| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/31/2007 06:41:16 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
Recruit some folks to volunteer to vote on 100% of some future challenge (and make sure they don't enter to avoid anyone claiming they're colluding), have them send you their votes, and publish the results. See whether they differ substantially from the full vote. Keep in mind that there will almost certainly be some small variations, but I'd bet not many major ones. |
There would be major variations if it were a jury of people devoted to photography and knowledgable about its art and history. |
|
|
|
07/31/2007 06:45:42 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
There would be major variations if it were a jury of people devoted to photography and knowledgable about its art and history. |
Just one of many issues surrounding juried competitions, and why I'd rather see DPC's main structure remain as it is. My point wasn't that my suggestion was perfect, but rather that if the OP wants to see juried decisions, he can start a group to declare their own.
Much the way Team Suck gives out its own awards and you name your individual ribbon winners, Don.
Message edited by author 2007-07-31 18:46:01.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2007 07:02:29 PM · #28 |
As a new member can someone please enlighten me at the the voting scale? I understand a 1 is bad and a 10 is good.
When I vote 5 is an average shot, something I would take as a vacation pic etc nothing special but it's in focus and is pretty to look at.
A 6 is a good hoilday picture, something I would frame and hang at home.
7 and 8 are for great shots that I feel would be book worthy
and 9 is for photos that I just can't believe someone can do that with a camera.
I'm getting slammed with 3's and 4's in my current challenge to me I have obviously done something very wrong with my shot, unfortunately since almost no one is providing feedback when leaving 3's and 4's I have no idea what it is that is so unappealing about my photo. |
|
|
|
07/31/2007 07:29:03 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by codfish:
I'm getting slammed with 3's and 4's in my current challenge to me I have obviously done something very wrong with my shot, unfortunately since almost no one is providing feedback when leaving 3's and 4's I have no idea what it is that is so unappealing about my photo. |
Your voting scale sounds good to me.
On the issue of getting 'slammed' with 3's and 4's... don't worry about it. You'll always get a bunch of 3's and 4's, and 1's and 2's. You should look at your average score and once you've entered a few challenges you'll have some idea of your personal goals (e.g. some people want to reach 5.0, 5.5, 6.0, 6.5, ribbon)
Someone gives your shot a 4? - Chances are that you didn't do anything technically wrong. It's just that your shot didn't appeal to the voter.
Message edited by author 2007-07-31 19:29:49. |
|
|
|
07/31/2007 08:04:59 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by codfish:
I understand a 1 is bad and a 10 is good. |
In that case, you know as much as anybody else. |
|
|
|
07/31/2007 08:08:46 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by codfish:
I understand a 1 is bad and a 10 is good. |
In that case, you know as much as anybody else. |
Dang! I thought I was voting on the number one image! :)
Getting back to the original topic I like the idea. Not doing it for every challenge mind you but for one or two. One thing I've noted in my local camera club is that the club judges will judge one way and when we get external judges (e.g. professional photographers, gallery owners etc.) we actually end up with considerably different results.
In terms of consistency? Everyone gets the troll vote once in a while. We also get the Pixie votes too. (I.e. someone handing out 10's like they are candy). For the most part, people on this site vote the same way more or less. I have to agree thought that having a select group of people each voting on 100% of the entries and not being able to vote on there own would be interesting to see.
Same number of votes.
+
The same voters.
=
A totally even playing field. (HAH!...I make me laugh sometimes)
Message edited by author 2007-07-31 20:14:15.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2007 08:34:15 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Citadel:
Same number of votes.
+
The same voters.
=
A totally even playing field. (HAH!...I make me laugh sometimes) |
The problem is "garbage in, garbage out."
In other words, every group would probably rank the shots a little differently.
But is any one group "right?" No. Not any more than the group of DPC voters as a whole is "right" in an absolute sense. It would just be a different set of opinions obtained in a different way.
What bothers me is that there seems to be this concept that somehow people are being robbed of their "deserved" score. There's no such thing. Put the same images in front of the same people on a different day, and they might well rank them differently because a million things can influence you when you hit that vote button. Put those images in front of 10 different groups, and you'll likely get 10 different rankings.
Posthumous might feel that a group educated in the art of photography would create a more "right" ranking, but I'd again just say it's another one. Someone else might say that they're trying to break into stock photography, so a group of stock purchasers is more "right." Add your own preferences, and you can see where I'm going.
DPC is set up to rank photos according to the mass opinions of members. No more, no less. Want a judged competition? Go to betterphoto.com or others, or offline competitions (I do).
|
|
|
|
07/31/2007 09:06:55 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
every group would probably rank the shots a little differently.
But is any one group "right?" No. Not any more than the group of DPC voters as a whole is "right" in an absolute sense. It would just be a different set of opinions obtained in a different way.
What bothers me is that there seems to be this concept that somehow people are being robbed of their "deserved" score. There's no such thing. Put the same images in front of the same people on a different day, and they might well rank them differently because a million things can influence you when you hit that vote button. Put those images in front of 10 different groups, and you'll likely get 10 different rankings.
Posthumous might feel that a group educated in the art of photography would create a more "right" ranking, but I'd again just say it's another one. Someone else might say that they're trying to break into stock photography, so a group of stock purchasers is more "right." Add your own preferences, and you can see where I'm going.
DPC is set up to rank photos according to the mass opinions of members. No more, no less. Want a judged competition? Go to betterphoto.com or others, or offline competitions (I do). |
What a fantastic summary, Jeffrey. Agree on all points.
I appreciate knowing what a fairly large group of people (mostly photographers of all skills and tastes) thinks - and that's what DPC voting offers.
If I wanted one or two in-depth critiques, I'd ask the critique club. |
|
|
|
07/31/2007 09:19:01 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by focuspoint:
I really would like to see a bit consistent and quality votes for our hard works. Yeah, go Leo :P |
Shall I assume that this comment could be interpreted as meaning that the current set of votes cast are "Inconsistent" and of "dubious" quality?
Rather disheartening to think that after almost 100,000 votes, my efforts, and those of countless others are seemingly summarily dismissed.
Ray |
The voting is "inconsistent" in that, since not everyone votes on 100% of the entries, each photo has been rated by a slightly different pool of voters. With a "jury" you know that all of the photos have been judged by the same people. |
I totally agree with your views... however, that presupposes that the judges would be called upon to vote on all of the images... something that the OP did not mention in his initial comments.
Ray |
|
|
|
07/31/2007 09:21:29 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
... however, that presupposes that the judges would be called upon to vote on all of the images... something that the OP did not mention in his initial comments.
Ray |
I didn't pay that close attention to the OP, but having the jury vote on all the photos is the only way having a juried competition makes any sense to me. |
|
|
|
07/31/2007 09:34:01 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by SandyP:
i.e. these ribbon winners just to name a few:
Two 1's; One 2 (puhhhhhlleeeease!!!)
Oh, and there is no question about these meeting the challenge either. |
Expert Editing Rules: "Please remember, however, that this is a photography contest. You are encouraged to keep your entries photographic in nature, and voters are encouraged to rate entries accordingly."
Saying that is a "photo" is stretching it a bit. :D Wonderful piece of digital art, but not a photo anymore... JMO of course. :P |
|
|
|
08/01/2007 08:51:46 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by levyj413:
But is any one group "right?" No. Not any more than the group of DPC voters as a whole is "right" in an absolute sense. It would just be a different set of opinions obtained in a different way. |
Relativism is an easy argument to defend. After all, it seems that all of humanity's attempts to provide meaning to the Universe have been exhausted, fallen short. But being easy to defend doesn't make something right or virtuous (two concepts that are destroyed by relativism). Not that Relativism doesn't have its uses. It's quite powerful and could even save humanity from itself in places like the Middle East.
But anyone who loves Monet should realize that his work did not come to the fore as the result of popular demand, but rather because a small group of "elitists" fought tirelessly to promote a certain vision.
Originally posted by levyj413:
What bothers me is that there seems to be this concept that somehow people are being robbed of their "deserved" score. |
I often think of those Impressionist "elitists" when I tell someone their photo was robbed. I am proud and enthusiastic to promote beauty where I see it.
Sure, the complaint is most often lodged by the people who took the photographs, but that's a different issue. We all tend to have an inflated opinion of our own work, including ribbon winners. That's why I tend to start threads where people are discouraged from self-promotion and asked instead to look outward.
Originally posted by levyj413:
Posthumous might feel that a group educated in the art of photography would create a more "right" ranking, but I'd again just say it's another one. Someone else might say that they're trying to break into stock photography, so a group of stock purchasers is more "right." Add your own preferences, and you can see where I'm going.
DPC is set up to rank photos according to the mass opinions of members. No more, no less. |
Ah, so you admit that different forms of judging could indeed be more "right" for different people. You have opened Pandora's box, and now that it's open, there's no reason why a simple "mass opinion" is necessarily the best option for all these disparate groups.
That being said, I try to make the most of the mass opinion here. I try to do my part to shift it, but most of the work is done by some of the brilliant (and *underrated*) photographers here. I just point at them now and then.
Message edited by author 2007-08-01 08:52:12. |
|
|
|
08/01/2007 10:38:09 AM · #38 |
I personally think it would "freshen" up DPC a bit to see juried competitions here. Sure, you can do that on other sites, but we all know this is the best site from a community perspective. So we want to spend more time here.
Perhaps an "extra" challenge every two weeks would be enough. It could be themed and juried by professionals in the subfield. E.g., a portrait challenge, judged by a sample of the professional portrait photographers among us or guest invited judges. Likewise, landscape photography, judged by pro landscapers. Note that judges would not be allowed to enter the competition.
|
|
|
|
08/01/2007 10:51:13 AM · #39 |
Originally posted by nshapiro:
I personally think it would "freshen" up DPC a bit to see juried competitions here. Sure, you can do that on other sites, but we all know this is the best site from a community perspective. So we want to spend more time here.
Perhaps an "extra" challenge every two weeks would be enough. It could be themed and juried by professionals in the subfield. E.g., a portrait challenge, judged by a sample of the professional portrait photographers among us or guest invited judges. Likewise, landscape photography, judged by pro landscapers. Note that judges would not be allowed to enter the competition. |
Excellent... when do we start?
Message edited by author 2007-08-28 09:22:28. |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 09:22:18 AM · #40 |
When do we start the "Trial" run... com'n!!! |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 09:27:16 AM · #41 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
Howcome the ribbon winners are able to avoid the trolls? |
Somebody has to win and somebody has to come last.
The main thing to understand is coming last only means that you may not be as good as other who participated. But you might be very good in own right. Being last in not always very bad thing. Its just matter of thinking. |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 09:29:53 AM · #42 |
For me, if only we could stop people to vote who participated, might stop lots of troll voting.
If someone does not have picture in the challenge, I think there are greater chances that he will vote fairly.
(it does not mean that all the people who participate vote unfairly, i feel due to human nature there are chances to be unfair). |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 09:30:10 AM · #43 |
Originally posted by zxaar:
Originally posted by jhonan:
Howcome the ribbon winners are able to avoid the trolls? |
Somebody has to win and somebody has to come last.
The main thing to understand is coming last only means that you may not be as good as other who participated. But you might be very good in own right. Being last in not always very bad thing. Its just matter of thinking. |
I like...
"They are the trolls... "
answer better ;) |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 09:44:59 AM · #44 |
I think a way, not to beat the trolls, but discourage it or even understand it, is for a member or two of the SC to look at the top ten images in a challenge, see which recived 1s and 2s and maybe just ask the voter why they believed that shot deserved such a score? Even if the user couldnt give a reason I wouldn't expect a ban or anything, just why they thought it deserved a low score. If they gave a reason then the SC could tell us why, without naming the voter. I know if I vote a 1 on an image I am more than happy to back up my decision with a reason.
Then again, a lot of you would hate the way I vote. I use the whole scale from 1 to 10. Yes, if I feel the image does not meet a challenge I will mark it down massively. For example, a few weeks back the challenge title was "Triumph" and I think a shot of a hummingbird won, or came second, or thereabouts. The only thing that tied it into the challenge, in my opinion, was the title of the shot, if the shot had been untitled, no one would of `got it`, not by even thinking outside of the box, and in a phtography competition, surely the image must do the talking and not the title.
A case of shoehorning? In my opinion, yes it is. It was a great photo, but in the context of a challenge I would of given it a 5, maybe a 4, maybe lower. Am I a DNMC Nazi? I'm dont think so.
So the way to go could be questionaires to those who voted a top ten image with a low score, and post the reason anonymously in the forums somewhere..
However, if you go with a judges challenge, I think the identity of the judges should remain anonymous as well.
Message edited by author 2007-08-28 09:49:57. |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 10:13:45 AM · #45 |
I've always wondered why we are allowed to vote in the challenges we participate in. Seems to be a bit of a conflict of interest. I would suggest that if we enter in a challenge, we are not eligible to vote in it.
My daughter works at a radio station, so she is not allowed to enter in the contests, and neither are any of us, the family; for good reason! I think it just makes sense.
Unless we are afraid that too many people will "not" vote because they are not involved. If that's the case, then maybe those people should remind themselves of why they came here in the first place: To help one another learn, and in the process, learn ourselves and improve.
Deb :-)
Message edited by author 2007-08-28 10:14:46. |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 10:20:36 AM · #46 |
Many of us are just too close to our work to accept criticism. Thus, we get threads complaining about trolls, challenge descriptions, unfair equipment advantages, lack of creative vision, gang voting... whatever. Anything to avoid responsibility for a poor entry. These things probably do exist to some extent, but their influence is pretty darn tiny IMO. If two or three trolls were rooted out, it might move a score from 5.1 to 5.2, and people would just point the finger somewhere else. While a juried competition could be fun, there would inevitably be new rants complaining about the jury selection, favoritism, bias towards certain types of photography and so on.
An alternate approach might be a feature where you could compare your entry against a username and it would tell you (assuming the person voted) if that person voted higher or lower than your score. No numbers, just a simple thumbs up or thumbs down. I suppose the voters would have to opt-in to participate, but at least it could give you some idea if a particular person liked the photo. |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 10:23:16 AM · #47 |
At many other sites where there is a jury / panel voting system, a group of favoured or "in-group" photographers tends to develop over time. These people tend to win everything and it is very difficult for newbies to break in. Also the panel often have preferences for picture styles which then become de facto standards on the site. Similar stuff happens in art schools all over where students copy the lecturer's style.
This is a little like DPC (think Ribbon Hogs) but at least here there is a much bigger group of "biased" voters to blame. In other words it is more democratic.
On balance, I feel it is a bad idea in general to go for a jury system for the above reasons. My 2c worth... |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 11:02:02 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by craigester:
This is a little like DPC (think Ribbon Hogs)... |
In any large group, wouldn't you expect some people to be more successful than others over time? If you really study the consistent top scorers, you'll find that there's actually a LOT of variety in styles and approach. Joey Lawrence tends to favor dark photos, Pedro and Goodman go for toned B&W portraits, Kiwiness and De Sousa certainly have good ideas, but it's their technical perfection that makes the difference. Heida was drama, Ursula is color and composition. Larus, Alexsaberi, Qart, Falc, DrAchoo, Elsapo, xtian, Grigrigirl... there are literally dozens of top-flight photographers here, and it's a credit to DPC that no single approach is dominant.
Consider Librodo's awesome portraiture... tons of favorites and several 8+ scores, but also some low scores because great portraits don't work for every challenge. Librodo aims for a great photo and tries to fit the challenge, while I target the challenge and try to make a great photo out of it. No surprise then that I have more ribbons while he has more great photos. People like  Dax- and  Susi take that concept even further... zero ribbons, but GEEZ look at the photos! I don't think DPC favors an "in" group of people so much as certain people are good at taking pictures that DPCers favor. ;-) |
|
|
|
08/28/2007 11:02:48 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by karmat:
What if SC, or whoever, picked the trolls, not knowing they were trolls?
(For the record, I've not decided if I think this is a good idea or not, that thought just came to mind) |
What if the SC don't pick any trolls and yet there still are a lot of images that get 1 votes ? What will be the new conspiracy de jour ? I don't know that people are ready to have their reality challenged like this.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2007 11:07:40 AM · #50 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by karmat:
What if SC, or whoever, picked the trolls, not knowing they were trolls?
(For the record, I've not decided if I think this is a good idea or not, that thought just came to mind) |
What if the SC don't pick any trolls and yet there still are a lot of images that get 1 votes ? What will be the new conspiracy de jour ? I don't know that people are ready to have their reality challenged like this. |
I agree.
What fun is it if we can't blame someone else for our mediocre and lower scores? |
|
