| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/04/2006 03:00:09 PM · #1 |
For anyone who is interested, this is the way I vote, spelled out in detail.
Feel free to use this if you like it, or to make suggestions to add or change any of the ideas presented.
My Voting Scale
10 – A perfect shot that meets the challenge. No technical flaws. Must have some sort of 'WOW' factor.
9 – A creative and interesting shot that meets the challenge. Has no technical flaws, but lacks any 'WOW' factor. Will successfully convey the artist's intent.
8 – Meets the challenge. Any technical flaws are not apparent at first sight. May have one or two nit-picky problems, but nothing glaringly obvious. Must be creative, original, visually appealing, or successfully convey an emotion.
7 – Meets the challenge. No extremely obvious technical flaws. Nit-picky problems may be evident, but not in great quantity. Must be visually appealing, may successfully convey an emotion, and most likely will be creative.
6 – Meets the challenge. EITHER: Will have no obvious technical flaws and few nit-picky problems but will be a 'ho-hum' presentation of subject. OR: May have a substantial technical flaw and some nit-picky problems, but will be creative, original, or successfully convey an emotion.
5 – EITHER: Meets the challenge. Has some obvious technical flaws. Has a 'ho-hum' presentation of subject or choice of subject. May be a 'snap-shot' type picture. Does not encourage the viewer to linger, but shows potential for the photographer. OR: Does not meet the challenge. Photo otherwise would receive a 9 or 10.
4 – EITHER: Meets the challenge. Has obvious to serious technical flaws. Has a 'ho-hum' presentation of subject or choice of subject. May be a 'snap-shot' type picture. May have compression issues. Does not encourage the viewer to linger, but shows potential for the photographer. OR: Does not meet challenge. Photo otherwise would receive a 7 or 8.
3 – EITHER: Meets the challenge. Has multiple serious technical flaws. Has a 'ho-hum' presentation of subject or choice of subject. May be a 'snap-shot' type picture. May have compression issues. OR: Does not meet challenge. Photo otherwise would receive a 5.
2 – EITHER: Meets the challenge. Has multiple serious technical flaws. Photo may be too small or too dark to see any details. Photo may have serious compression/resizing issues. OR: Does not meet challenge. Photo would otherwise receive a 3 or 4.
1 – Reserved only for pictures with no hope of rescue. Will have serious and overwhelming technical flaws. Photo may be far too small. Will have serious compression and resizing issues. May or may not meet challenge topic – it's hard to tell what's going on in the photo.
Points may be added or deducted for: creativity or lack thereof (+/-1), humor (+/-1), offensive content (+/-1 or 2), etc.
Sara
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 03:04:52 PM · #2 |
Thank you for putting so much thought into voting on our pictures.
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 03:08:40 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by saracat:
Points may be added or deducted for: creativity or lack thereof (+/-1), humor (+/-1), offensive content (+/-1 or 2), etc. |
I want to know what kind of offensive content I can shoot to garner a +2 ... : ) |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 03:14:57 PM · #4 |
A very good rule of thumb. I wish all voters voted like this.
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 03:43:37 PM · #5 |
This is a really great scale! This has always been how I vote as well :-) Thanks so much for putting this up...hopefully people will read it and take it to heart.
And I agree with coolhar, thank you for taking the time to consider all these things when voting!! |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 04:57:18 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by saracat:
Points may be added or deducted for: creativity or lack thereof (+/-1), humor (+/-1), offensive content (+/-1 or 2), etc. |
I want to know what kind of offensive content I can shoot to garner a +2 ... : ) |
Do I need to respond with a thumbnail of cheeseboy? |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 05:44:36 PM · #7 |
Question:
challenge is open (basic editing). I have sensor dust and no, I did not clean the sensor when I took the shot. I cannot clone (basic editing), and the dust splotch is visible and sticks like a sore thumb.
You recognize it as a sensor dust. The image is 10 or 9 below - do you penalize the photog for bad hygiene or do you give them a benefit of a doubt and score it as if it did not have the spots?
Just curious (and cleaned my sensor yesterday):-)
edit: spllng
Message edited by author 2006-04-04 17:45:12. |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 05:51:42 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
Question:
challenge is open (basic editing). I have sensor dust and no, I did not clean the sensor when I took the shot. I cannot clone (basic editing), and the dust splotch is visible and sticks like a sore thumb.
You recognize it as a sensor dust. The image is 10 or 9 below - do you penalize the photog for bad hygiene or do you give them a benefit of a doubt and score it as if it did not have the spots?
Just curious (and cleaned my sensor yesterday):-)
edit: spllng |
I will deduct if bad enough that it causes a distraction. I realize that you can't do anything about it, but at the same time, you have a choice to submit or not. I have chosen not to submit for the same reason. While I empathise, it's still an contest.
I do wish SC could figure out a way to allow dust removal within the boundaries of the basic challenge. |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 05:54:58 PM · #9 |
You have a good system. I think you're about a point more generous than I am for 6 and up. For me, a 10 has to be a best in class tyoe of shot (super WOW ;) ) 5 to 1, I am on the same page.
Message edited by author 2006-04-04 17:55:20. |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 05:55:52 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by srdanz:
Question:
challenge is open (basic editing). I have sensor dust and no, I did not clean the sensor when I took the shot. I cannot clone (basic editing), and the dust splotch is visible and sticks like a sore thumb.
You recognize it as a sensor dust. The image is 10 or 9 below - do you penalize the photog for bad hygiene or do you give them a benefit of a doubt and score it as if it did not have the spots?
Just curious (and cleaned my sensor yesterday):-)
edit: spllng |
If it's recognizable as sensor dust, then unless it's really bad (as in it looks like a dust storm in the middle of the desert!) I more than likely will ignore it in a basic editing challenge. Same goes for hot or dead pixels. In an advanced editing challenge where you have the opportunity to get rid of it, it would count against you.
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 06:06:05 PM · #11 |
From previous threads:
This is how I try (very hard) to vote:
1 > a technically (focus, exposure, balance, effects, lighting, sharpening, saturation, colour, cast, evidence of artifacts etc.) incompetent photo or an entirely unintelligible one (sometimes due to image size), an 'offensive' one to civilized nature or (even) a technically apt photo which 'clearly' demonstrates a 'failure of feeling'
2 > a technically lacking photo with little or no perceptible artistic (choice of subject, composition, perspective, manner, emotional energy and range, etc.) merit or interest, even when generously considered; a somewhat 'offensive' photo or a gross and inappropriate sentimentalization of feeling in the context of the challenge; the pursuit of cliché without room for even a latent interpretation (irony, allegory, metaphor etc.)
3 > a photo of mixed or questionable merit, both artistically and technically; a technically 'acceptable' one without marked artistic or journalistic interest; a sentimental or symptomatically 'commercialized' image designed to 'sell' a product or (worse! -of a person) of reasonable or considerable technical merit; a potentially 'interesting' or 'promising' photo (subject matter/perspective) with 'severe' technical flaws and/or without 'clear' intent or direction; a technically flawless image void of emotion and lacking sensory stimuli
4 > a 'pretty' photo reminiscent of many; an otherwise captivating image with one or more clearly distracting elements, either within the capture itself or via border and/or title; a technically accomplished photo relying predominantly on an idea, subject and/or title for impact; an artistically 'promising' capture with clearly noticeable technical defects, compositional issues or incongruous aesthetics; a technically 'stunning' capture otherwise bare of 'feeling' or aesthetic 'sense'
5 > a 'good' photo by most standards; one that communicates capably without necessarily teaching or exhilarating us; an artistically interesting photo pointing an unusual view, perspective or matter, even if it suffers from distinct technical 'flaws'; a technically 'stunning' capture with limiting human or artistic 'range'
6 > a remarkable image, well executed by most standards while allowing for some technical shortcomings not easily prevented or corrected; an ordinary or simple shot, perfectly timed or 'found' that tells an old story in a new way; a very personal take, a 'fresh' controversy with commotive qualities, but aesthetically 'exciting'; an image imitative within a 'classic' fashion, but well executed (i.e. landscape/portrait etc.)
7 > an outstanding photograph fit for both study and pleasure, while allowing for minor technical shortcomings, an accomplished imitation of a mode of seeing or rendering drawn or alluding to another medium including enduring snapshots or candids of remarkable human interest
8 > same as 7, but one that stimulates awareness and taxes the senses, technically accomplished, with near-imperceptible flaws, if not entirely flawless; clearly 'innovative' photographs pointing a little known interest, direction or delight
9 > same as 8, technically without a fault, but a photo which commotes 'perceived' reality to the point of restlessness and action
10 > an enduring photo that challenges the order of gods and the world, one holding its own alongside any other.
On (Challenge) Topicality
Limiting potentially immeasurable choices to a defined subject or a chosen category of photography, really, should stimulate creativity, not hamper it. Topics, IMO, are or should be there for the benefit of the photographer, not for the untaxed glee of some voters swinging a bat.
I do not penalize entries for failing to meet the challenge. I may award a higher score to a unique interpretation or to a finesse I recognize, but I cannot, in good conscience, penalize something or someone for a fault that may lie within me and not with a picture.
I have seen and continue to see perfectly good photographs here penalized for exceeding the appreciative capacity of voters to recognize an entry for the poignant topicality it may demonstrate. If I consider the photo remarkable (artistically very interesting), I may just decide to award the highest mark possible in the faint hope to compensate for a predictably overall devaluation.
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 06:21:04 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by saracat:
For anyone who is interested, this is the way I vote, spelled out in detail.
Feel free to use this if you like it, or to make suggestions to add or change any of the ideas presented.
My Voting Scale
10 – A perfect shot that meets the challenge. No technical flaws. Must have some sort of 'WOW' factor. |
Why must a 10 be "perfect" when site guidlines say a 10 is "good"?
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 06:30:01 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by _eug:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by saracat:
Points may be added or deducted for: creativity or lack thereof (+/-1), humor (+/-1), offensive content (+/-1 or 2), etc. |
I want to know what kind of offensive content I can shoot to garner a +2 ... : ) |
Do I need to respond with a thumbnail of cheeseboy? |
I was assuming that's what would draw the -2 option. |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 06:40:54 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by saracat:
For anyone who is interested, this is the way I vote, spelled out in detail.
Feel free to use this if you like it, or to make suggestions to add or change any of the ideas presented.
My Voting Scale
10 – A perfect shot that meets the challenge. No technical flaws. Must have some sort of 'WOW' factor. |
Why must a 10 be "perfect" when site guidlines say a 10 is "good"? |
Hmm. Perhaps I should define what I mean by "perfect". I know this probably won't 'mesh' with the dictionary definition of 'perfect', but here's what I'm looking for.
A photo with no technical flaws. The focus is appropriate to the subject (ie, soft focus used to good effect on a portrait, crisp focus giving definition to a macro shot, shallow DOF used to isolate the subject, etc.). The lighting is balanced and appropriate and illuminates the subject properly (according to the mood of the photo) and helps to define or enforce the mood of the photo. There are no unneccessary and distracting elements that could (or should) have been eliminated (stray hairs, power lines (unless they're the subject), busy and intrusive backgrounds, bra straps, sensor dust, litter, etc.). The composition supports the subject and causes the viewer to want to linger and study the photo. The photo has obviously been planned and/or thought about before the shot was taken. Care was taken with the crop - doesn't feel cramped or lop-sided. The subject itself is interesting, or the photographer's treatment of the subject causes it to be interesting. Post processing supports the photo and does not overwhelm it - this can be extreme or not, it just depends on the photo, but it shouldn't stick out like a sore thumb that it has been over-processed.
Make sense? Or am I just rambling?:)
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 06:41:53 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by _eug:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by saracat:
Points may be added or deducted for: creativity or lack thereof (+/-1), humor (+/-1), offensive content (+/-1 or 2), etc. |
I want to know what kind of offensive content I can shoot to garner a +2 ... : ) |
Do I need to respond with a thumbnail of cheeseboy? |
I was assuming that's what would draw the -2 option. |
Nah. It actually gets a +3 since it's offensive material plus humor. Hard to get that to work out just right!
:D
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 07:08:51 PM · #16 |
I find myself somewhere between ZeusZen and saracat and want to thank you both for taking the time out to explain your systems. I have not voted in a while because my scaling was too random and inconsistent. Now I have no excuse! I must admit that I had not admitted to myself the influence a title has on me!
Thanks again.
Carl |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 08:31:29 PM · #17 |
| I like the thought expressed here, but want to emphasize that the 10's I give represent best-of-show for the challenge. That often means near technical perfection and a photo with WOW ... but not necessarily since I will always give at least 1 10 and possibly a few, even if they're not perfect or profoundly WOW. |
|
|
|
04/04/2006 09:28:26 PM · #18 |
Any more questions or opinions?
|
|
|
|
04/04/2006 09:46:48 PM · #19 |
| Well...OK, since you asked! I would be less harsh on the DNMC scoring, deducting only one point for an image that bears absolutely no relationship to the challenge theme. I accept considerable artistic licence in that regard, recognizing that not everyone shares my view of what meets the challenge. |
|
|
|
04/05/2006 01:33:07 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by ElGordo:
Well...OK, since you asked! I would be less harsh on the DNMC scoring, deducting only one point for an image that bears absolutely no relationship to the challenge theme. I accept considerable artistic licence in that regard, recognizing that not everyone shares my view of what meets the challenge. |
I do have an open mind when it comes to DNMC. I am aware of the fact that others view the world differently than I, and that there are many interpretations of the challenge.
However, I consider the challenges to be akin to "assignments." If, for example, the challenge topic were 'Jewelry', I could see that rings, necklaces, bracelets, watches, earrings, cuff links, plastic beaded kids' play jewelry, hair barrettes, and even dog or cat collars could meet the challenge. But I could not consider such things as, oh, sunsets, trees, live wild animals, buildings, etc., as meeting the challenge. Water drops hanging off a flower or spiderweb would be a tenuous link, but one that would be acceptable as meeting the challenge - barely.
To me it's like you're in a class on grammar and composition. The teacher has handed out the assignment to write an essay about goldfish. Any aspect of 'goldfish', from environment to feeding habits to pet ownership and more is acceptable. But, no matter how well written, an essay about flowers or termite architecture, no matter how interesting, is going to score well with the teacher because it is not on topic.
DPC is, to me, a very loosely organized class, and the challenges are assignments. If I want to score well, I meet the topic as well as I can. Out of the box thinking is fine, but it still needs some sort of connection to the topic. Free studies are great, but if you're given a subject, I feel like in order to give you a high score you must make some effort to have some sort of connection to the suggested topic.
|
|
|
|
04/05/2006 01:37:31 PM · #21 |
| Can you explain what a 'technical flaw' is, please? |
|
|
|
04/05/2006 02:09:49 PM · #22 |
Technical flaw... (to me)
Something that could have and should have been taken care of when the shot was taken, OR a problem that was either caused by or not fixed by post processing. The photo needs to look like it was at least thought about.. not just thrown together and shot really fast.
Examples:
Out of focus/Improper focus
Subject either blurred or cut off due to camera movement
Bad lighting that seriously hampers clarity or quality
Over or under exposed spots
Distracting elements or items that don't relate to the photo, but clutter it
Dust, dirt, spots, etc, that could have been taken out in post processing, but weren't.
Overprocessing - over sharpening, over saturation, excessive use of filters, etc.
|
|
|
|
04/05/2006 02:13:35 PM · #23 |
i just give everybody a 3
if it's really good, i give it a 2
the stunners get a 1
i can vote on 200 images in less than 5 minutes on a good internet connection
:-) |
|
|
|
04/05/2006 03:07:48 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Cyndane:
Technical flaw... (to me)
Something that could have and should have been taken care of when the shot was taken, OR a problem that was either caused by or not fixed by post processing. The photo needs to look like it was at least thought about.. not just thrown together and shot really fast.
Examples:
Out of focus/Improper focus
Subject either blurred or cut off due to camera movement
Bad lighting that seriously hampers clarity or quality
Over or under exposed spots
Distracting elements or items that don't relate to the photo, but clutter it
Dust, dirt, spots, etc, that could have been taken out in post processing, but weren't.
Overprocessing - over sharpening, over saturation, excessive use of filters, etc. |
I would also include compositional problems such as things 'growing' out of heads, awkward model poses (where it is not obviously used for effect), and the like.
Just for reference, "nit-picky" stuff (to me) would be things like borders, facial expressions, costuming or make-up, or minor distracting elements.
|
|
|
|
04/05/2006 03:13:14 PM · #25 |
Thought you might find this interesting. This is the criteria used to judge pictures in competition for the International Print Competition:
12 Elements of a Merit Print
Twelve elements have been defined as necessary for the success of an art piece or image. Any image, art piece or photograph will reveal some measure of all twelve elements, while a visually superior example will reveal obvious consideration of each one. They are:
Impact is the sense one gets upon viewing an image for the first time. Compelling images evoke laughter, sadness, anger, pride, wonder or another intense emotion.
Creativity is the external expression of the imagination of the maker by using the medium to convey an idea, message or thought.
Style is defined in a number of ways as it applies to a creative image. It might be defined by a specific genre or simply be recognizable as the characteristics of how a specific artist applies light to a subject. It can impact an image in a positive manner when the subject matter and the style are appropriate for each other, or it can have a negative effect when they are at odds.
Composition is important to the design of an image, bringing all of the visual elements together in concert to express the purpose of the image. Proper composition holds the viewer in the image and prompts the viewer to look where the creator intends. Effective composition can be pleasing or disturbing, depending on the intent of the image maker.
Print Presentation affects an image by giving it a finished look. The mats and borders used should support and enhance the image, not distract from it.
Center of Interest is the point or points on the image where the maker wants the viewer to stop as they view the image. There can be primary and secondary centers of interest. Occasionally there will be no specific center of interest, when the entire scene collectively serves as the center of interest.
Lighting the use and control of light—refers to how dimension, shape and roundness are defined in an image. Whether the light applied to an image is manmade or natural, proper use of it should enhance an image.
Subject Matter should always be appropriate to the story being told in an image.
Color Balance supplies harmony to an image. An image in which the tones work together, effectively supporting the image, can enhance its emotional appeal. Color balance is not always harmonious and can be used to evoke diverse feelings for effect.
Technical excellence is the print quality of the image itself as it is presented for viewing. Sharpness, exposure, printing, mounting and correct color all speak to the qualities of the physical print.
Technique is the approach used to create the image. Printing, lighting, posing, film choice, paper selection and more are part of the technique applied to an image.
Story Telling refers to the image̢۪s ability to evoke imagination. One beautiful thing about art is that each viewer might collect his own message or read her own story in an image.
|
|
