DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> 'Troll' voters?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 47, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/08/2004 04:15:10 PM · #1
There have, as ever, been a number of comments on the blue in the October Free Study complaining, or rather, bewailing the fact that the shot recieved a number of votes of 1, and that those votes must have been from trolls. I didn't give that score myself, though I did score it pretty low.

My point is that those are not necessarily 'troll' votes. The image in question is a blatantly 'stock' image, neither particularly meaningful, and certainly not communicative, to my eye. It's been done over and over and over again. We've seen it in almost every book about deserts, promoting every TV series about deserts, in half a million travel guides, and it is, in my opinion, a tired a hackneyed image. It panders, in my view, to a lowest common denominator, and was only saved from recieving a one from me by the slightest difference from the usual in showing some texture on the dunes' syncline. That's my view, and I'll stand by it.

However, before you all shoot me down in flames, had I been in a position to take it, I most certainly would, and would have submitted it too. This is the fact about dpc - it's a challenge, and that understanding of the nebulous voters' mind is essential to high scoring photographs. It doesn't necessarily mean those shots are the photographers' life's work, the dearest thing to their hearts, nor anything else much at all. Likewise, it remains the perogative of each and every voter to use whatever scale or judgement they like the assess and rate each image. Those who are tired of such 'obvious' shots have every right to make a small, and obviously ineffectual, protest at the pandering nature of this entry.

I would have posted this on the shot itself, but this way it won't remain on there for everyone in future to see.

My objection is not to the shot itself, it's final placing or score, but to those who protest at the wonderful variety of opinions and valuations of the voters here. one of the glories of the place is that we have a community inclusive of many points of view, and long may that continue.

E
11/08/2004 04:45:06 PM · #2
Originally posted by e301:



My objection is not to the shot itself, it's final placing or score, but to those who protest at the wonderful variety of opinions and valuations of the voters here. one of the glories of the place is that we have a community inclusive of many points of view, and long may that continue.

E


This last statement you make here almost contradicts the rest of your post. You haven't given the photographer the same sense of appreciation that you have given to the voters. Are the photos submitted to the challenges not as worthwhile because of their 'variety of opinions and valuations' as the votes they receive?

You went on to say that you would have submitted it yourself if it was your photo even though it is "blatantly 'stock' image, neither particularly meaningful, and certainly not communicative, to my eye" and "a tired a hackneyed image. It panders, in my view, to a lowest common denominator."

It just doesn't make sense. You like the image enought that you would have submitted it yourself but you don't like the photo :)

11/08/2004 04:49:48 PM · #3
Doesn't make sense, John? Absolutely - most contradictions don't. I've submitted a number of shots to challenges that I don't particularly like, but that I think will score well. One's submissions don't reflect one's primary photographic interests, necessarily. We don't all see the same thing in all photographs ... isn't that the point of it all? Isn't that inherent contradiction what makes it so much fun?

E
11/08/2004 04:50:23 PM · #4
Very well said; this is something that often annoys me on highly rated photos. That a large percentage of people value it does not invalidate those who do not value it.

I think his statement makes perfect sense, John. He would enter the photo because he knows it would place well because it is a good shot; but he does not vote it high because despite being a good shot, it lacks originality. Have you never entered something you didn't value very highly but knew others would? It's all marketing.

edit - spelling.

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 16:51:48.
11/08/2004 04:55:57 PM · #5
It also comes down to the whole 'an image isnt good unless it directs me into a deep conversation about life and the meaning of the universe'. Perhaps the meaning is that there sure is a whole purty world out there to see and experience.
11/08/2004 05:00:13 PM · #6
Your post made sense to me. I agree with you that complaining about 1 votes is silly, attributing it to troll voters is sillier.

But, man, I have to say...I love that photo! I think it's much better than the credit you give it. But that's the truth of what your saying. I'm entitled to give it a score.

Some of the other photos in the top 4 certainly didn't turn my crank and I would hate to be called a troll voter because I voted them low...that's just wrong.

Edit: They were all good photos (the top 4)...it's the treatment once they left the camera I'm not too fond of!

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 17:01:06.
11/08/2004 05:03:11 PM · #7
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

Your post made sense to me. I agree with you that complaining about 1 votes is silly, attributing it to troll voters is sillier.

But, man, I have to say...I love that photo! I think it's much better than the credit you give it. But that's the truth of what your saying. I'm entitled to give it a score.

Some of the other photos in the top 4 certainly didn't turn my crank and I would hate to be called a troll voter because I voted them low...that's just wrong.

Edit: They were all good photos (the top 4)...it's the treatment once they left the camera I'm not too fond of!


Yep, i agree!
11/08/2004 05:08:11 PM · #8
This is a pretty non sensical thread because it has no redeeming factors.

Ponder this: I am constantly looking and delighting in images. I see a lot of them because of mt work.

Now, should I conclude then that 90 percent of entries have been done to death and therefore should never be done again? Also, since when are two photographs of same subject by different photographers the same. Are there not nuances of treatment that make it worthy of the photographers interpretation.

To carry your argument down home would mean that we do not want to see portrait head shots because we have seen all there is to be seen. I think not.
11/08/2004 05:18:12 PM · #9
Originally posted by moodville:

It also comes down to the whole 'an image isnt good unless it directs me into a deep conversation about life and the meaning of the universe'. Perhaps the meaning is that there sure is a whole purty world out there to see and experience.


Of course there is - and I have nothing aginst delighting in that. There is also a whole raft of opinions, likes, dislikes, and expectations, and that is equally 'purty' (just can't bring myself to write that other than in inverted commas - :-)) to see and experience.

E
11/08/2004 05:18:48 PM · #10
Not to speak for e301, but I think you misunderstood the post, graphicfunk...I understood it to be more about complaining about the 1 votes.
11/08/2004 05:20:19 PM · #11
Originally posted by graphicfunk:

This is a pretty non sensical thread because it has no redeeming factors.

Ponder this: I am constantly looking and delighting in images. I see a lot of them because of mt work.

Now, should I conclude then that 90 percent of entries have been done to death and therefore should never be done again? Also, since when are two photographs of same subject by different photographers the same. Are there not nuances of treatment that make it worthy of the photographers interpretation.

To carry your argument down home would mean that we do not want to see portrait head shots because we have seen all there is to be seen. I think not.


No - to carry my argument down home would mean that we do not want to exclude anyone's idea of what makes a good or bad photograph, and that is all.

E
11/08/2004 05:21:16 PM · #12
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:

Not to speak for e301, but I think you misunderstood the post, graphicfunk...I understood it to be more about complaining about the 1 votes.


You have my full permission to speak for me, Mike. For now, at least :-)

E
11/08/2004 05:26:40 PM · #13
In that case my apologies. However, there is no point in talking about trollers. These are folks who are more punative than helpful. lol
11/08/2004 05:45:15 PM · #14
the point of people complaining is this:

a one score (in my mind) would have to be:

1) out of focus
2) way off the challenge "theme"
3) colors would have to be totally messed up
4) showed no effort on the part of the photographer
5) clearly cheating (IE: use of illegal photoshop tools)
6) way under/over exposed
7) the title told me to vote it a 1
8) add your reason here
(not necessarily all at once)

since the photo in question clearly doesn't have ANY of these traits, it absolutely does NOT deserve a one. And if you gave it a one, you, my friend, are a TROLL voter.

That's what I think, not everyone will agree.

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 17:46:47.
11/08/2004 05:54:10 PM · #15
Originally posted by ericlimon:

the point of people complaining is this:

a one score (in my mind) would have to be:

1) out of focus
2) way off the challenge "theme"
3) colors would have to be totally messed up
4) showed no effort on the part of the photographer
5) clearly cheating (IE: use of illegal photoshop tools)
6) way under/over exposed
7) the title told me to vote it a 1
8) add your reason here
(not necessarily all at once)

since the photo in question clearly doesn't have ANY of these traits, it absolutely does NOT deserve a one. And if you gave it a one, you, my friend, are a TROLL voter.

That's what I think, not everyone will agree.

I thought it was reason #8 which was cited.
11/08/2004 05:59:04 PM · #16
the person who cites reason # 8 is not voting based on the quality of the photo. That same person will probably never leave a comment on a good photo that they gave a one, explaining why they thought it deserved the lowest score possible. That is trolling

Thankfully, those few trollers can't take down a good photo by too much

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 18:00:22.
11/08/2004 06:03:13 PM · #17
9) an 'offensive' one to civilized nature
10) a technically apt photo which clearly demonstrates a 'failure of feeling'
11/08/2004 06:05:32 PM · #18
How to vote on the Impressionism challenge:
10: impressed
1: not impressed
11/08/2004 06:06:33 PM · #19
LOL! That's pretty impressive.
11/08/2004 06:13:38 PM · #20
Originally posted by ericlimon:

the person who cites reason # 8 is not voting based on the quality of the photo. That same person will probably never leave a comment on a good photo that they gave a one, explaining why they thought it deserved the lowest score possible. That is trolling

Thankfully, those few trollers can't take down a good photo by too much


To re-state my point, again: perhaps they are not trolls - perhaps, they are thoughtful and committed photographers and members of your audience, who in all conscience are tired of such images? If we dismiss those opinions out of hand, do we not simply reject opinions oppposed to our own? What, then, are we ever to learn?

e
11/08/2004 06:17:25 PM · #21
None of those criteria listed apply to the vast majority of images here.

How about complaining about the poor 4.5 photo with 20 "undeserved" ones,* which would have at least then attained a rating of "average." At least the ribbon-winners with a one have a ribbon to console themselves with. The vast majority of us with ones must simply lick our wounds and carry on.

By your criteria most ones here are "undeserved."

*For easy reference, check my portfolio : )

Message edited by author 2004-11-08 18:19:07.
11/08/2004 06:18:29 PM · #22
to restate my point: "That same person will probably never leave a comment on a good photo that they gave a one, explaining why they thought it deserved the lowest score possible. That is trolling"

maybe we should ask the admins to make it so anyone who votes a one should be required to leave a comment on why it deserves a one?

I don't like to look at naked men, but during the nudity challenge, I didn't give ones because it was a photo of a naked dude. I got tired of looking at naked men during that challenge, so does it mean i should have started giving ones to those photos? I think not.
11/08/2004 06:20:48 PM · #23
Originally posted by e301:

... If we dismiss ... opinions out of hand, do we not simply reject opinions oppposed to our own? What, then, are we ever to learn?...


We would, at best, have learnt to polish our social skills to the point of eliminating any credible substance from our comments.
11/08/2004 06:21:47 PM · #24
Should? No.

Could? Yes.

We honor a diversity of opinions and styles; we mainly ask that people vote consistently, whatever criteria/method they use.
11/08/2004 06:23:40 PM · #25
Originally posted by e301:

If we dismiss those opinions out of hand, do we not simply reject opinions opposed to our own? What, then, are we ever to learn?


Yup, works for me. If I like an image well enough to give it an 8 or 10, then that's the type of work I aspire to, and I will simply ignore the opinions of those voting a 1. I'd rather learn from the people whose photos I value highly than those with other tastes.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/29/2024 06:02:47 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 03/29/2024 06:02:47 AM EDT.