calculation, minus a point or 2 for DNMC?

Edit : Just for the record, a photo will have to be frikkin horrible for me to give it a 1 ;-)


That's why it's easier for me to have a system ... if the image doesn't meet the challenge outline, but is still technically a great picture then I still give it a 8-9 final mark if all the rest is top mark...

it's so easy to just give a random voting or whatever people do when they vote , but it really doesn't help and I think its just being lazy reviewing and voting pictures that way. What we want is to learn and create a photo community that can help each of us to get better... a proper voting system would help no doubt about that.
07/24/2006 01:29:45 PM · #20
Originally posted by diner24:

That's why it's easier for me to have a system ... if the image doesn't meet the challenge outline, but is still technically a great picture then I still give it a 8-9 final mark if all the rest is top mark...


This is a very old argument, and I hate to stir it up again, but...

Doesnt't that basically make every challenge a free challenge? Why bother having challenge discriptions at all then? Couldn't I just take an incredible ocean landscape photo, so great that you say "Wow!" when you see it and enter it in the "Urban Cityscape" challenge and get a 9 from you?
07/24/2006 01:35:24 PM · #21
Here is my system.

When I open the photo and I go "WOW!" it's an automatic 8 or 9. If it's just another photo it gets a 5 or 6 depending on how 'un-WOWed" I am. From there I look at other aspects of the photo and add or subtract points. Originality pretty much falls inside the 'WOW' since after you have seen the 20th beautifull sunset it's no longer that 'WOWfull'.

Well, I hope that was technical enough for you.

07/24/2006 01:36:07 PM · #22
Originally posted by livitup:

Originally posted by diner24:

That's why it's easier for me to have a system ... if the image doesn't meet the challenge outline, but is still technically a great picture then I still give it a 8-9 final mark if all the rest is top mark...


This is a very old argument, and I hate to stir it up again, but...

Doesnt't that basically make every challenge a free challenge? Why bother having challenge discriptions at all then? Couldn't I just take an incredible ocean landscape photo, so great that you say "Wow!" when you see it and enter it in the "Urban Cityscape" challenge and get a 9 from you?


That is right ! But I think one would then have to disqualify it it from the challenge, as we do with those images that have been post edited in a certain way. If DP challenge would change the voting system then I believe the members would have to filter it as a we already do when a picture looks too doctored.
07/24/2006 01:40:10 PM · #23
From previous threads:

This is how I try (very hard) to vote:

1 > a technically (focus, exposure, balance, effects, lighting, sharpening, saturation, colour, cast, evidence of artifacts etc.) incompetent photo or an entirely unintelligible one (sometimes due to image size), an 'offensive' one to civilized nature or (even) a technically apt photo which 'clearly' demonstrates a 'failure of feeling'

2 > a technically lacking photo with little or no perceptible artistic (choice of subject, composition, perspective, manner, emotional energy and range, etc.) merit or interest, even when generously considered; a somewhat 'offensive' photo or a gross and inappropriate sentimentalization of feeling in the context of the challenge; the pursuit of cliché without room for even a latent interpretation (irony, allegory, metaphor etc.)

3 > a photo of mixed or questionable merit, both artistically and technically; a technically 'acceptable' one without marked artistic or journalistic interest; a sentimental or symptomatically 'commercialized' image designed to 'sell' a product or (worse! -of a person) of reasonable or considerable technical merit; a potentially 'interesting' or 'promising' photo (subject matter/perspective) with 'severe' technical flaws and/or without 'clear' intent or direction; a technically flawless image void of emotion and lacking sensory stimuli

4 > a 'pretty' photo reminiscent of many; an otherwise captivating image with one or more clearly distracting elements, either within the capture itself or via border and/or title; a technically accomplished photo relying predominantly on an idea, subject and/or title for impact; an artistically 'promising' capture with clearly noticeable technical defects, compositional issues or incongruous aesthetics; a technically 'stunning' capture otherwise bare of 'feeling' or aesthetic 'sense'

5 > a 'good' photo by most standards; one that communicates capably without necessarily teaching or exhilarating us; an artistically interesting photo pointing an unusual view, perspective or matter, even if it suffers from distinct technical 'flaws'; a technically 'stunning' capture with limiting human or artistic 'range'

6 > a remarkable image, well executed by most standards while allowing for some technical shortcomings not easily prevented or corrected; an ordinary or simple shot, perfectly timed or 'found' that tells an old story in a new way; a very personal take, a 'fresh' controversy with commotive qualities, but aesthetically 'exciting'; an image imitative within a 'classic' fashion, but well executed (i.e. landscape/portrait etc.)

7 > an outstanding photograph fit for both study and pleasure, while allowing for minor technical shortcomings, an accomplished imitation of a mode of seeing or rendering drawn or alluding to another medium including enduring snapshots or candids of remarkable human interest

8 > same as 7, but one that stimulates awareness and taxes the senses, technically accomplished, with near-imperceptible flaws, if not entirely flawless; clearly 'innovative' photographs pointing a little known interest, direction or delight

9 > same as 8, technically without a fault, but a photo which commotes 'perceived' reality to the point of restlessness and action

10 > an enduring photo that challenges the order of gods and the world, one holding its own alongside any other.

On (Challenge) Topicality

Limiting potentially immeasurable choices to a defined subject or a chosen category of photography, really, should stimulate creativity, not hamper it. Topics, IMO, are or should be there for the benefit of the photographer, not for the untaxed glee of some voters swinging a bat.

I do not penalize entries for failing to meet the challenge. I may award a higher score to a unique interpretation or to a finesse I recognize, but I cannot, in good conscience, penalize something or someone for a fault that may lie within me and not with a picture.

I have seen and continue to see perfectly good photographs here penalized for exceeding the appreciative capacity of voters to recognize an entry for the poignant topicality it may demonstrate. If I consider the photo remarkable (of considerable artistic or human interest), I may just decide to award the highest mark possible in the faint hope to compensate for a predictably overall devaluation.
07/24/2006 01:42:20 PM · #24
Either it meets the challenge or not. If I feel it doesn't, I don't vote on it.
I don't have a system like yours. That's too much work for my pea brain. I know what I like and how much I like it and I vote accordingly.
07/24/2006 01:45:25 PM · #25
I use dice. :-P
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 10/30/2020 03:56:15 AM

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 © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 10/30/2020 03:56:15 AM EDT.