| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/10/2002 03:06:57 PM · #1 |
It seems that folks are complaining that they have too much work to do on the site. Here is a thought to get the voting chore down. Recall that the site will only continue to grow and just might get to over a thousand entries soon.
Have 2,3,4,5 or more as needed challenges per week. Photographers will be limited to one entry per week they choose the challenge. They must follow the rules on that challenge (ie voting) but would not be required to vote or not vote on the other challenges. In effect then those who have time problems would have a smaller universe to deal with and others would see no real change.
If there were 4 challenges and an average of 108 entries we would have to vote on 27 more or less (assuming random distribution). Since the voting scale is automated the real impact on admin would be coming up with more topics (they could be recycled with or without previous entrants being allowed to participate in subsequent incarnations).
Those who like to vote on all areas would certainly be free to do so. Those who are straped for time could participate in their challenge only.
Bryan |
|
|
|
06/10/2002 03:23:27 PM · #2 |
Well, There are a lot of sites that offer multiple "challenges" or categories every week. Heck, there are a bunch of sites that have a picture of the day format in addition to categories.
The one thing that makes our site unique is it's an open, one shot deal once a week. You got one week to give your hardest swing at the topic.
It's simple, it's clean and even if we had a 1,000 entries its infinitely more manageable than multple challenges. I doubt we will get to 1,000 entries. I think the fact it takes a pretty good amount of time to vote on 100-200 keeps the entries down. The fact we limit the "editing" also keeps a lot of the photoshop freaks and people who depend on digital editing to get a good photo.
The only thing I would like to see is a way to de-emphasize just the 1-2-3 place format and open up some other "digital" prizes like what Drew and Langdon I think have in mind already. :-)
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 03:23:50 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by heritcon:
It seems that folks are complaining that they have too much work to do on the site. Here is a thought to get the voting chore down. Recall that the site will only continue to grow and just might get to over a thousand entries soon.
Have 2,3,4,5 or more as needed challenges per week. Photographers will be limited to one entry per week they choose the challenge. They must follow the rules on that challenge (ie voting) but would not be required to vote or not vote on the other challenges. In effect then those who have time problems would have a smaller universe to deal with and others would see no real change.
If there were 4 challenges and an average of 108 entries we would have to vote on 27 more or less (assuming random distribution). Since the voting scale is automated the real impact on admin would be coming up with more topics (they could be recycled with or without previous entrants being allowed to participate in subsequent incarnations).
Those who like to vote on all areas would certainly be free to do so. Those who are straped for time could participate in their challenge only.
Bryan
Perhaps, so that there are equal challengers per number of challenges instead of letting us pick the challenge we want (so the majority still doesn't choose the same challenge), assign them randomly to us - they could send them thru our emails midnight on Sunday's.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 03:26:31 PM · #4 |
I, for one, wouldn't want to see a limit to one challenge. I personally believe that just having multiple challenges per week (if they overlap) will help people feel they can miss one, and the total number of entries per challenge would drop. It might bring up the overall quality as well, as people would be less likely to submit for the sake of submitting.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 03:37:02 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by clubjuggle:
I, for one, wouldn't want to see a limit to one challenge. I personally believe that just having multiple challenges per week (if they overlap) will help people feel they can miss one, and the total number of entries per challenge would drop. It might bring up the overall quality as well, as people would be less likely to submit for the sake of submitting.
It also depends on what you feel the point of the site/ challenge selection is.
Personally I'm here to take better pictures and be sometimes 'forced' to shoot in
a style I wouldn't normally try. That's why it is a challenge. It is also a
learning process. Having the ability to opt-out on something that you might be
uncomfortable/ not so good at almost entirely misses the reason I take part in these
challenges. Though I'm sure everyone has different reasons for taking part.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 03:38:17 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by hokie:
Well, There are a lot of sites that offer multiple "challenges" or categories every week. Heck, there are a bunch of sites that have a picture of the day format in addition to categories.
The one thing that makes our site unique is it''s an open, one shot deal once a week. You got one week to give your hardest swing at the topic.
It''s simple, it''s clean and even if we had a 1,000 entries its infinitely more manageable than multple challenges. I doubt we will get to 1,000 entries. I think the fact it takes a pretty good amount of time to vote on 100-200 keeps the entries down. The fact we limit the "editing" also keeps a lot of the photoshop freaks and people who depend on digital editing to get a good photo.
The only thing I would like to see is a way to de-emphasize just the 1-2-3 place format and open up some other "digital" prizes like what Drew and Langdon I think have in mind already. :-)
I agree with you hokie. This site is definitely one of a kind among all the other challenges out there. It''s extremely well done, clear and concise. It''s easy to navigate and from a designer''s point of view, pleasing to the eye.
I like the way Drew and Langdon have set this whole thing up and I really wouldn''t want to see it ruined by trying to make it more like the rest. I have time to vote on 100 photos....200 even, if they had them. Granted, I have no life.....:) Okay...I DO have a bit of a life...two kids, full/OVER-time job as a graphic designer, soccer games, horseback riding lessons, cheerleading competitions (daughter''s), doctor''s appointments, dentist''s appointments, your basic taxi driver until my kids get their licenses and sole bread winner of the household. Life gets too real sometimes, huh?
Anyway, I like everything the way it is....I''m not opposed to improvement or change....just don''t do it at the sake of quality.
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/10/2002 3:38:53 PM. |
|
|
|
06/10/2002 03:47:43 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
It also depends on what you feel the point of the site/ challenge selection is.
Personally I'm here to take better pictures and be sometimes 'forced' to shoot in
a style I wouldn't normally try. That's why it is a challenge. It is also a
learning process. Having the ability to opt-out on something that you might be
uncomfortable/ not so good at almost entirely misses the reason I take part in these
challenges. Though I'm sure everyone has different reasons for taking part.
[/i]
The fact is, though, that you can opt-out now if you like. There have been weeks where I went out and took pictures for a challenge, and felt that I didn't get anything worth submitting by the end of the week. Since I joined the site I've skipped "From the Ground Up" and "Upside Down." I had shots for both, but given that I thought they'd fare poorly AND that I knew what the comments were likely to be, I skipped them. I feel, however, that some people submit anyway.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 03:52:47 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by clubjuggle:
The fact is, though, that you can opt-out now if you like. There have been weeks where I went out and took pictures for a challenge, and felt that I didn't get anything worth submitting by the end of the week. Since I joined the site I've skipped "From the Ground Up" and "Upside Down." I had shots for both, but given that I thought they'd fare poorly AND that I knew what the comments were likely to be, I skipped them. I feel, however, that some people submit anyway.
I opted not to submit this week. I just didn't have time to get anything I liked...and the few I did take seemed so boring. I like the fact that it's a challenge as well. It's like taking a class for me. I see it as a new assignment every week and I can't wait to see what the next one is. Funny thing is..I thought since I didn't submit this week, I wouldn't be checking this site every five minutes...but I think I'm just addicted. 'Cause I am...still.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 04:02:10 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by clubjuggle:
I, for one, wouldn't want to see a limit to one challenge. I personally believe that just having multiple challenges per week (if they overlap) will help people feel they can miss one, and the total number of entries per challenge would drop. It might bring up the overall quality as well, as people would be less likely to submit for the sake of submitting.
I would see that as a worst case scenario. My thought was to limit the number of votes that "had" to be cast not multiply them.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 04:12:21 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
[/i]
It also depends on what you feel the point of the site/ challenge selection is.
Personally I'm here to take better pictures and be sometimes 'forced' to shoot in
a style I wouldn't normally try. That's why it is a challenge. It is also a
learning process. Having the ability to opt-out on something that you might be
uncomfortable/ not so good at almost entirely misses the reason I take part in these
challenges. Though I'm sure everyone has different reasons for taking part.
[/i]
I must have miss wrote. The purpose was not to make it easy on the photographer, but the voter, and then ONLY if they chose so (they could vote on all or no challenge except that they would be required to vote on the one they entered). As for opting out Gordon that would be up to the integrity of the photog. They would still have a challenge just more than one. They could opt for the easy way out for them or the most challenging -completely at their discretion. If the challenges were recycled they would eventually get to do all and the admin would not have to be more creative either.
For example the 4 challenges for the full weeks in July could be X, Y, Z and Q. The photogs would randomize which week they chose to enter which challenge and the voting load would be lessened for those who see it as a burden. There has already been some discussion of announcing topics prior to a challenge to allow thought so that should not pose a problem.
Bryan |
|
|
|
06/10/2002 04:13:10 PM · #11 |
I think that multiple challenges would be a good idea too. I haven't spent a lot of time actually thinking about what would work best, but I really do think that I would like to see a format that created smaller challenges. I have heard some talk of several ideas that I don't like and I have heard of some that I do.
After all I have seen so far, I think the following would be a great way to start:
Break the site into two separate challenges to start with. We should create a challenge for entry level and novice photographers and another challenge for more advanced photographers. You could submit a photo to either/or, but not both. I think that photographers with an average score above a certain level should not be allowed to submit to the entry level challenge. I think that entry level photographers should be allowed to submit to the advanced challange if they wish.
I believe that this format would accomplish two goals. 1) the challenges would be smaller, and 2) higher challenge rankings for novice photographers would be more rewarding to the photographer.
I would also like to see (i will get pounded for this for sure) the photographer only being able to vote in the challenge in which they are participating as a photographer. I *DO* think that the photographers should be able to comment on any photograph that is submitted on the site.
I guess that this creates a challenge where only the challenge participants get to vote. Bad thing? I'm not sure... I am asking myself why all the non-photographers are here to begin with... If these people are most interested in photography, they could still view and comment, but not vote...
Am I in left field or are the drugs just kicking in?
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 04:17:33 PM · #12 |
I''m with the "keep to one challenge" school of thinking. If I have the choice, I will always post to the one that''s most comfortable for me. This week is the first time that I submitted even though I didn''t think I had a winning shot (but not a bad one, either). No, I lie. My games entry was not winning, and I knew it, but I liked the shot anyway. AND I learned how to do post-editing and how to improve the photo, so it was well worth it.
Splitting up in different challenges would defeat that purpose.
I also don''t believe that smaller challenges would produce more comments per photo. I have received similar number of comments on photos that rated similar, even though the number of entered photos was vastly different.
This site is great the way it is. Yes, it would be nice to be getting more comments, but I always get a couple that make me think, or try something again with the same setup (if possible), so that''s great, and all I expect.
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/10/2002 4:18:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 04:19:01 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by gr8photos:
I'm with the "keep to one challenge" school of thinking. If I have the choice, I will always post to the one that's most comfortable for me. This week is the first time that I submitted even though I didn't think I had a winning shot (but not a bad one, either).
Splitting up in different challenges would defeat that purpose.
I also don't believe that smaller challenges would produce more comments per photo. I have received similar number of comments on photos that rated similar, even though the number of entered photos was vastly different.
This site is great the way it is. Yes, it would be nice to be getting more comments, but I always get a couple that make me think, or try something again with the same setup (if possible), so that's great, and all I expect.
I also wonder what multiple challenges would do to the community spirit aspect
of the site. After all, a lot of the discussion turns around the current challenge.
If you were only in one out of 4, a lot of the debate might make even less sense.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 04:19:34 PM · #14 |
I don't like the idea of excluding voters (except as is already in place by the admins). I also don't like the idea of ranking the photogs.
A rank order is too open to subjective measures and will only lead to hurt feelings. It is the old saying "if you can't run with the big dogs stay on the pourch." All us puppies started somewhere and had to compete with the big dogs to get where we are now. There are always bigger dogs too! If you have the gonads to submit then have the gonads to take the hits and the wisdom to understand that many of the hiters are no better than you and simply ranting. |
|
|
|
06/10/2002 04:19:53 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I would also like to see (i will get pounded for this for sure) the photographer only being able to vote in the challenge in which they are participating as a photographer. I *DO* think that the photographers should be able to comment on any photograph that is submitted on the site.
I guess that this creates a challenge where only the challenge participants get to vote. Bad thing? I'm not sure... I am asking myself why all the non-photographers are here to begin with... If these people are most interested in photography, they could still view and comment, but not vote...
Am I in left field or are the drugs just kicking in?
Let the pounding begin. ;-)
I don't see any reason why users should not be able to vote on a challenge they didn't enter. A user can already see the scores among photographers/non-photographers, and I find there's value to seeing how big the spread between the two is.
Generally speaking, constructive feedback is good. More constructive feedback is better.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 05:02:06 PM · #16 |
Why are all the non-photographers here? I''m sure a lot of non-photographers have voted some very good pics to the top...although I have no statistics on it. I think disallowing anyone to come here and vote because they aren''t a photographer....well...I won''t say what I think it is.
And separating "good" photographers from the "best" photographers may be a good idea to some, but I think it''s kind of cruel to make someone have a certain average before they can become part of the "elite". Sure..it''s great for those who have good averages...but can''t the rest of us strive to be like you? I''m sorry....some of things said in this thread just struck me the wrong way.
I am most certainly an entry level photographer...yet I placed second last week. Doesn''t make my average high enough though. I, for one...found it gratifying and a little amazing that I could actually take a photo that would go so far. And it was nice...even if it doesn''t happen again...to know that I could. Can''t we all have that chance?
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/10/2002 5:05:28 PM. |
|
|
|
06/10/2002 05:08:54 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by KDJohnson:
Why are all the non-photographers here? I''m sure a lot of non-photographers have voted some very good pics to the top...although I have no statistics on it. I think disallowing anyone to come here and vote because they aren''t a photographer....well...I won''t say what I think it is.
And separating "good" photographers from the "best" photographers may be a good idea to some, but I think it''s kind of cruel to make someone have a certain average before they can become part of the "elite". Sure..it''s great for those who have good averages...but can''t the rest of us strive to be like you? I''m sorry....some of things said in this thread just struck me the wrong way.
I am most certainly an entry level photographer...yet I placed second last week. Doesn''t make my average high enough though. I, for one...found it gratifying and a little amazing that I could actually take a photo that would go so far. And it was nice...even if it doesn''t happen again...to know that I could. Can''t we all have that chance?
I think you miss-read what was posted. It said if you had a good enough average you couldn't enter the 'beginner' class, not the other
way around. No restrictions on the harder scored class, probably higher scores in the 'beginner' catagory.
Not everyone is at the same standard/ level of ability/ amount of time
they can devote/ camera equipment etc. This just tries to recognise
that and allow a level of achievement that isn't only 'first past the
post' against people that have been taking pictures in some cases for
decades vs other people who only picked up a camera a few months ago.
It isn't an 'exclusive' proposal either, except that you can't enter
at a lower level than you deserve.
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 06:22:24 PM · #18 |
Hee...I would love to see the different levels and watch all h3ll break lose when the first week of judging everybody's scores get the same stinky responses..LOL!!
Imagine..Your'e in the Novice class and of course..you are there because you need a little polishing on your technique. But all the voters...they don't care about arbitrary "divisions". They won't say "Hmmm..this is the novice division, that is pretty godd for a novice!".
Oh no!!! They will say "Man, you need to do (plug in any technical nit here you would like) so and so..I vote a 3!"
Where in the "Upper" divisions the voters will go.. "oHhHHh..so you think you are hot sh1t? Well I have seen better photos done by my neighbors dog plus..why does it have that funny green tinge to the black and white? and why is that background blurry (insert any comment misunderstanding camera technique for a fault here). You get a 4!!! Mr. Ansel Adams Wannabee"
I bet the first week "Moanday" will roll around and the bitching will be more furious than ever. CoOOooLL!!! :-) |
|
|
|
06/10/2002 06:49:27 PM · #19 |
A lot of people are sure anxious to change things. It reminds me of early on in college where there were tons of students complaining about every assignment and grade instead of just trying to learn what they could from what was offered. I know everyone means well, though, so please don't take this the wrong way. It seams to me that the only real problem for some people is the amount of photos that there are to vote on. It doesn't seem to be clear to a lot of people that you are only required to vote on a small percentage of the photos. Maybe at the top of the voting page where it tells the amount of photos remaining to be voted on there could be an additional meter that tells the voter how many of the required photos are remaining. This way it would be very clear when you have reached the minimum amount. Other then that I don't see any reason to add more challenges and complicate things. I like the idea of everyone sticking to one topic, learning about it and discussing it.
Tim
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 07:49:14 PM · #20 |
y''all have a good one.
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/10/2002 8:09:26 PM. |
|
|
|
06/10/2002 08:26:49 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by KDJohnson:
y''all have a good one
I have alienated this user from the site for making a suggestion in another thread regarding multiple challenges based on novice and advanced photographer classifications. This suggestion is NOT one that has not been made before and I do apologize if I offended anyone with that suggestion for the site. I will not make any more suggestions regarding multiple or different types of challenges in the future...
|
|
|
|
06/10/2002 09:04:45 PM · #22 |
Well, all the interesting discussions happen when I''m asleep down here in Australia, so here are my thoughts.
First of all, timj and anyone else who thinks that discussing changes is a bad thing... people aren''t suggesting changes for the sake of change, it''s because they see the site growing and the current format not working as well as it used to. It''s not a bad thing at all, and people are free to talk about whatever they coose. I don''t understand why it is that some people find a discussion they disagree with and rather than just give their dissenting opinion they suggest everyone stop talking...
Secondly, the only other thing I wanted to comment on was the reason why non-photographers are here. For many people, voting on the challenges a couple of times is just a way to test the waters and see if they want to start submitting. That''s what I did, initially thinking photos from my little polaroid would get nowhere here. I was right, but I decided after voting and talking here a little bit that I''d enter for fun anyway :). I have a friend who submitted for the first time this week after voting a few times. Other people I know vote because in the little chatroom we hang out online there are 4 or 5 participants in most challenges, and we talk about the photos, and they want to join in the conversations. It''s a social thing. I think a lot of other voters are friends and family of participants who want to join in that way too.
Other than those categories, I''m sure there are just voters here who like to look at pictures critically but don''t have a camera or don''t feel that they are good enough to participate, but one day they''ll get a camera in their hands and start applying all the things they''ve learned. Isn''t that a good thing?
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/10/2002 9:05:50 PM. |
|
|
|
06/11/2002 01:46:45 AM · #23 |
Sheesh. I sure didn't mean to offend anyone. It just seems like there is a big push to make this a different kind of site. If that happens, so be it. Very few things ever stay the same. I'm just one person with only one opinion. I just like it the way it is, that's all.
Tim
|
|
|
|
06/11/2002 02:04:16 AM · #24 |
Tim, I think I''m with you.
What problem are we trying to solve? Too many pictures to vote on?
Who is experiencing this problem and/or complaining about it? What percentage of the DPC community is troubled by it.
I like the site the way it is. I like the way Drew and Langdon maintain it and upgrade it in response to our suggestions.
Let''s not fix something that ain''t really broke.
sjgleah
Originally posted by timj351:
Sheesh. I sure didn''t mean to offend anyone. It just seems like there is a big push to make this a different kind of site. If that happens, so be it. Very few things ever stay the same. I''m just one person with only one opinion. I just like it the way it is, that''s all.
Tim
* This message has been edited by the author on 6/11/2002 2:04:08 AM. |
|
|
|
06/11/2002 04:15:55 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by lisae:
Well, all the interesting discussions happen when I''m asleep down here in Australia, so here are my thoughts.
First of all, timj and anyone else who thinks that discussing changes is a bad thing... people aren''t suggesting changes for the sake of change, it''s because they see the site growing and the current format not working as well as it used to. It''s not a bad thing at all, and people are free to talk about whatever they coose. I don''t understand why it is that some people find a discussion they disagree with and rather than just give their dissenting opinion they suggest everyone stop talking...
lisae, the simpilest way to win an argument is to stop the other side from being able to talk. That is human nature. I agree with you all are welcome to their opinion, none are required to give it and fore warned is fore armed. I started this thread in response to folks in other threads talking about the number of shots to vote on getting too big to handle.
I suggested this as a way to keep the current voting the same (nothing would change to vote except the need to change challenges to get them all in) and to keep the photo submission as "the same" as possible. Photogs would still be limited to one entry per week they simply would have to choose which category to submit to. As for making it easy or hard that would remain the responsibility of the photog -pick their easy way out or be challenged.
The change is not for changes sake. Nor is it changing the assignment as the college comment suggested. At 100 plus entries it is difficult for some folks to find the time to judge. In the past few months this site has gone from 20ish entries to 120ish entries what will happen when it hits 250ish? The site is very well managed and that breeds success. I don't see that slowing down. I think we can expect growth and perhaps suggestions on how to handle that before absolute need is a good thing.
If, however, you prefer the ostrich approah that is your call and you are welcome to it (I dislike censorship and defend your right to your opinion).
Bryan |
|
