| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/21/2007 08:27:23 AM · #101 |
Let me see if I understand the problem. Some people feel that entries that do no meet the challenge are being given high scores. Is this about it?
Here is a proposed step towards a solution: Have a poll asking members how they vote on entries that THEY feel do not meet the challenge. Give answer choices varying from "I vote wholly on the quality of the photo, not its relation to the challenge" down to the other end "I give every photo I don't think meets the challenge an automatic 1" and a few answers in between those extremes.
Once the results are in, we can see in a more definite way how members treat these entries. THEN, if it looks like there is a problem with the current system, a solution can be proposed. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 08:39:47 AM · #102 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
But I wanted the scores, so that's the way I went.
|
That is probably the sole reason people do it. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:07:56 AM · #103 |
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. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:23:21 AM · #104 |
So should I read that as "man, I'll sure be glad when this DNMC stuff gets relegated to a little checkbox and a good chunk of it disappears so we can get back to talking about photography and pictures?"
There certainly seems to be a spate of people talking about it, wouldn't it be wise to figure out a solution so we could move past it?
L2 - nice to see you are paying attention.
Regarding Q1, I'm glad it's being asked, but not sure - given the fact that people are already being encouraged to use their vote to indicate their opinions on MC/DNMC - that it's really relevant. What's more important is that if the shooter chose to do so, they could have an option to move their photo to a 'neutral space' where it could still receive a numerical score, but not a placement, OR let the pic roll with the punches.
I think personally that people would be inclined to vote normally if the pic was 'almost' meeting the challenge, but vote low if they felt that the image was blatantly flaunting the challenge. Either way, the shooter might not be aware of how many votes were actually low, just that lots of people were checking the box. This uncertainty would force them to make a decision based on what the image means to them - would they leave it in because they believe that their image has the integrity to remain, even with low votes, or would they pull it understanding that they appear to have made an error in judgement and still gather the valued information that comes from receiving comments and a score.
And I'm quite certain that it's a more elegant solution than simply commenting "DNMC - 1"
For Q2, I'm not sure that this stat would be appropriate for public viewing. I feel that this stat would be for the purpose of learning and helping the shooter to understand their vote split and deal with any possible emotional backwash. The shooter could then use their own discretion as to whether the DNMC figure was high or low.
I'm just wondering if perhaps this discussion ought to be moved to the thread I linked to earlier?
I will refresh the thread with a recap. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:29:15 AM · #105 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
So should I read that as "man, I'll sure be glad when this DNMC stuff gets relegated to a little checkbox and a good chunk of it disappears so we can get back to talking about photography and pictures?" |
He-he. Keep dreaming. DNMC will never be resolved. The root of the issue will still be there, whether you add something else to distract voters or not. If anything, a new "checkbox" would more likely fuel this debate even more.
Yes. Please resurrect the old thread... |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:30:22 AM · #106 |
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. |
YAY! |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:31:43 AM · #107 |
little more blunt that I would have said it ... but I agree
:)
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. |
|
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:48:54 AM · #108 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
A strict interpretation of DNMC is to deny imagination... |
I think some people want the entries to be like catalog shots -- Display Products Challenge or something -- rather than creative or imaginative variations or re-interpretations of the challenge. |
No. The problem is that since the challenge was given such a specific description: "Something in the act of opening/closing" some people felt the need to follow it very strictly.
However, if there had been no description at all for the opening and closing challenges, all these DNMCs being talked about would be fine and there wouldn't have been any debate, IMO. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 09:50:58 AM · #109 |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 10:17:20 AM · #110 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Originally posted by eschelar:
So should I read that as "man, I'll sure be glad when this DNMC stuff gets relegated to a little checkbox and a good chunk of it disappears so we can get back to talking about photography and pictures?" |
He-he. Keep dreaming. DNMC will never be resolved. The root of the issue will still be there, whether you add something else to distract voters or not. If anything, a new "checkbox" would more likely fuel this debate even more.
Yes. Please resurrect the old thread... |
Perhaps it will never be 'resolved' but at least we could try a method that might lead to discussing and rediscussing it so often?
People are discussing this in the forums because they are not satisfied with the solutions and they need a voice. Give them a voice and a chance to do something about it and things will probably start changing.
it doesn't matter if you think DNMC is the problem or talking endlessly about DNMC is the problem. a solution would still be good right? |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 10:20:36 AM · #111 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
... a solution would still be good right? |
You missed my point. A solution is not possible. Rather than re-quote myself...please read my 2nd to last post. Thanks. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 10:31:52 AM · #112 |
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. |
If you don't care, then why even bother saying 'no' to an idea. If you are happy with the current situation, and enjoy popping into these threads to help carry the flag of one of the two camps then you are not affected because the suggestion will not restrict you in any way.
I don't think it is fair to characterize something that clearly bothers more than one or two people as infantile whining. There is often a disconnect between what challenges are presented as (shoot X within the bounds of Y) and what ends up winning.
And it is about winning. Not learning, not expressing yourself - winning. DPCHallenge - a digital photography Contest.
So rather than force people into the box they so fear, just put a checkbox under the image and let people flag it if they think it is irrelevant to the challenge. People who do care about entries following the challenge description (no matter how narrowly defined) get a way to express their opinion without being ridiculed in the forums, the photog gets some feedback on how their supposed 'out of the box' creative thinking resonated with the people casting votes and life goes on.
No harm, no foul - no one has lost a thing.
|
|
|
|
09/21/2007 10:45:40 AM · #113 |
With all due respect...
Originally posted by routerguy666:
If you don't care, then why even bother saying 'no' to an idea. ... |
Because I don't think the flag bearer of this idea will stop at a checkbox if I read the related thread correctly. If only a checkbox, no big deal in the long run. To take this idea to the degree as proposed (SC involvement, subjective decisions on what's DNMC, etc...) is not something that's good for DPC IMO.
That's why I've posted as I have in this thread.
Will implementation of any part of this idea stop all the complaining about DNMC? No, I really don't think so - the DNMC complaints will shift a bit, but still be there.
I also think that concerns about DNMC are overinflated and repeatedly brought up by a very small percentage of the DPC community.
If people are concerned about entries in a challenge not meeting the challenge they have a voice - it's called a vote. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 11:31:42 AM · #114 |
This is like gymnastics wherein there are 2 aspects to a presentation (and in this case to a photograph) -- the technical and artistic (which includes composition and interpretation) merits.
It is almost always easy when the photo has an outstanding technical and artistic presentation. People will readily say WOW because clearly it's a 10. These are almost given. They do belong to the top. And yes, there are tons of photos here at DPC that are like that.
However on instances wherein a judge (in this case, us) is given a mediocre presentation, you start to nitpick or observe where you can deduct a point or bump it up to give more credit.
My take on things is like this -- presented with 2 buckets of photos:
-- wherein one contains those that understood the theme or the challenge but not technically good
-- OR those that are either almost OOB or even close to DNMC but technically great (flat photos, no emotions or meaning).
Most of the time, those that are artistic but lacking the technical skills to present it suffer because the ideas weren't clear to the viewers while those that are technically sound sometimes benefit even it's not that artistic.
With that, my suggestion to improve voting is that: instead of giving the audience a number from 1 to 10 to pick, let's separate the technical (1 to 10) and artistic (1 to 10) merits of a photo and then combine them in the end (but make both merits visible to all).
It will be taxing for the voters but it will put a much clearer line to participants as to where they are lacking when it comes to their entries. Even I can benefit from that given my flat photos. ^_^
Message edited by author 2007-09-21 11:32:57. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 11:43:34 AM · #115 |
once again, i agree with both of these statements
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I also think that concerns about DNMC are overinflated and repeatedly brought up by a very small percentage of the DPC community.
If people are concerned about entries in a challenge not meeting the challenge they have a voice - it's called a vote. |
|
|
|
|
09/21/2007 11:49:57 AM · #116 |
Originally posted by JBHale:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
A strict interpretation of DNMC is to deny imagination... |
I think some people want the entries to be like catalog shots -- Display Products Challenge or something -- rather than creative or imaginative variations or re-interpretations of the challenge. |
No. The problem is that since the challenge was given such a specific description: "Something in the act of opening/closing" some people felt the need to follow it very strictly.
However, if there had been no description at all for the opening and closing challenges, all these DNMCs being talked about would be fine and there wouldn't have been any debate, IMO. |
No the point is that it is very hard to see with closed eyes...
|
|
|
|
09/21/2007 12:11:00 PM · #117 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
With all due respect...
Originally posted by routerguy666:
If you don't care, then why even bother saying 'no' to an idea. ... |
Because I don't think the flag bearer of this idea will stop at a checkbox if I read the related thread correctly. If only a checkbox, no big deal in the long run. To take this idea to the degree as proposed (SC involvement, subjective decisions on what's DNMC, etc...) is not something that's good for DPC IMO.
|
You are talking about some other suggestion then. I suggested this down the page a bit without any of the trappings you are referring to. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 12:30:43 PM · #118 |
Hey...
I know of a great bar you can go to, to drown your sorrows.
Cheer up people, go take some photos.
"put on a happy face" |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 12:36:16 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
With all due respect...
Originally posted by routerguy666:
If you don't care, then why even bother saying 'no' to an idea. ... |
Because I don't think the flag bearer of this idea will stop at a checkbox if I read the related thread correctly. If only a checkbox, no big deal in the long run. To take this idea to the degree as proposed (SC involvement, subjective decisions on what's DNMC, etc...) is not something that's good for DPC IMO.
That's why I've posted as I have in this thread.
Will implementation of any part of this idea stop all the complaining about DNMC? No, I really don't think so - the DNMC complaints will shift a bit, but still be there.
I also think that concerns about DNMC are overinflated and repeatedly brought up by a very small percentage of the DPC community.
If people are concerned about entries in a challenge not meeting the challenge they have a voice - it's called a vote. |
excuse me? why don't you read the post in the thread and comment there. You might find that the idea has morphed somewhat in response to the discussion in that thread. Even specifically to AVOID the sort of Policing that we really don't need.
I'm sorry, but you seem to think I have some sort of vested interest in the joy of posting DNMC... or perhaps in reading and participating in the endless discussions that get brought up week after week. Oh yeah, that's right, I'm a troll and I write use DNMC as a personal mantra... have a look through my comments if you really feel that this is reasonable. In over 1000 comments, you will be hard pressed to find enough DNMC comments to fill up the fingers on one hand. Pardon me for trying to suggest something for the good of all.
you complain about people complaining about DNMC, but you are so set against trying something different. Such a strange attitude. "No and I don't want to talk about it, I just want to talk about why you shouldn't talk about it."
This topic gets raised at least once a week in some form or other. there is more than one issue being addressed. And it's usually a different person each week bringing it up. And usually regarding different pictures in different challenges.
Routerguy, I'm sorry if you caught some negative vibe there. He was talking about my idea. Your idea is a bit like my idea so it got stamped "Disapproved" by extension. If I got a bit excited and caused that, I apologize.
Message edited by author 2007-09-21 12:38:36. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 12:48:32 PM · #120 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
... Pardon me for trying to suggest something for the good of all. ... |
"the good of all" - rather presumptuous speaking for everyone.
Originally posted by eschelar:
... This topic gets raised at least once a week in some form or other. ... |
Or perpetuated for various reasons... |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 02:08:57 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Holy *#@!
This place is out of control. Waah, waah, waaaaahhhhh!
|
Let me save you some trouble...stop reading this thread. If there is a radio station that I don't like, I don't bitch about it. I just don't listen. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 02:19:53 PM · #122 |
Originally posted by bmartuch:
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Holy *#@!
This place is out of control. Waah, waah, waaaaahhhhh!
|
Let me save you some trouble...stop reading this thread. If there is a radio station that I don't like, I don't bitch about it. I just don't listen. |
Thanks for the advice. However, since I'm a member of the DPC community I like to stay informed of proposed changes (good or bad), and if I don't like the proposal I have just as much right as anyone else to voice my opinion. |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 02:32:22 PM · #123 |
Originally posted by bmartuch:
Let me save you some trouble...stop reading this thread. If there is a radio station that I don't like, I don't bitch about it. I just don't listen. |
By your logic, people who don't like the way the DPC masses vote vis a vis the challenge topic just shouldn't vote on the challenges -- Voilá! -- DNMC problem solved ... |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 02:32:49 PM · #124 |
So of course, as I'm taking a picture with a still camera, I can't really show the entire act of opening. The camera will capture an instant during the process of opening. The opening object will then be either wholly or partly open. In fact, I suspect that it will be acceptable for most people to actually set up a picture in such a way that the opening process is literally and physically stopped in order for a picture to be taken that represents or depicts the act of opening. That which is then made permanent by photographic recording, will be an opening. The intention to show an act of opening is implied by the contestant entering the picture in a challenge in which an act of opening is stipulated. It cannot be said that an entry does not meet the challenge unless the accuser is able to demonstrate the absence of this intention.
If this seems boring, I refer my learned colleagues to the rest of the thread... |
|
|
|
09/21/2007 02:38:06 PM · #125 |
Originally posted by raish:
So of course, as I'm taking a picture with a still camera, I can't really show the entire act of opening. The camera will capture an instant during the process of opening. The opening object will then be either wholly or partly open. In fact, I suspect that it will be acceptable for most people to actually set up a picture in such a way that the opening process is literally and physically stopped in order for a picture to be taken that represents or depicts the act of opening. That which is then made permanent by photographic recording, will be an opening. The intention to show an act of opening is implied by the contestant entering the picture in a challenge in which an act of opening is stipulated. It cannot be said that an entry does not meet the challenge unless the accuser is able to demonstrate the absence of this intention.
If this seems boring, I refer my learned colleagues to the rest of the thread... |
Well, this is sensible. But the "challenge", as it were, for those who took it literally, was to create an image which someone would look at and say "Hey! That's OPENING before my eyes!" The blue ribbon did exactly that, and it wasn't easy to do. It was a challenge for sure.
There were many lovely shots in "closing" of sunsets (close of day, see?) and while they literally meet the challenge, I don't think they were much of a challenge to make.
I think this is what people are beefing about: that a number of photographers go to great lengths to "solve" the challenge, and their efforts go unrewarded as rather generic images that happen to marginally "fit" the challenge win ribbons because they are beautiful.
R.
|
|
