| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/28/2002 01:51:45 PM · #1 |
Looking at my score (lowest yet), then at my comments (mostly very positive), and shaking my head while wryly laughing...
I have a bunch of things I want to write at this point, but I think I better wait until next week -- perhaps think of the best way to say it all.
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 02:20:55 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by Patella:
Looking at my score (lowest yet), then at my comments (mostly very positive), and shaking my head while wryly laughing...
I have a bunch of things I want to write at this point, but I think I better wait until next week -- perhaps think of the best way to say it all.
LOL....I just can't predict or get a handle on how the voting will go or the comments. I'm glad I'm not alone. It's really funny and seems to vary week to week. This week on a TUESDAY I have 117 votes already and only 5 comments--the scoring is low 5.21. Either mine is worse then I thought or the others are way better then I thought >?< LOL I'm getting a complex and it's only Tuesday! :o) I need to take some new shots and do them B&W to make myself feel better.
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 04:00:14 PM · #3 |
I'd give my eye teeth for a 5.2 right now -- I have a 4.4. (Hey -- those 8 tenths of a point are important!!!) It's not a perfect photo by any stretch, but it's better than average -- and I thought average on a 1 to 10 scale was at least 5.
I'm actually pretty sure I do know why I'm getting the score -- partially due to a few of the comments I've received -- but I can't go into it, or justify it, without losing the anonymity so....
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 04:03:51 PM · #4 |
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/28/2002 4:05:58 PM. |
|
|
|
05/28/2002 04:15:29 PM · #5 |
Guys, c'mon...you have got to decide.
Do you care more about votes on a general public website or do you care more about creating something that when you sit down with your friends, family or fellow photographers you could feel confident you didn't compromise to get a extra tenth of a point!
I will not go into my submission this week but I feel absolutely confident that even if I got a 1 across the board I would still think this is my best photo to date. And it may be my lowest scoring photo to date :-)
I got lot's of motives here but getting a high score is way on down the list.
Bring your photo's into the forums after the vote this week and I'll do the same and we can talk about photography..a lot funner than talking about public voting psychology!!! |
|
|
|
05/28/2002 04:23:39 PM · #6 |
|
|
|
05/28/2002 04:45:50 PM · #7 |
hokie,
My goal in trying to understand the voting public is in trying to understand what they like.
I''m lucky enough right now to be making my living as a "photographer" but it''s not the way I''d really love to be doing it. (My job, by and large, is object photography -- or taking a picture of a little kid holding a piece of string between his outstretched arms for a measurement lesson. Not terribly exciting stuff.)
I''d love, one day, to sell my more artistic work and it doesn''t matter one whit if I like something if nobody else wants to buy it and put it on their wall.
Now, I totally understand the difference between "mass approval" and a "select few". I also realize that not everybody here is necessarily an art lover or that, even if they are, not everybody will like my art. Also I know that the voter turnover on this site is probably relatively high, so reading the audience may actually be next to impossible. However, that''s not going to stop me from trying.
My goal with the photos I submit is two-fold: take a picture that I like and am satisfied with AND one that appeals to people at large.
For the most part, I know how to take a good picture, I know how to get the effect I want, I know what my camera can and can''t do. Don''t get me wrong, I can still learn new techniques and am very happy when I get those nuggets of constructive criticism that I can work with and on. One of the things I''d really like to learn, however, is how to read what a mass audience likes and the score is representative of that.
That''s why I''m confused by positive comments combined with a "low" score. If I was getting a lot of "this is crap" and a 4 score, I''d be thinking -- OK, blew that one.
So, yes, I do care about the votes on a general public web site because that score is a larger indicator of whether or not the public likes what it sees.
Hoping that made sense. It did the first time through, but then like any writer, I started to go through and revise and am not sure it flows like it first did.
Ah well, such is life.
Jeff
PS -- Don''t get me wrong, I''m not going to stop shooting what I like so as to satisfy my own personal goals -- but I would start shooting additional things differently for the gratification of my wallet. *grin*
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/28/2002 5:00:40 PM.
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 05:04:03 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by hokie:
Guys, c'mon...you have got to decide.
Do you care more about votes on a general public website or do you care more about creating something that when you sit down with your friends, family or fellow photographers you could feel confident you didn't compromise to get a extra tenth of a point!
I agree to an extent, Hokie. This is all well and good but the fact remains that this IS a photography challenge. If we didn't care about those points, we could just start a photography community and all would be well. But that's not the case here, and I think it's okay that we watch our scores and scratch our heads.
I've become accustomed to pictures I'm proud of not doing so well, and I'm okay with that aspect of things. What puzzles me is when a picture I'm not particularly happy with or that I think could use some work does a lot better than I expected, as is the case this week.
I dunno. Just some thoughts.
- Mike
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 05:30:50 PM · #9 |
This definitely is a photography challenge web site but I sometimes wonder what the challenge is ;-)
Is it a challenge to take your best photo, to be the best interpreter of a challenge subject, to be the most creative, the most technically proficient or to simply have the most generally appealing photo that doesn't piss off too many people but maybe doesn't inspire too many people either.
My photo last week was the highest scoring but in my opinion took the least amount of thought of any photo I have done. It had a pretty sky, the element of baseball that lots of people could relate to and some compositional stuff (read silouhettes) that helped simplify the photo and highlight the good stuff meaning the baseball elements and the sky. The only complaints I got was the dumb support wire behind the umpire was a distraction which I already knew and then some subjective stuff like alternate cropping ideas (good but not better..just different) No real criticisms even though I got some stinky votes in there.
I would have been surprised if it had not scored high when I took it because photos like that always rate well.
They are sorta safe. I am glad pretty photo's still appeal to people. It means we all aren't a bunch of pessimistic a-holes ..yet. :-)
I can understand your point of view Patella. I consult with industrial public relations departments and as part of my job I help them figure out what is a good media response for trade journal ad's and in-house communication. I would be no good to those folks if I couldn't give them a clue about how to reach the most amount of people while ticking off the least.
I guess I don't want to do that same thing for my hobby so my goals here are probably a bit different than yours.
I hope you just don't go crazy trying to figure things out ;-) |
|
|
|
05/28/2002 05:33:33 PM · #10 |
Well, to be completely objective about it, hokie, you have sort of come full circle. a few weeks ago you were railing, but now you seem to have moved past that to a more ''come-what-may'' viewpoint. : )
I went through the same thing myself!
which is good imho: definitely a lot healthier than obsessing about why one''s pictures do or don''t ''win''! : )
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/28/2002 5:51:28 PM. |
|
|
|
05/28/2002 06:02:06 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by hokie:
[i]This definitely is a photography challenge web site but I sometimes wonder what the challenge is ;-)
Is it a challenge to take your best photo, to be the best interpreter of a challenge subject, to be the most creative, the most technically proficient or to simply have the most generally appealing photo that doesn't piss off too many people
As someone reasonably new to this group, I think the better word is "and", ie, all of what you list. While I am still trying to improve my skills, I tend to learn quite a bit from each session - comments given to me, and submissions by others. The best I can tell from the reasonable comments is that folks tend to look for everything you list. I certainly don't come close to getting it all. But each time, I hope to improve.
Jim
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 06:11:34 PM · #12 |
Geezzzzz-Louise.
I feel like I have to explain myself. My point today was (1)that already so many had voted..(2)the scores were low...(3)and the comments few.
No, I''m not obsessed with the score. Would I like to do better---- absolutely. Do I want to be in the top three. For sure! The whole idea is to improve with each entry.
I''d like to take shots that are both technically and aesthetically pleasing to the voter/viewer and ME. If I don''t like it or think it''s any good I won''t post it. Do I post pictures that I think I could of improved. YES! My hind sight is 110% I see my flaws and others point them out to me. I like the critiques and find them very helpful.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/28/2002 6:12:03 PM.
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/28/2002 6:12:31 PM. |
|
|
|
05/28/2002 06:47:05 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Patella:
I'd give my eye teeth for a 5.2 right now -- I have a 4.4. (Hey -- those 8 tenths of a point are important!!!) It's not a perfect photo by any stretch, but it's better than average -- and I thought average on a 1 to 10 scale was at least 5.
I'm actually pretty sure I do know why I'm getting the score -- partially due to a few of the comments I've received -- but I can't go into it, or justify it, without losing the anonymity so....
Actually if you look at the highscore on previous challenges (7.754,7.460,7.557) your median would be more like 3.7 or 3.8 so you ARE above average. :)
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 06:57:41 PM · #14 |
Chariot,
Uh-uh -- nice try. *grin* Even if we play by your rules, last place in the last three challenges was 3.273, 2.181, and 2.653. And the photo that fell in the middle of the ranking in each was 5.343, 4.863, and 5.414. (I may have fudged one way or another if there were an odd number of entries.) So I'm STILL under. Besides, statistics can always be messed up until you prove what you want to prove. *grin* (My apologies in advance to any statisticians out there...)
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 07:14:55 PM · #15 |
Chariot & Patella your mean. Doing MATH like that.
Too intimidating! <gbg>
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 07:28:13 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Patella:
Chariot,
Uh-uh -- nice try. *grin* Even if we play by your rules, last place in the last three challenges was 3.273, 2.181, and 2.653. And the photo that fell in the middle of the ranking in each was 5.343, 4.863, and 5.414. (I may have fudged one way or another if there were an odd number of entries.) So I'm STILL under. Besides, statistics can always be messed up until you prove what you want to prove. *grin* (My apologies in advance to any statisticians out there...)
Ok I tried.
Your picture sucks.
HAHAHAHAHAHA - I'm just teasing of course. But that's ok cause most of my pictures have sucked also!
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 07:28:51 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by kee:
Chariot & Patella your mean. Doing MATH like that.
Too intimidating! <gbg>
Screw math. You ride a Harley. You are cool! :-D
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 08:12:50 PM · #18 |
OK, when I first started doing this I thought I didn't care what people thought. Boy was I wrong! I realized after my last photo(which I didnt like, but it is the best my camera will do in that situation) that people may actually think Im a total idiot with a camera sometimes. No, I am just an idiot with a digital camera! I shot only 5 shots at the game with a digital, but over 400 in film. So, I did do better than that pic, but some of us have a job to do too!
Personally, I am trying to do things I dont normally do on film with the digital. I honestly think some people take this WAY too serious in the judging. With 141 votes, I have a 6.53 and I know my pic is much better than a 'D' or if you want to go with a 5 as average, I think it is better than just above average. I think some people need their voting license taken away!
Honestly, it does bother me, but it isn't going to get to me. Don't let it get to you either Patella! Heck we can go down with 3's and 4's if you want ... but I will tell you what I gave you and why, if you ever want to know .... and it takes a lot to get below a 5 with me. Just wish others had the same voting philosophy. |
|
|
|
05/28/2002 08:27:59 PM · #19 |
Tiger,
OK, this really is getting more out of hand then I intended it to -- but what the hey...
LOL -- a 6.53, based on the last challenge, practically has you in the top 5. That means more along the lines of an A+ than a D. (Because as Chariot pointed out, you can''t strictly go by the 5...)
I also realized why I care about the score and why I think we ALL really do care, at some level, about it. If we didn''t care, why would we submit our work into the scored contest? Why wouldn''t we refrain and simply put it up in a forum or on our own website or something for other people to comment on without the scoring process?
Eww -- maybe that was too trouble-maker -- "complaints" aside, I like the site, usually appreciate the scores I receive, fully support Drew and Langdon, etc etc etc -- and only wish I''d come up with the idea first. *grin*
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/28/2002 8:33:51 PM.
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 08:47:45 PM · #20 |
Well, I first came here because I was just buying my first digital camera and I saw this site talked about in one of the DP Review forums.
I'm not much in to open public voting or polls (mainly because my whole life has been centered around that stuff and I know it's all Bullsh1t) but I saw a lot of good photographers that also seemed to be in the same boat as me..new to digital. I though I could pick their brains and compare my tirials and errors.
The only thing that has ever..and I mean EVER bothered me enough about the voting in any way shape or form was the unwillingness of folks who either loved or hated your photo to comment beyond "Great!" or "Sucked!".
I think I have mentioned that I help a couple days at a high school and one word comments are VERBOTEN! For one thing the kids are on a yearbook. A medium for communication and by god they will communicate or they are off. They can join the mime team in theatre or the grass watching team in the gardening club.
I do not deny that I like to see people enjoy stuff I photograph but I am here for the exchange, and to exchange ideas you have to participate which means submissions. :-) Votes can..well...you get the idea.
|
|
|
|
05/28/2002 09:53:20 PM · #21 |
Well, I'm even worse off than any of you! My score is currently 3.55, even though I have some great comments that say it's beautiful, people love the colour and movement, etc. I think that with my camera and the way people vote I'll be lucky to ever get a score over 5.
After thinking about it for a while, I've realised that for most of the photos the voting isn't meaningful, and never will be. The only good thing about it is that it makes people look at each photo (or at least 25% of them) and consider it critically. The consideration is the important thing. Most people probably never analyse the images they see. People who vote on this site are encouraged to at least decide if they like it or hate it or feel somewhere in between. For some it encourages them to ask themselves why they respond that way. These are good things. The final scores, for most of us, don't really matter as much as the knowledge that all those people at least looked at the photo and thought about it for a moment. If they leave a comment that says it's nice but rate it down, well, it had an impact. |
|
|
|
05/29/2002 05:46:43 AM · #22 |
am i the only person who has the experience of deeply liking an artist or a musician that is not appreciated by the masses?
you can create something that is wonderful to some, but not all. the non-universal appeal does not detract from it's wonderfulness. not imo anyway.
|
|
|
|
05/29/2002 06:26:52 AM · #23 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
am i the only person who has the experience of deeply liking an artist or a musician that is not appreciated by the masses?
you can create something that is wonderful to some, but not all. the non-universal appeal does not detract from it's wonderfulness. not imo anyway.
Heh... that sounds like my entire musuc collection.
You make a good point about non-universal appeal. I'm usually more interested in the vote distribution and comments than the average vote, anyway.
|
|
|
|
05/29/2002 06:37:32 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
am i the only person who has the experience of deeply liking an artist or a musician that is not appreciated by the masses?
you can create something that is wonderful to some, but not all. the non-universal appeal does not detract from it's wonderfulness. not imo anyway.
Yup, I see this in my photographs too. The 'simplest' most 'populist' ones score higher than the ones I am more proud of. This is probably because the ones I like more require more thought and consideration to see the interesting details. I doubt most people voting spend a whole lot of time on each picture, so the ones that do the best have high impact, immediate obvious good features and are probably not having much long term value.
|
|
|
|
05/29/2002 06:55:45 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
am i the only person who has the experience of deeply liking an artist or a musician that is not appreciated by the masses?
you can create something that is wonderful to some, but not all. the non-universal appeal does not detract from it's wonderfulness. not imo anyway.
Mag...Sometimes its just ignorance. That word can make people angry but what does ignorance really mean? Just a lack of exposure, experience or knowledge about something, someone..whatever.
We all are ignorant about lots of stuff, even after we get some experience in something it doesn't mean that we have a full grasp of it. Ignorance is natural..you can't know everything..I accept my ignorance when faced with it and let others take the lead. I guess that's why I follow so much :-P
Art is not a science. There aren't clear answers. We can vote based on technical skill to a degree but even then what appear to be technical "flaws" to some may be done on purpose...like oversaturation or grain or overexposure, etc. It's difficult to tell sometimes.
I have said over and over don't give up your visions, it's all you've got to make you interesting. Do you know why even large advertising agencies farm out to smaller firms and even independents? Because they can't have every artistic vision hired under one roof. Some try but the best art directors are those that know where the talent is..even outside their immediate doors.
I am just using that as an example even though advertising may mean nothing to most here...it's just something I have been around and know a lot of people in.
One of the reasons I like photography is that it teaches me how to communicate with photographers my company may hire. The real pro's have so much talent but I can relate somewhat..I can tell them what I want and what my clients want..I am like a translater between the suits at a corporation and the artists, and that means my job is done better..plus I like photography as a hobby.
Anyway, I agree with you magnetic...most assuredly. |
|
