| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/11/2010 07:44:31 PM · #1 |
Do you read the challenge descriptions, or do you just go by the title?
|
|
|
|
07/11/2010 07:48:34 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Do you read the challenge descriptions, or do you just go by the title? |
I read both the title and the description (when one is posted). When I vote, I keep both in mind, and also try to keep in mind that photography is like all other art forms....creative. So, I am mindful that my interpretation may not be yours. I think part of the harsh scoring comes from the narrow minded ways of some who feel their interpretation is the correct one, and any other DNMC. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 07:48:46 PM · #3 |
| i think many just read the title. i know i personally read the descriptions and vote accordingly on what i consider dnmc. but i think i know where you're going with this, i have a weathered entry that has potential to be panned by the dnmc police. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 07:51:11 PM · #4 |
I always read the challenge descriptions as titles are too open to various interpretations or too limited. That goes for entering and voting.
|
|
|
|
07/11/2010 07:54:10 PM · #5 |
My first challenge I made the mistake of reading only the title....It was the Masks challenge way back when. I crashed and burned on that one even though it seems that alot of people liked that shot. I have learned my lesson since then.
|
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:08:49 PM · #6 |
| Generally both, though on occasion the challenge description simply reads, NA. Which seems to mean that anything goes. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:09:29 PM · #7 |
I read the description... because often the title can be a tad vague. I hope everyone does or there is going to be way to many DNMC's coming up!
|
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:11:49 PM · #8 |
| Definitely both. To me, not reading the description would be akin to reading each of the chapter titles of a book, but not the actual book content. Seems a bit silly :) |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:12:43 PM · #9 |
Uh, oh. My PM with you started this, didn't it?
As far as my own answer. I should know to always read the description, but I am guilty of sometimes not doing so.
Message edited by author 2010-07-11 20:13:58. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:13:53 PM · #10 |
I think I'm going to create a new category of fail to complement my new "6 is average" voting behavior..
I'm going to start handing out DNMD when people fail to meet the description but are somehow possibly vaguely on-board with at least the challenge title..
Points will still be deducted, but not as harshly as a plain old DNMC..
....
Oh, and if you didn't guess, yes, I think everyone should read and adhere (at least loosely) to the challenge title and description as a package... |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:14:41 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Uh, oh. My PM with you started this, didn't it?
As far as my own answer. I should know to always read the description, but I am guilty of sometimes not doing so. |
Well, what side of this are you on Spiffy? :) |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:14:55 PM · #12 |
I don't read either the title or the description. I like to just guess whether I am meeting the challenge topic or not. :)
Seriously though, I've been finding more and more challenges lack a description. In a way its good because the best topics really need nothing more than the title. e.g. "red" When additional info is needed however I definitely read both and I'll refer to the description in cases where I am not sure if a DNMC vote is warranted. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:16:40 PM · #13 |
Unless we want every challenge to be, basically, a Free Study, I'd hope people are reading both the description and the title. (I think having to state you read the title is a little redundant however).
Creativity is all well and good, but there's a reason challenges are supposed to be challenging, and it's not so you can throw a photo of a dog in a flowers challenge where the description is "Take a photo of a flower, or bunch of flowers, in a creative way" and then title your entry "My little Daffodil".
Too often I see people screaming because they don't think that the description should matter much (if at all), and I say that's utter horsepucky.
If anything, the descriptions should be tighter and more stringent.
So yes, I read the descriptions, and yes, I vote on them incredibly tightly, when I can.
|
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:32:45 PM · #14 |
| A good case in point was the street portraiture that says "Take a formal (non-candid) natural light portrait of a .. [more] complete and total stranger(s). Any location will do... the street, a coffee shop, a bowling alley, the subway, the park, a pool hall, etc. " To me this does not mean take a picture of a bird (sorry for the real world example). Total strangers seems to strongly imply people. I could be wrong, but I try to meet the description as much as possible. I agree with the previous post that a picture of a dog in a flower competition with a title that meets the challenge will get a big DNMC. Some challenges (order and chaos) are much more open to interpretation. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:33:33 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Well, what side of this are you on Spiffy? :) |
Just to the east side of the bad weather. Or, is it weathered? |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:36:47 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by asamite:
A good case in point was the street portraiture that says "Take a formal (non-candid) natural light portrait of a .. [more] complete and total stranger(s). |
The bigger issue I am seeing with that challenge description has been the usage of the word "formal". It seems in direct conflict with street photography. Several of the comments I've gotten suggest my entry is too candid/not formal enough. Not even sure how you would do "formal" in the usual sense of the word for this challenge. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:37:01 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Unless we want every challenge to be, basically, a Free Study, I'd hope people are reading both the description and the title. (I think having to state you read the title is a little redundant however).
Creativity is all well and good, but there's a reason challenges are supposed to be challenging, and it's not so you can throw a photo of a dog in a flowers challenge where the description is "Take a photo of a flower, or bunch of flowers, in a creative way" and then title your entry "My little Daffodil".
Too often I see people screaming because they don't think that the description should matter much (if at all), and I say that's utter horsepucky.
If anything, the descriptions should be tighter and more stringent.
So yes, I read the descriptions, and yes, I vote on them incredibly tightly, when I can. |
I agree.. Tighter, well edited, and more stringent.. :) |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:37:48 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
Do you read the challenge descriptions, or do you just go by the title? |
I read the descriptions thoroughly...
Think of a really neat imaginative take on it...
...and then execute poorly.
|
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:41:12 PM · #19 |
| I think some challenges should just have titles. For a change. Otherwise I think I should write all the descriptions ad libidum. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:55:46 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Originally posted by asamite:
A good case in point was the street portraiture that says "Take a formal (non-candid) natural light portrait of a .. [more] complete and total stranger(s). |
The bigger issue I am seeing with that challenge description has been the usage of the word "formal". It seems in direct conflict with street photography. Several of the comments I've gotten suggest my entry is too candid/not formal enough. Not even sure how you would do "formal" in the usual sense of the word for this challenge. |
I think both the word formal and natural light are the key words in that descriptor - which begs the question . . . is natural light one that existed already (as in a subway/bowling alley) excluding one that you have to add to get the shot - as in a flash/strobe? Or is it truly natural light; i.e., sunlight through windows, etc? I'm interested to see how this challenge ends up.
Message edited by author 2010-07-11 20:56:35. |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 08:59:37 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by giantmike:
Definitely both. To me, not reading the description would be akin to reading each of the chapter titles of a book, but not the actual book content. Seems a bit silly :) |
Sad to say, I once scored 24 out of 25 points for a book report for high school Biology doing exactly that ... ;-) |
|
|
|
07/11/2010 10:30:40 PM · #22 |
This is definitely an issue that has 2 sides.
One is from the point of view of the shooter.
The other is from the point of view of the voter.
As a shooter, it is possible (and easy) to see a connection that others might not see because of the amount of time you spend on the idea of your pic.
As a voter, it is very easy to miss this connection due to a different perspective or simply not seeing something very well (or misinterpreting).
One could argue that this is no reason to vote a pic down that was taken by someone who put the thought and effort into it.
One could also argue that this is *exactly* the point of entering pics into a public voting atmosphere. If you don't make your connection clear and obvious, you will miss a larger portion of your audience and the picture is ultimately 'less effective'.
This stems to the idea that often comes out that pics don't win because they are outstanding as much as 'less objectionable'. Pics win because of grabbing the larger portion of the voters as opposed to high values for a smaller portion.
I personally see the concept of DPC as more of a tool along the lines of "Assignment: Photo". HOWEVER, when I do feel inclined to put a pic into the mix, I often just take a look at the titles and see what comes about. I will then work on the photo and read the description before submitting. Bad habits.
If I see an unusual or more interesting challenge, I will sometimes read the desc right then, but ususally not. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 07:10:29 PM EDT.
