Caedes

Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc.

Discussion Board -> Desktop Wallpaper, Art, etc. -> A suggestion for improving voting etiquette…

A suggestion for improving voting etiquette…

&philcUK
09/03/07 2:11 PM GMT
Before I get into anything else, I’d just like to make it clear that I’m initiating this discussion as a means for people to evaluate how and why they award a particular score to an image. I don’t intend it to be comment on the pros or cons of the voting system per se and so would appreciate it if, for a change, we could have a rational discussion about it without doing the usual dramas and re-treading old ground.

I think it’s pretty clear from even a cursory scan through the new images galleries that most people who are actively voting are doing so biased purely on personal preference and or experience of a particular medium rather than taking the time to consider other variables in a piece such as creativity, originality, technical achievement etc. Many people have sited in the past that they feel unqualified to comment or rate an image fairly as they do not understand the process involved in creating an image if it is out of their normal circle of activity.

I’d like to suggest that members try to take the time to familiarise themselves with possibly alien forms of art if they are intending to take an active role in the voting process. From a personal point of view, when I first started posting images here I had no experience at all with fractal design and to a larger extent, wasn’t a particular fan of it either. I remember feeling at the time that I felt I was unable to say what was a good or bad fractal as I had no idea how they were created but because I was exposed to them on a regular basis, decided it would be best to at least try and understand the process that went into them. All it took was a couple of hours on a free download of apop to quickly get some ball park point of reference on what was needed to create a good original fractal and what was little more than shuffling presets around and rendering it. If I am completely honest, I’d still say they aren’t my favourite form of art here on Caedes, but at least now I have a frame of reference to try and judge them if I get one in the voting booth.

The same theory I think can easily be transposed onto any form of art – be it illustrative, photographic, cg etc. I would hope that by trying this, people will gain a greater understanding of an artists work and vote accordingly on it rather than just dismissing something with a low token score to get if your screen. In so doing, people will hopefully also get a more balanced assessment of their work and less fluctuation in their scores. Basically – even if you cant appreciate the art in the piece; at the very least understand the efforts involved in bringing it to you.

Any thoughts?
0∈ [?]
A smart bomb is only as clever as the idiot that tells it what to do

Comments

Post a Comment  -  Subscribe to this discussion
::Shewolfe
09/03/07 2:28 PM GMT
A topic that has been on my mind.
I do think that your suggestion of getting to grips with forms of artwork we are not familiar with by downloading and investigating is good.
I will be trying to do this more often.

I admit, I often base judgements on preference, it cannot always be helped.
However I do try my best to take into account things like lighting, angle, clarity, imagination etc so that even if I do not personally like the image I can see how well they did on other things and then I add that into my vote.

I am trying to take some shots of things that I would not normally look at twice to see how these things affect photographs. I think next, I will investigate fractuals as they seem very popular.
0∈ [?]
Crazy doesn't even begin to cover it..
::m0rnstar
09/03/07 6:02 PM GMT
Yes, even I, have accessed the not-usually-used Windows side of my MacBook to download apop. Haven't had much time but intend to see what all the 'rendering' is about. Phil, it's a good suggestion and those of us interested in bettering ourselves as artists should all agree with you.

~Mary~
0∈ [?]
Thanks to all the great Caedesians for your help and kind advice. Please visit my Image Gallery
.Pixleslie
09/03/07 7:25 PM GMT
...if they are intending to take an active role in the voting process.

Question: Is voting optional for long-term members who want to post images on Caedes? This and other comments on the threads here seem to hint at that possibility.

Thanks.
0∈ [?]
“A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you the less you know.” Diane Arbus
.timw4mail
09/03/07 7:50 PM GMT
No, voting is only optional for Cadre (paying) members.
0∈ [?]
"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness." - 2 Timothy 2:16 (KJV) <- -> Timothy J. Warren | My homepage|My Forum| My Gallery| My DeviantArt Gallery| AIM: aviat4ion
::J_272004
09/03/07 10:17 PM GMT
YEAH!!!!!!! FINALLY someone who thinks the same as me.. I've been saying that for a looooong time.. It's a great idea trying a program to see what the fractalist really have to do and just how hard it is (which is what I did because I had no idea either and once I tried it.. look what happend.. I got hooked)..
T
he thing is Phil, how many do you think will do this, thats the problem, some can't even consider looking outside the square, in their mind its "I don't do that kind of stuff so who-cares" and I doubt that would change.. I've had private conversations where I have said to people.. just because you don't do that genre doesn't mean you vote low, its unfair on the artist who sits for hours trying to get a decent image..
I can't see why the couldn't rate it on colour, design and if it appeals to their eyes.. you don't need to be "qualified" to know that.. it's the same for photos, you don't need to be Einstein to see and know if the pic looks good, if its clear or blurry, if it appeals to their eyes..

Thats why it just gets to me when people say "oh I dont want to vote or CAN'T vote on a photo or cg because I don't do that kind of thing and don't know anything about it" like i've said many times.. the style may not be your cup of tea but you still have eyes and you should know if you like a colour or design or a scene.. and.. remember.. other members are voting on YOUR images too and THAT may not be their "cup-of-tea" so play fair.
0∈ [?]
MY GALLERY ........... "Live one day at a time and make it a masterpiece"
.Pixleslie
09/04/07 12:25 AM GMT
...voting is only optional for Cadre (paying) members.

Aaaaaaaah, so those most committed to Caedes are less likely to vote than we "." people, eh? Is that a good idea? Especially if the goal is to have people voting knowledgeably?

I'm not saying that dot-people lack knowledge, but many of us are new here, in test-drive mode, less aware of Caedes standards and, possibly, less cognizant of art and photographic principles. But we have to vote to post. Fine by me, but does the policy support knowledgeable voting?

P.S. I may actually "over-vote" fractal art because it wows me to bits. I don't (yet) know what's difficult or easy in creating fractal pieces so I may be too easy to impress. It was fractals that kept bringing me back to Caedes and continues to make me rethink light and composition in photography. So... uhhhh... 9s, 10s... easy. But a snapshot? Meh.

P.P.S. (Hey, at least I'm not resorting to footnotes.) But does this bring us back to why worry about the c-index at all? Increasing the number of votes it takes to set the index is likely to do more for "averaging away" the "dumb" votes than trying to get the hasty and the new to study up. Just sayin'.
0∈ [?]
“A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you the less you know.” Diane Arbus
::J_272004
09/04/07 1:02 AM GMT
Firstly its good to see that someone who doesn't know the how-to-do fractals actually likes and appreciates them,

As for the paying members not voting, if you go to the "active users" you will see that the majority of paying Cadre do vote and also do a lot of commenting on the images..

as for the worry about the "C" word.. that has been flogged to death for a loooooong time, there is noway.. no matter what you say to change some members minds on it, to them that is the "GOD" of Caedes, it means everything to them, so "To take notice of the C or not to take notice of the C" that is the question
0∈ [?]
MY GALLERY ........... "Live one day at a time and make it a masterpiece"
::third_eye
09/04/07 1:23 AM GMT
I have an idea. I know the current encouragement is to vote based on what we see, and "feel" about a piece. As many of us might not know, or be familiar with certan media (ie photography, fractals,etc) perhaps some sort of guide might be helpful.

Here's my thought. what if a group of widely recognized experts or accomplished artists in each media get together, and sort of lay out the parameters of, at least in basic terms, what does, and doesn't makea "good" photo, fractal, CG image, etc.?

I know art is subjective, but to some extent, alot of us know what's good and what isn't. My idea is to be able to gather some outlines written by those who can verbalize what those things are (or aren't)

What say you?
0∈ [?]
I'm not better than you, I'm just challenging you to be better than me.
.linda_0
09/04/07 1:41 AM GMT
Hi Phil,
Thanks for opening this thread - I have recently begun posting a few more pictures, and so am now obligated to be more active in voting. I do worry about my ability as a "judge", as I feel so many others are so far more qualified. What qualifies me, other than somewhat of an "artist's eye" and a fascinated interest in this medium? As an amateur I look to the many posts on Caedes to study and learn. I try to judge based on items that I see pointed out for other photos - whether there is a point of interest, hot spots, color and light balance,interest (and there can be objective interest even I don't particularly love the subject). The more time I spend on the site, the more I learn, and I am always trying to improve my knowledge to be a better voter.

People here form a wide range - from beginners to talented and experienced photographers. I think we have to think about scores keeping this in mind. To be realistic, this site is OPEN, and will naturally reflect that. It will not have the tight, more accurate rating system that a professional studio with a panel of experts would have.

I feel so fortunate to be able to participate in a community like this, where my efforts are sincerely looked at and constructively commented upon, and I am included despite my lack of experience. Not only included, but encouraged and coached!

It seems to me that this site draws artistic people who are looking to improve and grow. Your suggestions on studying things a bit more are on target, and I think that most people here truly want to do their best and participate fairly. Posts like your bring this to our awareness - we can meet the challenge.
0∈ [?]
::Shewolfe
09/04/07 1:19 PM GMT
I don't agree that paying members are less liekly to vote.
It's an interesting part of my daily routine now and I want to improve on how I give my votes.
0∈ [?]
Crazy doesn't even begin to cover it..
::animaniactoo
09/04/07 4:03 PM GMT
Some people have become members simply so they can get around the voting restriction. I take that to be sort of a cop out on their part, especially as some of those have been very vocal about the c-index scores they get.

Rob makes a great point about have a starting place for people to learn. Even if it's just tutorial threads about things like looking @ a digitally produced shoreline image and seeing if the water has been faded @ the shoreline to show "depth" as the ground drops away. Looking @ a hand-drawn image to see if the shadows make sense. Looking @ a photograph for framing, p.o.v. or light contrast.

Give me 2 weeks or so, and maybe I'll unbusy enough to run a "Digital Art 101" thread. I'll start by picking apart my own pieces. lol.
0∈ [?]
One man sees things and says "why?" - but I dream things that never were and I say "why not?"
.Pixleslie
09/05/07 1:10 AM GMT
Shewolfe: So does it make sense to you that non-paying members are required to vote?

As a non-paying member myself (thus far), I'm not out to knock the non-pays' smarts or artistic sensibilities. I'm only suggesting that experience and commitment are likely to make for more knowledgeable voting and that climbing the learning curve to be a truly knowledgeable voter's more likely a better investment for those who, well, have invested -- literally -- in the site.

It seems like the required voting is a sort of "earn your keep" measure intended to encourage people to pay up and escape the requirement along with the ads. Is that the right signal to send?

Should voting be an honor earned instead of a chore inflicted, I guess, is the concise way of posing the question.
0∈ [?]
“A photograph is a secret about a secret. The more it tells you the less you know.” Diane Arbus
&philcUK
09/05/07 7:51 AM GMT
ah it seems it's getting to that time to hit the unsubscribe button again....
0∈ [?]
A smart bomb is only as clever as the idiot that tells it what to do
&KEIFER
09/05/07 8:17 AM GMT
the "cadre" has been in place LONG before the voting booth .. the lack of a voting requirement for cadre members was done as a PERK for those that support the site via donation .. prior to Sept 2005 there was no 'VB', voting was done on each individual image page, usually only by those attracted to the image in the first place .. thus scores were inflated on the high side

*caedes is interested in hearing new ideas to offer ::cadre members as perks ... especially if the idea to limit uploads AND require voting ever catches fire

;)

because .. the bills have to be paid more than the images have to be voted on ... internet hosting companies are run by GEEKS, and while some of you consider yourself a geek because you use a computer ... these are real geeks I'm talking about, and geeks just understand Cheetos, Red Bull, Pizza, Girls Gone Wild, and ... MONEY
0∈ [?]
.•*''*•._.•*''*•._.•*''*•._.•*''*•..•*''*•._.•*''*•._.•*''*•._.•*''*•..•*''*•._.•*''*•._.•*''*•._.•*''*•.
.purmusic
09/05/07 8:38 AM GMT
Just to clarify ... and so no further feathers get ruffled ... what I think Phil is saying is this (hope you don't mind me weighing in here Phil and feel free to correct me if I am wrong please) ... and I quote from his original posting to this thread:

"Before I get into anything else, I’d just like to make it clear that I’m initiating this discussion as a means for people to evaluate how and why they award a particular score to an image. I don’t intend it to be comment on the pros or cons of the voting system per se and so would appreciate it if, for a change, we could have a rational discussion about it without doing the usual dramas and re-treading old ground."

If I may, for those members that are new'ish to the site ... the collective palates of the more seasoned members are and have been a bit tainted for discussions on the merits of the voting system et al.

The ideas and discussion points made outside of the intended sphere of this particular forum have merit. They have been expressed without rancour, hyperbole (for the most part ... <--- it's a JOKe) and so forth ... but, this is not the place for those discussions ... in short.

Having said that ... I would really like to hear how Phil awards a score ... and offer up my own image ... here ... for continuation of this exchange of ideas.

I am interested because at times I don't think that those that create from other's work essentially, photo manipulations ... receive the scores that are necessarily fair in addition to those works created in the cgi and abstract categories.

And by all means ... I am more than open to critique. This is the first image that I ever posted on the site here. And being honest with myself ... I would award it perhaps a 70 at best, based now on the knowledge I needed to produce it and the subsequent execution.

It is a good example for this talk I feel as I provided a link to the originating image for comparison. To allow the viewers an opportunity ... and borrowing from one of the comments posted by another member on the image ... if I indeed brought some 'value added' to the table in posting it.

Uhm ... hope I left my Bossy Betty persona behind on this post. Not my intention.

Just trying to right a debate before it gets too sidetracked and thoughts expressed get misconstrued.

:o)
0∈ [?]
"Sometimes me think what is love, and then me think love is what last cookie is for. Me give up the last cookie for you." - Cookie Monster
&philcUK
09/05/07 9:30 AM GMT
Les - as far as photos go I split the mark 50/50 between creativity and technical efforts - for instance if a landscape has some good foreground detail but is poorly metered so the sky is nuked then it gets a lower or even zilch technical score to add to the other part. Similarly, if a piece is good overall in most respects but then gets over processed either in sharpening or gratuitous filtering etc, then that knocks the score back too.

Bearing that in mind for your example image, two things would spoil the party for me – the scorched sky and the poster edges effect which, in relation to the softness of the image, is too abrupt and harsh and doest really do anything to add to the effect. Perhaps a diffusion effect would have suited it better. If that all makes any sense? I think the bar is always getting raised here so it is harder to get a score you will be happy with – for this image at this moment in time and because of the two issues I mentioned, I’d say would be a 6/10.
0∈ [?]
A smart bomb is only as clever as the idiot that tells it what to do
.purmusic
09/05/07 9:42 AM GMT
Yes, your suggestions and thoughts make sense to me now.

Thanks Phil. Your candor is appreciated.

I have reconsidered my own score ... 70 is way, way too generous. I would gratefully accept a 60. :o)

p.s. As far as abstracts go ... if anyone is interested in giving Apophysis a try, as one example of the programs used in creating 'flames' ... school is now in session ... here.
0∈ [?]
"Sometimes me think what is love, and then me think love is what last cookie is for. Me give up the last cookie for you." - Cookie Monster
.purmusic
09/05/07 10:30 AM GMT
A bit more to the discussion ... I feel it is fair to say that as members become more aware and exposed to different art forms, and even those genres that they feel that they are familiar with ... their own voting tendencies will evolve.

The design and charter of the site, as I understand it ... was to provide a community ... for the growth of the individual artists.The least understood word in all of this, at least to me ... is 'community'. It infers a certain degree of responsibility on the part of the members.

To be fair-minded in the judging of other's works should be a part of that tacit agreement upon signing up.

With a base understanding of design and illustration ... my approach, as I have stated elsewhere is this:

Everyone starts off with a 5/10 or a 50.

Points are awarded and taken away from that initial score based on:

Creativity and Originality.
Composition.
*Technical Considerations and Proficiency.

*Which vary from genre to genre. For example ... photography ... Clarity, Exposure, Colour (saturation if applicable) and so on ... abstracts ... I have become more familiar with some of the programs used ... and have developed somewhat of an eye as to the efforts put forth by the artists and again, some of the aforementioned apply as well.

Composition seems to come to the forefront as one element that could be assessed fairly ... even by the novice. Is there a focal point to the piece or image? Does your eye wander with no real intended focal point?

Is it balanced to your mind's eye?

To an extent ... all of this implies an investment of time (and I am not talking about hours on end) on the part of the participating members. If you wish to be treated fairly, then do so yourself accordingly.
0∈ [?]
"Sometimes me think what is love, and then me think love is what last cookie is for. Me give up the last cookie for you." - Cookie Monster

Leave a comment (registration required):

Subject: