Ok, I've given up on trying to figure out what images get what scores, and no, a vote (high or low) doesn't determine (in my eyes) the quality of an image. I opened this image's page, and saw a score in the high40's. ok, fine. but the comments left don't match the score received. So, does this stink,and I'm just getting placated, or is someone trashing me(again) in the VB?

I know this topic has, by now, the same effect as fingernails on a blackboard. I'm a supporter of the site, and think it has great potential. At the same time, I think a certain amount of unfairness exists, and I'm less than thrilled with that. enough so to just wipe out my gallery and go "poof". In all honesty, I would've already had it not been for a handful of people here I'd sorely miss. (no, I ain't sayin who)

Dammit, I swore I wouldn't hop on a soapbox again..sorry people, but this is buggin' me.

All people, (some of them) will ALWAYS, (sometimes) blow smoke up your .. er, .. pants leg (or not) ..

it is human nature (on alien planets too)


`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·

(*straightens tie*) .. you will need to go on "American Idol" in order to get critical verbal critique each and every time you go before the judges .. most people find it difficult to be critical .. most don't wish to be critical .. they are just saying "Hi, Rob, I'm here, thanks for sharing this"

voting anonymously doesn't carry that mystique .. so it is difficult and a little pointless to try and equate the two

saying in NO uncertain terms .. "I am not sure about this image, tell me what's wrong with it" .. is the best way to hoodwink people into leaving their comfort zone and volunteer pointers ..

`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·`·.¸¸.·´´``··._.·

Speaking for myself .. this type of image doesn't catch my eye, it is over and done with in a split second. I have absorbed its lifeforce and moved on to another victim .. it is a documentary shot .. it doesn't tell a story .. and, to be honest, I would probably give it a 4 in the booth .. now, show me a unique perspective, follow a branch, lead me into the blossoms .. show me the texture of the wood and the softness of the petals ... and I'll vote accordingly for the results

others, here, will feel the complete opposite from that

and, so ... therein lies the rub, rob

ok, all I was seeking was a little honesty. thanks for delivering the goods.

1) flowers have brown spots and are curled up
2) Lighting is a bit harsh/hard
3) Its a flower shot - you'll have to do something unique to get a score aboe a 60 (IMHO, of course).

I was wondering why this one of mine got a cindex of 49. I've waited for the dillusional stuff to wear off (about two weeks)...just haven't been brave enough to ask. *i'm hijacking your thread btw*...it's similar to your question though.

...i'll tell you why:

1) grainy
2) quality
3) dark
4) umm............the tower is tilted ever so slightly that you'd have to use a ruler to tell
5) some ppl may think the blurry flowers is distracting.

Welll ... here comes the contrarian ... to an extent.

Rob ... gorgeous ... gorgeous color saturation on this image of yours in question. Drew me in at first glance ... and then ...

It's a bit busy in my humble opinion. Not truly lacking a focal point ... but close to. The light play is nice ... but, conceals some of the details of the blossoms.

Think maybe this is just a case of being a little too tight on the shot. Simply put.

Opening it up a bit might have improved the composition (to my eyes, in full-size view ... it is a bit chaotic). Relegating the blossoms to the bottom right hand corner ... and let that blue sky do some more talking.

Now ... this all said, obviously, without the benefit of having been there.

I would have given this in the VB ... a solid 6. The singular aspect of the colour ... and then adding in the technical proficiency ... it deserves at least that in my mind.

I do agree with Keith though on one point ... asking for some 'fresh eyes' (bold it if neccesary and add a disclaimer ... temper it, add some humour) in your commentary ... might get some more constructive criticism coming to you.

But ... that blade has two sides (as I am sure you are aware). If someone rips on you and slams your work ... take what you will from that.

See, that's just it..with a 47, I'd almost expect "it's ok, but..." or "this needs..." or " better luck next time".

Just about all of the commentors proclaimed what a great shot it was. Personally, it's not my favorite, I was simply tossing out a "crowd-pleaser" or so I thought

by now, those who know me, and/or know my work, should know the images that speak for me. also,if I'm asking for critiques, I'd expect the full spectrum. well, I'd hope for some restaint,and not have to tolerate another "pornographic" comment. that was a bit irritating.

"Think maybe this is just a case of being a little too tight on the shot." - I was thinking you might get in closer. *shrugs*

I think if the lighting was...hmmm...like, if you look at where the subject is 'supposed' to be (following the rule of thirds), there isn't really a dominant subject...you're eye kindof wanders around: the middle is dimly light; the subject (brightly lit flower in the lower left) is too low/left, and the jumble of flowers to the right is relativly far away.

...if you want more indepth bs(?), i can write more if you like. :)

sure, go for it.

So ... what you are saying Noah, if I understand you right ... in your last post ... is that there is no focal point? (I made mention of that aspect in my commentary.)

And I am being serious here for my and Rob's benefit ... how would getting closer help that?

You also made mention of the flowers having brown spots.

Again, not sure how getting closer resolves itself with your comments and suggestion(s) and employing the 'rule of thirds?'

Are you referring to a macro shot then?

Just curious, that's all.

..guess my shower and history homework is put on hold..let me prepare my indepth critique. I just have to write it...err, and get over to my computer so i can use photoshop. Give me about 10 mins.

PS: i'm taking much longer than 10...hold on.

"Its a flower shot - you'll have to do something unique to get a score aboe a 60 (IMHO, of course)."

Therein lies either a grain of truth, or an aversion to floral pictures!

Rob, you could have ensured your score was even lower,despite glowing comments, by doing THIS with it.
My effort to do something 'unique' with it.
Ok, not unique, just a bit different. I liked it, voters obviously hated it.

I can assure you my comment on your pic in question was not placatory, I said what I saw.I also saw the slightly damaged petals, but have come to expect reality in your pictures. Others may have repaired the damage(I probably would have) and then be accused of "prettying up" the picture. Sometims you just can't win.
It has to be remembered that those who comment do not always get the chance to vote on that particular image.

Edit1
Edit2 - edit 1 and 2 i used the unsharp mask @ a wide radius and small % to strengthen the shadows - i like the effect, others think it looks fake.
Edit3...

Edit3:

- Orange = crop...or possibly close in more on the subject. ...or you could try just the opposite, but in that case you lose a single subject and it turns into more of a 'texture' shot (it matters what you're looking for).
- Yellow = brown/curled-up stuff
- Blue = curled up flower

Yellow and blue show that the flowers are not exactly healthy - in this case, the clone stamp comes in handy (i quickly used it on edit1, but, as you can see, it's not exactly natural). PS: lyneve stated that some ppl dislike this...she has a point.

" So ... what you are saying Noah, if I understand you right ... in your last post ... is that there is no focal point?" - umm, yup. I basically said the same thing you did. >_>

(now onto a different aspect of the photo)...by 'get closer', i actually meant 'fill the frame'. You may also try this by using a different POV so the flowers line up, then use a narrow DOF to isolate one of them so it says something like: 'hey look at me'...minus the 'hey look at me' part. You might be able to play around with the POV and still get the blue sky in there....somewhere....maybe.

Anyways, onto the rule of thirds (btw, rules are ment to be broken)...By getting closer, you could a) center the subject and get a bunch of blue sky around it (errr, sort of, kindof like edit2, but not really what i was thinking of)...maybe a 1:1 canvas size ratio b) getting closer isolates one of the clumps of flowers = less busy c) getting closer has nothing to do with the rule of thirds, but of course it would be good to still follow it.

I just typed. I think i restated a bunch of already stated points.

***don't believe everything you read...oh, just note, that what i said is 'my style'.***

PPS: Don't procrastinate!! Now i have 4 hours of history hmwk, and 3ish of physics to do tomorrow. :(

Rob, I believe that most of the people that vote on an image never leave a comment. That could explain why the comments do not match the score. Very rarely do I get an image in the booth that I have already commented on. Usually, if something pops out at me, I will comment after I have it in the Booth. 9 times out of 10, I will say that I got it in the voting booth and then state what grabbed my attention.
Maybe others have better luck, but I figure that the most of the voters who see my images are here one day, gone the next! That, to me, is the peril of the anonymous voting, albeit this system is way better than the old way, IMHO.
I like to go to new images and browse by date after viewing my 'friends' list.
There are my 2 cents , my friend. ;=)

Rob, you got at least 47 for yours. I post flower photos regularly . Just take a look at what I got for this one posted two days ago :
http://www.caedes.net/Zephir.cgi?lib=Caedes::Infopage&image=Ramad-1177055884.jpg
(Sorry couldn't get the link)
It means quite a few have given me 30 for this photo. If this isn't "bashing" what is it? I would really like to know. Any explanation from anyone will be most welcome.

Sorry, that link also doesn't seem to work . I'll try it again .

http://http://www.caedes.net/Zephir.cgi?lib=Caedes::Infopage&image=Ramad-1177055884.jpg

OoPs! Error again - Try this one below:

http://www.caedes.net/Zephir.cgi?lib=Caedes::Infopage&image=Ramad-1177055884.jpg

Hey Raj,

Took a look at your image(s) ... and if I may be so bold ... well, hold on ... we are seriously hijacking Rob's thread here.

I will PM you my comments. :o)

I don't mind the hijack, as it's somewhat of an institution here, but I especially don't mind if it's still a thoughtful conversation and not just idiot babble. Les, go ahead and put your comments here, so others might learn something from them as well.

Noah,I liked edit #1, and thank you very much for taking the time and energy to do that. I'll answer more completely a little later.

I hadn't got this one in the voting booth, but would've given it a 4 as well. To me it comes across a wee dark and as Special K said it doesn't really hit ya in the face. Even your own words..."just a tree in a yard in the neighborhood". Many people seemed to like it and that's what counts. I've got tons of snaps like yours...30's, 40's...just a simple "click" and I post it. Comments & critques two different thangs, this you know though. 8~)

*lynches self before others have the chance to do it*

>edit<
I could swear there was a 2-3 paragraph entry in the now-blank post above me...oh well.

what does the above response mean? "lynches self" (???) rob, i certainly never said anything that should offend you and privately i thanked you for opening this string. why would you say such mean words to and or about me?

you didn't offend me, per se. and the comments weren't intended as "mean", more like regretful..for having opened a can of worms. I'd say more, but you deleted the text of your entry...kinda tough to refer to it now..

truth be told, you've developed a reputation for ripping into anyone who has...the nerve..to offer anything other than high praise for your work, and have written (they've been shown to me) some less than flattering PM's.

i don't ever remember ripping into ANYONE. is my "reputation" in the caedes group a bad one, i hope not.
to go back to the above removed remarks i thought i had continued your thread about low scores on shots which had received lots of complimentary comments. i also said that i had gone through galleries both the main and the new and had compared certain shots of mine with very similar ones in the galleries which had received very high scores where mine had received scores that were quite low. i never mentioned any other photographer and any other specific photograph and don't know why i would offend anyone. each category had lots of entries in it (with many of the high scores). i listed a few of mine that i was perplexed about and asked for comments. i said that if they were particularly brutal comments they be sent to me in a personal message.
if that is a way to lynch myself then it makes me very sad. i think there are quite a few subscribers to this site who think i'm a decent participant who only wants to be a better photogtapher. i ended by saying that i had submitted a shot called red rocks on schnebley hill. it was downloaded by lots of people. i had thought it was a pretty good photograph and was surprised by the score. i said i'd like to follow a picture through the whole evaluation process just to watch it in action.
in another forum i suggested annonyminity for all photographs (including not using the friends list) until after a score was given. i thought this was re enforcing your comment about "someone trashing me again". if no one knows who we are when they vote they can't give a "trashing" vote.
although i spend far to much time on the site i do enjoy seeing everything that is submitted. i try to vote when i remember to and i try to be objective about my votes. i always hope the pictures i vote on are not ones i haven't seen before on friends list.
*if you are a reader and i have sent you a letter where i've "ripped into you" i would certainly apologize for having left that impression.
**know this, i work hard to present good photography to the site. there are many ways to lynch oneself. i hope that asking for your positive or negative comments isn't one of them. thanks!

um...when I wrote *lynches self...etc* I was saying i'd lynch myself, before the lynch mob came after me for opening the can of worms (this thread). there's lots to be said for reading carefully, and taking something in context...

I give up :o(

someone come get me when this site is fun again

double, unintended post.

People, People, People (lynchers and lynchees) ..

We actually NEED more threads like this .. We NEED more honest, open discussion (less babble) .. people need to be able to speak their mind

Later, I will be marketing a product called Knicker-Snaps™ .. so that our knickers don't bunch up, and we can batten our hatches down and wade into the fracas sans fear and trepidation

the coat-check girl has been instructed to start accepting egos at the door, along with topcoats and purses ... the filing and retrieval system for egos is still quite new and we hope to get the proper one returned to you upon completion of your evening ..

(*hands out knicker-snaps coupons*)

How about a product called Keifer's Riddles? For example Does Knicker-Snaps mean Knicker photos or does it mean the person has put on a few pounds and the knickers snapped! Or can it be dog eared or creased snaps because in German for example the word knick (the "k" is pronounced) means a crease or dog ear on a paper. By the way "keifen" in German means "to nag" and "Keifer" can mean someone who "keifens" although the word does not exist. Just a joke, Keith - no offence meant :)

LOL .. I hereby, officially, proclaim it to be a real word


Beer for everybody!!

I am keifen quiet on this one :)

Yeah, I just submitted something that took me all night to render and I got a c-index of 10, even though everyone who commented thought it was great. I haven't had hardly any time lately to do fractals because of 1. work and 2. World of Warcraft. I probably won't be doing very many more fractals anytime soon.

1) The VB is somewhat biased yet at the same time completely honest and random. Unless I've seen it in my friends listing, I don't know who took the picture, unless it's an outstanding pic with a little dragonfly in the corner, then I know it's Kristof's, but other than that it totally anonymous so I don't see how someone could be bashing you in the VB, Rob. One the same note, if it's a flower pic and I don't like flower pics then I might not rate it highly or if someone gets it in thier mind that there are too many flower pics and they are going to try to discourage them, etc... you get the point. So while you may have a reaally good photo, it may not appeal to everyone so you might not get the 9's and 10's. And since it is totatlly anonymous, you don't know how many of those people got to vote on your pic. Perhaps you got three, perhaps you got 10. It can make quite a difference. You also don't know the background and experience of the people who are rating you either. So while the c-index is a raw indicator it's also deeply flawed. I share your frustration as I just scored a 7 and a 39 on my last two posts. (I removed the 7)

2) I'd like to think that my comments tend to be quite honest (bluntly so) and sometimes I'm quite self consious of that. I'll often reword or even erase sentences and whole critiques altogether. (Yes and not even send them after writing them) because I'm afraid they are too bluntly honest and am afraid of getting anthrax tainted hate mail. /* sentence deleted */ see there I go again.

3) /* paragraph deleted */

4) BLUNTLY HONEST OPINION AHEAD. DO NOT READ IF YOU ARE OVERLY SENSATIVE OR DO NOT HAVE A THICK SKIN.




___________________________________________________________

/* sentence deleted */ There is a shadow covering the center bunch which probably isn't desirable. It's also very difficult to see where the blossoms that are the subject start and stop. The background is very busy and your dof is long enough to keep the branches in focus. try to get more separation between the two. There were a few comments mentioning the contrast in color. You do have a nice blue sky for a background to set the pink blossoms against. Good color contrast. Clarity and sharp focus are good. Overall the undefined subject is holding the photo back. I'd probably give it a 5 or 6 in the VB.

Rob

You just hit the nail on the head. Why should you be scared of "Anthrax tainted hate mail" for speaking the truth? I have seen some wild reaction to critic here but then you have the choice never to comment on that person's posting again. It may be a good idea if in the voting booth the voting person could put an anonymous short note of explanation (voluntary) and the contributor of the photo could read it somewhere. It may mean a little more time and effort for those who want to post a photo. Truly speaking there have been a lot of trash photos being posted lately. Like "my child with my dog" or bicycle parked against the wall etc. (I mean something like that - not exactly those themes or captions!). It may also help if such personal/non-artistic photos are right away barred by the approving persons.

*bangs head on desk*

there's somethingto be said for...paying attention. I said this in one of my earlier posts here:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"See, that's just it..with a 47, I'd almost expect "it's ok, but..." or "this needs..." or " better luck next time".

Just about all of the commentors proclaimed what a great shot it was. Personally, it's not my favorite, I was simply tossing out a "crowd-pleaser" or so I thought

by now, those who know me, and/or know my work, should know the images that speak for me. also,if I'm asking for critiques, I'd expect the full spectrum. well, I'd hope for some restaint,and not have to tolerate another "pornographic" comment. that was a bit irritating."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't exactly bemoaning a low score in and of itself, but pointing out what I saw was an inconsistency, and asking for input on it. Perhaps I should've posted links to several of my images that scored in the 70's, that have phenomenal (in relative terms) view/download #'s, that people have openly wondered why the scores weren't higher.

I really tried not to make this a "bleeding ego" issue. I'm far from sensitive, as anyone who knows me can attest to.

Lord knows, I have a slew of low-scoring images in my gallery. No,I'm not pleased, but I figured out a while back that images that are more in a fine art vein, tend not to be highly popular here. Perhaps it's just an indicator that I, and my work would be better suited elsewhere.

"One the same note, if it's a flower pic and I don't like flower pics then I might not rate it highly or if someone gets it in thier mind that there are too many flower pics and they are going to try to discourage them, etc... you get the point."




This is a valid point but surely most people with any sense of fairness can rise above this. We all vote for various genres, types and styles of images, and if we dont have the ability to leave behind personal preferences and vote honestly and fairly then we should not be voting at all. That is where the comments are useful. I tend not to comment on certain types of images because they do not interest me as much as others, but when I vote on them it is not difficult to put that aside.I would never vote lower on say, a car or an alligator, just because I am not avidly interested in them.
Anyone trying to discourage certain types of pictures by down voting them (flowers were mentioned) is probably having the opposite effect.
I often wonder what is it about flowers and plants that make them so unpopluar with some people?

I was just throwing flowers out there as an example. I figured with as many flower shots as I post, that would be obvious. In a way, Eve, I think you're sort of making my point. With the voting community being wide open, you have no idea what criteria they are voting on. I haven't seen any guidelines on how to vote so my voting criteria is my own, as is everyone else's. That criteria may be fair or it may not. We'll never know.

My message to flower haters : There is no other object on earth that can provide a photographer with so much variety in form, colour and beauty. An example : Among Dahlias alone there are nearly 25000 varieties. As Lyn before me said try to rise above your prejudice, open your eyes and look properly at the photo instead of giving it a 3 rightaway.

How I Vote
Still the same :)

Rob (viking_boy), you said you never saw any guidelines for voting. They can be found
HERE under your Navigation bar at left and then under 'Other Stuff'. Hope this helps. ;=)

Thanks Mimi, but that's for giving a critique, not voting in the VB.

Guidelines to think about is what I had in mind Rob. Sorry if I confused you. My error.

I'm not sure about other people, but when I go to the voting booth images are reduced in size. If they are reduced, does this then affect the quality of the image i.e. more grainy?
It may possibly affect voting if detail is lost due to the reduced size?

I think that says it all - hahahah!

Your concerns regarding the size of an image in the voting booth affecting quality would best be put in the feature bloat/bug squash thread. Thanks.

I think its time some people 'got real' about comments being a realistic guide to a photo's worth. Try the real world and see what others are doing. Post them somewhere no-one knows you and see what feedback you get. If they are so good, sell them - or at offer them for sale? Or maybe you'd rather not leave the comfort blanket Caedes zone and just want things to return to 'wonderful!' days?

Just who exactly was that intended for? Once again, I can't help but wonder what you're doing here...

Whoever it was directed at Kate - there are heaps of artists here whose work is certainly professional enough to sell, and I believe many do.
However, most of us do not reach those levels, and come here for enjoyment and sharing of pictures and expertise.As I have no aspirations to sell my photos (knowing full well no one would buy them) and knowing that asking friends (in the 'real world') for their opinions would lead to 'Oh how lovely', regardless of its quality then I rely on opinions and votes here as a measure of their appeal.
I think there are no real complaints about the 'nice' comments -certainly not from me anyway. I tend to give 'nice' comments too - there is always something nice to say about any image. I think what concerns some people is that when it is obvious a picture has had low votes, the person giving those votes rarely comes forward and makes a comment on it, giving their reasons. And yes, I am guilty to a degree of that as well. I DO comment on images other than those of my friends, mostly because I like what I see. Those on my friends list are there precisely because I like their style of work, so I am more likely to have something good to say about their uploads. Occassionaly I make a comment on a work I have seen in the VB,and voted low on, but not often. If ever I reach the stage where I feel confident enough to make valuable suggestions for improvement that may change.

In the meantime I just suggest improvements to those I have come know well enough to know they will not take offence at someone of limited knowledge being presumptious enough to tell them what to do.

Thats why I think when someone votes a 0 or a 1 a comment box should appear and it should be compulsory (anonymously) for a "please-explain-why-you-hate-it" comment at least that way the artist knows why and if it's a Legitimate score or just someone who's ego's are voting.. maybe that would ease the pain and heartache.. =)

Perhaps anything under 5 ?
Being annonymous could make all the difference, and the voter still has the option to make it public if they wish, which would be of help to other viewers as well.

actually .. *caedes has reverse engineered the internets .. and he is in the final stages of sending a high voltage spike back through your mouse cable

...zzzZZZZAP!!!


OUCH!! .. he's been testing it on me all week

(*shakes fist eastward*)

Ahhh, but you LIKED it Keifer!

Well, I understand and love having fun. But maybe you noticed, that Thirdeye, Rob, left this place. I still hope he will miss us and come back, but I think, that it is not the perfect way to answer somebodies complains, his feeling that he got hurt, just and only with jokes. Just this days something is very strange with the c-index again and being one of the three monkeys, who do not see, hear or speak, does not help somebody who feels hurt.

I'm not totally gone, I'm just not going to be posting photos anymore. That, and I'll probably be showing up less and less here on the boards as I eventually get this site out of my veins.

Are you still here???? Spooky????

8~P

I still ain't got this in the VB!! Poop, I was gonna give it a 5!! Just 'cause!!

Hey!! Start posting again mister...that's an order!! You can whine when you're dead!! Go on..click it..you know you wanna!! "Upload Images"!! It's easy...here watch me!!

You're a perfectionist, cool...so get to perfecting!!

BIG hugz!!

Ahh ... ok, I think I got it now.

You see ... the finger that he uses to click the shutter is the same one that he uses with his mouse.

Add in that he most likely ignored properly warming up beforehand, and stretching ... that appendage was bound and prone to get injured. Just needs a little physiotherapy, 'tis all.

*hands Rob some really, really ... really tiny weights*

Use a spotter now, ya hear? :oP

I was wondering this too! It seems none of my c-indexes reflect the stated opinions??? maybe only staff members should vote!!!

MVillian said . . .
"maybe only staff members should vote!!! "

Well, they do in a sense - they vote on what is or is not made permanent, having the final say and the only vote that counts, finaly, for each image.


Sadly, it is apparent that c-index scores do not always reflect the comments and opinions given beneath the image.
By the same token, high c-index scores do not really mean much, otherwise I would not have 7 archived images with scores above 80.

My own evaluation of my pictures in most cases does not correspond with the aggregate of votes,very often an image I consider to be not up to standard receives higher votes than expected, and vice versa.
I would imagine most people think the same thing, unless they are in the upper echelons of talent and expect and get (rightly so) consistently high votes. The rest of us must rely on the voting system as an indication of improvement, and continue to be disappointed when an apparently popular image is scrapped.
Human nature being what it is, I, and it would appear no one else, ever complains when a lower rated image is chosen by the hierarchy for inclusion in the permanent galleries.
I believe that some fine and deserving images DO slip through the net - no I am not referring to my own here, I mean across the board and I think it would be nice if there was some means by which we could question this and ask for a re-evaluation without having to go through the 'request for comment' procedure.

I have stopped wondering about the c-Index because I have found that it is no use getting upset about it. I check mostly my percentage of downloads/views. There are many people out there who are not caedes members but who admire my/your photos. When I get an 80% download on a photo I am quite happy.

Why not do away with the c-index system altogether and have a 'popularity' of an image system - based on views and downloads?

Yeah.. someone who thinks the same as me.. =D
I've been saying that for a couple of years.. but your talking to a brick wall.. ;) *kidding Caedes I know its a statistic thing for you...
You'll find certain members here will jump up and down about it because that c-index is their obsession(sorry if that offended anyone but its the truth.. you only have to re-read the past threads on this to see what i mean)some live and breath the c-index instead of just to enjoy creating and to share their wonderful art (which is why they originally became members to do)..
I can go on and on about it, but I either get abused for my opinion or the thread gets shot by the elephant gun...

I agree with Ramad, too... thats how i judge mine.. the c-index is only a tiny percentage of the members on here, there are a lot who don't vote and as Ramand said, there are a lot who take a stroll through the galleries, view and download them which gives the V/D a more accurate judgement... but..... thats my opinion...

I believe the c-index is a valuable gauge as an overall indication of improvment.
When I first joined Caedes I can remember being delighted with a score of 40, and my life's ambition was to get a 90+. well I did that, and I still get 40's but can see that my overall standard has improved as I become more discerning.
Sometimes it may seem that some 'live and breath' the index but that is not always the case, it is just that sometimes a question (or 2 or 200!) arises concerning it.
The enjoyment of sharing and learning is far more important.
Perhaps those who never query the c-index in any way are those whose talent and expertise gains them consistently high scores and they have no doubts as to their ability. A chance comment from someone that an image has spoken to them and caused pleasure can be just as satisfying as a high score. Very often that comes from a low scoring effort. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but if enough beholders say your pic is worth <20 then you can be pretty sure its a bomber.

I just looked at my c-index's and i have quite a few in the 20's, 30's and under.. I personally don't take any notice of it, I prefer to go of the views/downloads.. to me the c-index is not a true indication.. not everyone gets to vote on it and as it has been said many many times, quite a few score low because they dont like that particular type of art.. so not a true score.. to me if people look at it and download it great, if they leave a comment wonderful, at least that way you know how many have taken a look.. I'm one of "those" people who just enjoy creating, and sharing it and don't give a rats about the "statistics" of the "C"... I know a lot who won't agree with that.. but i really don't care.. thats my opinion, you all have yours...

It has to be remembered though that many of the views and downloads are there because they have been voted on and viewed full screen. In a way that is not a true score either. :)

True.. I personally think the c-index and the V/D should be hidden so no-one can compare, complain, etc .. as it has been said its a statistic "thing" for the boss and for the mods (sometimes)...

The problem is that C index is essentially a popularity score and less of a quality score. When you get a bunch of bored people at home, work or school voting on a site like this, they're going to be inclined to vote whatever floats their boat.

Here's a thought completely different, too. It may also be they thought it was great and did not read the directions, and thought it was the opposite way around. I once had a 1-10 scale on my site with directions and I could tell by the comments that were left that some people didn't actually read the directions. These days people are reading less and less in general.

Emily, you're second paragraph is a nice thought & you're right in that ( to me, anyway ) it seems that less & less people are reading, but I doubt if that's the case here.

Personally, I think we should do away with the voting / c-index deal. Or if we must vote, why not something generic like a star ? Up to say, 5 stars ? Or 10 ? Then all it would mean was that someone gave you a star, no big deal.

But if we have to have a vote then let the results be available only to the Mods. Just like Jacqueline said.

Addressing your feelings of being targeted in the booth Rob... well you have my sympathy there. Really & truly. But hon ... get in line behind the fractalists.

Do you mean there are really cheaters here? To what gain?

Assuming there are...voters with less than noble intent..

My best guess is personal agenda.

Could be a)I don't like him, so I'm voting low; b)I don't like this (style, media, genre, etc) regardless of quality, so I'm voting low;

This site is a cross-section of world society, so just as there's endless possibilities out there, likewise in here.

Prior to the installation of the voting booth .. there was a "cartel" of friends that, basically, all created ALT names and voted each other up while, at the same time, targeting the people they didn't like with 'downward momentum in their image ranking numerics' ..

There was no 'gain' then either .. but the people involved apparently got some sort of kick out of it ..

it is speculated that the same sort of thing goes on now .. but they are just rumors, hushed whispers in smokey restrooms .. usually started by ME

:o)

i know this much........if people were interesting in "downgrading" the work of others, they need only go to the new images gallery to see who has uploaded what and go from there. i would hope that a spirit of fraternity (all enjoying the same past time) as well conscience would guide all to treat each other well whether in comments or in votes.

in theory, that's a wonderful concept, abeit somewhat naive, in my opinion. If conscience were a sufficient guide, stores would have no gates, and neither would water...

The reason they do it? It's an Ego thing.. plus they are living in the cyber world and have forgotten about "real" life..

Well...you said it first Rob but a good place to air my pet peeve on this site...."Oh wonderful a 10"..."love it, top marks"..."a fav a 10"..."great shot a 10 for sure"...and on and on. Then it gets hammered in the VB. Apparently none of these people vote...and I know some are among the top voters. Go figger. People if you don't mean it don't say it...that's called being hypocritical. Better to be just critical than to add a hypo to it. Now I feel better....anyone want to buy some camera gear?

It often seems that way but . . .
It has to be remembered that these comments could well be sincere and that they have just not seen the images in the VB?
Benefit of the doubt and all that?

this brings up an interesting side topic. we have this friends list. i have found that the friends on the list write to me about my shots and i write to them. if i don't write then they don't write. there are times that i think that a certain photo isn't quite what i think it should be so then the dilemma occurs. my first inclination is just not to write to them about the photo. that's a little touchy because they expect to hear from me. i like to make suggestions as private messages so that others might have their own opinions and any ideas i have are for the photographer's eyes only.....................

as for "favs". i decided early on that this list was not for me. i guess it's because when people tell me they've added it to their favs, i go check. sure enough they're not there. it just seems easier not to have a favs list..........after voting i frequently open the pics i've voted on to see if they have scores and if my score is somewhat in line with the total scores. i'm sure i don't see everything that is in the vb.

I used to feel the same way you did Jen, if I had a criticism I made it & any suggestions behind closed doors so to speak, via PMs. But it was recently brought home to me that I wasn't doing that artist or others any kind of favor.
There are probably very few professional photographers or digital artists on site, so we're all pretty much in the same boat. That is, learning & trying to improve ourselves. So now, if I have a criticism I say it, gently, but I say it. Then try & offer up ways to improve the pic.

As much as I would LOVE to say sometimes " What were you thinking ?!?!!" I manage to avoid it. ;o)

So far but it IS a new week so I'm not promising anything. :oD

Personally I don't usually comment on the pics that come up due to my "friends" list because I only have artists who are better than myself on the list; therefore I rarely feel that I have any advice to offer them. It's more to make sure I don't miss out on anything spectacular.

well .. I'm glad your getting all of my pics then

:oP

sam, that was a "right on" statement!

"It's more to make sure I don't miss out on anything spectacular."

"Spectacular" can appear in the most unlikely places though :)

food for thought...

If a chef prepared a gourmet meal,and gave it to a bunch of chimps, should he be distressed, or shrug, and remind himself that afterall, they're chimps?

I'd go with the latter, if only in spirit, when I get a low score on a pic everyone seems to love. They'll only be up for a short amount of time, so it's a non-issue , I suppose.

in your parable .. it sounds as though the chef prepared the meal for the chimps

when I get a low score .. I figure the security cameras were of such poor quality that they didn't get a good picture of me walking in .. and I am only upset because I feel there is no point in having security cameras if you can't identify the culprit, er, I mean artist

I mean, come on! .. who could vote low on my stuff?

um .. don't answer that

(*plugs fingers in ears*) .. ♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ la la la la la la

The more "friends" you have the better your c-index will be, because your friends have already seen your posting under New Images before they got it in the Voting Booth. This is a simple fact and there is nothing you can do about it except have the system changed.

Raj, your theory is using the assumption that recognising the image will result in giving a more favourable score. I often recognise an image in the VB from my friends list but just as often recognise a style or type from someone who is not on my list so it can work both ways. A person with no friends list at all could be just as familiar with personalities and styles by viewing the new images each day. I have to disagree that the bigger your list the higher your scores will be. :)

Yes, Lyn but you are an exception. There are many who are not like you and who will favour their friends when they know that the posting belongs to one of them. This is my impression but I may be wrong.

Hello Lyn, Perhaps
THIS will show you how it can be with C-Index. This photo has at the moment a 77 % download but quite a few have given it a 3! Compare it with some other flower photos and you will see what I mean.

Raj, the colors there are first class. The focus, however, missed by a mile. Also, the car in the background is distracting. In all honesty, if I had this in the VB, i'd have plunked it too. Sorry

Raj .. your first link has a SLASH at the end ".jpg/" .. all you need to do is edit your post to fix it

see? .. I can be helpful

if following the "Caedes guide for Critique" .. I would say "good post, the spelling is good, punctuation is clean .. but the link is a little off to my eyes .. next time, try re-editing the slash at the end

:o)

RE: Fuchsias .. Personally .. I think color is good, focus is on the green leaves in the center (perhaps autofocus?) .. but, for me, the "utilitarian" background (the blue and the tile) drop it into a snapshot .. I don't want to see any housing elements, man-made elements in my flower photos .. give me bokeh or give me death

well, not literally, I was being poetic

Tks Rob - I see your point - by the way, it is not a car - it is a blue flower pot sitting on the terrace! :)

Thanks Keith, I knew about the slash at the end (Cat had told me that a couple of months ago but I made the same mistake again!!)

yes .. I remember that .. I was just pointing out that you could have edited the first post and not posted again

I am misunderstood often

you should stand under something else then. 8•P