I'd like to say that I'm pleased to notice more comments this round (#79) in the challenge gallery.
I think this happened thanks to Paul's post for the Mega regarding the way people are commenting.
What I want to say is a continuation to that discussion, but I think it fits better here.
Well, some people said that they were not commenting because they didn't feel qualified enough for doing this…
I have to admit that I don't feel I'm good in comments either, especially that the language doesn't really help me,
and on some entries I really don't know what to say…
However, people vote. Since they do it, they are supposed to know the reason why they vote for a specific entry and not for another, right?
So, if they know this, the next step is just a matter of switching the browser page, go to the gallery and write down those feelings, under the entries they liked.
We all deserve this I guess - correct me if I'm wrong.
As I said under the other post, I've seen entries with lots of (good) comments, yet less votes than others with few comments or none. - How can this happen?
- I also have seen winners of a challenge with no comments at all under their entry, while again, others with lots of comments didn't make it even to the top.
I said that the voters should reveal their identity and make a comment telling us their reasons for choosing specific entries vs. others.
- I didn't mean that we should say something like: " I'm John and voted for Mary because I feel she's better"
No.
- I think that we don't need to mention about voting, at all - We should just tell what we think about the qualities of Mary's entry, from our personal point of view.
We all work hard for these challenges and put a lot of passion and energy on producing our artwork.
That's why I think each one of us will benefit from an open system allowing us to know about what we did, so we can improve ourselves.
PS: In addition:
1. Commenting is a very good learning tool for ourselves.
2. Commenting before voting will make our voting process much easier
...
Well, some people said that they were not commenting because they didn't feel qualified enough for doing this…
I have to admit that I don't feel I'm good in comments either, especially that the language doesn't really help me,
and on some entries I really don't know what to say…
...
As I said under the other post, I've seen entries with lots of (good) comments, yet less votes than others with few comments or none. - How can this happen?
...
That's why I think each one of us will benefit from an open system allowing us to know about what we did, so we can improve ourselves.
PS: In addition:
1. Commenting is a very good learning tool for ourselves.
2. Commenting before voting will make our voting process much easier
Thank you for your attention,
Like photography, commenting is an art form that gets better with practice. I agree with you that people should set aside their discomfort and comment. I started doing it early in my participation in the challenges because I hoped that people would reciprocate. (Please comment on my photo - please, please, please. ) I found that as I did it, I was better able to critique my own photos.
Regarding the connection between number of comments and number of votes: I noticed the disconnect when the switch was made to top 10. Since then, I have not found any way to predict how well a photo is going to do before the final poll is posted. It does heighten the anticipation.
In this last challenge, there were 79 voters and 44 entrants. I expect that some of the voters who are not entrants are folks who used to participate but find themselves time constrained and are unlikely to take the time to comment. I think we reach a better consensus winner when there are more voters. So, while I encourage everyone to comment (especially on mine ), I would not want to discourage voting.
It's possible that the move to 10 votes has had some unintended consequences.
If you are mathematically inclined, there a lot of fascinating stuff about how the voting rules influence the outcomes of elections. If you want to explore, you can find a good place to start at Wikipedia.
Our system rewards broad support, rather than enthusiastic support.
Here's a hypothetical example. In our voting system, one could imagine that the winner could be, say, everyone's second choice, but nobody's favorite. Suppose there are two photos that engender "love it or hate it" reactions. Suppose there is another photo that is quite nice; no one loves it, but everyone thinks it is pretty good. Each of the first two will get half the people voting for it, and the third one would get everyone voting for it. That photo would win, even though no one thought it was the best.
Maybe that's okay! The voting rules can be any way we want them. But it might explain some of the unpredictability you've noted.
I generally don't vote for 10, if I can avoid it, because the fewer I vote for, the bigger difference it makes for that photo. (If I voted for every photo, it would be the same as if I didn't vote at all!)
FWIW, I don't think that happened in this round. The cathedral photo was stunning.
The goal of my photography is is the effective, original communication of a feeling expressing truth, beauty, or love.
It's possible that the move to 10 votes has had some unintended consequences.
If you are mathematically inclined, there a lot of fascinating stuff about how the voting rules influence the outcomes of elections. If you want to explore, you can find a good place to start at Wikipedia.
Our system rewards broad support, rather than enthusiastic support.
Here's a hypothetical example. In our voting system, one could imagine that the winner could be, say, everyone's second choice, but nobody's favorite. Suppose there are two photos that engender "love it or hate it" reactions. Suppose there is another photo that is quite nice; no one loves it, but everyone thinks it is pretty good. Each of the first two will get half the people voting for it, and the third one would get everyone voting for it. That photo would win, even though no one thought it was the best.
Maybe that's okay! The voting rules can be any way we want them. But it might explain some of the unpredictability you've noted.
I generally don't vote for 10, if I can avoid it, because the fewer I vote for, the bigger difference it makes for that photo. (If I voted for every photo, it would be the same as if I didn't vote at all!)
FWIW, I don't think that happened in this round. The cathedral photo was stunning.
+1 on every account, including Tatiana's amazing cathedral photo.
Personally, I preferred the 2-judge system of the past. Oh well.
Keep in mind that the biggest reason we switched to a multiple choice voting system is because; time and time again it was asked for. Even now I still hear people saying how hard it is to just choose ten. The other strong reason for the switch was the high public opinion that a two tiered voting system was exclusionary and inconsistent. The current system that has been working out very well, gives everyone a chance to see where in a public peer group they sit.
In response to a public display of who is voting for who or a requirement that a comment be made; I am all for suggesting comments which we always have. Displaying votes as public creates an atmosphere where even less people will vote than we have right now. I personally would rather see more votes which gives a statistically better outcome than an elite few who are thick skinned enough to make both who they voted for and why, public knowledge.
The current system that has been working out very well, gives everyone a chance to see where in a public peer group they sit.
This is a very good point. Brian is correct on matters of statistics, though.
Even though I mentioned I preferred the 2-judge system, the new system doesn't bother me one bit. I just enjoy the fact that there is a new challenge every 2 weeks that makes me get my camera back out.
The good (or bad, depending on how you look at it) thing is that we could twiddle with the voting rules ad naseum. Depending on what the Heroes can code up, one could imagine ranking your top ten. Then, depending on which variant you choose, you might get more points for a #1 rank than a lower rank.
Or you could do what's known as "instant runoff" voting, where your ranked votes produce a majority winner. It would take more work on the part of the Heroes, but it would warm the hearts of the voting system nerds.:D
Let me be clear, here -- I'm not advocating for a change. The point of the challenge, after all, is not to find the optimally fair way to absolutely determine the most important winner. It's to get you to think outside the box and challenge yourself to take better photos!
The goal of my photography is is the effective, original communication of a feeling expressing truth, beauty, or love.
(First I have to say that I appreciate your last sentence )
Your information is very interesting! Somehow I thought about this…
What I noticed and you explained why, is because we are using here an electoral system of voting, where the are only 2 options: YES, or NOT
What I was proposing earlier, was a system using Stars (marks) - it's the system used in sport or artistic competitions.
This gives the voters 6 options:
5 = Top favorite,
4 = Very good, but not my top fav.
3 = Good but not outstanding,
2 = Mediocre,
1= Fair enough
0 = Try again
Considering (as discussed a while ago), that we are not voting for a president here,
I think that the second method would be more suitable for our purpose.
The Stars should be hidden of course for the voting time, so people don't get influenced by the previous voters.
Any thoughts?
PS: the stars are already existent in the gallery, but not used.
Even though I mentioned I preferred the 2-judge system, the new system doesn't bother me one bit. I just enjoy the fact that there is a new challenge every 2 weeks that makes me get my camera back out.
There were aspects of the 2 judge system I liked. I won my first challenge under the old system and it was a different challenge to pick a top 10 for the finalist round of voting. I am glad I was able to experience that. One that I did not choose ended up doing very well in the final voting.
With the top 10 system, I think everyone gets better feedback even if they get no comments. Two challenges ago, I experimented with a very abstract photo. Under the old system it would not have made 2 judges top 10 and that would be all I would know. Under the new system, I could see that there were a few people who found it appealing and where it ranked among all of the entries.
I heartily agree with silversx80 that I keep coming back because I enjoy the challenge of producing a photo to a theme every two weeks. Every two weeks by itself is sometimes a challenge when life gets in the way of photography.
And like Tatiana, I strongly encourage everyone to comment as much as they can. Thanks for bringing it up. Don't be afraid.
I have to say that I experienced the same thing as WhatSheSaw with the old voting system,
and like most of us, I too can't wait to see the next challenge theme
However, maybe it will be interesting to know why some people are regretting not having the old system so much.
I personally like the new system, and feel it has been pretty accurate with the results. The old system was okay, but I think with such a variance in what appeals to different people, it didn't really represent what the majority felt should be in the top ten, plus, and I could be wrong, but for me I found myself trying to make images that would appeal to those specific judges just to get in to the top 10, as apposed to currently, just shooting what I like and enjoy. I say leave it alone! Just my 2 cents
Karin
"Dance like no one is watching. Sing like no one is listening. Love like you've never been hurt and live like it's heaven on Earth." — Mark Twain
... PS: the stars are already existent in the gallery, but not used.
If this type of voting system was possible with the current way that both Dgrin and SmugMug were setup it certainly would be something worth considering, except that it would put each persons vote into the public eye, which I have covered the disadvantages of previously.
As I mentioned the first time you brought this subject up, the stars system is fine for general comments but using it to choose a winner will not work because the results are not put into any sort of table that we have access to. The task of manually tabulating stars leaves a lot of room for error and an enormous amount of time needed for anyone in charge of figuring out the winner.
The current system of voting works very well. It gives everyone an opportunity to choose more than one, and it includes all qualified entries in the vote. It also is very easy to dump the data into a spreadsheet and tabulate the winners. On top of this the gallery gives people willing to commit their time and opinions, a way to comment on each of the images if they wish. The voting poll does have the capacity to show the names of all the voters but it is not enabled for reasons we have already covered.
Sorry, my internet was slow yesterday and when I replied to Brian, I didn't see the answers in-between.
I know what you previously said about counting the stars, but I thought this could have been be done as a task of the previous winner (not by you), and that would be for sure verified and corrected by each entrant, if not for another reason, at least by curiosity.
I see your point of not showing the names and I think it's a good point.
I was just trying to find a better way on doing this because it's not about the voting per se, but about a meaningful vote, that can tell us more than just numbers.
I still think that something can be done.
I know that it's not a big task for a programmer to make a new script form for the voting pool...
For example instead of 1 checking button, we can have 3 (or more), going from "my top fav." to "fair enough" or no check at all.
- This is just an idea that can be debated, of course.
The previous system (in my opinion) would have been good if we had a (rotating) professional (or very qualified person) doing the first round - I know there are quite a few fantastic photographers and good judges here at DGrin/SmugMug - but this would imply some extra fees from our side…
I'm not trying to annoy you, but I'm just thinking of a way where we can benefit more from these challenges.
We will probably stay with the current system though, the comments have increased in the gallery and this is good…
I know what you previously said about counting the stars, but I thought this could have been be done as a task of the previous winner (not by you), and that would be for sure verified and corrected by each entrant, if not for another reason, at least by curiosity.
Whether it is done my me or someone else is irrelevant, it still would be an enormous time consuming task prone to error.
I know that it's not a big task for a programmer to make a new script form for the voting pool...
It may or may not be a big task, let's not assume here. What I am trying to communicate though is given the current tools at our disposal, the Dgrin forum software has a polling system built in that we are currently using. The switch from posting the photos in the forum thread, to using a SmugMug gallery was done to facilitate meaningful comments attached to each picture. It seems what you are after is more participation from the general community in the commenting section. So "a better way" is already in place as far as I can tell.
I am not against entertaining new ideas but it needs to be stressed we need to be developing those ideas using the tools we have at our disposal not wishing for new tools that require already overtaxed volunteer hours or funding to produce. New ideas also need to be as efficient in implementation or more efficient. Manually counting stars is very inefficient.
The previous system (in my opinion) would have been good if we had a (rotating) professional (or very qualified person) doing the first round - I know there are quite a few fantastic photographers and good judges here at DGrin/SmugMug - but this would imply some extra fees from our side…
The previous system tried very hard to bring this into a reality. Even I myself personally contacted several "professionals" in hopes that we could bring in the perceived qualified individuals to vote. My attempts were met with either being ignored or politely refused. That aside, even if we did have "professional", "qualified" people volunteering to vote it is my experience that even they are questioned in their opinions like any other human, putting us back at square one.
We will probably stay with the current system though, the comments have increased in the gallery and this is good…
There been several rounds recently that I have agonized over how to define what a border is and how it should be qualified or disqualified. This round (#82) has been no exception. I have decided going forward, that this is the new rule regarding borders/frames:
Borders/Frames: You may use a simple border of a single color to frame your photo if you feel it will enhance the final image. Natural borders or frames such as windows, doorways, dark vignettes and subjects that float on a solid background will also be permitted. No multi color, decorative or picture frame style borders will be accepted unless waived in a specific round.
I have also updated the rules to reflect this change effective immediately.
Borders/Frames: You may use a simple border of a single color to frame your photo if you feel it will enhance the final image. Natural borders or frames such as windows, doorways, dark vignettes and subjects that float on a solid background will also be permitted. No multi color, decorative or picture frame style borders will be accepted unless waived in a specific round.
Sean, I appreciate the heads up and the careful thought you give to issues like this. Thanks!
Borders/Frames: You may use a simple border of a single color to frame your photo if you feel it will enhance the final image. Natural borders or frames such as windows, doorways, dark vignettes and subjects that float on a solid background will also be permitted. No multi color, decorative or picture frame style borders will be accepted unless waived in a specific round.
I've often wondered WHY the "no frame" rule was there in the first place; I assumed there was a reason at some point. Do you know why it was implemented when LPS (before my time) was set up?
I've often wondered WHY the "no frame" rule was there in the first place; I assumed there was a reason at some point. Do you know why it was implemented when LPS (before my time) was set up?
I don't know, but having seen what some people do to "frame" their pictures I can see two reasons:
1st to prevent an escalation of frame creation-- you know, the multi-beveled, drop shadow monstrosities some people create to surround a picture that ends up being the size of a postage stamp,
and
2nd, related to point 1, to make sure that the image was the focal point of everyone's entries.
The reasons were pretty much what MarkR suggests. The photo should stand on its own and not need a fancy frame to embellish it. Frames if done correctly will enhance but not take away from an image. I hope I do not regret changing it but only time will tell.
I like the new rule about natural borders. A window frame doesn't seem all that much different to me than using a tree's branches to frame a subject.
I agree but because a window frame surrounded by black could have been manufactured in post it too fell victim to the way the past rule read. In fact it was window frames specifically that pushed me over the edge to changing things.
I've often wondered WHY the "no frame" rule was there in the first place; I assumed there was a reason at some point. Do you know why it was implemented when LPS (before my time) was set up?
I can't find it now, but there was a discussion very early on about how folks didn't want to judge a photo with a border and borders had no place in a Photo Challenge.
I do know one thing...I was a framer too until I started the challenges. I had to get away from it and am really glad that I did. I see some of the ones people do now and it can be hideous. A small, thin line can enhance but when you see an inch thick Barney purple border, it's just baaaaaad.
I'm happy to see the rule change and I don't think it's a bad idea.
I'm trying to enter into my first challenge and I'm certain I'm doing something incorrectly... when I try to upload the image, I get an error message that says the image is too large to be uploaded. I've perused the rules and didn't see a restriction on file size but even so, is there a size restriction? Thanks in advance for any guidance!
Comments
Great, thank you!
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
How oh so observant of me
That explains why your entry suddenly changed from your old username to "photo-funtasia"
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
I'd like to say that I'm pleased to notice more comments this round (#79) in the challenge gallery.
I think this happened thanks to Paul's post for the Mega regarding the way people are commenting.
What I want to say is a continuation to that discussion, but I think it fits better here.
Well, some people said that they were not commenting because they didn't feel qualified enough for doing this…
I have to admit that I don't feel I'm good in comments either, especially that the language doesn't really help me,
and on some entries I really don't know what to say…
However, people vote. Since they do it, they are supposed to know the reason why they vote for a specific entry and not for another, right?
So, if they know this, the next step is just a matter of switching the browser page, go to the gallery and write down those feelings, under the entries they liked.
We all deserve this I guess - correct me if I'm wrong.
As I said under the other post, I've seen entries with lots of (good) comments, yet less votes than others with few comments or none. - How can this happen?
- I also have seen winners of a challenge with no comments at all under their entry, while again, others with lots of comments didn't make it even to the top.
I said that the voters should reveal their identity and make a comment telling us their reasons for choosing specific entries vs. others.
- I didn't mean that we should say something like: " I'm John and voted for Mary because I feel she's better"
No.
- I think that we don't need to mention about voting, at all - We should just tell what we think about the qualities of Mary's entry, from our personal point of view.
We all work hard for these challenges and put a lot of passion and energy on producing our artwork.
That's why I think each one of us will benefit from an open system allowing us to know about what we did, so we can improve ourselves.
PS: In addition:
1. Commenting is a very good learning tool for ourselves.
2. Commenting before voting will make our voting process much easier
Thank you for your attention,
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
Like photography, commenting is an art form that gets better with practice. I agree with you that people should set aside their discomfort and comment. I started doing it early in my participation in the challenges because I hoped that people would reciprocate. (Please comment on my photo - please, please, please.
Regarding the connection between number of comments and number of votes: I noticed the disconnect when the switch was made to top 10. Since then, I have not found any way to predict how well a photo is going to do before the final poll is posted. It does heighten the anticipation.
In this last challenge, there were 79 voters and 44 entrants. I expect that some of the voters who are not entrants are folks who used to participate but find themselves time constrained and are unlikely to take the time to comment. I think we reach a better consensus winner when there are more voters. So, while I encourage everyone to comment (especially on mine
I personally never counted numbers and I don't think this is relevant.
(I just noticed what was obvious)
… and never doubt the artistic aspect of everything we create, because the creation itself is an art.
What I meant was to encourage comments, so they reflect the votes.
This way, each of us will know how our efforts have been appreciated.
Knowing this, will help us improve our work and will also eliminate frustrations.
This is how I think.
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
If you are mathematically inclined, there a lot of fascinating stuff about how the voting rules influence the outcomes of elections. If you want to explore, you can find a good place to start at Wikipedia.
Our system rewards broad support, rather than enthusiastic support.
Here's a hypothetical example. In our voting system, one could imagine that the winner could be, say, everyone's second choice, but nobody's favorite. Suppose there are two photos that engender "love it or hate it" reactions. Suppose there is another photo that is quite nice; no one loves it, but everyone thinks it is pretty good. Each of the first two will get half the people voting for it, and the third one would get everyone voting for it. That photo would win, even though no one thought it was the best.
Maybe that's okay! The voting rules can be any way we want them. But it might explain some of the unpredictability you've noted.
I generally don't vote for 10, if I can avoid it, because the fewer I vote for, the bigger difference it makes for that photo. (If I voted for every photo, it would be the same as if I didn't vote at all!)
FWIW, I don't think that happened in this round. The cathedral photo was stunning.
www.photographyjones.com
+1 on every account, including Tatiana's amazing cathedral photo.
Personally, I preferred the 2-judge system of the past. Oh well.
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/
Olympus E-M5, 12-50mm, 45mm f/1.8
Some legacy OM lenses and an OM-10
In response to a public display of who is voting for who or a requirement that a comment be made; I am all for suggesting comments which we always have. Displaying votes as public creates an atmosphere where even less people will vote than we have right now. I personally would rather see more votes which gives a statistically better outcome than an elite few who are thick skinned enough to make both who they voted for and why, public knowledge.
This is a very good point. Brian is correct on matters of statistics, though.
Even though I mentioned I preferred the 2-judge system, the new system doesn't bother me one bit. I just enjoy the fact that there is a new challenge every 2 weeks that makes me get my camera back out.
http://silversx80.smugmug.com/
Olympus E-M5, 12-50mm, 45mm f/1.8
Some legacy OM lenses and an OM-10
Or you could do what's known as "instant runoff" voting, where your ranked votes produce a majority winner. It would take more work on the part of the Heroes, but it would warm the hearts of the voting system nerds.:D
Let me be clear, here -- I'm not advocating for a change. The point of the challenge, after all, is not to find the optimally fair way to absolutely determine the most important winner. It's to get you to think outside the box and challenge yourself to take better photos!
www.photographyjones.com
(First I have to say that I appreciate your last sentence
Your information is very interesting! Somehow I thought about this…
What I noticed and you explained why, is because we are using here an electoral system of voting, where the are only 2 options: YES, or NOT
What I was proposing earlier, was a system using Stars (marks) - it's the system used in sport or artistic competitions.
This gives the voters 6 options:
5 = Top favorite,
4 = Very good, but not my top fav.
3 = Good but not outstanding,
2 = Mediocre,
1= Fair enough
0 = Try again
Considering (as discussed a while ago), that we are not voting for a president here,
I think that the second method would be more suitable for our purpose.
The Stars should be hidden of course for the voting time, so people don't get influenced by the previous voters.
Any thoughts?
PS: the stars are already existent in the gallery, but not used.
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
There were aspects of the 2 judge system I liked. I won my first challenge under the old system and it was a different challenge to pick a top 10 for the finalist round of voting. I am glad I was able to experience that. One that I did not choose ended up doing very well in the final voting.
With the top 10 system, I think everyone gets better feedback even if they get no comments. Two challenges ago, I experimented with a very abstract photo. Under the old system it would not have made 2 judges top 10 and that would be all I would know. Under the new system, I could see that there were a few people who found it appealing and where it ranked among all of the entries.
I heartily agree with silversx80 that I keep coming back because I enjoy the challenge of producing a photo to a theme every two weeks. Every two weeks by itself is sometimes a challenge when life gets in the way of photography.
And like Tatiana, I strongly encourage everyone to comment as much as they can. Thanks for bringing it up. Don't be afraid.
and like most of us, I too can't wait to see the next challenge theme
However, maybe it will be interesting to know why some people are regretting not having the old system so much.
What is that they find wrong with the new one?
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
"Dance like no one is watching. Sing like no one is listening. Love like you've never been hurt and live like it's heaven on Earth." — Mark Twain
If this type of voting system was possible with the current way that both Dgrin and SmugMug were setup it certainly would be something worth considering, except that it would put each persons vote into the public eye, which I have covered the disadvantages of previously.
As I mentioned the first time you brought this subject up, the stars system is fine for general comments but using it to choose a winner will not work because the results are not put into any sort of table that we have access to. The task of manually tabulating stars leaves a lot of room for error and an enormous amount of time needed for anyone in charge of figuring out the winner.
The current system of voting works very well. It gives everyone an opportunity to choose more than one, and it includes all qualified entries in the vote. It also is very easy to dump the data into a spreadsheet and tabulate the winners. On top of this the gallery gives people willing to commit their time and opinions, a way to comment on each of the images if they wish. The voting poll does have the capacity to show the names of all the voters but it is not enabled for reasons we have already covered.
Nelson Lehner
Dreamin' of a resolution!:D
Sorry, my internet was slow yesterday and when I replied to Brian, I didn't see the answers in-between.
I know what you previously said about counting the stars, but I thought this could have been be done as a task of the previous winner (not by you), and that would be for sure verified and corrected by each entrant, if not for another reason, at least by curiosity.
I see your point of not showing the names and I think it's a good point.
I was just trying to find a better way on doing this because it's not about the voting per se, but about a meaningful vote, that can tell us more than just numbers.
I still think that something can be done.
I know that it's not a big task for a programmer to make a new script form for the voting pool...
For example instead of 1 checking button, we can have 3 (or more), going from "my top fav." to "fair enough" or no check at all.
- This is just an idea that can be debated, of course.
The previous system (in my opinion) would have been good if we had a (rotating) professional (or very qualified person) doing the first round - I know there are quite a few fantastic photographers and good judges here at DGrin/SmugMug - but this would imply some extra fees from our side…
I'm not trying to annoy you, but I'm just thinking of a way where we can benefit more from these challenges.
We will probably stay with the current system though, the comments have increased in the gallery and this is good…
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
Whether it is done my me or someone else is irrelevant, it still would be an enormous time consuming task prone to error.
It may or may not be a big task, let's not assume here. What I am trying to communicate though is given the current tools at our disposal, the Dgrin forum software has a polling system built in that we are currently using. The switch from posting the photos in the forum thread, to using a SmugMug gallery was done to facilitate meaningful comments attached to each picture. It seems what you are after is more participation from the general community in the commenting section. So "a better way" is already in place as far as I can tell.
I am not against entertaining new ideas but it needs to be stressed we need to be developing those ideas using the tools we have at our disposal not wishing for new tools that require already overtaxed volunteer hours or funding to produce. New ideas also need to be as efficient in implementation or more efficient. Manually counting stars is very inefficient.
The previous system tried very hard to bring this into a reality. Even I myself personally contacted several "professionals" in hopes that we could bring in the perceived qualified individuals to vote. My attempts were met with either being ignored or politely refused. That aside, even if we did have "professional", "qualified" people volunteering to vote it is my experience that even they are questioned in their opinions like any other human, putting us back at square one.
Also thank you Joe and Nelson
TravelwaysPhotos.com ...... Facebook
VegasGreatAttractions.com
Travelways.com
Borders/Frames: You may use a simple border of a single color to frame your photo if you feel it will enhance the final image. Natural borders or frames such as windows, doorways, dark vignettes and subjects that float on a solid background will also be permitted. No multi color, decorative or picture frame style borders will be accepted unless waived in a specific round.
I have also updated the rules to reflect this change effective immediately.
Sean, I appreciate the heads up and the careful thought you give to issues like this. Thanks!
My SmugMug Galleries
I've often wondered WHY the "no frame" rule was there in the first place; I assumed there was a reason at some point. Do you know why it was implemented when LPS (before my time) was set up?
I don't know, but having seen what some people do to "frame" their pictures I can see two reasons:
1st to prevent an escalation of frame creation-- you know, the multi-beveled, drop shadow monstrosities some people create to surround a picture that ends up being the size of a postage stamp,
and
2nd, related to point 1, to make sure that the image was the focal point of everyone's entries.
I agree but because a window frame surrounded by black could have been manufactured in post it too fell victim to the way the past rule read. In fact it was window frames specifically that pushed me over the edge to changing things.
I can't find it now, but there was a discussion very early on about how folks didn't want to judge a photo with a border and borders had no place in a Photo Challenge.
I'm happy to see the rule change and I don't think it's a bad idea.
If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera. ~Lewis Hine
http://sandizphotos-seascapes.smugmug.com/