Bummer... two DNMC in the top three...

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

09/25/2007 07:32:25 PM · #353

A DNMC check box is redundant.
Write "DNMC" if you must in the comment section.
Golly! People think that's abrupt? They don't mark it "Photographer found this comment useful"? They send you nasty PM's?
So...let's institutionalize this abrupt, useless "comment" that inspires nasty PM's....?????

I am not a member of the SC.
I've made over 1500 comments, many of them for Critique Club.
I have NEVER received a nasty PM. Ever. But I've always spoken my mind.

Canon EOS-20D

09/25/2007 07:33:32 PM · #354

Originally posted by yanko:

Reading the posts in this thread is just comical. Most don't even seem to take the time to read what has been proposed before opposing it. I can't say that's surprising since that's how most people seem to function in every day life. Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything. It already has been proposed to make the checkbox/stat optional for photographers who don't want it and of course the voter can choose not to participate either. I really do not understand why anybody would oppose something that just provides additional information that would be helpful for the photographer while not altering the challenge results one bit. I swear people just oppose things just for the sake of opposing things. If you have no interest in this feature then don't participate in it. It's that simple.

The two main complaints I've seen are either that people aren't voting (other images) DNMC enough or that photographers are receiving too many DNMC votes. I haven't really seen anyone request that they be told their image doesn't meet the challenge more often which is what your proposal here (which seems to differ from a number of other proposals in this thread) seems to address. Is that really what you are asking for?

Originally posted by zxaar:

So whats wrong in starting a thread. That we still do about things we feel about. I chose to have this feature whatever good or bad comes out of it, I have to live with.
Further for those who opposed it, and do not want to see the thread, can use 'ignore thread' feature.

As far as its value is concerned let us decide how much we value it, please do not decide it for us.

There's nothing wrong with starting a thread but given that threads are usually intended to spur discussion, you should probably expect some, some of which isn't glowing support. Frisca is as entitled to her opinion as you are to yours.

bucket

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/25/2007 07:36:52 PM · #355

I don't like this DNMC idea...
how about an IDGI (I don't get it) checkbox...
I have never found someone telling me DNMC helpful as a photographer...

willhadl

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

09/25/2007 07:39:47 PM · #356

Wow what a thread. Here is my two cents take it for what it is worth.

When someone votes 1 2 3 I am guessing that it has something to do with DMNC in that persons mind. Most of my images range around 5 and lately 5.5 to nearly 6. so I feel like my work and interpretations of the topics are fairly sound. Once in a while I push the envelope with my interpretation and get the odd comment DMNC but not a significant increase in the number of lower votes. Do I think a DNMC button would help me understand my final score better? Maybe it would, it would be easy for a person to check 5 and DNMC button for a nice image but would have been higher if you had done a better job of meeting the challenge. This would be helpful if I had a low number of small scores and a higher number of DNMC checks. Clearly some would feel the need to start a thread to explain why their image did meet the challenge and I think to some extent or another these threads would be educational not that we don't have those types of threads already.

OK I'm done rambling.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

09/25/2007 07:44:43 PM · #357

Originally posted by KaDi:

You're missing the point. I've left many harsh critiques myself as well as leave DNMC comments and will continue to do so even if some aren't valued. The point is not trying to cuddle those who are easily offended but rather to maintain the freeflowing of information so that the photographer can continue to learn. This idea would help ensure that continues whether you have a thin skin or not.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

09/25/2007 07:46:35 PM · #358

Originally posted by frisca:

As mk smartly pointed out, only those who support the box would use it, so its value is limited at best since its not an accurate measure. And then, with inaccurate numbers, there would be even MORE opportunity to kvetch about the # of DNMC checks one got. As if we didn't already have enough to kvetch about around here. I don't see what such as box adds to the discussion or to our knowledge.

Actually, you *are* making an assumption about the way it would be used.

I would use it as a gauge of how I hit the mark with voters, not as a personal weapon.

I think this may be a point of contention across the board, and something that's not being looked at overall.

I still see it as a way to register the compliance, or not, of the challenge theme without adversely scoring the merits of an image.

And conversely for how I do.

I feel that I'm more likely to get applicable feedback if all someone has to do is hammer a checkbox, rather than having to take the time to make a comment.

I'd like to know if the three second views of my shot make the cut or not.

I will just have to explain it in a comment now rather than giving a score and checking, or NOT checking, the box.

Regardless of whether or not there is ever a checkbox installed, I will always take the time to comment on any image that strongly makes an impression on me, good or bad.

I'm just pretty careful to try to be constructive when I give someone a low score to explain why.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

09/25/2007 07:53:49 PM · #359

Originally posted by bucket:

I don't like this DNMC idea...
how about an IDGI (I don't get it) checkbox...
I have never found someone telling me DNMC helpful as a photographer...

What that means to me is that I failed to communicate my message to the viewer.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II

09/25/2007 07:58:06 PM · #360

Originally posted by yanko:

I don't think I'm missing the point at all. I've followed this thread since its inception 5-6 days ago...and held my tongue until lately.

If there were a great demand for people to have a DNMC...sorry, an anonymous DNMC....wait, an anonymous, doesn't show statistics to anyone but the recipient DNMC...box... Ummm, people would check those comments that said nothing but "DNMC" helpful and start threads asking for more of them?

What I see here is a few people saying how helpful it would be to other people to receive their opinion (anonymous, of course) that this image "DNMC".

If you read my post above (or below) you'll see that I think that this is not only a redundancy of the site, but also meaningless. There's always a reason someone thinks an image doesn't meet the challenge...DNMC does nothing to explicate that thought. I've been around long enough to remember when "DNMC" was proposed as an acronym here...one of the first responses was something like "What? It's too difficult for you to type out Does not meet the challenge?" ...what a long, sad road it's been since then!

basssman7

Nikon D500

09/25/2007 08:06:22 PM · #361

Originally posted by muckpond:

i'm always open to arguments and differing points of view, so a discussion such as this has no bearing on anyone's future SC worthiness, at least as far as i'm concerned.

Thank you. :)

As long as everything is civil and polite, there is no harm in a little banter.

Message edited by author 2007-09-25 20:07:42.

09/25/2007 08:09:45 PM · #362

Originally posted by mk:

People say they are getting DNMCs but unless they are getting actual comments to that affect they are just assuming that's the case. Too many people seem to assume a low score or low vote means DNMC when it could just be the voter(s) thought the photo was just plain bad. That confusion doesn't help the photographer learn from his/her mistakes, IMO.

Regarding the other problem you mentioned, I think having this DNMC stat would also shed some light on it as well. People seem to assume that DNMC means you give the photo a 1, 2 or 3. So when people don't see many of those votes on a winning shot that they think nobody else thought the shot was DNMC. Having the checkbox/stat might show that in fact many thought it was DNMC but they just didn't vote it a 1, 2 or 3. I know when I vote only a photo that is both terrible and DNMC gets a vote in that range. It would be quite common at least for me to check the box and still give a photo a 5 or a 6 depending on the take on the challenge and how well it was shot. Again, this might not cure cancer or save babies but it would provide just a little more information, which could be useful. At the very least it would change the argument to why are you fools not voting the way I do and give DNMCs 1s. :P

Message edited by author 2007-09-25 20:31:28.

zxaar

09/25/2007 08:11:24 PM · #363

Originally posted by KaDi:

I think that this is not only a redundancy of the site, but also meaningless.

Why not we decide about the usefulness or redundency after this feature is implemented. Untill then its all guessing. (on my part and on your part. Isn't it).

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

09/25/2007 08:27:42 PM · #364

Man, it's like pulling teeth here. It's just a suggestion for a new stat. I even suggested changing the name to Challenge Relevancy Index earlier in this thread if DNMC was too much of a bad word for some.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

09/25/2007 08:29:11 PM · #365

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by KaDi:
I think that this is not only a redundancy of the site, but also meaningless.

Why not we decide about the usefulness or redundency after this feature is implemented. Untill then its all guessing. (on my part and on your part. Isn't it).

Why? More are opposed to it than in favor of it.

Based on your logic I think we should wait until there's enough support for it to implement it. :P

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

09/25/2007 08:34:09 PM · #366

For anyone looking for a post stating valid reasons for NOT seeing any merit to this suggestion (BTW - what was the initial OP of this thread about?) please read the following (there are others if you care to look back thru this thread):

Originally posted by scalvert:

... People who misunderstood the challenge figure out their mistake soon enough, either through the score, current comments or discussion threads. Whether a checkbox affects the score or not, I don't see any benefit for the site or the photographers. We'd probably have to create a whole new forum section dedicated to rants about how many DNMC's a particular image got (whether it placed "too high" or "too low"), and IMO it just seems like a way for the self-righteous to feel better about themselves when they don't agree with the placement of an image. No thanks!

If you feel strongly about a DNMC, then say so in the comments. The recipients won't always agree with you, and neither will the voters, but you're entitled to your opinion. Sometimes you'll get flamed, and you can either report those PMs or laugh at the ravings of a lunatic. If you can't be bothered leaving a comment, then that's your problem... not a site-wide issue.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

09/25/2007 08:36:46 PM · #367

Last, but not least, since this thread seems to be going in circles...

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Holy *#@!

This place is out of control. Waah, waah, waaaaahhhhh!

DNMC. Who cares? Leave a comment, don't leave a comment. Blah, blah, blah...

Photography, like any type of art, is subjective to personal opinions and taste. Some like it, some won't. Some will say perfect shot for the challenge, some will say DNMC. What's the big friggin deal?!

I say no to adding anything else to the voting setup. It's enough to get people to vote as it is. Don't make it any more complicated.

Now - go take some photos, vote on some images, love it, hate it, leave a comment, or don't. Be the individuals that you are and have some fun - and lighten up!!! Life's too short. Geeesssh.

taterbug

Nikon D300

09/25/2007 08:38:52 PM · #368

It's not a matter of 'If I don't like it, I just don't have to use it', like many keep pointing out. If you look back through the thread at the arguments presented by those opposed to the idea, most of those are addressing concerns of negative ramifications for the site/users in general. Now, a lot of the arguments for the idea, seem to come down to, a personal 'I don't think it would do any harm, I could get useful information from such a stat'. I think most, if not all of those against it, if it were just a matter of personally not thinking that they would want to use such a feature, I'm sure would not really care, go ahead and do it and we can just ignore it. Right or wrong, they have misgivings about the plan, and are arguing out of their concern for the site.
...so, I think the argument of just ignore it if you don't like it, is not a valid argument at all.

09/25/2007 08:42:52 PM · #369

Originally posted by zxaar:

No.
It is redundant because there is already a mechanism to voice "DNMC".
It is meaningless because it assumes an absolute.

Please at least have the common decency to read my posts in their entirety before you pick out small words to make some sort of point. I don't need to see it implemented to see its ramifications....do you, really?

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6D ED

09/25/2007 08:43:16 PM · #370

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by zxaar:

Originally posted by KaDi:
I think that this is not only a redundancy of the site, but also meaningless.

Why not we decide about the usefulness or redundency after this feature is implemented. Untill then its all guessing. (on my part and on your part. Isn't it).

Why? More are opposed to it than in favor of it.

Based on your logic I think we should wait until there's enough support for it to implement it. :P

This is much like a passage in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series involving the invention of the wheel. In the book, it goes over a scenario about what would have happened if lawyers, marketers and advertisers were involved when the wheel was invented. After many focus groups and analysis of risk factors it was determined the wheel idea would be scrapped.

Message edited by author 2007-09-25 20:45:59.

liltritter

Nikon D70s

09/25/2007 08:45:30 PM · #371

i still like um. Damn nice, dnmc or not.

09/25/2007 08:45:47 PM · #372

Originally posted by KaDi:

What I see here is a few people saying how helpful it would be to other people to receive their opinion (anonymous, of course) that this image "DNMC".

Since some people wish to ignore this point, I'll quote myself.

09/25/2007 08:47:21 PM · #373

Originally posted by yanko:

Really? I see it more like the passage in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy where Arthur settles for something that's like, but not quite the same as, tea.