 Posted 11/17/2006 3:40:07 PM
|
|
|
|
Fremme,
I don’t know why anyone would rate your image a one, except for the reason of upsetting you. In my book that’s malicious. The only person to answer your question as to why, is the person who left it and I doubt very much if they will own up to it. Granted, people learn in different ways, looking at other photographers work can be very inspiring.
Chrisbnp,
I’m not saying that members aren’t helpful in the critiques they leave, the point I was trying to make was that this site is geared up for voting first, comments second. I have just this second clicked on the Critique button, on the main page and found only 3 critique requests, only one of them asking for help the other two were undecided on which category their image should be posted in?
A good photograph is one that touches the heart and leaves the viewer a changed person for having seen it.
|
|
|
Posted 11/21/2006 6:46:33 AM
|
|
|
|
| I share your frustrations with malicious or tactical voting - it shouldn't be what this site is about and it annoys me! But: it would appear to be relatively common and hence I treat it as part of the joys of having images rated on DA - if an image that starts really well in the 8's and 9's suddenly plummets then it will usually be because of this type of voting pattern. I usually let the image alone and if it's a good image then the regular and "honest" voting will carry it naturally to where it should be. If the image is bad then it's bad - but I have to support some form of system catch that would stop a low vote and ask for justification, and putting the voter's name and rank on the comments page against the vote they have given may stop tactical voting without some justification? This may also prevent someone voting low by accident, it must happen? Anyway, I shall step away from the soap box now!  Andy
___________________________http://www.dailyawards.com/myprofile.aspx?CID=3659]
|
|
|
Posted 11/29/2006 7:32:31 PM
|
|
|
|
Actually there are many valid reasons that an image will decline in the voting.
One is that the image has lost it's wow factor because they have seen it when you won a catagory award, signature award, or even just in browsing.
The second is that your fans have already voted, despite common belief, it happens.
The third reason is that those that you have given low votes for have exacted a revenge.
The last is that people that have issues with you get around to your image.
Which of these is the "truth"? I'm not sure, but it seems to be a universal truth, I'm betting that any image that stays on the boards for more than 14 days will see a decline in the score irregardless of the photographer.
It can be frustrating but, in reality, it all seems to even out by day 30 for any image. For proof look at the scores that win weekly or monthly awards, the stability seems to be achieved.
Overall my bet is that the first factor is the most important. By the time you get to monthly, the cream has risen to the top.
|
|
|
Posted 12/5/2006 5:13:38 PM
|
|
|
|
| Yes! I agree that dates on images is not the the best way the improve one's shot.Management should look at a rule change on this issue. 1 is not a good score for a good photo, though on the other hand when 2 voters give high 9-10, then the next 2 voters give you low 7's, I had to ask myself what is happening here. Big problem I believe is that different computers will show images with varying qualities. Question is how do we over come this?
|
|
|
Posted 12/6/2006 4:59:02 AM
|
|
|
|
Lukas (11/17/2006)
On a light note ... If you post a picture with a date in it ... I will give you ONE!  That's just me ... Since we don't know the picture in question, it's hard to put in an educated opinion. It could very well be a malicious vote ... I know I am just absolutely no help here. So long then. Lukas I'm the same way if they have their name on it Actually, I don't put a 1, I just skip that image. I think the pictures here should be the images themselves, not the prettying up with borders and text and names (except in digital art).
Kevin L. Kitchens (HawkeyeLonewolf) NO LONGER ACTIVE USER
-----
|
|
|
Posted 12/6/2006 5:06:16 AM
|
|
|
|
fremme (11/16/2006)
I think a lot of people sometimes don't necessarily know what to vote on cause to give a picture a 1, for me, that would mean that it's a white dot in a black back ground with no focus, no light, nothing.The site has protection for this already with the weights. If it's a newbie who doesn't know what to vote for, their '1' vote won't amount to a hill of beans. If it's the highest weighted user, then it will count for more, and they got that way because they know what they are doing. Face it, a '1' vote still gives you '1' more point than you had before. Also, people are going to use different scales here. I've yet to give a 1 or 2, but I do see how some could believe that we're rating the pictures HERE and that to be HERE there is some minimum level of skill required. So a '1' here does not mean you're on par with your Uncle Joe shooting with the flash from the nosebleeds at the stadium with his thumb in front of the lens. It's not wrong assumption either. I know he has the midpoint as 5.5, which is true, but the "average" should really be around 3 or 4... with the really good pictures coming in around 8. 9's and 10's should be rare and just so perfect you'd think you were looking in a magazine or billboard. People here seem to treat it like gymnastics or skating scoring, where you never see really low scores... such that the low scores are meaningless. They could really go to a 1-3 scale to replace the 8-10's that they always get. It's just a number.
Kevin L. Kitchens (HawkeyeLonewolf) NO LONGER ACTIVE USER
-----
|
|
|
|
