| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/07/2009 09:55:12 AM · #51 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
I was going to drop out of this thread but how about this as a concept.
We have the 1 to 10 scale for the photograph that we score in whatever way we see fit.
Then in addition we could have a checkbox for Meets Challenge.
If the box is checked the score stands if it isn't then maybe 10% could be removed
Just a concept nothing more or less than that lol |
I was actually considering that option for my site challenges when they get up and running. :) |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 09:59:25 AM · #52 |
I was actually considering that option for my site challenges when they get up and running. :)
Hey let me know when it's sorted |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:03:46 AM · #53 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
The assumption for the 1-10 scale is that the photo is valid for the challenge. If it's not valid there is no way to express it except with a 1. Correctly anyway. |
The rule: "You should... consider the challenge topic when voting, and adjust your score accordingly. There is no rule suggesting that failure to meet the challenge deserves an automatic 1, only that you take the topic into consideration. For most people, that means weighting rather than outright rejection. Meeting the challenge is often a subjective gray area, as amply demonstrated by "complaints" in this challenge. Anyone who thinks the Blue Ribbon in Transparency didn't meet the challenge is both heavily outvoted and just plain wrong IMO. There's a transparent bottle between the water and the viewer, and you'd have to be TRYING to justify a DNMC to claim one there. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:07:10 AM · #54 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
The assumption for the 1-10 scale is that the photo is valid for the challenge. If it's not valid there is no way to express it except with a 1. Correctly anyway. |
The rule: "You should... consider the challenge topic when voting, and adjust your score accordingly. There is no rule suggesting that failure to meet the challenge deserves an automatic 1, only that you take the topic into consideration. For most people, that means weighting rather than outright rejection. Meeting the challenge is often a subjective gray area, as amply demonstrated by "complaints" in this challenge. Anyone who thinks the Blue Ribbon in Transparency didn't meet the challenge is both heavily outvoted and just plain wrong IMO. There's a transparent bottle between the water and the viewer, and you'd have to be TRYING to justify a DNMC to claim one there. |
I'm speaking in the abstract with no regard to any specific examples.
EDIT: And looking at that photo it's clear that it DNMC at all and contrary to your opinion, you have be TRYING in order to claim the photo met that challenge.
It's an EXCELLENT photo, but to anyone objective, the "subject" is the water drop/splash and the bottle is without question NOT between the viewer and the subject. The "water" is the background for the subject.
But again, this is a great photo, but sadly a great example of how failing to meet the challenge, but offering up an excellent photo can still win a ribbon.
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 10:12:25. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:13:50 AM · #55 |
EDIT: And looking at that photo it's clear that it DNMC at all and contrary to your opinion, you have be TRYING in order to claim the photo met that challenge.
It's an EXCELLENT photo, but to anyone objective, the "subject" is the water drop/splash and the bottle is without question NOT between the viewer and the subject. The "water" is the background for the subject.
But again, this is a great photo, but sadly a great example of how failing to meet the challenge, but offering up an excellent photo can still win a ribbon. [/quote]
Agreed |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:14:51 AM · #56 |
Hello Lutchenko,
My concept is to have the 1 to 10 scale for photograph, and there's a box for us to check if the photograph doesn't meet the challenge. If the box is checked, the photograph will go into the "Free Studies" category. This means, there would be three ribbons for photographs that meet the challenge, and one winner in the "Free Studies". Hehe.
But then again, everyone will start checking the box, even if the photograph meets the challenge! Haha.
Ang
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
I was going to drop out of this thread but how about this as a concept.
We have the 1 to 10 scale for the photograph that we score in whatever way we see fit.
Then in addition we could have a checkbox for Meets Challenge.
If the box is checked the score stands if it isn't then maybe 10% could be removed
Just a concept nothing more or less than that lol |
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 10:20:40. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:18:45 AM · #57 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
looking at that photo it's clear that it DNMC at all and contrary to your opinion, you have be TRYING in order to claim the photo met that challenge. |
A difference of opinion, and you are apparently outvoted by a wide margin (both literally and figuratively). |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:21:45 AM · #58 |
looking at that photo it's clear that it DNMC at all and contrary to your opinion, you have be TRYING in order to claim the photo met that challenge.
A difference of opinion, and you are apparently outvoted by a wide margin (both literally and figuratively).
Without having a specific checkbox for Meets Challenge you can not state who did and did not consider that it met the challenge. All you can state is that majority of voters liked it.
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 10:22:20. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:22:39 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
looking at that photo it's clear that it DNMC at all and contrary to your opinion, you have be TRYING in order to claim the photo met that challenge. |
A difference of opinion, and you are apparently outvoted by a wide margin (both literally and figuratively). |
Right doesn't always win, that's for sure. This is an example of that.
We've seen many here state plainly that they don't penalize great photos for not meeting the challenge. So the fact that Irene won does not in any way, shape, or form indicate that the majority believe she met the challenge. It merely means she got a higher vote average. Period. Nothing more can be assumed.
Relying solely on the facts and terms of the challenge and a clear and plain objective viewing of the photo, the photo DNMC. People can disagree, but they would be wrong.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:25:35 AM · #60 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Without having a specific checkbox for Meets Challenge you can not state who did and did not consider that it met the challenge. All you can state is that majority of voters liked it. |
You either assume that most of the membership plays by the rules or they do not. From my perspective they do, therefore I can reasonably state that the vast majority not only liked it, but felt that it deserved a high score when considering the topic per the rules. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:27:10 AM · #61 |
Hello,
It's apparent that there are at least two groups of voters. One group which votes for photographs that meet the challenge and is also beautiful, and the other group votes for photographs regardless whether they meet the challenge or not, as long as it's beautiful.
Ang
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
EDIT: And looking at that photo it's clear that it DNMC at all and contrary to your opinion, you have be TRYING in order to claim the photo met that challenge.
It's an EXCELLENT photo, but to anyone objective, the "subject" is the water drop/splash and the bottle is without question NOT between the viewer and the subject. The "water" is the background for the subject.
But again, this is a great photo, but sadly a great example of how failing to meet the challenge, but offering up an excellent photo can still win a ribbon. |
Agreed [/quote]
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 10:33:09. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:29:55 AM · #62 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
We've seen many here state plainly that they don't penalize great photos for not meeting the challenge. |
I've seen *FAR* more people declare their willingness to penalize a DNMC with a 1 than say they don't penalize at all. It's not even close. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:32:43 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
We've seen many here state plainly that they don't penalize great photos for not meeting the challenge. |
I've seen *FAR* more people declare their willingness to penalize a DNMC with a 1 than say they don't penalize at all. It's not even close. |
Well, you've been here longer, so that anecdotal evidence may be true. I'm only stating in the recent (weekly) discussions on voting methods. :) |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:35:41 AM · #64 |
You either assume that most of the membership plays by the rules or they do not. From my perspective they do, therefore I can reasonably state that the vast majority not only liked it, but felt that it deserved a high score when considering the topic per the rules. [/quote]
We can assume many things but we should only make statements based on facts for which one needs hard and fast data.
Whilst we can assume that most of the members play by the rules, and it is clear from the data that most people liked the the image in question, we can not state that most people feel it met the challenge as that data is simply not available to us and as such we can only assume it.
By the way I treat this as a debate and not a serious argument. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 10:54:49 AM · #65 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
Whilst we can assume that most of the members play by the rules, and it is clear from the data that most people liked the the image in question, we can not state that most people feel it met the challenge as that data is simply not available to us and as such we can only assume it. |
A number of very beautiful images in past challenges that failed to score above 6 or even 5 because they obviously didn't meet the challenge provide strong evidence that liking the photo isn't enough and voters DO consider the topic seriously. The "classic" example of this is when a regular ribbon winner accidentally submits a great photo to the wrong challenge. It happens, and "liking the image" won't save your score, trust me. Complaints that the voters don't consider the topic are largely unfounded IMO, and are usually raised by a harsh voter when the "mainstream" results don't agree with his or her opinion. If you can't assume the voters consider the topic, then you can't assume they don't either, and it could be that your DNMC opinion is simply a minority view. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 11:04:59 AM · #66 |
A number of very beautiful images in past challenges that failed to score above 6 or even 5 because they obviously didn't meet the challenge provide strong evidence that liking the photo isn't enough and voters DO consider the topic seriously. The "classic" example of this is when a regular ribbon winner accidentally submits a great photo to the wrong challenge. It happens, and "liking the image" won't save your score, trust me. Complaints that the voters don't consider the topic are largely unfounded IMO, and are usually raised by a harsh voter when the "mainstream" results don't agree with his or her opinion. If you can't assume the voters consider the topic, then you can't assume they don't either, and it could be that your DNMC opinion is simply a minority view.
Lots and lots of asumptions.
Ok let me ask this.
If in the image in question we removed the water splash do we think it would have won?
If the answer is yes then fair enough.
If the answer is no then it did not meet the challege as the main subject was not seen through anything transparent.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2009 11:15:17 AM · #67 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
The assumption for the 1-10 scale is that the photo is valid for the challenge. If it's not valid there is no way to express it except with a 1. Correctly anyway. |
No other way? More humor perhaps?
For newcombers, please recognize that the all-or-none approach of deciding that being "valid" for a challenge is always just a yes-no determination is one way to vote. Generate a "1" vote to register strongest possible disapproval. Some people make their particular subjective view of "meets the challenge" as an entry threshold, followed by voting like a free study on the images that survive their initial yes-no filter. The rules don't say to do that, but don't prohibit that approach either.
Still, there are other ways that can be equally "correct" without disrgarding the challenge title and description. Admitting this does not entail ignoring the challenge topic or making every study essentially a free study.
For example, earlier in the thread I spotted an observation that some people see a scale of how well an image meets the challenge. That can be the basis for more than a yes-no decision. Does it not meet any aspect of the title or description (some of these are entered in error). Does it just barely meet one part of the title but not much of the description? Does it meet the description technically but only in an obvious way. Does it meet the description in an abstract but not obvious way? Does it fit perfectly and also do so in an original and creative way? Recognizing a scale of goodness-of-fit can be a reasonable justification for giving more points for how high up on the "meets the challenge" scale it is, or maybe removes points for how low on the "meets the challenge" scale it is. That is just one example of another approach to evaluating how well challenge entries "meet the challenge".
But that probably isn't the only scale to vote on. I feel confident in thinking that an image can still be evaluated on photographic and artisitic qualities as well as on how it fits the challenge. Just look through this thread. You may see some consensus that an awful snapshot that nevertheless does meet all aspects of the title and description probably should not win a ribbon. A creative and technically excellent entry that meets most but maybe not all of the challenge description probably should not automatically be assigned last place. (Admittedly, not everyone agrees). I see nothing wrong with considering two or more scales simultaneously. Doing so is not especially simple, but is also not "incorrect".
The voting rules just instruct us to "consider" how well an image meets the challenge. They don't say how to do so. The term "consider" can be taken to imply that meeting the challenge is not the only factor on which to base voting. For those who do vote on a scale of how well an image meets a challenge while also considering a scale of artistic merit, there is no one "correct" way to assign relative weights to the differnt scales. Actually, the relative weight could even change image by image based on how important all the factors are to each image.
Perceptions of how well an image "meets" the challenge description vary from person to person. Nothing wrong with that. Perceptions of how artistic and technically excellent an image is also vary from person to person. Nothing incorrect about that. The ambiguities please some members and drive others crazy. This will feed the formation of endless threads about how to vote. Nothing wrong with that either. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 11:23:53 AM · #68 |
I find that most scores average out well with a large voter base. It catches every kind of voter for everyone in the challenge, so everyone is playing on the same plane of voting, it really all comes out in the wash in the end. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2009 11:42:21 AM · #69 |
Originally posted by goinskiing:
I find that most scores average out well with a large voter base. It catches every kind of voter for everyone in the challenge, so everyone is playing on the same plane of voting, it really all comes out in the wash in the end. Just my opinion. |
Mine keep coming out in the wash. Perhaps I need to add more starch.... :-) |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 12:02:30 PM · #70 |
Sleep snug and sound, safe in the knowledge that the DNMC Police are On Patrol. Rigid Constraints Upon Interpretation Will Be In Force. Citational 1's will be distributed.
Possibly as much as a fraction of one percent of the total vote will be so affected. Be Warned, DNMC-Entering Evil-Doers!!
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 12:03:06. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 12:18:22 PM · #71 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
...it did not meet the challege as the main subject was not seen through anything transparent. |
Ah, I would argue then that the issue is not so much the voters, but the way you interpret the challenge. The description is a guideline, not a rule or checklist, and if you interpret every word THAT literally you're only going to handicap and frustrate yourself (this is a recurring hangup for a handful of DPCers). The challenge/topic was Transparency. THAT'S what the rules ask us to take into consideration (not necessarily the description). The description might or might not be helpful as guidance for the sort of thing the voters expect to see, but it's certainly not the final word on what's possible. Voters consistently view the challenge as the topic and the description as a "serving suggestion." If it looks Transparent, it is. If it looks like Wildlife, it is. If it looks like 4am or 2 seconds, it is. That's how it works, and no amount of ranting and raving will change it. Just go with it and save yourself the grief. Given my entry record, if there's one thing I understand it's meeting the challenge, and it's not that the voters aren't considering the topic... they do. You simply don't agree on what the topic IS! ;-)
Note that this is the third time this challenge has run. The description is different in each, but the topic is the same (hence I, II, III). Anytime a challenge is repeated, you have the ultimate guideline of what the voters expect: past results, and there's really no justification for surprise if the subject of a Transparency challenge is a transparent object or a zoo photo scores high in a Wildlife challenge... AGAIN. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 12:20:25 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:
The assumption for the 1-10 scale is that the photo is valid for the challenge. If it's not valid there is no way to express it except with a 1. Correctly anyway. |
The rule: "You should... consider the challenge topic when voting, and adjust your score accordingly. There is no rule suggesting that failure to meet the challenge deserves an automatic 1, only that you take the topic into consideration. For most people, that means weighting rather than outright rejection. Meeting the challenge is often a subjective gray area, as amply demonstrated by "complaints" in this challenge. Anyone who thinks the Blue Ribbon in Transparency didn't meet the challenge is both heavily outvoted and just plain wrong IMO. There's a transparent bottle between the water and the viewer, and you'd have to be TRYING to justify a DNMC to claim one there. |
I'm speaking in the abstract with no regard to any specific examples.
EDIT: And looking at that photo it's clear that it DNMC at all and contrary to your opinion, you have be TRYING in order to claim the photo met that challenge.
It's an EXCELLENT photo, but to anyone objective, the "subject" is the water drop/splash and the bottle is without question NOT between the viewer and the subject. The "water" is the background for the subject.
But again, this is a great photo, but sadly a great example of how failing to meet the challenge, but offering up an excellent photo can still win a ribbon. |
I have to agree as well.
*hides*
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 12:20:50. |
|
|
|
01/07/2009 12:33:18 PM · #73 |
Like I've stated before, all challenges are essentially Free Studies. There is no penalty for DNMC except a bunch of comments stating the obvious that aren't constructive anyway. Enter what you like and take your medicine. Some shoehorned entries will do good and others no so good.
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 12:34:14.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2009 12:50:07 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
...it did not meet the challege as the main subject was not seen through anything transparent. |
The description is a guideline, not a rule or checklist, ...
The challenge/topic was Transparency. THAT'S what the rules ask us to take into consideration (not necessarily the description). The description might or might not be helpful as guidance for the sort of thing the voters expect to see, but it's certainly not the final word on what's possible. ... |
???! Many times (not always) a challenge description is a key part of the challenge - a defining or direction applied to the topic. Certainly the description was applicable to the transparency challenge.
"Create a photo in which a transparent or semi-transparent object is between you and your subject."
How can you read that and NOT see how it should influence the photo submission AND voting of the challenge?
I didn't participate in this challenge, but had I voted there certainly would have been a minor adjustment to the final results.
|
|
|
|
01/07/2009 12:55:36 PM · #75 |
Ah, I would argue then that the issue is not so much the voters, but the way you interpret the challenge. The description is a guideline, not a rule or checklist, and if you interpret every word THAT literally you're only going to handicap and frustrate yourself (this is a recurring hangup for a handful of DPCers). The challenge/topic was Transparency. THAT'S what the rules ask us to take into consideration (not necessarily the description). The description might or might not be helpful as guidance for the sort of thing the voters expect to see, but it's certainly not the final word on what's possible. [i]Voters consistently view the challenge as the topic and the description as a "serving suggestion." If it looks Transparent, it is. If it looks like Wildlife, it is. If it looks like 4am or 2 seconds, it is. That's how it works, and no amount of ranting and raving will change it. Just go with it and save yourself the grief. Given my entry record, if there's one thing I understand it's meeting the challenge, and it's not that the voters aren't considering the topic... they do. You simply don't agree on what the topic IS! ;-)
Note that this is the third time this challenge has run. The description is different in each, but the topic is the same (hence I, II, III). Anytime a challenge is repeated, you have the ultimate guideline of what the voters expect: past results, and there's really no justification for surprise if the subject of a Transparency challenge is a transparent object or a zoo photo scores high in a Wildlife challenge... AGAIN. [/quote]
Firstly I'm certainly not ranting and raving as you will see from one of my earlier posts in this thread where I state that I am treating this as a debate and not a serious argument.
What I take from this is that one should concentrate on taking a striking photograph and then worry about how you are going to fit it into the challenge later.
For those of us who are not artists but lets say engineers it would be very nice one week if we had a challenge where
there were strict rules that had to be adhered to.
This then begs another question I guess, is DPC a digital photography contest site or an art contest site?
Message edited by author 2009-01-07 12:56:53. |
|
