| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/10/2007 11:11:30 AM · #126 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by PapaBob:
I see issues with that kind of system, first we would not all get to vote on all of the images unless we vote early, second why would anyone vote early and have to see all the images....:). |
You have the option of viewing/voting on them all. That hasn't changed. The system is designed to cull the field and encourage those who do NOT vote because fields are too large/too watered down with simply average images. We've heard from a number of them in this thread.
It's worth a try, anyway, to see how it works out. In the real world, most competitions have a screening process for entries that takes place before the voting ever begins.
R. |
I guess my only issue with that is people have the option, I think we already established people should not have the option, there was a group of people who did not want to see or vote on nudes (not trying to get that started again..lol)and they were told they needed to see all the images, to me this is a simalar problem because now people are asking to not want to be bothere tosee what someone else has deemed to be an average image. Also how should people feel if their work is deemed not good enough to have people that the time to look at there work and possibly give them a comment to help them improve. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 11:34:37 AM · #127 |
| I guess my problem would be if I don't have time at the beginning, I wouldn't get to see all the images in the challenge. My top vote getter quite often finishes well off the pace of the winners. I'd miss out on those shots. I quite often find things to see in the "average" shot that I'm glad I had the chance to see, regardless of where that shot finishes in a challenge. I think, in short, it would make for very boring voting. Of course, I vote 100% of the challenges I vote, so I'm not the target audience for these discussions, am I? And I do think it would be very discouraging to find that after a couple of days, no one else will be seeing/commenting/voting on your image. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 11:45:03 AM · #128 |
If the issue is participation, what would you guys think about a barrier to entry that didn't require "talent" or a financial issue?
For instance, in order to to be qualified to enter a Free Study, a member must maintain a general 10:1 participation ratio.
Whether we count forum posts, votes cast, or comments made as participation would be a matter to flesh out later - but what do you think of this idea in general?
|
|
|
|
11/10/2007 11:49:48 AM · #129 |
Originally posted by PapaBob:
I guess my only issue with that is people have the option, I think we already established people should not have the option, there was a group of people who did not want to see or vote on nudes (not trying to get that started again..lol)and they were told they needed to see all the images, to me this is a simalar problem because now people are asking to not want to be bothere tosee what someone else has deemed to be an average image. Also how should people feel if their work is deemed not good enough to have people that the time to look at there work and possibly give them a comment to help them improve. |
I hear ya. But the perceived problem (one of them anyway) that the proposal is addressing is: "There are too many images in the Free Study challenge, it discourages me from voting." We can limit the entries in a given challenge, but that is probably not workable, as it penalizes those who shoot a great image near the end of the month. We can institute exclusive Free Studies, breaking them into editing or subject categories, reducing the size of the fields but not the overall numbers of Free Study entries. Or we can experiment with a system for pruning the field partway through the voting.
It seems to me to be worth a try, on a trial basis, for the monthly Free Study only, NOT the regular challenges.
R.
|
|
|
|
11/10/2007 11:52:13 AM · #130 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
And I do think it would be very discouraging to find that after a couple of days, no one else will be seeing/commenting/voting on your image. |
Yup, that's the downside. But in my experience I have received at least 75% of my total votes within the first several days of voting...
R.
|
|
|
|
11/10/2007 11:55:56 AM · #131 |
Originally posted by L2:
If the issue is participation, what would you guys think about a barrier to entry that didn't require "talent" or a financial issue?
For instance, in order to to be qualified to enter a Free Study, a member must maintain a general 10:1 participation ratio.
Whether we count forum posts, votes cast, or comments made as participation would be a matter to flesh out later - but what do you think of this idea in general? |
Interesting proposal. Limit free study participation to "socially active" members... In effect, you're making free studies a "reward" for active participation on the site. Of course, that would mean we'd not be seeing some fantastic Free Study entries from the likes of, say, Larus.
I'd have to think this one through. I'm not in principle opposed to the monthly Free Studies being a "bonus round", so to speak, but then why would I be? I'm very active, myself :-)
R.
|
|
|
|
11/10/2007 12:09:31 PM · #132 |
Originally posted by L2:
If the issue is participation, what would you guys think about a barrier to entry that didn't require "talent" or a financial issue?
For instance, in order to to be qualified to enter a Free Study, a member must maintain a general 10:1 participation ratio.
Whether we count forum posts, votes cast, or comments made as participation would be a matter to flesh out later - but what do you think of this idea in general? |
Interesting idea, it may entice more voting and limit the number of entries and is fair to one and all, definitly worth looking into in my opionion. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 12:12:31 PM · #133 |
Originally posted by PapaBob:
Originally posted by L2:
If the issue is participation, what would you guys think about a barrier to entry that didn't require "talent" or a financial issue?
For instance, in order to to be qualified to enter a Free Study, a member must maintain a general 10:1 participation ratio.
Whether we count forum posts, votes cast, or comments made as participation would be a matter to flesh out later - but what do you think of this idea in general? |
Interesting idea, it may entice more voting and limit the number of entries and is fair to one and all, definitly worth looking into in my opionion. |
In addition maybe a quarterly free study that is open to everyone to address the issue of folks that just can not find the time to vote. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 12:27:27 PM · #134 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I bet you could very easily double the number of votes cast in a large challenge by not allowing thumbnails to be viewed unless you have voted on the image. I think cherry picking is probably prominent in large challenges and there are photos that people want to vote on and ones they don't care about voting on. I think the viewers want to see the photos even if they aren't going to vote on them, and the thumbnails are providing that opportunity. |
I've supported this idea for a long time -- I think it would make the vote distribution much closer to the "random" assignment it purports to be.
An alternative suggestion has been made previously to allow pre-viewing of the thumbnails, but that clicking on any un-voted image takes the voter to the next image on their random list, not to the selected image, unless that image had already been voted-on. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 12:34:32 PM · #135 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
You still get a score, you still get a placement in the challenge, you just end up with fewer votes than before.
R. |
And fewer opportunities to be seen and commented-upon ... we're often saying it's the lower-scoring photos which need the help and should get the comments, yet with this system they won't even be seen.
This conversation seems terribly skewed towards finding the "most efficient" method to determine the "winning" photo, and not towards how to help the most people "become better photographers" -- the stated mission of this site. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 12:39:46 PM · #136 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
You still get a score, you still get a placement in the challenge, you just end up with fewer votes than before.
R. |
And fewer opportunities to be seen and commented-upon ... we're often saying it's the lower-scoring photos which need the help and should get the comments, yet with this system they won't even be seen.
This conversation seems terribly skewed towards finding the "most efficient" method to determine the "winning" photo, and not towards how to help the most people "become better photographers" -- the stated mission of this site. |
Well, I can see that perspective for sure. My proposal such as it is, is designed to address the "problem" of too few votes. Your objection, and it is certainly valid, has to do with too few comments. I do wonder, given the low rate of commenting in general, whether the proposed tiered solution will really reduce the comments on the "cut" images significantly. Anyway, the system could be set up so you could view ALL the images at any time, and comment on any of them. But the "voting progression" could be reduced.
I don't know, it's just an idea. Like any idea, it has plusses and minuses...
R.
|
|
|
|
11/10/2007 12:44:10 PM · #137 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
This conversation seems terribly skewed towards finding the "most efficient" method to determine the "winning" photo, and not towards how to help the most people "become better photographers" -- the stated mission of this site. |
I don't understand this. The site says 'a digital photography contest'. If that has changed, so should the title. The learning part is a big, great bonus but it isn't advertised as the mission of the place. Is that what the site is about? If that's the case why not just dump scores and voting altogether and just run weekly events whre photos can be submitted for comment and advice. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 12:49:11 PM · #138 |
One thing to consider.
I would like to know the ratio of DSL and Cable vs. Dial-up voters. We MAY HAVE more people voting from dial-up than before because of various reasons. With the cost of everything going up some may have had to go back to dial-up.
If that is the case or part of the problem is there a way DPC can incorporate a download voting system. Where a voter could download a challenge, vote off line, and upload their votes to DPC. That way while they're at work, sleeping, or out shooting photos they can be downloading a file so they can vote offline. Then upload it in the same manor.
Just a thought. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:01:25 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by PapaBob:
Originally posted by L2:
If the issue is participation, what would you guys think about a barrier to entry that didn't require "talent" or a financial issue?
For instance, in order to to be qualified to enter a Free Study, a member must maintain a general 10:1 participation ratio.
Whether we count forum posts, votes cast, or comments made as participation would be a matter to flesh out later - but what do you think of this idea in general? |
Interesting idea, it may entice more voting and limit the number of entries and is fair to one and all, definitly worth looking into in my opionion. |
I like it, I like it, I like it! |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:04:04 PM · #140 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
This conversation seems terribly skewed towards finding the "most efficient" method to determine the "winning" photo, and not towards how to help the most people "become better photographers" -- the stated mission of this site. |
I don't understand this. The site says 'a digital photography contest'. If that has changed, so should the title. The learning part is a big, great bonus but it isn't advertised as the mission of the place. Is that what the site is about? If that's the case why not just dump scores and voting altogether and just run weekly events whre photos can be submitted for comment and advice. |
Originally posted by About DPC Challenge:
DPChallenge was created in January 2002 by two friends, Drew Ungvarsky (drewmedia) and Langdon Oliver (langdon). The original idea behind the site was for it to be a place where the two of us and a couple of our friends could teach ourselves to be better photographers by giving each other a 'challenge' for the week. The idea quickly took off and became much more in the months that followed. |
Learning is the mission; the contest is the format or structure used to accomplish that goal. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:13:42 PM · #141 |
I see. Doesn't seem like the idea has scaled up well from a few people to 86,000, nor it is realistic to think that it would. It would be like everyone attending a university and sitting in the same classroom for four years straight no matter how long they've been there and no matter what knowledge they have already learned to date. Seniors and freshman, same lecture week after week.
It either needs to get more challenging as people get more skilled or those people will get bored and move on. Same as any other learning environment.
But anyway, there's just too many damn entires in the challenges. I can live with looking at everything from cell phone snaps to award winning entries, just so long as there are a reasonable number of them per challenge.
|
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:19:50 PM · #142 |
Originally posted by RKT:
Originally posted by PapaBob:
Originally posted by L2:
If the issue is participation, what would you guys think about a barrier to entry that didn't require "talent" or a financial issue?
For instance, in order to to be qualified to enter a Free Study, a member must maintain a general 10:1 participation ratio.
Whether we count forum posts, votes cast, or comments made as participation would be a matter to flesh out later - but what do you think of this idea in general? |
Interesting idea, it may entice more voting and limit the number of entries and is fair to one and all, definitly worth looking into in my opionion. |
I like it, I like it, I like it! |
I don't like it. There are already those who have limited their participation because of a perceived "elitist" attitude among those who have the time to post to forums, vote on all entries, make comments, etc. etc. I miss seeing their entries. Whatever criteria is chosen would definitely NOT be "fair to one and all" because of different circumstances for different folks. A "FREE STUDY" should be just that. A challenge which is free to one and all to enter. I do like the idea of splitting it into different categories, as was suggested before - thus allowing everyone to enter and allowing entries in each category to be judged more fairly. It still allows everyone who wants to the ability to enter on a monthly basis. I think the Free Study challenges are quite valuable and should be continued on a monthly basis. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:22:04 PM · #143 |
Originally posted by swhiddon:
One thing to consider.
I would like to know the ratio of DSL and Cable vs. Dial-up voters. We MAY HAVE more people voting from dial-up than before because of various reasons. With the cost of everything going up some may have had to go back to dial-up. |
A bit outdated, but...
ETA: It's high time we ran this poll again; we run it every 18-24 months or so to track the trend. I doubt that folks have gone back to dialup in any significant numbers. The fact is that basic high-speed services are almost as cheap as dialup and they don't tie up a 'phone line. Nonetheless, 'tis all opinion without data! Now where *is* Mr. Data??
Message edited by author 2007-11-10 13:24:45. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:26:31 PM · #144 |
Originally posted by ancientimages:
... There are already those who have limited their participation because of a perceived "elitist" attitude among those who have the time to post to forums, vote on all entries, make comments, etc. etc. I miss seeing their entries.... |
It's ok to not like the idea, but I'm confused. There are people who refuse to participate anymore, because they don't participate as much as others? |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:29:03 PM · #145 |
Originally posted by Judi:
Maybe if you split them into 4 categories as was suggested once before.
- Minimal
- Basic
- Advanced
- Expert
This would not only lower the entries (especially if they were staggered one a week) but more interest and happy campers would come of it as you could only enter one category per month. This in turn would dwell more views per entry and possibly more votes. |
I voted on all the entries in the Oct Free, but if it were divided into categories, it would make it soooo much easier to vote. Good idea! |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:34:17 PM · #146 |
Originally posted by L2:
Originally posted by ancientimages:
... There are already those who have limited their participation because of a perceived "elitist" attitude among those who have the time to post to forums, vote on all entries, make comments, etc. etc. I miss seeing their entries.... |
It's ok to not like the idea, but I'm confused. There are people who refuse to participate anymore, because they don't participate as much as others? |
Color me confused too. I also think it's not that some of us have the time, it's that some of us make the time...I feel obligated, in a good way, to do more than just throw a picture in a challenge...but maybe that's just me and a handful of others. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:34:18 PM · #147 |
Originally posted by phatphoto:
Originally posted by Judi:
Maybe if you split them into 4 categories as was suggested once before.
- Minimal
- Basic
- Advanced
- Expert
This would not only lower the entries (especially if they were staggered one a week) but more interest and happy campers would come of it as you could only enter one category per month. This in turn would dwell more views per entry and possibly more votes. |
I voted on all the entries in the Oct Free, but if it were divided into categories, it would make it soooo much easier to vote. Good idea! |
I actually DO like the idea of categories, but I'd want to see them as (for example) portrait, landscape, macro, whatever works: I have a real hard time saying this macro is better than that landscape, the rules are so different. I'm less interested in basic/advanced splits.
R.
|
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:34:22 PM · #148 |
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious flaw in the plan with regard to splitting up the Free Studies into one week groups and limiting submissions to just one entry per month:
Let's say Minimal runs first, you aren't interested, move on. Basic runs next, you got a great shot so you enter. Advanced runs, you only had an OK shot but you know you can't enter so you lick your wounds and hope your Basic score holds up. Now here's Expert, and OMG you have your best idea ever ever ever, but you've already taken your chance in Basic so you miss out. Damn! If only you hadn't entered too early!
Shoot, lose, hope, repeat. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:37:48 PM · #149 |
Originally posted by L2:
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious flaw in the plan with regard to splitting up the Free Studies into one week groups and limiting submissions to just one entry per month |
You really don't like this idea do you?
How is what you described any different than dealing with which challenges pop as advanced or basic as it is? I was pretty disappointed to see the one advanced editing challenge go to the lame 'copy someone else's art from a movie scene' challenge and see single light source come up as Basic.
It's also no different than having two exclusives pop at the same time, both of which you have "the" shot for and one of which you will be forced to sit out on.
The fates are fickle, what can you do.
Message edited by author 2007-11-10 13:38:52. |
|
|
|
11/10/2007 01:41:39 PM · #150 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by L2:
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious flaw in the plan with regard to splitting up the Free Studies into one week groups and limiting submissions to just one entry per month |
You really don't like this idea do you?
How is what you described any different than dealing with which challenges pop as advanced or basic as it is? I was pretty disappointed to see the one advanced editing challenge go to the lame 'copy someone else's art from a movie scene' challenge and see single light source come up as Basic.
It's also no different than having two exclusives pop at the same time, both of which you have "the" shot for and one of which you will be forced to sit out on.
The fates are fickle, what can you do. |
I didn't like it back in April 2007, either. :)
The difference between two exclusives popping at the same time and this is that when the exclusives pop, you have entries to choose from. When you must wait to see what you shoot later, you risk a) not getting anything later or b) getting something awesome later but not being able to enter it at all. |
|
