| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/14/2002 03:26:33 AM · #51 |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 04:45:04 AM · #52 |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 05:40:25 AM · #53 |
So my last entry got 8 1's, 16 2's and 14 3's, 18 4's and 43 5's
It would be nice to know why.
It would be interesting to understand why people thought it was so far away from being a good photograph and/or uninteresting and/or not fitting the challenge topic of advertising.
In fact I'd still really like to know what those 99 voters thought about my picture that made it well below average or average in their minds.
I didn't get a negative comment. Nearly all of them are wildly positive.
There are plenty of negative things to say about it.
It was a parody, rather than an advert. The lighting needed some more work. I could have composed it better.
But I just get 1's and 2's rather than feedback. Though I rather expected that would happen with this particular picture.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 05:42:24 AM · #54 |
When do I give a 1 vote?
To start with, I rarely give a 1 vote. In my beginnings here, I would do it when I didn't think the photograph met the challenge. I thought that, if the challenge was not met, ther was no use in considering the other aspects of the photo.
I have since changed my philosophy on that. I do believe that I could possibly not uderstand the photographer's interpretation of the challenge. This being the case, I don't score with a 1 vote. However, my score will still be no greater than a 5 if I can't see the interpretation of the challenge. To get a 5, the technical merit of the photograph must be exceptional. There is one example of this particular problem in the current challenge that I have been struggling with.
When do I give a 10 vote?
I gave four ten votes this week. Each of these photos demonstrated a great interpretation of the challenge. Each of the photos provided some amount of emotional spark when I viewed them. Each of the photos was technically acceptable (not necessarily perfect). I don't require technical perfection to award a 10 if the subjective value of the photo is high enough.
The current rating system is:
1 - Very Bad
10 - Very Good
There's nothing in this definition that holds me to any specific voting guidelines. This system allows me to balance my subjectivity and objectivity in a single numeric vote.
A score of 5 from me indicates that the photo is 'average'. Average means that there are no serious technical problems and no excessive amount of emotion generated.
Voters/Photographers who vote consistently low:
These people don't bother me in the least. If you want to vote lots of low scores, be my guest. When I look at photographer profiles, most of the photographers here who I consider to be consistently exceptional, hand out average votes much lower than my own. I think everything washes out in the end. I would be curious to see several deviations in the way votes are counted. I'm fairly confident that in any case, the vote is not swayed that much one way or the other....
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 05:46:36 AM · #55 |
I find it shameful that this photo didn't score in the top 10 at least.. I scored this photo a 10 myself.
I don't believe that many voters who cast 1 votes take the time to comment on them. After this photo and Arnit's Got Toast photo, I'm almost ready to ask for separate votes. Photographer votes determine the placement and voter votes are just for fun.
Gordon, I don't think that many of the photographers doubted this photo...
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
When do I give a 1 vote?
To start with, I rarely give a 1 vote. In my beginnings here, I would do it when I didn't think the photograph met the challenge. I thought that, if the challenge was not met, ther was no use in considering the other aspects of the photo.
I have since changed my philosophy on that. I do believe that I could possibly not uderstand the photographer's interpretation of the challenge. This being the case, I don't score with a 1 vote. However, my score will still be no greater than a 5 if I can't see the interpretation of the challenge. To get a 5, the technical merit of the photograph must be exceptional. There is one example of this particular problem in the current challenge that I have been struggling with.
When do I give a 10 vote?
I gave four ten votes this week. Each of these photos demonstrated a great interpretation of the challenge. Each of the photos provided some amount of emotional spark when I viewed them. Each of the photos was technically acceptable (not necessarily perfect). I don't require technical perfection to award a 10 if the subjective value of the photo is high enough.
The current rating system is:
1 - Very Bad
10 - Very Good
There's nothing in this definition that holds me to any specific voting guidelines. This system allows me to balance my subjectivity and objectivity in a single numeric vote.
A score of 5 from me indicates that the photo is 'average'. Average means that there are no serious technical problems and no excessive amount of emotion generated.
Voters/Photographers who vote consistently low:
These people don't bother me in the least. If you want to vote lots of low scores, be my guest. When I look at photographer profiles, most of the photographers here who I consider to be consistently exceptional, hand out average votes much lower than my own. I think everything washes out in the end. I would be curious to see several deviations in the way votes are counted. I'm fairly confident that in any case, the vote is not swayed that much one way or the other....
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:00:04 AM · #56 |
Well... you know... that bg was blurry. {g}
Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
So my last entry got 8 1's, 16 2's and 14 3's, 18 4's and 43 5's
It would be nice to know why.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:11:27 AM · #57 |
Gordon...I voted a 5 on this photo.
I just got absoluted out for one thing. That sounds unfair but its true. Too many of one subject tends to pull my emotion down a bit. Emotional ideas drive almost half my voting.
Technical merit I gave high marks on..probably a 10. I used to be a graphic designer 15 years ago and I know how most of the tricks are done. I am just starting to get my own ghetto studio together myself after a 3 year absence of taking any serious photos at all and I can truly appreciate waht it takes to get a nice technical representation from a home studio.
In retrospect, this photo blended into the entries too much for me because reflecting on it now I think I should have given at least a 7 to this based on a 5 for emotion and a 9 or 10 for technical merit. It just got lost in the more appealing entries. Also, I had the absolut ad with the photos on it and the dq'd absolut rated higher and got my absolute quota in :-)
I have been saying for a long time now that if we really wanted a learning site to develope here we are going to have to modify the voting system somewhat.
I am all for encouraging new people that don't contribute a photo or simple professional critics to be able to express themselves. But some of the more informative comments and thought out votes are getting squished out by the casual voters and non-contributors.
There are a million sites out there that allow the web surfer to just vote on popularity. Try to find a site like this where new and upcoming amatuers and raw hobbyist's can get a chance to mingle and share ideas.
There just aren't any. So I don't feel obligated to offer to casual voters what is already out there for them to have fun with.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:20:11 AM · #58 |
i think the glass is "half full" myself.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:24:01 AM · #59 |
Hokie,
This is something you should try to avoid if possible. With each challenge, there will be subjects duplicated. With around 100 entries hitting the challenge, you should expect some similar subjects each week.
Try to judge EACH photo on it's individual merit. One thing that may help with this is to spread your voting out more, it it's not already spread out.
When I start my voting, I browse the thumbnails for a while and view some of the full sized images before I get started. Then, I start voting on the photos that I don't particularly like and get them out of the way early. In my mind, this improves my voting because the photos I like best are saved for last. I usually get my voting done in one or two days. I also comment on each photo every week. I'm working on making my comments better but sometimes it's hard to write a great comment (critical or not) on a photograph that doesn't appeal to me.
Originally posted by hokie:
Gordon...I voted a 5 on this photo.
I just got absoluted out for one thing. That sounds unfair but its true. Too many of one subject tends to pull my emotion down a bit. Emotional ideas drive almost half my voting.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:25:24 AM · #60 |
From the numbers, it looks like about half of the votes come from noncombatants. I actually appreciate this input (no matter how much I squeal), as it does represent how your photo would do if you tried to sell it, say, from a stand in front of the gas station. There are plenty of places to go to get informed opinions of your work. Trouble is, those folks can make their own photographs.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:32:48 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by irae:
From the numbers, it looks like about half of the votes come from noncombatants. I actually appreciate this input (no matter how much I squeal), as it does represent how your photo would do if you tried to sell it, say, from a stand in front of the gas station. There are plenty of places to go to get informed opinions of your work. Trouble is, those folks can make their [i]own photographs.
[/i]
I understand the appeal to John Q. Public. No argument. I guess what I am saying is John Q. doesn't determine if your photo gets to a magazine or art gallery, art directors and gallery owners do and they are more informed than John Q.
And we know that half of John Q. out there depends on knowledgeable art afficianado's to TELL them what is good.
If we depended on the John Q. for everything we would only see dogs playing cards painted on black velvet. That's what Fox network is for :-)
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/14/2002 10:34:12 AM. |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:43:47 AM · #62 |
i think that we should not subscripe to an elitist, 'only we photographers know what's good attitude.' the art gallery owners may choose who gets put in the gallery but it's the public who buys.
galleries arent even the only venue for photography: magazines, editorial, newspapers, catalogs - all are valid forums for the expression of photography and are consumed by people of all levels of experience.
i also think we should rejoice at how good we got it at this site. here we have a completely free website that allows us to interact with all these great people, get all this feedback on our photos, some of which is worth more than others, but so what? take what's useful to you, and leave the rest behind!
unless we start charging, it's always going to be open. and guess what? that's ok. because the 1's are a reality check that *not everyone shares our exact worldview.*
if we're interested in a clear-eyed view of reality, and not just a solipstic, self-referential, frenzy of mutual self-congratulation, we need to keep it open.
live with the 1's. what do they mean in the grand scheme of things? NOTHING. what does it mean that someone's photo was ranked higher than mine? NOTHING.
at the end of the day, it's the comments, the real world response to your work, and ultimately your own self-satisfaction that matters. that's why i say the glass is half-full: this site is great!
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:58:31 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by hokie:
I have been saying for a long time now that if we really wanted a learning site to develope here we are going to have to modify the voting system somewhat.
I am all for encouraging new people that don't contribute a photo or simple professional critics to be able to express themselves. But some of the more informative comments and thought out votes are getting squished out by the casual voters and non-contributors.
There were 225 total voters (including photographers) for the last challenge. How many can we eliminate and still have a contest? What about people who are signed up as photographers, but have never submitted a photo? What about people who don’t submit photos “often”?
There are a million sites out there that allow the web surfer to just vote on popularity. Try to find a site like this where new and upcoming amatuers and raw hobbyist's can get a chance to mingle and share ideas.
I agree that this site is pretty unique.
For a photo to get a one from me, it has to be devoid of technical and artistic merit and fail to make any attempt to meet the challenge. I think I have always given a at least a single one in every challenge, but I don’t give many. For a photo to get a ten from me, it has to meet the challenge, have artistic merit, and be nearly technically perfect. (Since we can’t spot edit, I allow for minor imperfections.) I think the most tens I have given for any challenge is four. Of course, my interpretation of “technical and artistic merit” as well as “meeting the challenge” may vary from any other photographers. ;-)
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 06:58:41 AM · #64 |
Magnetic9999...I agree 100% with what you say.
But... I will never be able to convey my exact reasoning behind my thinking on a website. Text on a messageboard does not fully express my thinking. It lacks inflection and the impact of my interjection during a thought.
I am not looking for elitism. Is a person who goes to school to study art looking for elitism? I think sometimes they are just lookng for a quite venue to mingle with a variety of their peers. People who are struggling with the same hurdles with different results.
Besides magnetic9999..just because someone like myself finds certain things frustrating does that mean they expect them to disappear? Commentary does not mean you EXPECT the world to conform.
Don't interpret my discussion on this as a representing some absolute and total disdain for all.
My thoughts on this matter represent maybe 5% of what I think this site means to me as a whole.
It just happens to be the more conroversial part of my thinking and therefore gets more airplay :-) |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:02:03 AM · #65 |
oh i don't (take you that way). in fact, i enjoy the discussion myself : . but even in art school, there were probably some people more interesting to you than others? maybe that's just the way it goes?
personally, i feel lucky if i find a website with even like one person i can connect with on a non superficial level. so that's where i'm coming from : ) |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:02:45 AM · #66 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
i think that we should not subscripe to an elitist, 'only we photographers know what's good attitude.' the art gallery owners may choose who gets put in the gallery but it's the public who buys.
I agree, but I think it might be interesting to see the difference. Voter only vs. photographer for each individual picture or submitting photographer vs. voter/nonsubmitting photographer. I think this may have been suggested before in a more appropriate thread. I believe I voted differently in the 2 challenges I voted on before I submitted, so it's not necessarily a casual difference, I think. At the very least, it would give me something more to overanalyze ;-)
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:11:28 AM · #67 |
Hokie, I can understand why you are upset looking at the comments that your last image got. A lot of people didn’t get the subtleties in the photo, but I think that applies to photographers as well as voters. I missed the eye until I went to write the comments, and then had to bump the photo’s score.
I’m struggling with what I want to do to the games challenge. I have an idea that I think would be cool, but it’s too subtle for people to get. It involves knowing a little about the rules of the game and examining the photo closely enough to realize that there is a problem. I ran a test on a victim last night, and she didn’t get the trick to the photo, so I think I’ll shoot something else.
Now there would be an interesting challenge topic: “What’s wrong (or hidden) in this photo?”
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:21:35 AM · #68 |
so you are saying that your voting patterns/predilections changed when you began submitting? can you characterize the difference?
yes, i too would like to see more stat breakout between voters and photogs, btw. put in my vote, oh almighty omniscient site gods!
Originally posted by Kimbly:
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
[i]
i think that we should not subscripe to an elitist, 'only we photographers know what's good attitude.' the art gallery owners may choose who gets put in the gallery but it's the public who buys.
I agree, but I think it might be interesting to see the difference. Voter only vs. photographer for each individual picture or submitting photographer vs. voter/nonsubmitting photographer. I think this may have been suggested before in a more appropriate thread. I believe I voted differently in the 2 challenges I voted on before I submitted, so it's not necessarily a casual difference, I think. At the very least, it would give me something more to overanalyze ;-)
[/i]
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:40:47 AM · #69 |
Amphian..
I hope all the photographers here never take my comments as a sour grapes about my photo...ever. That mean's EVER.
The eye thingy was done as an exercise in subliminal..sorta a subchallenge to the advertising thing. I learned so much about exposure rates on that challenge alone it was worth it.
I take my photos for what they are, a guy struggling to get a fix on what his digital camera can do. I understand my limitations. As a matter of fact, I feel like I have received TOO HIGH a vote on everything so far considering my whacky things like blowing the sky while messing with levels or using unmasked desk lamps/flashlights to light a glass subject.
My recent entry is doing the best so far and it too represents an experimentation with what I have learned so far. I did this photo for my daughter and a school article she is writing.
I try very hard to do things with my photos that I used to do with a regular SLR to see the differences in technical handling. I also believe in using quick set-ups for photos like photojournalists use. No special lights or multiple day shoots. I may spend a day or two thinking about a subject but I shoot it all in a day.
I would not care if I got all 1's if it helped me to be a better photographer.
My ranting probably comes a lot from my exposure to high school kids I have been hanging around with. I help with a graphics/computer class afterschool twice a week and the apathy I see, the indiscriminate flaming and the fear to step forward with a well formed opinion at this age is stuff we talk about. Many of the kids I work with want to work in the communication fields.
But I can take abuse on my stuff all day long :-) I'm glad anyone would even take the time to comment on something I submitted. |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:42:25 AM · #70 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
so you are saying that your voting patterns/predilections changed when you began submitting? can you characterize the difference?
Sure. I got a lot more careful. Paid more attention to technique when I began realizing how hard it was to achieve. Started paying more attention to the abscense of things - the abscence of glare, reflections, stray telephone poles, and busy backgrounds...I think someone who has been trying to take a photo of a shiny thing for the past week appreciates a lot more when they see one with no reflections, than someone who just sees all the ads in magazines and doesn't realize how difficult it is. Once I put my own stuff in, I started feeling annoyed at how I felt people hadn't really looked at my photo, and that motivated me to look at others' more closely. I don't think that my average score has changed, but it may be distributed differently.
I have a theory that most people (myself included, but I can think of exceptions) probably have a knee-jerk tendency to rate things that are 'pretty' highly. Things that are colorful, recognizable, sharp, crisp, clean and happy. I think the photos that win often reflect this, and I realize that it's more difficult than you think to make something look this way. But I think that there is also merit in the dirty, nitty gritty and subtle that takes a few seconds of looking at a photo to appreciate. |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:43:52 AM · #71 |
Those 1 votes could be extremely helpful if the voter explained why the vote was given...
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:47:05 AM · #72 |
I agree with Gordon,it would be nice to know "why" we are scored the way we are, by some. But, I don't see a simple solution. And we need to bear in mind, that this site has invited a diverse voting public. They are NOT all photographers.
I am a prime example: just learning about cameras, set-ups and settings. But, on the other hand, I have an art background, so I DO know "color and composition", etc. Still others may know how to decorate a room, plan a garden, compose a flower arrangement, and so on.... They too, know what they appreciate when viewing and voting on the photos. Their opinions are just that: THEIR opinions! But, when we enter our pictures, we asked for their opinions! Take it or leave it.
On my first ever attempt to enter a challenge, with "Gotcha Covered", I received 6-1's, 13-2's and 15-3's, 33-4's and 30-5's. But, on the up side, I also got 10-10's, 9-9's, 17-8's, 33-7's, and 28-6's. Yet, soon after entering, my photo received several disqualification requests, because it evidently looked altered. Some of you "seasoned photographers" assumed that my text had been added in Photo Shop, requested I be disqualified, and I was ( because Drew and Langdon agreed: it "looked" added). I had to prove with my original picture that it followed the criteria for a legal entry.
Meanwhile, my picture missed the first few hours of voting, when I'm sure the majority of the photographers are scrutinizing the "competition" and voting. So, I'll never know how I really "stacked up" in comparison to your pictures; although I did receive numerous helpful comments from some of you, and, in a way, it was kind of funny that it had stumped some of you! :o)
On the lighter side, and that is depending on how you look at it, too: My daughter's entry for "Advertisement" last week, had at least one request for DQ by a voter (non-photographer), who didn't see how it met the criteria for an "Advertisement". The entry (the M&M pic, by Digiteyes) was given a "1" for her score, and the voter was her MOTHER-IN-LAW! I don't think she left a comment; just hit the DQ button!
So maybe, Gordon, you'd better check with your Mother-in-law, and see how she voted!
Originally posted by GordonMcGregor:
So my last entry got 8 1's, 16 2's and 14 3's, 18 4's and 43 5's
It would be nice to know why.
It would be interesting to understand why people thought it was so far away from being a good photograph and/or uninteresting and/or not fitting the challenge topic of advertising.
In fact I'd still really like to know what those 99 voters thought about my picture that made it well below average or average in their minds.
I didn't get a negative comment. Nearly all of them are wildly positive.
There are plenty of negative things to say about it.
It was a parody, rather than an advert. The lighting needed some more work. I could have composed it better.
But I just get 1's and 2's rather than feedback. Though I rather expected that would happen with this particular picture.
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:50:21 AM · #73 |
Gordon's setups are all simple. He just uses magic :)
|
|
|
|
05/14/2002 07:55:16 AM · #74 |
Kimbly...you say exactly what I think.
The response from people who contribute at any level is so much more involved.
I really think that the contributors, for the most part, put a lot more thought into how they vote and are willing to accept a discussion over their ideas so much more quickly than casual voters.
It's hard to balance a site where you don't want to restrict the casual voter's access (there might be a photographere lurking there) but maybe you want to build a more rich information oriented site for the serious hobbyist/amatuer.
A discussion on DP Review in the canon forums said this very thing.
DP Review Canon forums have gotten so big and cumbersome its hard for the up and comer to get some specific feedback on their photos and technique.
I have started to see people breaking off into private, smaller groups to get more immediate and specific feedback. |
|
|
|
05/14/2002 08:17:25 AM · #75 |
Originally posted by hokie:
The response from people who contribute at any level is so much more involved.
It is, but it's also different qualitatively.
When I watch a movie, sometimes I'm more mesmerised by the font choices in the titling, because i do stuff like that professionally.
When I listen to music, I'm like 'listen to the ambient reverb on that snare, man; that sounds like a killer space it was recorded in', because i write and record music.
i do try to see the forest, as well as the trees, but there can never be complete separation, because i'm too attuned to the underlying processes.
that's why the casual 'uninformed' opinion is so meaningful. no art for art's sake baggage, no technical evaluation, just blammo, a pure reaction. and sure maybe it's raw, and maybe it's harsh, and honestly, if that were the only type of feedback we got here, i wouldn't stick around more than the first 5 mins. But it's not. There's a mix, and you get to see many sides of things.
regarding the 'apathy of youth' which i'm not sure is rightly described as apathy - it might actually just be inexperience, emotional jadedness, and undeveloped skills in critical thinking: i think that's a) partly a failure of our educational system, and b) the barriers of entry to things as esoteric as photography have fallen so far that anyone can now participate, whether or not they have any training in discourse, abilities with verbal articulation, or education whatsoever.
There's also the age-old ridiculing of the smart kids that keeps kids 'in line' and unwilling to be expressive.
that's not likely to change, esp as it is touted that the internet allows all to participate sans gatekeepers. i think i read somewhere that maybe 5% of the population has master's degrees or equivalent? that's not the majority : )
* This message has been edited by the author on 5/14/2002 12:19:37 PM.
|
|
