ummm, if they are ranking and not rating, how would you vote on more than 10 pictures?
I've seen/heard people in the voting/commenting gripe threads talk about how they distribute X amount of 10s/1s and categorize the rest as they compare to weach other.
I feel that an image should be judged on its own merits, NOT how it compares to the others.
I rank images, it's just what I do. I see the 'GOOD --- BAD' as a relative marker, not an individual marker.
I see it like a chili tasting contest. Judges are saying both, "This is a really fantastic chili!" and "But it's not as good as THAT chili!" and three chilis ribbon.
GASP, what a concept.
Neither voting method is any more or less "right" than the other.
Put your image in the contest, and lives wif the results folks.
The OP's lament only makes sense if the scale of 1 to 10 has some universal value. It doesn't. Nor does it have any stated criteria. Even so, as karmat said, it is a rating, not a ranking.
Some people, myself included, use it as a relative rating. No law against that. I do it for precision, not against it. Something I vote a 10 is over 300% better than a boring, competent photo. So the boring, competent photo that meets the challenge in an unimaginative way gets a 3 from me. For me, the value difference between a 1 and a 3 is much less significant than the value difference between a 3 and a 10. That's how it should be, and that's why I start at 3, not 5.
If the relative nature of scoring were unimportant, than the ribbons would be unimportant. Good luck convincing DPC of that.
I still think some people are trying to force their interpretation of how to vote on others! Argh! Just let us vote already!
Just going by what the scale says.
It's frustrating to keep getting 4s and 5s on a clear 6+ photo.
But what-to-the-ever.
I recall you saying that you give votes in the 1-2 range or maybe it was 1-3 range for DNMC entries. Where does it say to do that on the scale or in the official rules for that matter?
I still think some people are trying to force their interpretation of how to vote on others! Argh! Just let us vote already!
Just going by what the scale says.
It's frustrating to keep getting 4s and 5s on a clear 6+ photo.
But what-to-the-ever.
I recall you saying that you give votes in the 1-2 range or maybe it was 1-3 range for DNMC entries. Where does it say to do that on the scale or in the official rules for that matter?
Because that would be a BAD photo relative to the terms of the challenge.
No biggie -- just venting... it's just very frustrating to waste so much time.
There are many people who rank them and the only issue about that for many of us is that we are competing against ourselves. Always trying to get a new PB, or rotate the profile page. In a freestudy, this makes the voting very harsh because we are being ranked against everyone's best from the month, rather than on our own entry's merits. A high five in a FS is like a 6+ in another challenge. Would be nice to be able to have the scale mean the same, but it's not going to happen.
As K10Dguy said, he ranks them because that is how he feels it should be done. I prefer to rate the images on their own merit. My average vote in freestudies is very high. My average vote in open challenges is lower because there are more beginners participating in those. Also, the lower the average score, the higher my commenting ratio. The high scores will already get taken care of with lots of glowing comments.
Again, everyone interprets the scale as they choose. One thing you can do is to read more than the average score to figure out if your entry was really lacking, or if it successfully hit the target audience. As an example, my current life & death entry is holding a little under a 5 1/2, but the votes and lots of comments tell me it is a very successful entry for me. People like it or dislike it, with not too many of the "it's just ok" votes.
If you read more than the final average, you will not be as frustrated with the system.
I'm probably one of the bad boys because I do consider the photo's competition as well as everything else I've seen to date. There's really no way to avoid that. You can't vote on a wine glass as if it's the first time you've seen it when it wasn't. After awhile your expectations go up. It's only natural. Your expectations also go up when you get better as a photographer. How many people here would still give Langdon's cue ball shot a perfect 10 and consider it the greatest photo ever taken at DPC?
After awhile your expectations go up. It's only natural. Your expectations also go up when you get better as a photographer. How many people here would still give Langdon's cue ball shot a perfect 10 and consider it the greatest photo ever taken at DPC?
I have to agree with this. I find that some of those shot types that wowed me early on are not impressing me as much as earlier. They are still worth a positive score of at least a 6, however. I am also finding I am developing an appreciation for other genres of photography and some entries that I would have nitpicked for flaws a year or two back I am now seeing differently.
I'm probably one of the bad boys because I do consider the photo's competition as well as everything else I've seen to date. There's really no way to avoid that. You can't vote on a wine glass as if it's the first time you've seen it when it wasn't. After awhile your expectations go up. It's only natural. Your expectations also go up when you get better as a photographer. How many people here would still give Langdon's cue ball shot a perfect 10 and consider it the greatest photo ever taken at DPC?
Edited for spelling/clarity.
Absolutely. When I first joined here, I found some images of sliced fruit splashing into water to be pretty damn cool. Hadn't really seen them before (and pretty much I only see them here, still). But after the first 100 or so they have lost all wow-factor, and after a 1000 or so they'll have a groan factor.
I think a similar effect that yanko describes actually occurs within a challenge, too: as you vote, you become more and more influenced by what else you have already seen (or not yet seen as in "this is different!"). So, whether you intentionally rank images with respect to others, the influence of other images would be very hard to ignore.
As K10DGuy said (more or less): you enters your image, you takes your chances
The playing field is still level for all entrants--the rankers rank, the raters rate, the trolls troll. "It rains on the just and the unjust"
Wailing and gnashing of teeth serves no purpose, subtracts rather than adds value to the experience.
I rank images, it's just what I do. I see the 'GOOD --- BAD' as a relative marker, not an individual marker.
I see it like a chili tasting contest. Judges are saying both, "This is a really fantastic chili!" and "But it's not as good as THAT chili!" and three chilis ribbon.
GASP, what a concept.
Neither voting method is any more or less "right" than the other.
Put your image in the contest, and lives wif the results folks.
Sometimes you are pretty wise for a wiseguy, there, chopper!
