Votes in the triangle chall.- w/out camera voters

05/18/2005 10:36:44 AM · #1

Yes, another topic about scoring in this challenge ;)

Why? Because I am curious about one fact: how does the voters without camera score? Because I looked at the top 100 photos and, with 2 or 3 exceptions the Average Vote per Users w/out Cameras was very, very low - around 4, or 5 for photos I think that are awesome. So, I want some explanations. Thank U all :)

Sorry if I misspelled something

moodville

Nikon D100

05/18/2005 10:39:41 AM · #2

The number of voters without cameras is quite low and so if one voter without a camera votes an image a 4 then that will be the average. Whereas the hundreds of voters with cameras that will vote between the range of 1-10 tend to average out a little higher.

05/18/2005 10:44:02 AM · #3

Yes, indeed. Thanks 4 your reply, moodville.
I get this, but the fact still remains: the user w/out camera dislike so much the photos?? or why they score so low?

buzzmom

Panasonic DMC-FZ20

05/18/2005 10:55:37 AM · #4

i noticed the same thing it was quite interesting...maybe we should all chip in a few bucks and but them all cameras

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

05/18/2005 12:12:36 PM · #5

Great idea :)))

I would be interested in heaving a reply from one of this voters. Do I ask too much?

HBunch

HP PhotoSmart 315

05/18/2005 01:04:43 PM · #6

Originally posted by narcisa:

Yes, indeed. Thanks 4 your reply, moodville.
I get this, but the fact still remains: the user w/out camera dislike so much the photos?? or why they score so low?

A low score in a group of 100 voters doesn't show up as well as a low score in a group of 3 voters. If you look at the voting breakdown for the images you are talking about, you will see that they probably have more than just the one or 2 low scores, which means that people with cameras thought it deserved a lower score as well.

For example, on your image, the non camera votes are 2.667. 3 votes of 3, 3 and 2 would give you this average vote.
You got 16 votes of 3, so that would mean that 14 of those votes came from users WITH cameras.
3 Votes of 5, 2, and 1 would also give you the same results.
Like I said, it just shows up better when there are only 3 votes being averaged, as opposed to 100 votes being averaged.

neophyte

Nikon D810

05/18/2005 01:10:22 PM · #7

Originally posted by hbunch7187:

Originally posted by narcisa:
Yes, indeed. Thanks 4 your reply, moodville.
I get this, but the fact still remains: the user w/out camera dislike so much the photos?? or why they score so low?

A low score in a group of 100 voters doesn't show up as well as a low score in a group of 3 voters. If you look at the voting breakdown for the images you are talking about, you will see that they probably have more than just the one or 2 low scores, which means that people with cameras thought it deserved a lower score as well.

For example, on your image, the non camera votes are 2.667. 3 votes of 3, 3 and 2 would give you this average vote.
You got 16 votes of 3, so that would mean that 14 of those votes came from users WITH cameras.
3 Votes of 5, 2, and 1 would also give you the same results.
Like I said, it just shows up better when there are only 3 votes being averaged, as opposed to 100 votes being averaged.

This misses the point. the votes of people without camera are still lower than the average in almost every case I've seen. I believe this is the question. Why? I work alot with stats and still feel voters without a camera are an outlyer group.

HBunch

HP PhotoSmart 315

05/18/2005 01:17:08 PM · #8

Originally posted by neophyte:

Well...if ONLY the 3 people WITH cameras who voted 1, 2 and 2 voted and NO others, then the people WITH cameras averages would be lower. *shrug* Maybe they just aren't into photography very much and don't appreciate photos in the same way 'we' do. Maybe they are kids. Maybe their camera died...or Maybe they are professional photographers who use film and just can't take photos for this web site, but still like to look at the photos and maybe they have a really HIGH standard. Who knows. Lots of reasons I guess.

05/18/2005 02:47:39 PM · #9

Yup, u are both right.

So, we have to shoot so well that even the w/out camera voters can be pleased ;)

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

05/18/2005 02:50:34 PM · #10

And it is not only my photo's case. Look at the yellow ribbon winner: //www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=175103

Average Vote per Commenters:8.333
Average Vote per Users w/ Cameras: 7.028
Average Vote per Users w/out Cameras: 4.750

I don't think this was a picture of 4.75...

holdingtime

Canon EOS-5D

05/18/2005 02:51:58 PM · #11

could it be that the people without cameras vote for what they like and not what is technicaly well done........

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

05/18/2005 03:12:58 PM · #12

After reading this post I went to the Triangle's results and sporatically looked at the vote tallies on about 20 images from 1st to the bottom 25% if the entries. I found that roughly, very roughly, an estimated average of 6 votes in the 1's and 2's on those images. I noticed this last night on this challenge and said to myself...hmmmm? Now I am going to look at some of the other challenge results, just for S's and Grins.

PS: I cannot see why anyone would give our 1st place winner in this challenge a 1. I didn't give it a 10, ... but a ONE? (I think there were 3 1's) NOPE... 1 ONE.

Message edited by author 2005-05-18 15:14:48.

srdanz

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

05/18/2005 03:14:04 PM · #13

C'mon people, why is it such a bad thing to not have a camera? Does that reduce someone's taste, or ability to recognize a nice photo?

I almost wish we had more voters without camera here. After all, the vast majority of people that enjoy everyday photos in NG, SI, and other magazines of any kind, haven't taken and edited the photo in their life.

We do not make photos only for the people that can instantly recognize the model of the lightbox used in the photo, and the manufacturer of the backdrop, we take them (presumably) so that these are something beautiful and/or something that can intice a viewer to think about something we wanted to convey.

And I could go on with comparing this to music - is anyone not playing an instrument entitled to like/dislike/grade a song?

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

05/18/2005 03:16:28 PM · #14

Why point fingers at the people with no cameras, that wouldn't make sense. They have nothing to gain or loose.

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/18/2005 03:23:28 PM · #15

Originally posted by sofapez:

Why point fingers at the people with no cameras, that wouldn't make sense. They have nothing to gain or loose.

I think the implication here is that the voters without cameras are showing themselves to have insufficient understanding of "photography" to vote knowledgeably, OR are voting low scores just for the hell of it since they don't have anything at stake viz the integrity of the voting process. That's what I think these comments are getting at.

This is NOT my opinion, btw. I'm NOT saying this is the case. I'm NOT saying the vwc shouldn't be allowed to vote, nothing like that. I'm neutral on the entire subject. There don't seem to be enough of them to make it a problem. I'm just "assuming" this is what other people may be thinking, based on the comments I'm reading here. And it may even be true, hell if I know.

R.

Message edited by author 2005-05-18 15:24:28.

buzzmom

Panasonic DMC-FZ20

05/18/2005 03:24:29 PM · #16

Originally posted by sofapez:

Why point fingers at the people with no cameras, that wouldn't make sense. They have nothing to gain or loose.

i dont know about anyone else but i always appreciated photography....however once i put a camera in my hand pictures started to look very different....you understand what it takes to get a shot...focus it properly post process to get the levels right...its like a childless person looking at a mom with a screaming kid wondering why they cant controll them...until you got one you just dont get it

05/18/2005 03:27:07 PM · #17

Originally posted by bear_music:

Originally posted by sofapez:
Why point fingers at the people with no cameras, that wouldn't make sense. They have nothing to gain or loose.

I think the implication here is that the voters without cameras are showing themselves to have insufficient understanding of "photography" to vote knowledgeably, OR are voting low scores just for the hell of it since they don't have anything at stake viz the integrity of the voting process. That's what I think these comments are getting at.

This is NOT my opinion, btw. I'm NOT saying this is the case. I'm NOT saying the vwc shouldn't be allowed to vote, nothing like that. I'm neutral on the entire subject. There don't seem to be enough of them to make it a problem. I'm just "assuming" this is what other people may be thinking, based on the comments I'm reading here. And it may even be true, hell if I know.

R.

It would not be what I am getting at... it doesn't make sense, since the average for non camera voters is way above the 1 ze, 2 ze range. Of course I do not know how many non camera voters there are, or any of the other variables either.