Not sure if this is already discussed. Will it help to have "Photograph Information" and "Photographer's Comments" during the voting? I think it will be useful. Sometimes during voting, question come up to my mind like where is this place, what could be the camera settings, how this shot is done. I often go back and check for these after the challenge, but not always.
We already have too many any ideas, assumptions, stabs at "intent", "meaning" and other dilutions of matter. What does matter, IMO, are the facts of the image (and the title perhaps, if it's an appropriate one). A photographer's comment, while possibly educational or entertaining, may also be "leading" and, at the very least, take some degree of attention away from the photo. With the already infinitesimal attention afforded a photo in this environment, I cannot be enthusiastic about such a feature.
Maybe an alternate solution is to be able to tag photos for review later.. Similar to adding it to your favorites, but it would display in a different queue. It would be a helpful reminder of the photos you wanted to learn more about, once voting was over.
We already have too many any ideas, assumptions, stabs at "intent", "meaning" and other dilutions of matter. What does matter, IMO, are the facts of the image (and the title perhaps, if it's an appropriate one). A photographer's comment, while possibly educational or entertaining, may also be "leading" and, at the very least, take some degree of attention away from the photo. With the already infinitesimal attention afforded a photo in this environment, I cannot be enthusiastic about such a feature.
Besides, Zeus would write really long, involved descriptions... :-)
We already have too many any ideas, assumptions, stabs at "intent", "meaning" and other dilutions of matter. What does matter, IMO, are the facts of the image (and the title perhaps, if it's an appropriate one). A photographer's comment, while possibly educational or entertaining, may also be "leading" and, at the very least, take some degree of attention away from the photo. With the already infinitesimal attention afforded a photo in this environment, I cannot be enthusiastic about such a feature.
Besides, Zeus would write really long, involved descriptions... :-)
I was actually thinking the opposite. He'd write very short descriptions that needed to be read several times to understand it much like his photos. :P
We already have too many any ideas, assumptions, stabs at "intent", "meaning" and other dilutions of matter. What does matter, IMO, are the facts of the image (and the title perhaps, if it's an appropriate one). A photographer's comment, while possibly educational or entertaining, may also be "leading" and, at the very least, take some degree of attention away from the photo. With the already infinitesimal attention afforded a photo in this environment, I cannot be enthusiastic about such a feature.
Besides, Zeus would write really long, involved descriptions... :-)
I was actually thinking the opposite. He'd write very short descriptions that needed to be read several times to understand it much like his photos. :P
FWIW I think I first suggested this about eight years ago ... ;-)
The primary objection (other than those stated in the thread) is the compromise in anonymity.
Personally, I'd like to make it a pop-up field, so that those who don't want to see it at all won't, and maybe make it available only after a vote has been cast (and locked-in). That way people could add comments but not change their vote based on the photographer's comments, which addresses the anonymity issue.
I think then it becomes a writing contest. There are people who just know how to sell something. And there are people who can't explain something if there life depends on it. I think the photo should be able to stand on its own.
I think then it becomes a writing contest. There are people who just know how to sell something. And there are people who can't explain something if there life depends on it. I think the photo should be able to stand on its own.
I suppose if your the type who automatically picks up the phone whenever an info-commercial comes on you might have a problem. However, I can see it being beneficial in some instances especially with photojournalism. The risk comes when an overzealous photographer reveals too much and the mystery that was its' charm is lost.
I should have put "Photograph Information" and/or "Photographer's Comments". Everyone talked about "Photographer's Comments" till now. How about "Photograph Information"? We have to also discuss pros, not only cons. Will it help everyone getting more votes/comments?
FWIW I think I first suggested this about eight years ago ... ;-)
The primary objection (other than those stated in the thread) is the compromise in anonymity.
Personally, I'd like to make it a pop-up field, so that those who don't want to see it at all won't, and maybe make it available only after a vote has been cast (and locked-in). That way people could add comments but not change their vote based on the photographer's comments, which addresses the anonymity issue.
good advice.
There are two things could be done.
1. photog comment is hidden by default to voter. So if voter wants to read it, he can click and reads it.
2. make it a quantifiable offence to reveal identity. If someone has tried it, his photo will be removed. So it keeps anonimity.
