Oooo...low entry numbers and just a little more than a day to go. Have I really stumped you all that much this time, or are you all holding out to post of the last day?
Looks like you're getting plenty of strong last-day entries from what I've seen this morning!
Poetry geek and theatrical-type that I am, I found this one the most intellectually interesting of the challenges I've attempted/followed. My biggest problem this time out was not lack of ideas - I've probably had more ideas for this challenge than any of the others - but I wound up going with the one I did due to 1. lack of time (busy two weeks), 2. lack of resources (the appropriate props, models and locations - see note 1!), and 3. lack of adequate technique/skills/equipment to create the other images in my head
HOWEVER ..... reason #3 is actually WHY I'm doing these challenges, and given how much I have learned since I got prodded into giving it a try, it is soooooooo totally worth it... yes, even when it's frustrating
So yeah, a hard challenge - but a really, really, REALLY good one!
Oooo...low entry numbers and just a little more than a day to go. Have I really stumped you all that much this time, or are you all holding out to post of the last day?
I think it's a great challenge topic, but the rest of my life has intruded on photo time in many ways, large and small. Of course, I knew when you set up the two week per challenge schedule that such a pace would feel relentless at times. I'm not arguing against the current setup, just recognizing that I'm going to have to sit some of these out from time to time.
I entered, a little late, but I did. I really messed up my "shooting/right" arm, so I have been resting it as much as possible.
I really like challenge 10 and the poem, it is great to see how everyone interprets it.
Peace,
Donna P.
You're only as good as your next photo....
One day, I started writing, not knowing that I had chained myself for life to a noble but merciless master. When God hands you a gift, he also hands you a whip; and the whip is intended solely for self-flagellation...I'm here alone in my dark madness, all by myself with my deck of cards --- and, of course, the whip God gave me." Truman Capote
Omg, I LOVE #11!!! I have no idea how I'll do it, but (hardly surprisingly, given I'm a musician it appeals enormously! I can't wait to see what folks come up with
And here seems a good point to reiterate my thanks to Emily and the dgrin Powers That Be for running these challenges - it's the only place on the net I've felt the community generous enough to encourage fledgling efforts like mine so I really appreciate the opportunity to jump in WAY over my head without ridicule or resentment from the more established and experienced folks. My thanks to you all for letting me learn by DOING!
Omg, I LOVE #11!!! I have no idea how I'll do it, but (hardly surprisingly, given I'm a musician it appeals enormously! I can't wait to see what folks come up with
Voting
I was thinking (I know - bad thing) about the current voting process and it occured to that if each person is allowed to post only a single vote, then only the first place photo is represented accurately in the polls, even though 5 photos are selected to move to the next round.
To simplify an example, lets pretend that only 2 photos move forward and say there are 4 photos (A, B, C, and D) entered and there are 20 people voting. Photo B is absolutely incredible and 15 people vote for it. 2 people believe that photo D is the best and cast their votes for it. The final 2 votes go to the 2 remaining photos (A, C). So we have:
1st place: Photo B
Runner Up: Photo D
Out of the Next Round: Photos A and C
We can all agree that photo B is the clear winner but what about photo D? Imagine that out of the 15 people that voted for Photo B, 12 of them would have voted for photo A as their 2nd place selection however they couldn't cast a vote for Photo A because their one allowed vote went toward Photo B.
There may be some technical limitations on how the poll is set up but wouldn't it make sense to allow the public to vote for 5 favorites from the field and then have the images place based on the total number of votes that they received?
There is probably some fault in my logic or I should follow the advice of my current client and stop thinking logically but I thought I'd put it out there to think about. So am I totally off-base or does it make some sense?
Oh, please don't take this as a criticism of the way the contest is being handled. I love the new format and Emily, Doc IT, and the guest judges are doing an incredible job. Amazingly it is running far smoother than last year's contest. I also think that there are always ways to improve. Isn't that what drew us here in the first place?
I was thinking (I know - bad thing) about the current voting process and it occured to that if each person is allowed to post only a single vote, then only the first place photo is represented accurately in the polls, even though 5 photos are selected to move to the next round...
There may be some technical limitations on how the poll is set up but wouldn't it make sense to allow the public to vote for 5 favorites from the field and then have the images place based on the total number of votes that they received?...
You're probably aware that the judging for the Mega Challenges takes a form similar to your suggested approach. So there is probably some support, at least conceptually, for what your advocating.
I think the problem is that the software for this site does not allow for polls to accept this type of voting procedure. So to institute this voting would require someone to tally all the rankings from each voter by hand. I doubt Dgrin has the time or budget to hire PriceWaterhouse to tally and audit the votes every two weeks!
You're probably aware that the judging for the Mega Challenges takes a form similar to your suggested approach. So there is probably some support, at least conceptually, for what your advocating.
I think the problem is that the software for this site does not allow for polls to accept this type of voting procedure. So to institute this voting would require someone to tally all the rankings from each voter by hand. I doubt Dgrin has the time or budget to hire PriceWaterhouse to tally and audit the votes every two weeks!
...12 of them would have voted for photo A as their 2nd place selection however they couldn't cast a vote for Photo A..
Overthink much?
Seriously mate, that is some flawed statistical analysis. Software aside, you are comparing apples to oranges (single v. multi vote outcome). But lets not get into statistics because the vote numbers we get are far from a valid statistical sample anyway. 16 options with roughly 100 votes is what we like to call "statistically insufficient".
To put it simply, what does it matter what your 2nd choice would have been? There is a distribution of votes for best photo, and those can be ranked.
Asking for multiple votes is a cop out. I've said it once, and I'll say it again, man up and vote for the BEST photo.
Seriously mate, that is some flawed statistical analysis. Software aside, you are comparing apples to oranges (single v. multi vote outcome). But lets not get into statistics because the vote numbers we get are far from a valid statistical sample anyway. 16 options with roughly 100 votes is what we like to call "statistically insufficient".
To put it simply, what does it matter what your 2nd choice would have been? There is a distribution of votes for best photo, and those can be ranked.
Asking for multiple votes is a cop out. I've said it once, and I'll say it again, man up and vote for the BEST photo.
Seriously mate, that is some flawed statistical analysis. Software aside, you are comparing apples to oranges (single v. multi vote outcome). But lets not get into statistics because the vote numbers we get are far from a valid statistical sample anyway. 16 options with roughly 100 votes is what we like to call "statistically insufficient".
To put it simply, what does it matter what your 2nd choice would have been? There is a distribution of votes for best photo, and those can be ranked.
Asking for multiple votes is a cop out. I've said it once, and I'll say it again, man up and vote for the BEST photo.
grumble grumble
I apologize for bringing up a topic of discussion in a thread titled - "General Discussion". I put forth the question in light that it may be something to think about in future iterations the DSS challenges in the coming years. I'm well aware that there are current limitations on what can and can't be done in the current application; however, it shouldn't deter people from thinking of ideas for improvement.
Maybe you missed the point of what I was getting at. Simply put, we vote for 1 photo yet 5 photos are selected to move to the next round. Position 1 is not in question - it is 2 thru 5 that do not receive an accurate polling. Its not advanced statistics but a rather easy deduction that if we only vote for the best photo, then positions 2 - 5 are based on the #1 selections of those that didn't vote for the majority winner and may not truly represesent the true selection of the community for the photos that should move into the next round.
I have no problem "manning up" to vote for what I believe is the best photo, I just think it would be a good thing to be able to support the other 4 that I believe deserve the right to move forward in the competition. I understand that we currently do not have the technical capability at this time to do this; however, that is is not to say that we not have that in the future as dgrin continues to evolve.
Throughout the last 2-years I have been supportive of this contest in both forms that it has taken. One of the reasons is that I thought that the community has been able to make suggestions for reasonable discussion on ways to potentially improve (right, wrong, or indifferent) the competition. I definitely didn't expect to be ridiculed. I hope others don't find the same when they attempt to explore a new idea in a discussion forum.
Now that I know my place, I'll return to simply placing entries and going with the status quo. Appreciate you taking the time to give your feedback.
I think the main point is that we do the best with what we have, and there will always be flaws. Yes, please give us your comments and suggestions, but be aware that there will be those that disagree and will wish to debate.
Travis, I have seen how your idea works in other areas. Personally one thing I do know is that it takes each individual so long to decide on their "top 5" as opposed to a "top one" that fewer people vote. Picking your fave and casting your vote for one image takes a lot of thought, but isn't a huge strain on time (believe me, I know how long it takes to pick a top ten every two weeks, and I don't even have to order them!). Your comment came across as a slight critisism of our current system, and not so much as a "future idea", so I can see where the miscommunication lies.
Oh, and give Doc a break. When it comes to statistics, trust me, he knows what he's talking about. He's a great guy who puts in a lot of time here behind the scenes, and should be allowed his knowledgable opinion without being called a "bad cop".
Please, no hard feelings anyone. Keep the ideas coming, that is what this thread is for, and allow for counter weights without thinking you're being suppressed.
Your comment came across as a slight critisism of our current system, and not so much as a "future idea", so I can see where the miscommunication lies..
Sorry Emily, I thought I made it perfect clear in the last paragraph that it was not a criticism and gave both Doc and you credit for doing an incredible job (see quote below). That is why I was so taken back by your responses.
Oh, please don't take this as a criticism of the way the contest is being handled. I love the new format and Emily, Doc IT, and the guest judges are doing an incredible job. Amazingly it is running far smoother than last year's contest. I also think that there are always ways to improve. Isn't that what drew us here in the first place?
Sorry Emily, I thought I made it perfect clear in the last paragraph that it was not a criticism and gave both Doc and you credit for doing an incredible job (see quote below). That is why I was so taken back by your responses.
Sometimes I hate the internet for how stuff can be misconstrued...I have enough trouble getting my real thoughts across in person!
Travis and Aaron - I love both your work and ideas. And without Doc, I wouldn't be running these challenges. So, I'm going to go stop my girls from biting each other while I reflect on the fact that I haven't shot a single creative image since DSS began, and you all are far surpassing my abilitities.
Now THAT is a misrepresentation!!! you will always be a step ahead of us!
No worries on the communication thing. I'd love to see us continue to build upon the great work that you have done! Now lets go get those beers that were suggested!
Now THAT is a misrepresentation!!! you will always be a step ahead of us!
No worries on the communication thing. I'd love to see us continue to build upon the great work that you have done! Now lets go get those beers that were suggested!
I'm afraid all I'm up for is cough syrup, but I'd be happy to share a dose or two. :
Now that I know my place, I'll return to simply placing entries and going with the status quo. Appreciate you taking the time to give your feedback.
Well, Travis, I thought I could be "real" with you, like in the sense of that would be my reply if we were discussing this over beers. So I apologize for stepping out of my more professional mod shoes.
Well, Travis, I thought I could be "real" with you, like in the sense of that would be my reply if we were discussing this over beers. So I apologize for stepping out of my more professional mod shoes.
Cool?
We're cool. I don't mind being real. I just think the suggestion I was making for possible future improvements was misunderstood and readily dismissed. Now how about a Fosters?
Asking for a Fosters here is the fastest way to identify yourself as an American!
Now, I was thinking about your suggestion and how I'd explain why it simply doesn't help (at least in my book). We're clear we just can't do it anyway, so its an exercise...
Putting more points up for grabs is akin to grade inflation and only serves to level out the distribution of points.
When photos just get a vote/point for being first, the "peak" is more likely to stand out. As points for subsequent places get added, this peak gets diluted AND it is entirely possible that it could be overwhelmed. Imagine if everyone disagrees on the #1 photo, but agrees on #2 - Based on the point values, #2 could actually come out the winner!
In reply to that you might say: just have very disparate point values - 1 is good for 100 pts and then 2, 3, 4 are good for maybe 15, 10, 7, respectively. In that case, why bother?
So another reply might be: bin the votes discretely - votes for 2nd place can only garner a "win" in the 2nd place "bin". To that I say the same thing, why bother?
The conclusion from both examples is, they just don't help, and in fact, in particular cases, can skew the results.
... 15 people vote for it. 2 people believe that photo D is the best and cast their votes for it. The final 2 votes go to the 2 remaining photos (A, C).
Cheeez... what's the world coming to when there can't be a little real hate :boidstfu:thwak:gun2:argue:fish:puke expressed sometimes (hehehe:D:D:D)
Now to the controversy...
Getting a winner is straightforward. Choosing the field to advance to the next challenge level, as we see, is not.
To put Travis' point a little differently...
When we allow only one vote/voter and then make decisions other than about the overall winner with that same data we go very wrong. We are erroneously proceeding as if we were still drawing voter preferences from the same voting population.
Clearly we are not. If 75% of the original voting population vote for a photo, that photo is the winner. It is then only a different 25% of the original voting population that are voting for the next placed, and so on diminishingly. How biasing is that?!?
Travis is right in that by eliminating the sub-populations of voters who have voted we create each time a decision is reached a new and discrete population of voters for the next decision. That is in effect to run 5 different challenges, where we manipulate the voting population each time after the first, for the field of five to advance to the next level.
On the other hand, if we allow the original population of voters to have a 1st and 2nd choice, we produce a clear winner and a ranking of runners up which produces our field of five in a far more meaningful way - all data from the exact same and complete population of voters - one challenge only.
This could easily be done by asking not one but two questions in the voting poll.
I am SO glad I'm not a statistician - I'd lose my mind.... :hide
Ok, moving on to something TOTALLY unrelated. In my #11 entry, I used a tiny area of another photo in the same series (taken on the same tripod, from the same place at the same time!) to patch and clone a complex area in the final image. Do I need to declare the other image as a separate exif for the sake of The Rules? The final image is not a composite as such (the copy/paste had different exposure and was used only to boost clarity in a small area that was too detailed to clone and patch easily otherwise).
If Tommy has a 24mm lens, and is shooting at a distance of 4 feet, and Mary has a 80mm lens and is shooting at a distance of 12 feet, and they are both traveling at the same speed parallel to the subject and all other factors being equal, which image will be the sharpest?
I am SO glad I'm not a statistician - I'd lose my mind.... :hide
Ok, moving on to something TOTALLY unrelated. In my #11 entry, I used a tiny area of another photo in the same series (taken on the same tripod, from the same place at the same time!) to patch and clone a complex area in the final image. Do I need to declare the other image as a separate exif for the sake of The Rules? The final image is not a composite as such (the copy/paste had different exposure and was used only to boost clarity in a small area that was too detailed to clone and patch easily otherwise).
One day, I started writing, not knowing that I had chained myself for life to a noble but merciless master. When God hands you a gift, he also hands you a whip; and the whip is intended solely for self-flagellation...I'm here alone in my dark madness, all by myself with my deck of cards --- and, of course, the whip God gave me." Truman Capote
If Tommy has a 24mm lens, and is shooting at a distance of 4 feet, and Mary has a 80mm lens and is shooting at a distance of 12 feet, and they are both traveling at the same speed parallel to the subject and all other factors being equal, which image will be the sharpest?
Comments
Looks like you're getting plenty of strong last-day entries from what I've seen this morning!
Poetry geek and theatrical-type that I am, I found this one the most intellectually interesting of the challenges I've attempted/followed. My biggest problem this time out was not lack of ideas - I've probably had more ideas for this challenge than any of the others - but I wound up going with the one I did due to 1. lack of time (busy two weeks), 2. lack of resources (the appropriate props, models and locations - see note 1!), and 3. lack of adequate technique/skills/equipment to create the other images in my head
HOWEVER ..... reason #3 is actually WHY I'm doing these challenges, and given how much I have learned since I got prodded into giving it a try, it is soooooooo totally worth it... yes, even when it's frustrating
So yeah, a hard challenge - but a really, really, REALLY good one!
I think it's a great challenge topic, but the rest of my life has intruded on photo time in many ways, large and small. Of course, I knew when you set up the two week per challenge schedule that such a pace would feel relentless at times. I'm not arguing against the current setup, just recognizing that I'm going to have to sit some of these out from time to time.
I really like challenge 10 and the poem, it is great to see how everyone interprets it.
Peace,
Donna P.
And here seems a good point to reiterate my thanks to Emily and the dgrin Powers That Be for running these challenges - it's the only place on the net I've felt the community generous enough to encourage fledgling efforts like mine so I really appreciate the opportunity to jump in WAY over my head without ridicule or resentment from the more established and experienced folks. My thanks to you all for letting me learn by DOING!
I know! My gears are grinding as well.
http://lrichters.smugmug.com
I was thinking (I know - bad thing) about the current voting process and it occured to that if each person is allowed to post only a single vote, then only the first place photo is represented accurately in the polls, even though 5 photos are selected to move to the next round.
To simplify an example, lets pretend that only 2 photos move forward and say there are 4 photos (A, B, C, and D) entered and there are 20 people voting. Photo B is absolutely incredible and 15 people vote for it. 2 people believe that photo D is the best and cast their votes for it. The final 2 votes go to the 2 remaining photos (A, C). So we have:
1st place: Photo B
Runner Up: Photo D
Out of the Next Round: Photos A and C
We can all agree that photo B is the clear winner but what about photo D? Imagine that out of the 15 people that voted for Photo B, 12 of them would have voted for photo A as their 2nd place selection however they couldn't cast a vote for Photo A because their one allowed vote went toward Photo B.
There may be some technical limitations on how the poll is set up but wouldn't it make sense to allow the public to vote for 5 favorites from the field and then have the images place based on the total number of votes that they received?
There is probably some fault in my logic or I should follow the advice of my current client and stop thinking logically
Oh, please don't take this as a criticism of the way the contest is being handled. I love the new format and Emily, Doc IT, and the guest judges are doing an incredible job. Amazingly it is running far smoother than last year's contest. I also think that there are always ways to improve. Isn't that what drew us here in the first place?
My Images | My Lessons Learned and Other Adventures
You're probably aware that the judging for the Mega Challenges takes a form similar to your suggested approach. So there is probably some support, at least conceptually, for what your advocating.
I think the problem is that the software for this site does not allow for polls to accept this type of voting procedure. So to institute this voting would require someone to tally all the rankings from each voter by hand. I doubt Dgrin has the time or budget to hire PriceWaterhouse to tally and audit the votes every two weeks!
That's pretty much it.
Seriously mate, that is some flawed statistical analysis. Software aside, you are comparing apples to oranges (single v. multi vote outcome). But lets not get into statistics because the vote numbers we get are far from a valid statistical sample anyway. 16 options with roughly 100 votes is what we like to call "statistically insufficient".
To put it simply, what does it matter what your 2nd choice would have been? There is a distribution of votes for best photo, and those can be ranked.
Asking for multiple votes is a cop out. I've said it once, and I'll say it again, man up and vote for the BEST photo.
grumble grumble
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
I vote for a scatter plot.
:hide
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
I apologize for bringing up a topic of discussion in a thread titled - "General Discussion".
Maybe you missed the point of what I was getting at. Simply put, we vote for 1 photo yet 5 photos are selected to move to the next round. Position 1 is not in question - it is 2 thru 5 that do not receive an accurate polling. Its not advanced statistics but a rather easy deduction that if we only vote for the best photo, then positions 2 - 5 are based on the #1 selections of those that didn't vote for the majority winner and may not truly represesent the true selection of the community for the photos that should move into the next round.
I have no problem "manning up" to vote for what I believe is the best photo, I just think it would be a good thing to be able to support the other 4 that I believe deserve the right to move forward in the competition. I understand that we currently do not have the technical capability at this time to do this; however, that is is not to say that we not have that in the future as dgrin continues to evolve.
Throughout the last 2-years I have been supportive of this contest in both forms that it has taken. One of the reasons is that I thought that the community has been able to make suggestions for reasonable discussion on ways to potentially improve (right, wrong, or indifferent) the competition. I definitely didn't expect to be ridiculed. I hope others don't find the same when they attempt to explore a new idea in a discussion forum.
Now that I know my place, I'll return to simply placing entries and going with the status quo. Appreciate you taking the time to give your feedback.
My Images | My Lessons Learned and Other Adventures
Travis, I have seen how your idea works in other areas. Personally one thing I do know is that it takes each individual so long to decide on their "top 5" as opposed to a "top one" that fewer people vote. Picking your fave and casting your vote for one image takes a lot of thought, but isn't a huge strain on time (believe me, I know how long it takes to pick a top ten every two weeks, and I don't even have to order them!). Your comment came across as a slight critisism of our current system, and not so much as a "future idea", so I can see where the miscommunication lies.
Oh, and give Doc a break. When it comes to statistics, trust me, he knows what he's talking about. He's a great guy who puts in a lot of time here behind the scenes, and should be allowed his knowledgable opinion without being called a "bad cop".
Please, no hard feelings anyone. Keep the ideas coming, that is what this thread is for, and allow for counter weights without thinking you're being suppressed.
Sorry Emily, I thought I made it perfect clear in the last paragraph that it was not a criticism and gave both Doc and you credit for doing an incredible job (see quote below). That is why I was so taken back by your responses.
My Images | My Lessons Learned and Other Adventures
Sometimes I hate the internet for how stuff can be misconstrued...I have enough trouble getting my real thoughts across in person!
Travis and Aaron - I love both your work and ideas. And without Doc, I wouldn't be running these challenges. So, I'm going to go stop my girls from biting each other while I reflect on the fact that I haven't shot a single creative image since DSS began, and you all are far surpassing my abilitities.
http://lrichters.smugmug.com
Now THAT is a misrepresentation!!! you will always be a step ahead of us!
No worries on the communication thing. I'd love to see us continue to build upon the great work that you have done! Now lets go get those beers that were suggested!
My Images | My Lessons Learned and Other Adventures
I'm afraid all I'm up for is cough syrup, but I'd be happy to share a dose or two.
Mmmmm.... Robitussin shots over ice.... bring it on
(Sorry you're not feeling well! We've had it in this house too - chicken soup and sympathy to you....)
Cool?
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
We're cool. I don't mind being real. I just think the suggestion I was making for possible future improvements was misunderstood and readily dismissed. Now how about a Fosters?
My Images | My Lessons Learned and Other Adventures
Asking for a Fosters here is the fastest way to identify yourself as an American!
Now, I was thinking about your suggestion and how I'd explain why it simply doesn't help (at least in my book). We're clear we just can't do it anyway, so its an exercise...
Putting more points up for grabs is akin to grade inflation and only serves to level out the distribution of points.
When photos just get a vote/point for being first, the "peak" is more likely to stand out. As points for subsequent places get added, this peak gets diluted AND it is entirely possible that it could be overwhelmed. Imagine if everyone disagrees on the #1 photo, but agrees on #2 - Based on the point values, #2 could actually come out the winner!
In reply to that you might say: just have very disparate point values - 1 is good for 100 pts and then 2, 3, 4 are good for maybe 15, 10, 7, respectively. In that case, why bother?
So another reply might be: bin the votes discretely - votes for 2nd place can only garner a "win" in the 2nd place "bin". To that I say the same thing, why bother?
The conclusion from both examples is, they just don't help, and in fact, in particular cases, can skew the results.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
:hide
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Now to the controversy...
Getting a winner is straightforward. Choosing the field to advance to the next challenge level, as we see, is not.
To put Travis' point a little differently...
When we allow only one vote/voter and then make decisions other than about the overall winner with that same data we go very wrong. We are erroneously proceeding as if we were still drawing voter preferences from the same voting population.
Clearly we are not. If 75% of the original voting population vote for a photo, that photo is the winner. It is then only a different 25% of the original voting population that are voting for the next placed, and so on diminishingly. How biasing is that?!?
Travis is right in that by eliminating the sub-populations of voters who have voted we create each time a decision is reached a new and discrete population of voters for the next decision. That is in effect to run 5 different challenges, where we manipulate the voting population each time after the first, for the field of five to advance to the next level.
On the other hand, if we allow the original population of voters to have a 1st and 2nd choice, we produce a clear winner and a ranking of runners up which produces our field of five in a far more meaningful way - all data from the exact same and complete population of voters - one challenge only.
This could easily be done by asking not one but two questions in the voting poll.
Anyone for a Perrier? (This is KSA!!)
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
Ok, moving on to something TOTALLY unrelated. In my #11 entry, I used a tiny area of another photo in the same series (taken on the same tripod, from the same place at the same time!) to patch and clone a complex area in the final image. Do I need to declare the other image as a separate exif for the sake of The Rules? The final image is not a composite as such (the copy/paste had different exposure and was used only to boost clarity in a small area that was too detailed to clone and patch easily otherwise).
Thanks!
Uh...yes?
Done - cloning-source image exif duly added!
Peace and Out
Donna P.
whos facing east?