One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad.
IMO, it is the voters' definition of the challenge topic that matters since they are the judges. Some will see it the artist's way, some will not, some won't care. Your job as the artist, aside from taking a good photograph, is to convince enough of them that your entry fits. Just be thankful there are many of them.
One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad.
IMO, it is the voters' definition of the challenge topic that matters since they are the judges. Some will see it the artist's way, some will not, some won't care. Your job as the artist, aside from taking a good photograph, is to convince enough of them that your entry fits. Just be thankful there are many of them.
There has been a change in recent months. Some voters are spending too much time scrutinizing an image for challenge compliance... looking for a reason to cast a low vote. It used to be that images which met the challenge ... generally.... were assessed for the caliber of the photography. And, it used to be common for there to be more votes than entries. Not any more! That gives more power to the fewer voters, some of whom are using a narrower definition of the challenge than intended. I'd simply like to see this remain a photography site, rather than a "tear down your neighbor" tactical vote, intended to improve your challenge ranking.
There has been a change in recent months. Some voters are spending too much time scrutinizing an image for challenge compliance... looking for a reason to cast a low vote. It used to be that images which met the challenge ... generally.... were assessed for the caliber of the photography. And, it used to be common for there to be more votes than entries. Not any more! That gives more power to the fewer voters, some of whom are using a narrower definition of the challenge than intended. I'd simply like to see this remain a photography site, rather than a "tear down your neighbor" tactical vote, intended to improve your challenge ranking.
...and of course there is empirical evidence to support this claim?
Sorry my friend, I am not buying it... voters have and continue to vote according to their preferences.
One of the difficult conditions in recent months has been the overemphasis of DNMC by those voters whose definition of the challenge does not match the definition applied by the artist photographer. Sometimes, outstanding photography is snubbed by voters because of a perceived DNMC, even when a challenge entry clearly meets the general challenge description. The "Nonsense" challenge is an opportunity for voters to refocus their attention to the caliber of the photography, rather than split hairs. Almost all of my photography is nonsense, so I think the topic is broad.
IMO, it is the voters' definition of the challenge topic that matters since they are the judges. Some will see it the artist's way, some will not, some won't care. Your job as the artist, aside from taking a good photograph, is to convince enough of them that your entry fits. Just be thankful there are many of them.
Some voters are spending too much time scrutinizing an image for challenge compliance... looking for a reason to cast a low vote.
Seriously?? On what basis are you making that assessment?? Always the victim, Hahn. If voters don't see things your way, it's because they are out to get you.
The voting may have elements of unfairness, but if all you care about is your score, then why not just play along and deliver the appropriate literal-topic-interpretation, eye-candy that consistently scores highly instead of bucking the reality and then complaining about it? If you don't care about your score (highly recommended), then just shoot what you like and appreciate the fewmany that appreciate your work. Frankly, I don't know why you enter challenges here - you certainly don't need the validation that you are a gifted and skilled photographer and there is no monetary benefit, so why bother?
edited because there are actually many who appreciate your images, myself included, regardless of the score I give it.
I want to hear more about this golden age when dpc voters were open-minded.
The 1920s perhaps? No, it couldn't have been during Prohibition. It was probably the 1980's, during the Crack era.
voters have always been like teenage girls in the mall, wearing northface denali jackets and uggs on the outside of their skinny jeans, with long straight hair in a pony tail. unknowingly striving for perfect similarity of "literal" challenge interpretations.
voters have always been like teenage girls in the mall, wearing northface denali jackets and uggs on the outside of their skinny jeans, with long straight hair in a pony tail. unknowingly striving for perfect similarity of "literal" challenge interpretations.
Voting is gonna be hard for this one. There are alot of images I really like but given the challenge, some are silly/cute and do in a way make some sense...
