Caedes
Upload Images
Welcome guest
Log In or Register
User Stats
- 0 total users online
- 40 users active today
- 259207 total members
- +show users online
Request for Comment
Discussion Board -> Request for Comment -> Why such different c-indexes - comments?
Why such different c-indexes - comments?
Comments
Post a Comment - Subscribe to this discussion
simple .. different people in the booth when they went thru,
different levels of hunger, angst, attitude, ego, education, humility, diaper rash,
but .. to be honest, they aren't equal images .. #2 is less interesting than #1 from a "wow" factor .. just because they are both fireworks does not make them the same or equal .. there's timing, luck, exposure, action, etc .. all factoring into the interest level of a fireworks shot
Just my opinion of course .. but I stood in one spot for 5 or 6 hours waiting for the Bay Bridge Birthday in SFO (mid 80's) just so I would have an unimpeded field of fire when the barges started going .. thump, thump, thump
different levels of hunger, angst, attitude, ego, education, humility, diaper rash,
but .. to be honest, they aren't equal images .. #2 is less interesting than #1 from a "wow" factor .. just because they are both fireworks does not make them the same or equal .. there's timing, luck, exposure, action, etc .. all factoring into the interest level of a fireworks shot
Just my opinion of course .. but I stood in one spot for 5 or 6 hours waiting for the Bay Bridge Birthday in SFO (mid 80's) just so I would have an unimpeded field of fire when the barges started going .. thump, thump, thump
0∈
[?]
*---===>>>>>(¯`·._(¯`·._.: It ain't over till the FAT BABY sings :._.·´¯)_.·´¯)<<<<<===---*
I would say that among the causes you mentioned we can take the 3rd and 4th as quite possible causes. Diaper rash we can reserve for the extremely disappointed artist. :)
0∈
[?]
If practice makes perfect and nobody is perfect, then why practice?
To my eyes, and in my humble opinion Stephen ... "Gold Rain" is a much more 'expansive' shot.
Literally.
It fills up the viewers' screen more so and is probably better received than the teaser and its' possible precursor, "Gold Rain 2" ... for that reason.
Two good shots, taking the lighting and exposure times into consideration ... just that one has that little more 'something something' in my mind.
Don't know if this is the case, but I offer this as some additional food for thought ... I think it is easy to lose ones' objectivity when there is a personal stake of sorts, involved.
Literally.
It fills up the viewers' screen more so and is probably better received than the teaser and its' possible precursor, "Gold Rain 2" ... for that reason.
Two good shots, taking the lighting and exposure times into consideration ... just that one has that little more 'something something' in my mind.
Don't know if this is the case, but I offer this as some additional food for thought ... I think it is easy to lose ones' objectivity when there is a personal stake of sorts, involved.
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
Thanks everyone for giving me your thoughts....I agree that its difficult to put aside your own biases and look at things objectively, that's why your comments are so helpful.
0∈
[?]
I believe that the same image viewed at different times of the day, week, month would inevitably give a different result in the VB, due to the fact that it is a different selection of voters each time. I think it is better now the votes are increased to 20 (approx) but think that an even higher sample would give a more balanced and fairer result in many cases.
0∈
[?]
The question is not what you look at, but what you see ~ Marcel Proust
I tend to agree with one of the previous comments. Also for me "Gold Rain" works a lot better than "Gold Rain 2", that is, I love the first, I find the second just ok. I think it has to do with intensity and position of the fireworks lights in the photo. The first is much more balanced for my taste. Congratulations though, I was able to make photos like these. Rob
0∈
[?]
Gold Rain2 also has some bursts that don't look like they are fully developed yet and still need a longer exposure to capture thier full burst.
0∈
[?]
All comments are appreciated. Constructive criticism is greatly appreciated.
I agree what Lyn said above as every time different people are voting at images on random base. The given value for an image is depending on a lot of factors, like the personal taste (voting according their own taste), skills, mood, and so on of the voter. The voter has to vote without the descpription of the image too. Sometimes the description makes an image interesting as the image on its own often can't tell where it stands for. So my conclusion is that the C-index is only a not objective indication whether an image is good or not. Once I did an experiment: one of my uploaded images got a C-index of 19 (while the comments on that image were, without any exception, (very) good). Even a friend of mine said he gave it in the VB a 10. The comments and the C-index were that contradictory that I decided to delete this image and to repost the same image again. I told the people which already had commented on my 'old' image, that I wasn't expecting of them to comment on the 'new' image again. Nevertheless I got (again) a lot of comments. Some comments on that 'new' image were asking what I had changed. They couldn't compare, as I deleted the 'original one'. The answer is : 'Nothing.', but the C-index increased to 59 and, I have to speak the truth, decreased later to 42!
To me the C-index isn't that important anymore. To me the 'comments' prefer, only when they are honest (above being polite). As we are human beings, not everyone is thinking the same of course. I know for sure (as they told me personally) that some friends quit uploading to Caedes because of their frustration about the C-index system. Another, more important, thing I like to say about this system is this: After 'logging in' a list of new images of 'my Caedes friends' appear. I'm watching and commenting those images before I go into the VB. When one or more of those images appear in the VB later, I already know exactly that they are of friends of mine and then it's very hard to be that objective as I should be (human behaviour). The last thing I like to say about this item is, that it seems to be that an image must have a very good C-index to go into the permanent galleries. If so and (!) if this is the only criterion, I have my doubts whether an influential system is still a good system to make a proper choice whether an image can go into the permanent galeries or not. Cornelius
To me the C-index isn't that important anymore. To me the 'comments' prefer, only when they are honest (above being polite). As we are human beings, not everyone is thinking the same of course. I know for sure (as they told me personally) that some friends quit uploading to Caedes because of their frustration about the C-index system. Another, more important, thing I like to say about this system is this: After 'logging in' a list of new images of 'my Caedes friends' appear. I'm watching and commenting those images before I go into the VB. When one or more of those images appear in the VB later, I already know exactly that they are of friends of mine and then it's very hard to be that objective as I should be (human behaviour). The last thing I like to say about this item is, that it seems to be that an image must have a very good C-index to go into the permanent galleries. If so and (!) if this is the only criterion, I have my doubts whether an influential system is still a good system to make a proper choice whether an image can go into the permanent galeries or not. Cornelius
0∈
[?]
Please tell it to another when you like my work. If you don't like my work, please tell it me
deleted (by mistake same as above)
0∈
[?]
Please tell it to another when you like my work. If you don't like my work, please tell it me
I agree...I also look more closely at the comments, as well as the views/downloads. You never really know what's going through the voter's heads when they're in the booth. Really funny about your 40 point climb in c-index too!! Maybe if you did the same thing again it will climb to a 99!! Thanks for your thoughts, Cornelius.
0∈
[?]
As a wise man once said, "Wherever you go, there you are."
just so we are all clear - reuploading the same images for any other reason (experimental or otherwise) than significantly altering its appearance isnt permitted.
0∈
[?]
A smart bomb is only as clever as the idiot that tells it what to do
The c-index is not the single reason an image is chosen for the permanent gallery. A unique capture, angle, subject matter, lighting, etc. can also qualify an image for the permanent gallery.
0∈
[?]
~mimi~
Phil, I was possibly wrong doing this. If so: although I couln't find anywhere that it was forbidden to do so, I have to offer my apologies. As I said above, I did it only once to proof that what I was saying, was not a supposition but reality (I'm not a cheater!!!!). It's possible to influence the C-index system in different ways. Really hoped that I showed in a constructive and not negative way this 'shortcoming' in the C-index system (images in the VB aren't that anonymous as they should be). It frustrates me (and probably other people with me) to a certain extend. Hoped for a more fundamental discussion in order to try to achieve an improvement of the system instead of ignoring what I've said above by saying only: 'That's not permitted.' Reading the comment of LynEve above, think she has an improvement goal as well.
To Mimi I like to say this: I'm so sorry for you Mimi, but I haven't another possibility than to say that your comment is a supposition to me, as the system to determine whether an image goes into the permanent galeries or not, is, like the C-index system, kept secret (in order to prevent influence (paradox?)). In my opinion there are very good images with a very low C-index (see e.g. the image with a C-index of 18 in the personal gallery of Paul Gerritsen) (think he's one of the best photographers at Caedes). As far as I know none of those low C-index images, in spite of their originality, subject matter, lighting, and so on, can be found in the permanent galleries. My advice is to read, if you didn't already, in this case the discussion under 'Vote Numbers' as well.
Best regards to all readers, Cornelius
To Mimi I like to say this: I'm so sorry for you Mimi, but I haven't another possibility than to say that your comment is a supposition to me, as the system to determine whether an image goes into the permanent galeries or not, is, like the C-index system, kept secret (in order to prevent influence (paradox?)). In my opinion there are very good images with a very low C-index (see e.g. the image with a C-index of 18 in the personal gallery of Paul Gerritsen) (think he's one of the best photographers at Caedes). As far as I know none of those low C-index images, in spite of their originality, subject matter, lighting, and so on, can be found in the permanent galleries. My advice is to read, if you didn't already, in this case the discussion under 'Vote Numbers' as well.
Best regards to all readers, Cornelius
0∈
[?]
Please tell it to another when you like my work. If you don't like my work, please tell it me
Cornelius,
The quote below is taken directly from the front page of this site. I did not surmise anything to you.
"The c-index is not used to decide whether or not an image is promoted to the permanent image collection nor whether the image gets deleted (although it may be used to help the Praetors find good images worthy of permanent status)."
The quote below is taken directly from the front page of this site. I did not surmise anything to you.
"The c-index is not used to decide whether or not an image is promoted to the permanent image collection nor whether the image gets deleted (although it may be used to help the Praetors find good images worthy of permanent status)."
0∈
[?]
~mimi~
Cindy, think we are talking about different things. Your 'quote' tells me: "The c-index is not used to decide whether or not an image is promoted to the permanent image collection nor whether the image gets deleted." It don't tell me, however: "A unique capture, angle, subject matter, lighting, etc. can also qualify an image for the permanent gallery.", as you were surmising in your above comment.
The SYSTEM to decide whether or not an image is promoted to the permanent image collection, is kept secret and untransparent as we can only guess for it. Fact is that none of those low C-index images, in spite of their unique capture, angle, subject matter, lighting, etc. can be found in the permanent galleries. Think our discussion goes into the wrong direction as we are discussing now about minor things. Most essential to me is my worry that the C-index system has proven to be an influential system and that this system 'may' be used to help the Praetors find good images worthy of permanent status.
Sorry that I needed so many words to say only this:
a) when a system has proven to be influential, we have to try to improve the system;
b) when a system is not influential, there's no necessity to keep it secret.
Cornelius
The SYSTEM to decide whether or not an image is promoted to the permanent image collection, is kept secret and untransparent as we can only guess for it. Fact is that none of those low C-index images, in spite of their unique capture, angle, subject matter, lighting, etc. can be found in the permanent galleries. Think our discussion goes into the wrong direction as we are discussing now about minor things. Most essential to me is my worry that the C-index system has proven to be an influential system and that this system 'may' be used to help the Praetors find good images worthy of permanent status.
Sorry that I needed so many words to say only this:
a) when a system has proven to be influential, we have to try to improve the system;
b) when a system is not influential, there's no necessity to keep it secret.
Cornelius
0∈
[?]
Please tell it to another when you like my work. If you don't like my work, please tell it me
Cornelius,
You are right. Sorry for the attempt to be helpful. End of this dialogue for me.
You are right. Sorry for the attempt to be helpful. End of this dialogue for me.
0∈
[?]
~mimi~
Mimi, thanks for taking part in the discussion. Although we have different meanings, I appreciate your contribution very much. Regards, Cornelius
0∈
[?]
Please tell it to another when you like my work. If you don't like my work, please tell it me
"The SYSTEM to decide whether or not an image is promoted to the permanent image collection, is kept secret and untransparent as we can only guess for it."
That's not true at all. It has been stated several times in the past that the moving of images to the perms is entirely at the mods discretion. Nothing secret about it.
That's not true at all. It has been stated several times in the past that the moving of images to the perms is entirely at the mods discretion. Nothing secret about it.
0∈
[?]
-Everyone is entitled to my opinion- rescope.com.au
Perfect systems, let's keep it that way. End of the discussion for me. Cornelius
0∈
[?]
Please tell it to another when you like my work. If you don't like my work, please tell it me
I've been following the discussions about the C-Index and it seems like everyone has a different opinion, which I think is a good thing. I for one am a fan of the index (not that I agree with how they turn out in some cases). However, I am wondering why two of my very very similar shots (Gold Rain and Gold Rain 2) got two very different C-Indexes. I don't much care about the difference in the index, but that would lead me to believe that one is not as good as the other. To my very untrained eye they both seem to have the same quality, etc...so, if anyone could throw me some comments/criticisms that would be great and very helpful.