| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/12/2004 03:41:50 AM · #1 |
We all have seen countless threads and challenge comments with rants and all order of garbage which goes something like
"You didn't fit the challenge - I have to vote you down, etc."
But I have to ask a question:
What would be the harm in just putting "feet" as the topic for the challenge and no more information at all? Or just putting "miniature."
It seems that most elaboration on the challenge topic only serves to narrow the focus as to remove any chance to deviate any slight bit from the literal meaning and create swarms of useless comments during the voting phase. And Everyone's interpretation of what meets a challenge is not consistent- nor is the "argument" settled by elaborating on the challenge entry page. Granted, some challenges need elaboration- and thats great , e.g. the "DPC" band album cover. So be it.
But we are artists and not robots. The point is to meet the challenge so a "still life" could not be a landscape or portrait- and no-one would disagree- but if there is going to be a topic such as "Huge" or "mammoth" we don't need comments that say "take a picture of something very big" - because some stickler will hold you to it if you tries to use a play on words or be clever in any way.
Lastly,
Explanations of the challenge topic only encourage strict adherence to the literal meaning of the topic so as to avoid comments like..
"I like your picture but, where is your entry for this challenge?"
Just my o. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 04:08:47 AM · #2 |
| I second your thoghts..seems to me.. OUT of The Box ....here.... gets shit.. no matter how many people think they are creative...seems to me if you don't meet the Challenge DEAD ON....or a Favorite... (oh my GOD it must be Jacko.... or Heida....or for the black and white of it....BEGUIN....lol....Sheesh...nobody seems to everchange their Ideas..as good as the flying MOTOCROSS dude is ...let it go.. and get more creative in thought..... Thank You for your time |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 04:21:31 AM · #3 |
I have to agree with you on this, I run a little photography yahoogroup, in our contests we have one word as the theme and the interpretation is totally open, I was going to start adding a description/criteria but decided against it, due to the fact that it would only serve to be restrictive. For example, this week's theme is 'boring', we've had a few entries following the boredom theme, tonight I'll be getting out the power drill and 'boring' into some wood for my pic :)
I know that creativity and interpretaion can be applied here, but there's always going to be those that use their literal understanding of the 'rules' as a reason to discredit an image.
To be honest (being new here) I'm doing a similar thing when voting on here, my structure works like this:
A. Does the pic meet the challenge description?
0 - not at all
1 - in a way, yes
2 - clearly does
3 - illustrates it perfectly
B. Is it a technically good image?
0 - no, bad quality
1 - some issues with the image
2 - good quality pic
3 - technically perfect (IMO)
C. Creativity/originality
0 - nothing new
1 - interesting interpretation
2 - very creative and original
D. Wow factor
0 - regular pic
1 - Ohhhh, that's good
2 - Oh wow, I love it!
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 05:33:34 AM · #4 |
colda .. I gotta say that is a pretty nifty voting style. I usually try to stay out of voting conversations because people just start arguing about who is telling who how to vote and its a big mess. I've been using the if it meets the challenge it gets a 5 (which I read somewhere) .. and it only goes down if its very poor (i.e. very out of focus or something of that nature). I'm going to try and adopt that style ... but I'm thinking depending on how late it is I might have a harder time keeping track of the numbers.
Cheers,
Mike |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 05:42:23 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by colda:
To be honest (being new here) I'm doing a similar thing when voting on here, my structure works like this: |
Out of curiosity, what do you score a picture that does not meet the challenge description at all (0), is a bad quality image (0), shows no creativity (0), and has no wow factor (0)? 
Message edited by author 2004-08-12 09:43:04.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 05:46:10 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by colda:
I have to agree with you on this, I run a little photography yahoogroup, in our contests we have one word as the theme and the interpretation is totally open, I was going to start adding a description/criteria but decided against it, due to the fact that it would only serve to be restrictive. For example, this week's theme is 'boring', we've had a few entries following the boredom theme, tonight I'll be getting out the power drill and 'boring' into some wood for my pic :)
I know that creativity and interpretaion can be applied here, but there's always going to be those that use their literal understanding of the 'rules' as a reason to discredit an image.
To be honest (being new here) I'm doing a similar thing when voting on here, my structure works like this:
A. Does the pic meet the challenge description?
0 - not at all
1 - in a way, yes
2 - clearly does
3 - illustrates it perfectly
B. Is it a technically good image?
0 - no, bad quality
1 - some issues with the image
2 - good quality pic
3 - technically perfect (IMO)
C. Creativity/originality
0 - nothing new
1 - interesting interpretation
2 - very creative and original
D. Wow factor
0 - regular pic
1 - Ohhhh, that's good
2 - Oh wow, I love it! |
Must take you forever to vote :D
Heres my scientific voting criteria.
Do I like the image 1=No 10=Yes and everything else in between.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 05:55:35 AM · #7 |
jonpink, I adopted that voting system because I was spending far too much time pondering, now i just look at a pic, add up the criteria and am done :) - btw, I loved your 'Rabbit' pic :)
EddyG, all '0's hmmm, (*trying desperatly to think of something witty to say and failing miserably*), I'd have to give them a one or a two on a distorted 'wow' score - 'oh wow, WTF have they entered that?!?', then say something nice in the comment ;)
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 09:16:30 AM · #8 |
| I don't usually vote with a criteria- I just think too much time is spent pondering whether something meets a challenge. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 09:46:34 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by colda:
To be honest (being new here) I'm doing a similar thing when voting on here, my structure works like this:
A. Does the pic meet the challenge description?
0 - not at all
1 - in a way, yes
2 - clearly does
3 - illustrates it perfectly
B. Is it a technically good image?
0 - no, bad quality
1 - some issues with the image
2 - good quality pic
3 - technically perfect (IMO)
C. Creativity/originality
0 - nothing new
1 - interesting interpretation
2 - very creative and original
D. Wow factor
0 - regular pic
1 - Ohhhh, that's good
2 - Oh wow, I love it! |
I like your system except for one thing. A picture that is technically perfect, very creative and original, and has the wow factor would earn a 7 without meeting the challenge at all. That seems unfair to those who at least met the challenge first. My two cents...
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 09:50:39 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by boomer:
I like your system except for one thing. A picture that is technically perfect, very creative and original, and has the wow factor would earn a 7 without meeting the challenge at all. That seems unfair to those who at least met the challenge first. My two cents... |
I can't answer for colda but I can't see that one would be likely to judge an image as being VERY creative and original without also meeting the challenge because it's inherently linked and part of being exceptionally creative would be in finding a really special way of depicting the theme. Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 09:56:34 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by boomer:
A picture that is technically perfect, very creative and original, and has the wow factor would earn a 7 without meeting the challenge at all. That seems unfair to those who at least met the challenge first. My two cents... |
Have you read this thread? Apparently meeting the challenge is over-rated to some voters.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 10:05:42 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
I can't answer for colda but I can't see that one would be likely to judge an image as being VERY creative and original without also meeting the challenge because it's inherently linked and part of being exceptionally creative would be in finding a really special way of depicting the theme. |
Ditto. It's difficult to assign specific numbers to each aspect when they're all interrelated and dependent upon one another. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 10:21:15 AM · #13 |
"Think outside the box."
"There are no rules."
"The topic doesn't matter if it is a good image."
These, and countless variations are exclaimed almost daily around here. They claim they are fighting for their right to be creative and original, but it just reminds me of an old country truck driving song, in which the driver says to 'give me forty acres and I'll turn this rig around.' He mentions that others can 'turn it on a dime, or turn it right down town,' but that is far too limiting for him.
Those that constantly exclaim the comments I mentioned above, and others like them, are just saying that they can not be creative unless they have the freedom to do as they please. Sorry, but limitations don't stifle creativity, they seperate out and allow to shine those that truly are creative and original.
Creativity is infinite; chop it up however you like -- into as many pieces as you want. Each small piece of the whole still has an infinity of posibilities.
Why do limitations seem to put such a cramp on creativity then? I think that when the walls go up, these people fixate on them and then can't pull their attention away long enough to look at the infinite posibilities that are there with them.
The limitations of the themes are what make them a challenge. :D
David
I like the walls! I paint them neutral grey and sketch my plans on them.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 10:25:32 AM · #14 |
First Post,so don't hurt me too bad:)
I've only hung out here a couple of weeks, so I only recently voted on challenges. And I'm not a member, so only half the challenges are open to me.
When it comes to voting, I read a few posts, and ran into someone who said they start at a 5 for meeting the challenge and go from there.
Now, I do approximately the same, but it's the "From there" that will differ from person to person. Now, colda has her system, and I find that what I do is similar (Kudos to colda for the framework):
A. Does the pic meet the challenge description? (determines my starting point)
3 - not at all
5 - in a way, yes
B. Is it a technically good image?
-2 - no, bad quality
-1 - some issues with the image
0 - No issues, standard quality pic
+1 - good quality pic
+2 - technically perfect (IMO)
C. Creativity/originality (Note: after the first dozen at level 1, a pic topic moves down a notch periodically, depending on how many I'm forced to look at. Level 2 doesn't change, because those tend to be REALLY original)
-1 - Oh, God, Not another bug/flower/staircase/etc
0 - nothing new
1 - interesting interpretation
2 - very creative and original
D. Wow factor
0 - regular pic
+1 - Ohhhh, that's good
+2 - Oh wow, I love it!
E. Personal Touch (ie Does it speak to ME?)
-1 - Eww, something about it irks me
0 - Eh.
+1 - Cool. I feel your pain.
I'm not advocating the use of my system to anyone, but As you can see, sometimes I won't vote exactly the same as everyone else, but I've slanted things so I'm probably AT MOST 3 points above or below the average. Yes, I know it might not be fair to judge "Cat Picture 32" at a -1 compared to "Cat Picture 1", but I go back and lower the other ones accordingly after I've voted on them all. So it ends up even anyway.
Besides, Life in general isn't fair. There's no way to expect a committee of a few hundred minds to be completely fair, either.
Message edited by author 2004-08-12 14:26:40. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 10:40:52 AM · #15 |
I am not aspousing anarchy- I have given reasons for why I think that the challenge topics should speak for themselves.
1. They might allow for a less robotic approach- but
only as it relates to...
2. The fact that some people think they know what the challenge is all about and insist on leaving bone headed comments that prove themselves wrong.
Thats it. The best pictures that are "closest" to "meeting the challenge" will still win- and thats fine- but more focus might be on the photograph rather than lecturing on how someone didn't meet the challenge. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 10:46:46 AM · #16 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
2. The fact that some people think they know what the challenge is all about and insist on leaving bone headed comments that prove themselves wrong.
|
I don't THINK I'm guilty of this one. And if anyone sees me mention that I don't think a pic meets the challenge, check to see if my comment is a question. I know that if someone reads a question the wrong way, it can be construed as sarcasm, but usually I really am asking. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 12:30:51 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
What would be the harm in just putting "feet" as the topic for the challenge ...
But we are artists and not robots. The point is to meet the challenge so a "still life" could not be a landscape or portrait- and no-one would disagree- |
Don't be so sure ... : )
Still Life ... With Underpass
This was both a landscape and a portrait of sorts ...
I mostly agree with your basic premise ... although my 100% dead-center in-the-box interpretations haven't done all that much better.
Message edited by author 2004-08-12 16:31:37. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 04:34:48 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by computerking:
... And if anyone sees me mention that I don't think a pic meets the challenge, check to see if my comment is a question. I know that if someone reads a question the wrong way, it can be construed as sarcasm, but usually I really am asking. |
Welcome to dpc computerking.
Leaving comments that are in the form of a question on photos during the voting stage is not really a good idea. Some will take it as an invitation to start a dialog via PMs which can lead to changed votes; and also it is not fair to all the other entrants who haven't had the same opportunity for input into your voting decision. Discussion about photos should be encouraged and is usually helpful to all involved, but wait until after the voting is finished to start the back and forth about a specific photo. Same goes for these forums, don't discuss specific images while they are being voted on. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 05:39:57 PM · #19 |
I once was young now I'm old -- in all those years I debated with myself and others about what is 'creativity.' All art is artifical, contrived, and personal. I have no control over what you think or see. I put my pictures out there to get some type of reaction. Any action is ok. That's the way is judge. By my personal reaction. 5 is ok 10 is great 1 is boring.
cd |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 06:30:09 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
...Leaving comments that are in the form of a question on photos during the voting stage is not really a good idea. Some will take it as an invitation to start a dialog via PMs which can lead to changed votes... |
While I'd share your concerns with regards to effecting a vote, I rather value a comment followed by a question mark, if the content includes an unknown. Unknowns followed by a period... well, we have plenty of this already.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2004 06:40:02 PM · #21 |
| I have not been a member long but I must say that I entirely agree with blindjustice on this. I am in no way thin skinned but it certainly does spark a bit of aggressiveness on my part when someone comments with a smart remark because they are too close minded to allow any interpretation of the challenge that may be outside of the literal sense. Frankly, I say that's crap. Foot, Feet, who the heck cares? |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 08:48:59 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by coolhar:
Leaving comments that are in the form of a question on photos during the voting stage is not really a good idea. Some will take it as an invitation to start a dialog via PMs which can lead to changed votes; and also it is not fair to all the other entrants who haven't had the same opportunity for input into your voting decision. Discussion about photos should be encouraged and is usually helpful to all involved, but wait until after the voting is finished to start the back and forth about a specific photo. Same goes for these forums, don't discuss specific images while they are being voted on. |
Understood about the conversation-starting issue, And as Zeuszen mentioned, my 'question comments' tend to include unknowns, or at least what is unknown to me. Example is this picturefrom the Macro IV set. See my comment there, it basically turned out that I wasn't the only confused person. I'm not a member, so I had no vote to sway, but I didn't expect a reply, and I lack the know-how to accurately figure out what change on the artist's side would fix my dilemma. So I put in my question, and hopefully next time a picture like that from that artist will be just a bit easier to recognize. Unless, of course, I was in the minority on the confusion side. I make no claims to be able to understand everyone's vision, and so, I may be confused by something others will get right off the bat. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 10:03:16 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by computerking:
Understood about the conversation-starting issue, |
Good. That's the point I was trying to make. You will feel more comfortable in your ability to evaluate images after you've been around here for a while. The comments you receive on your entries and reading the comments left on other photos are really a very good way to learn about critiqueing as well as about photographic techniques. |
|
|
|
08/12/2004 11:26:47 PM · #24 |
yeah I agree with all the arguments to some extent, especially art IS artificial. Nice perspective! I looked around a couple of this kind of sites but I stuck here for one reason only.
It is easy take a good picture. Just go wander around and you will surely find something with good composition, colors and stuff. Like grand canyon or something. But what do you learn in that process? In my opinion; very little or nothing! But if you must figure out something, like in vanishing point, it opens a new dimension to photograpy and it is not reached with technical skills but with art. Ok, let's not go there, in the question, "what is art?" ;D.
In my opinion I'd like to see more subjective challenges where the aim would be to capture something personal and unique and could be titled something like "urban jungle" or "winnig" or "loosing" or more that sorts of things.
|
|
