I know we've been here before, but why can't we just get rid of it (C:index) or replace it with something better? It just irritates everyone because very little thought seems to be put into it these days. I'm not speaking only of my posts, but there are some really fine images on here that are being 'tanked' and they really don't deserve to be. Maybe DigiCamMan was right.

Even if the C-index were to be abolished today, this minute, the same people who vote would still be here. My guess is that they'd find some other way to crap on the work of others that they didn't like, understand, etc. Lord knows I have a fist full of images I think people undervoted.

But yes, we have been here before, and it ought to be pretty clear that at least for the foreseeable future, things will remain as-is. So then, what options remain?

Leave? I guess. Or just decide that you're putting your work out into a public place, a public forum, and decide which feedback, be it in scoring or commenting that you're going to place any value in.

Maybe Jerry was right Cindy, I don't know. But I know Rob is. As far as any of us can see, nothing's going to change for the forseeable future. It's a fact of life.

Do I want to sit here & moan about the injustices of life on a site that under appreciates abstracts in general & fractals in particular ? Well, yeah I do but that's a dead horse I refuse to beat anymore.

I do look at the scores on my images, how could I not ? But I know it's not going to change anything so I just kind of shrug & go on my merry way because short of leaving like Jerry... what else can you do other than follow Rob's very sensible suggestion.

Well, we were asked for suggestions some time back, January I believe, and some new options on a voting system were introduced in several threads. If someone had to respond to several queries about the post they were voting on by ticking off a box, they might take time to evaluate and answer appropriately. It could also be anonymous, in that, every Caedes member could have a number for voting that was only known to the staff. Then if someone (known by their number as posted next to their responses) continuously answered the same things over and over again, then we would know they were full of beans and ignore their responses. Of couse, we'd have to be privy to the vote results from each member (only by their number). If we could see the results of the voting in this way, we could see if just one or two souls is voting everyone really low. Just a thought.

One other question. Is there anyone here who thinks the voting system is A-okay?

I honestly have no problem with it. IMO great images generally get high c-indexes and crap ones generally get the lowest. There are always going to be some images where people might wonder why it scored what it did but that will happen regardless of the system. I would be against discarding the c-index as it is a good guide for mods when moving images to the perms. I won't be drawn into another debate on the issue though as I have already pointed these things out on numerous occasions in the past and don't see the point in going through it all again so if I don't reply to some counter claim or query that would be why. There are several other threads where you can find my opinions on the subject if you care to search them out.

No, you've said enough. It still doesn't explain why crap images can get high scores and great ones low scores. If I wondered that sometimes, I could understand, but it happens a lot lately and that is what I don't understand. No need to explain. If all that index is good for is a guide for mods, then it could easily be dispensed with, in my view, and the mods could use other criteria, but I won't say anymore about it as I guess that is what is expected of me.

"I would be against discarding the c-index as it is a good guide for mods when moving images to the perms"

IMHO that is one of the faults of it because even though "great images generally get high c-indexes and crap ones generally get the lowest" is very true, there is a mighty big bunch in between.
You do not need to look very far to see some crap images getting ridiculously high scores and vice versa.

132 images posted today - that number divided by the number of image mods should not be too onerous a task to decide what is good and what is crapo, without the c-index being used as a guide.

Many members vote on 40 images a day (I am not one of them) as well as preparing and uploading their own images, commenting on those of others others plus behind the scenes help and evaluation.

Image mods are chosen for their expertise and fairness, so why do they need the aid of the c-index which often does not reflect fairness.

I do not agree that the only options are to put up with it and don't complain, or leave. It is sad that questions and concerns are often seen as complaints, when in actual fact they are an effort to understand and maybe explain reasons which in turn may prevent people from leaving through misunderstandings and dissatisfaction.

I would be lying if I said I did not care about the c-index. Anyone who does not feel pleased when an image scores high I think would be as well.If one scores lower than expected or hoped for then there is often something to be learned from that. Sometimes though there is nothing to be learned except that there was something people did not like about it - and they rarely say what it is. That is of no help and no use whatsoever, except perhaps to the person/s who gleefully voted low on an image they did not like the subject matter of,regardless of its worth,as has been suggested on other occassions, or in an effort to boost their own image scores. Or mnaybe just got out of bed on the wrong side that day.

I would not really like to see the VB and resulting c-index abandoned - perhaps a reassurance from higher up that serious concerns (and there have been some) will be investigated without the 'complainants' being seen as moaners and stirrers.

People would not take the time to ask if they did not have the good of the site as a whole at heart.

None of us come and question a high scoring image but it is human nature to be bewildered when a seemingly good one is panned. I am not referring to my own images (although I have been known to be surprised) but have noticed that many good, well executed and good wallpaper pictures have gone that way.

I never told anyone to put up with anything or stop complaining.

Lyn, you're entitled to your opinion but the simple fact is that it does make selecting images easier and that's that.

Cynlee, I did not say that was the only thing it was useful for. Nor did I say that I "expected you" to keep quiet.

This is exactly why I didn't want to get involved in this in the first place, because people become so incredibly defensive when anyone disagrees with them. But then if I were to say nothing, we are accused of ignoring peoples opinions. We really can't win. Anyway, I've had enough of it.

"I never told anyone to put up with anything or stop complaining"

Sam, I know you didn't. I was refering to another comment in this thread.
In no way was I being 'defensive' incredibly or otherwise, or at last that was not my intention. I stand reprimanded - ok it makes selecting images easier and thats that.

Discussion does not mean 'disagreement' and no one needs to 'win' it is not a battle, and I do not like to think of it being a case of 'we' and 'them'

Like you, I have had enough of it, and I will shut up, and go and polish my tripod or something.

I decided a long time ago that comments meant more than the voting.

I second that motion John ... this meeting is now adjourned.

~backs outta the room s l o w l y~

Sometimes it's not your thought that puts people on the defensive, but how you string your words together. I know it's a tired and beaten subject (index), but it would seem that that might be precisely the reason it could stand being reviewed. The view that I am getting from some members and staff, (now don't jump all over me for this, it's JUST an opinion after all) is that the c:index is sacrosanct, we are stuck with it for lack of something better and love it or leave it.
Eve, you have a wonderful way with words, I just hope that I have chosen wisely too. Sam, you didn't tell anyone to put up with or stop complaining, but that was never-the-less the tone of what you said. Maybe if you put a little smiley face so we'd know you weren't so serious. :) Just joking.

Oh boy, the 'C' word still has much impact...I may regret this but.....frankly, I can see both points of view in a way...on the one hand, I personally don't put much value on the c-index anymore...like others I have seen lotsa' great images where the c-index was ridiculously low and poor ones which were waaay overrated...that said, I feel the comments and esp. the number of downloads place far more value on an image...for example, there was a time I had a manip in my gallery that even I felt was lacking alot...one day after many months of being in my gallery I was stunned to discover the huge number of downloads it had...for some reason, the general viewer or visitors to caedes liked it...and that's what we're supposed to be doing here, sharing wallpaper-worthy images regardless of what number we place on one anothers' images...I also recognize that the site wants the best quality we can provide AND we all hope to improve our skills so this is where constructive commenting is important and where supportive comments are also far more helpful than any scale or c-index...yes, there are times when I resort to words like 'wow' or 'great' instead of more useful feedback...that's because that was my first and spontaneous reaction and I would point out that it is not always on the best of images that I do this on but it's my reaction to an image also taking into account that person's skills at that time...I might say 'wow' or 'great job' because I've seen alot of improvement in that person, though the quality of their work is still not up to that of others...so if caedes himself personally wants to keep the c-index I don't particularly care...on the other hand, there was a time when I had a much larger and different gallery than I do today...some of my images that made it to the permanent gallery were not always the ones with the highest c-index so I'm not sure how that works for image mods deciding on what to do...I would hope that quality and uniqueness would be the standard and not a number that can change from one day to the next....now, do I have you all thoroughly confused?...good, lol.

So much for not being drawn in...

The way the c-index can be used as a GUIDE for moving images can be explained very simply. Go to the new images gallery and sort by c-index. Go through the first few pages and see how many images on those pages you think might be worthy of perm promotion. Now go to the last of the rated images (remember images that have not yet received an index are the ones right at the end) and see how many of those images you believe are worthy of promotion. That's pretty much all there is to it.

The other way the c-index is useful (as I have, again, mentioned many times before) is that visitors to the site looking for great wallpapers can also use the c-index as a guide to find the most popular. This is a pretty standard function on any wallpaper/image site.

As a relative novice I think I have to agree with Sam here. I don't put a whole lot of weight on the c-index anymore, preferring instead to rely on comments and number of downloads, but there has to be SOME sort of rating system in place, so I can judge FOR MYSELF how my various posts compare to each other. (Interestingly, i have noticed that more often than not there seems to be a direct mathematical correlation between the number of downloads and what the c-index ends up being. I can usually predict within 3 points what the c-index will be based on the number of downloads.)

Are some crap shots gonna get high marks and some great shots get low marks? Absolutely. Is that going to happen with any rating system? Absolutely, unless voting is left to a very small group of people who are professionals. What appeals to one person does not appeal to another and any voting system is going to reflect that.

Now throw a novice like me into the fray and watch me screw up scores. Until I came here I didn't even know what the rule of thirds was, much less Orton or DOF. Composition was something I wrote 25 years ago in High School. I took a cool picture of my nephew and a tiger, posted it here, started looking around and fell in love with the site. I can tell you my early votes were probably travesties, because i voted on whether I liked it or not, to heck with stuff like composition, DOF, focus, etc. And i would bet I'm not the only one. I bet a lot here still do that. I've tried to become better educated (and a lot of you posting here have helped with that - thank you all, you know who you are) but I'm sure I still drop the ball at times. NO rating system which open to everyone will change that.

Having rambled on here, my suggestion would be to limit voting to people who have been active members for 6 months, or a year. Or to people who have an average score of over 60. Or 50. Or whatever number you want to choose.

Rob (Third Eye) pointed out in a different thread that he was sick of getting low scores because some guy who didn't know the difference between and F-Stop and a Bus Stop gave him a 3 (that was probably me Rob, sorry about that).

My humble opinion is that changing the METHOD of voting won't change much, but controlling WHO votes will. Maybe it's not fair to newer members like myself, but I believe it would be a MUCH fairer and more accurate gauge to quality.

Go at, tear me to pieces. ;-)

Rich

The C-index: my most favorite/hated subject.

The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that there is a direct correlation between the C-index and the stupid cleche, "guns kill." Guns don't kill. The people that use them kill. The C-index isn't bad. People who don't know how to evaluate a photo make it bad. People gives high scores to images that are not in sharp focus; people give high scores to their favorites. People give high scores to anything that is colorful-no matter what else is wrong with it. People give low scores to cats (as a rule) no matter how good the photo i because they don't like cats. People give low scores to fractals in the VB because they don't like fractals. I could go on and on. People need to be educated on HOW TO evaluate a photo: what to look for; what things to take points away from; what things to give points for; what is good composition; what is bad composition; what are blown highlights; how to identify an over sharpened image etc. Many Caedes members just don't know these things, especially the ones new to the sight. They have never been educated.
We need the C-index (dear God, did I say that?). Without it, we will never know how Caedes members REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEally feel about our postings. You won't get it from their comments. Many of those comments are just flowery lies because they don't want to hurt someone's feelings. So, it is my opinion that the C-index is the real source of truth about how well your image is liked. So is the download rate. But no, people are sucked in by all the flowery comments that do not reveal the truth.

To the Mod Squad: if you want to tame the C-index and make it an accurate source of evaluation, your going to have to find a way to educate the membership, NEW and OLD on how to properly evaluate a photo.
(Steps down from soap box-exhausted)
Pat

To Pat /\:

I agree. I think we are on the same page. That's why i feel limiting voting to people with more experince and/or a higher average score helps fix the problem.

Rich

I don't think the mods see this as a problem. Do they get to vote too or would that be a conflict of interest?
I like Pat's idea of educating folks on how to evaluate an image. And who would take on such an endeavor?

Mods aren't required to vote but may do so voluntarily. I don't really see how voting could be a conflict of interest since we move images based on our own opinions, so increasing the c-index to justify moving it would be pointless (unless there is some other way in which you are thinking it could be a conflict of interest). Personally I don't vote often at all but that is only because I am too lazy :-P

I was just wondering.

I was away for some time from caedes. But now I am back and I am surprised to see some really great pictures with low c-index and some less good ones with higher one.

As many previous posters pointed out, there are many problems with c-index:

1. It's just a number. It doesn't tell what is wrong with a picture. It represents just a general average idea about picture quality.

2. Some people might vote differently for the things they don't understand. For example fractals may get lower scores because someone doesn't know what is of artistic value here.


So it got me thinking about how it could be fixed. And I think I have come up with an interesting idea that would solve the problem but allow artist(site user) to get an accurate feedback about the quality of their work.

Instead of just making a scale 0...10. My idea would be to provide each image with 5 points score as a base per single vote.

Now voter needs to change this score, but using an objective parameters. Here is a list of objective parameters that he can use to change the score of an image.

* Composition
* Lighting
* Image quality
* Artistic value
... and something like that

Each one of these points give some fixed score value either 1, 2 or even half of a point (0.5)

Now the user just need to select one of the points and specify if this would go as + or as - to the base score.

For example my image abs.jpg has a base 5 point score each time someone votes for it.

Now some voter comes. He sees that my composition is really bad so he takes of 1 point because of composition. The image however has great quality in terms of resolution and sharpness so he gives the image +1 point.

As a result my image still has a score of 5 points, but I as an artist can see that the composition was the reason for the score to be lowered, and the image strongest point was the image quality!

The other interesting point is that as an additional bonus, the search options for this site can be extended to allow searching the image based on objective quality criterias.

So what do you think ?

"So what do you think ? "

I think it looks a very good system :)

Two years ago I posted how I vote CLICK HERE

It lead to an interesting discussion.

I believe I have become a bit more discerning, but basically I still vote exactly the same way.

Link
One of the last images I moved in the perms.
Low c-index, low dlds, but what a nice capture! ;-)

Just shows to go you, the index isn't all that necessary.

Not that I'm criticizing DMINATOR, but to play devil's advocate for a second... I think a lot of people are going to see that as way too much work because one of the issues with the c-index is people tend to slam through it to upload their pic to the site.

The more thoughtful, knowledgeable people may take the time to do exactly as suggested but I can definitely see a lot of people not.

Thank you Lauren, I agree. I think we have a tendency to look at the issue as hardcore Caedesians. There are many many casual users who are not going to put a long time into it.

That's why I keep coming back to limiting the voters, as I stated above.

Well, wouldn't you want a more detailed critique of your work through more conscientious voting, though it may take a little more thought and a few more seconds. Then if you didn't find out what was wrong from the comments, you would definitely have a clearer idea of what needs improvement from the voting. I don't think 10 more detailed votes through DMINATOR's method or something similar takes any more time than running through 40, 1-10 pt. images.
If we're here to learn how to improve, aren't we also here to learn from others images as well and to appreciate the work of others? It says we're a community so why not take the time to evaluate each others work with a little more consideration?

Cindy, i agree with you....but I don't think the casual user will. Incorpoorate both ideas, more detailed voting and limits on who is voting.

Bottom line Cindy, nobody can depend on the c-index as a reliable tool to evaluate our work, in my opinion. I may be all wet, but that's my honest opinion.

IF the proposed suggestion was put into use I'd see a couple of things happening, one....some people would probably leave the site & two, there'd be a huge upswing in donations so people could avoid the c-index altogether.

And I can also see the vast majority of hard core Caedsians avoiding it altogether too, so it's purpose would again be kind of nullified. Because how true of an indicator can it be if only a few are really using it ? Sorry Rich.

If anyone wants true evaluations of our work then what we really need to do is encourage honest critiques.... another can of worms, sorry Sam et al.

Of which, I admit, I'm guilty of too. I've seen plenty of images, photographs,abstracts & fractals included, where I've thought "wow, no kidding ?" but either avoided commenting or just said something non committal & ignored the subject.

We all have, every single solitary one of us. I have suggested ways to improve a fractal in the past & gotten "I like those dots ! They add to the image & if I wanted help I'd ask !" The same thing when I've suggested ways to improve color in an image.... on the hand maybe I was too blunt. I don't know.

All I know is, I doubt in the long run if Caedes is going to change it.

I understand Laurens points, but only agree with them so far. As far as making contributions to avoid the c-index, some of the most avtive in top 100 list are already contributors.

In addition, as far as the number of votes go I would rather have 7 votes from experienced people who are truly rating the composition, clarity, etc than 17 people who are basing their vote on whether or not they 'like' the picture.

The thing is that with a system of voting that allows for judgement of different criteria, i.e. composition, lighting, IQ, etc., the critique is anonymous and no one can get upset with anyone specific as they can when we leave a constructive criticism comment right under their image. With just five criteria to be judged for example by ticking off a 1 to 5 number box for each of them, and limit the number of critiques for EVERYONE to just five images before posting one of their own, the burden isn't great enough to make anyone want to move on. The cadre members could still get to post two images in 20 hours and maybe we can think up some other little perk for them as well.

Cindy, I agree with your sentiment, but I still think that with everyone voting we will run into many of the same problems.

But the way it is now, Rich, only the non-cadre members have to vote at all.

It is good that the discussion has continued.

First of all I would like to remind everyone what was the idea behind of c-index:
"The c-index is a number between zero and 100 that aims to give a rough idea of the quality of an image. The primary use of the c-index is to enable users to sort galleries in order to bring the best images to the top." So initially it should have represented the quality of an image so the site visitors can quickly find "the best" images!

Initially we had somekind of voting system where everyone could vote, but it turned out that people mostly voted for their friends pictures, and yes it was mostly maximum :)

After that it was changed and it was mandatory for everyone to vote for a random image of an anonymous author. It actually does much better work now, no doubdt! But it does require much more work from a voter then it was before such as viewing image in fullscreen (the idea was to evaluate the actual resolution quality (sharpness for example)).

But as Laurens pointed out "I think a lot of people are going to see that as way too much work because one of the issues with the c-index is people tend to slam through it to upload their pic to the site."
Laurens is right here also. People just slam through it. They don't vote objectively but just want to get it done fast and upload their pretty picture. Yes I know I might also be guilty. But I take my voting very seriosly, I know that my vote matters to the person on whos work I am voting for! And I wish I could explain the reason for the final score.

Me personally also want to get votes from experienced people who know what they are voting for.

@ Cindy: True. But look at the 100 most active members and you will find a lot of Cadre mambers with heavy vote totals.
Please understand -I don't dislike the idea of a voting system which ranks composition, clarity, etc; I think that would be a fine idea. My point is that when you have people voting that don't know what a good composition is we will have the same problems. To the suggestion of educating everyone. Great idea, however you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him gargle twice a day with Listerine and floss after every meal. Or something like that. Those 'casual' users aren't going to take the time to educate themselves and I don't see how you can 'force' them to do so. Tha's why i keep coming back to limiting the voting pool.

@ dmintor: I agree. I think you said it very well. I realize this would be a radical change, but one that I think would be more honest.

Yes Rich is also right.

The problem is that the system is mandatory and it doesn't matter what system is used, people cannot upload without voting. So they have to vote "something" just to upload their pictures. They don't know or don't care and this is how it works now.

I do think however that this is a matter of education. I think that even the 'casual' user doesn't upload just to upload and forget about it. They want feedback for their work. Usually they don't get the feedback they should. Look out any photos that have c-index less that 50. How many comments do you see that explain why someone voted less than 50 for it ? Its fun to read them because almost all of them say something like "Wow, great picture, good job!". But why c-index so low ? Noone explains. So how can anyone improve his work if he gets this kind of comments and such a low c-index ?

Ofcourse the new system is not a panacea, but it may serve much better purpose at educating the users in making them aware of the problems they have. And explaining them what quality terms are available and how they can use them to improve their work. It is not foolproof and some errors would come, but I bet as people would become more aware of this the quality of voting would eventually rise, and caedes user professionalism also.

AMEN!

Education is a fine thing but 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink'

The Request for Comment section is a very good place to receive critiques on specific images - I think it is not used nearly enough and many hesititae to use it more often for fear of being seen as a 'complainer'. The people who do respond to requests are usually those who in their general commenting tend to give informative feedback.

Oh dear I have just read the above post properly - sorry to reuse the horse quote - perhaps an indication of its truthfulness.
Voting is not mandatory for caedre members - they can choose to vote or not to vote.

I think the disatisfaction about the fairness of the voting system could be alieviated in part by a reassurance from moderators that genuine concerns voiced about anomalies in score results are taken seriously and not regarded as 'moaning' or over inflated ideas of ones own images' worth. Many have expressed puzzlement when a trend of low scores occurs - if this is for some suspicious reason, is there any reason it can not be checked by those who can?

I guess Lyn is also right :) And the education quote fits my point very well. Right now c-index is just a number that doesn't explain anything so the "horse would starve to death, because it doesn't know where or how to drink".

But if you add a feedback system that would show how can you improve your work then "you would lead the horse to water". You did your best but atleast you have shown the way, and it is up to user to use this knowledge. If he doesn't learn then he would continue to get lower scores later.

I cannot explain the fact why some of the best photos (that have great composition, color , sharpness and artistic value) get lower scores. Yesterday I checked new images gallery for sub 50 score list, and there are some rare 1-2 pictures that should have got much higher scores. But my question is WHY it didn't. I want to know the objective reason behind it. Thats my point. I don't want to remove the c-index, I just want to have some sort of objective criterias that explain the score.

Take for example some sports. In figure scating I think each element of figure scating program at the beginning has 100 points. Now if a scater makes a mistake then points are removed, because he made mistakes "a,b,c". This is an objective reason and explains why the score is not 100.

Once again - Amen!

Perfect example here. I tried something very different for me. I figured it would not be very well recieved, these types of things usually aren't, and it didn't get many downloads...but a c-index of 5?? And not one word as to why. Check it out soon because it will be deleted from my gallery within a day or two.

I see my friend Cynlee has started this so I will throw in my 2 cents too. Have not done that for ahwhile.

The c-index (cows) really does not make sense in my humble opinion. I have had some good images,(maybe not perfect) but I would like them to be! Anyway I have been amazed at the low rating. Like it has been said over and over, your told how good your images are and then getting slammed so darn bad in the VB.
It is very disheartening to see this on anyone's good image.
I think most of us try to get better and better and then to get voted down it feels like a slap in the face.! What's the answer to all of this! It's been discussed so much I really don't know anymore. I do look at the the index and I do look at the amount of downloads.
Just because we might not like a certain subject matter we should try to be fair and courteous in our comments and evaluation.
I don't like spiders so I would just vote a picture down because of it! No Way! They give me the creeps but to see a good close up of one is really intriguing and I'll give the person a good comment and vote if it derserves it.

I don't like people images much at all but do give credit where credit is due but of course I don't make them my desktop either. That is my choice!

Just trying to show that we can be fair in our evaluations no matter what the subject matter is but then we can go on to the next and not fave them or make them our desktop.

I sure would like to see an improvement in the voting system but sure don't have the answer. Like I said I just felt I was overdue for a discussion and this is a real sore spot for many.

I so agree with Pat about the cat images getting low votes also. There have been some really good ones, and they seem to unfairly get knocked down. I for one Love a good pet image and will not hesitate to fave it and give a good vote.
I'll step back and thank you kindly for letting me get this off my chest. sandi♥

*takes notice of a pertinent moment to jump into the fray ...*

@ Rich:

As with all scoring ... give the number some time to adjust.

Personally? Nothing wrong with some experimentation and learning some new approaches. Your image is ... and forgive me being blunt here, kind of non-descript to my eyes.

In between that of a true manipulation, and that of simply applying a filter or treatment to the base image.

The composition is good. However, the treatment has taken any sense of depth out of the equation in my humble opinion. And the remaining delineation is questionable.

@ DMINATOR:

"I want to know the objective reason behind it."

Art is subjective. Simply stated.


Now then, why at this juncture?

Wellll, harkening back to Pat's; aka PatAndre post ... there is a system in place to provide feedback to the artists in addition to the C-Index. It's called ... constructive comments.

Think about it.


And the fact remains, that something has to be in place to allow visitors to sort images.

The C-Index is a simple gauge, and how you approach that number emotionally ... seems to be the fulcrum point as to how 'you' will view your experience on the site here.

"I think the disatisfaction about the fairness of the voting system could be alieviated in part by a reassurance from moderators that genuine concerns voiced about anomalies in score results are taken seriously ..."

Not going to happen. My personal opinion only.

Why? The C-Index already adjusts for those aberrant scores. Something that has not been mentioned once on this thread thus far.

Take it upon yourselves to be more forthright in your comments. That ... is the problem as I view it. My personal opinion only.

Les - I brought that picture up, not to crab about the score, but to point out that an abysmal score got not one comment as to why. To incorporate a scale on various points would allieviate some of that. In addition, having experienced people vote may help when people try something new.

But thanx for the comments, I do appreciate it.

No worries Rich. I got that from you. Just a bit of yang to the yin from me, on the critique side. No slights intended.


And I do agree with you and those that put forth the idea on the limiting of voting by newer members. To an extent.

I could be wrong, however, I do and have gotten the impression from the administration that the site is designed to be all inclusive. Participation is encouraged at all levels of tenure or membership.


The scale idea is a good step forward. However, once again ... no guarantee that it will force better scores coming out of such a system. And on that note ... I will defer to those that have the power to enact any changes.

And if ... if, 'our' work was exhibited or publicly displayed elsewhere ... you would end up with a cross section or spectrum of knowledgeable viewers ... and not.


Annnnd ... place some faith that discussions such as this one, does not fall on deaf ears.

Everyone wants to know why no one leaves a 'comment' as to why their image is receiving a lousy c-index.
Has it occurred to anyone at all that the people making comments are not getting that image in the voting booth?
We currently have 184 pages of new images at 36 images per page. That equals 6,224 images that one can get 10 or 20 or 40 of in the voting booth.
The odds are slim to none (at least for me) that I get an image in the VB that I have already left a comment on.

Solution? Not going there :=)

Mimi, I think we can understand that there are many pages of images and we for sure don't vote on them all. Goodness sakes if we did. Everyone has their own idea of what makes a good image and that is for sure reflected in the VB.

@ Mimi: Agreed. I think the point is that ALL of my friends liked the picture and left nice comments and NO ONE in the VB did? I know, I know that gets back to leaving more honest comments.

@ Sandi: Yes, everyone has their own idea of what makes a good image. That is both a strength and a weakness. We certainly don't want to lose individuality or try and make someone conform to a 'norm'; however when people are voting on whether or not they 'like' a picture, rather than strength of composition, clarity, DOF, etc we end up with great pictures with low c-index and vice-versa.

Since my thought of limiting voters doesn't appear to be gaining much traction I will submit the following for discussion:

Institute a scale system similar to one suggested about a million posts /\ by dminator. To keep it simple I would suggest 4 catagories,as Dmitri did:

* Composition
* Lighting
* Image quality
* Artistic value

Rate each on scale of 1-25, add the 4 together and you have a c-index number. Give us the breakdown and not just the total so we can see where our strengths and weaknesses lie. We don't need the grand total, just the average of each catagory. For example, if I have 10 votes and a total of 200 points for comp the c-idnex average for comp would be 20.

Eliminate the voting requirement for non-cadre mambers. Much as I know this will gall some people I agree with the above comment that there are those that rush through the voting to upload their pictures. Allow one picture every 36 hours for non-cadre members and 3 pictures every 36 hours for cadre members.

Have an educational page similar to the one on leaving a good comment and have it come up whenever someone enters the VB.

I do agree however, that some of this falls on our own shoulders. There is another interesting thread about comments being to nice. I agree and have been trying to be more honest. We need to be constructively critical of each others work (note the word 'constructively').

And Les - thank you for your guidance and insight - believe it or not it is much appreciated. Most of us don't know what it's like to walk in your shoes. I think people who are posting here understand we need some sort of rating system and are trying to find one that works for everyone (or the majority of people anyway). If we didn't think there was any hope of change we wouldn't engage in such heated discussion.

Time to go vote. Everyone's getting a 1 tonite.

(Just kidding!)

I wasn't going to get involved with this thread mainly because most of you know my feelings about the dreaded "C" word and I can't be bothered with being abused again over it.. but..

as I have suggested many many many times when voting not only do the voters do their vote but it should be compulsory for them to either make a comment as to why you voted the way you did before you go on to the next image to vote on (kinda like how you have to look at the image full view first) or have (kind of) like it has been said above but like this for those who don't want to comment:eg compositon: poor {} good {} needs improving {}
that way it gives the artist an idea of why its was rated the way it was.

IMO I think if anyone is getting a raw deal on the voting system its the fractalists, there are some amazing manipulations and fractal work that get hardly a look in because of the usual excuse "I don't know how they do it so I can't vote on it" its the same with photographs too though people who are learning seem to think they can't give a decent score.. its not hard to see if you like the pic, the colour, if it's blurry or not.. sure they may not know what a DOF is but i'm sure there are a lot of other visual things that can be taken into consideration..

OK i'll shut up now.. before I get carried away and end up the same as the other threads beaten to a pulp for my view.. lol..

Come on guys and girls....WHO CARES!! The C index doesn't mean a THING REALLY. Why get all upset over it.

This is a World Wide BBS. There's "Kids" on this board, people with all sorts of "Likes and dislikes", and opinions...hell, I see people on here that don't even have gallerys, but still give comments.
People just "see things with a different eye"

Don't get all "personally bent out of shape" over a stupid number which REALLY doesn't mean a damn thing!!

I've got my Preferences in Images. Photography and Digital landscapes and creations.

I'm not that big on Fracts, or Poser type stuff. So, unless it's just completely Junk, I rate it as a 5. "Average". Which to me it is. An Average Frac. When a Frac really jumps out at me....Like...."WOW, That's cool"! Ok, 6,7,8. It's all "Visual".

Now Photography. Flowers for example. Seems to be the season for em.
I look for FOCUS, Contrast and Color First, in ANY Photograph. If it ain't got all 3 of those FIRST, in the voting booth, well...it's a 4 at best. If it does have all those 3, then I go lookin....at angle, lighting, background...Lookin for SOME Type of a "POW" Factor. No Pow factor? It's and "Average, good shot". 5.

I got "friends", like all you got "friends"....My friends sure ain't afraid to tell me what they think about my submissions. THAT's all that matters to me. "C index"? I could care less.

One of the neatest comments I have ever got, which means more to me than any C index or anything else.

"I looked thru your gallery, and the one thing that really stuck me, was your Diversity." Thank you.
Now That's a compliment.
Cause I really try do be Diverse in my Photography and Graphics.

I really try to post "Different" stuff. Something with at least a "Little" POW factor.

C index? WTFC. :-)

Damn....Somebody really noticed!! :-)

YES!! EXACTLY!! i have been saying that for so long and each time i'm the one who's wrong.. lol good to see someone finally thinks the same as me.. lol

LOL... I think you're right Jackie... fractals DO get dumped on in the booth !

I have to agree also that the fractal artists do not get their just rewards. I do not understand that art but I do like and appreciate what I call a good one and vote on and comment I believe fairly. I find some of them so impressive and because i do not understand how to do it - I find it even more impressive. I have some fractal artists on my friends list and if it pops out at me and looks very intricate that is what i notice most.

Exactly its not too hard to look at it.. you don't need to know how to do it.. On behalf of the fractalists we thankyou.. ;)

That fractals get a bad rap is proof that voting is purely subjective and what follow are my subjective opinions.

1) Folks just vote better on the genre they prefer the most, like landscapes and animals. It's really all that simple. Voting is a "no-brainer". To vote, the image has to be viewed momentarily at full size and that is the only time, unless the image is viewied full screen when commenting, that the quality can really be seen. I always view images full screen before commenting because even though a post may be impressive at first glance or in thumbnail, when it is viewed closer, it may have lots of noise, loss of detail, blurring, etc.

2) Remember that those voting don't often know the mechanics or techniques employed in fractal creation to decide on the attributes of a good fractal, or they don't know what depth of field or rule of thirds mean to be able to determine if a photo is good quality.

3) Perhaps folks vote as they do in disdain for the current system. In that light, a system that could be helpful to the artists just becomes a bugaboo.

4) So, if we can't fix it (the voting system), maybe we should just ignore it.

@purmusic

"I want to know the objective reason behind it."
- Art is subjective. Simply stated.

Yes thats what I agree with, and was the whole point of this thread. You cannot rate art, especially in numeric scale.

How can you rate Mona lisa or Three musicians with a scale from 0 to 100 ? I guess the first would get c-index 80 and the last somewhere near 10 :)

The thing is that we don't have a choice. We are forced to rate someone else's work. So my point was if we have this objective system, then we should rate objectivelly.

Speaking of how art can be rated. I think it cannot be rater at all. It is a matter of personal preferance. You either like it or don't ! Some other web-sites only have vote +1..+5 points. So people always rate positivelly how strongly they like this picture, thats it :)

For example 3 people voted:
a) +1 point
b) +5 points
c) +1 point

The final score is 7 points from 3 votes. and not 2.3 average like it would be now.

Dmitri, I think you and I are pretty much in agreement here. My only concern with a grand total as opposed to an average is not knowing what each indivisual vote was. In your example above the total score is seven, but 2 people didn't like it at all and scored it a 1, where one person loved it and gave it a five which skews the entire result. One person voting very high or very low can skew the end result dramatically. In addition, until all pictures have the same number of votes there is no way for visitors to objectively compare posts. Nor can I compare my works to others.

I agree with your premise entirely, but still think we need an average, whether it be 1-100, 1-5 or starting with a baseline score such as 5 and adding/subtracting points from there.

To the fractal folks. My apologies. I am one of the people you are referring to. I have downloaded Apopphysis and played with a bit, but don't have the slightest idea of what I'm doing. If one of you would like to help educate me (hint, hint Lauren) I'd appreciate it, but right now I have no idea how much work, or creativity went into producing the end result so I end voting on whether I like it or not. I usually go back and compare my vote to the c-index and to be honest I usually blow it.

@ Dmitri and Rich:

Well done gentlemen. I applaud your efforts and suggestions and time spent towards a 'fix'.


I suppose airing one's grievances is also part of the equation, however ... working constructively towards an end goal seems to be more productive in my mind.


So ... it sounds like, for the most part ... that there is agreement that some sort of ranking system needs to be in place.

If not to provide 'us', the artists ... some sort of gauge as to how successful a piece or image posted is ... then, certainly from an administrative standpoint ... to allow visitors to sort images on the site here.

Ok, intermission is over ... rambling on the part of yours truly ... done.

Carry on. :o)

"2) Remember that those voting don't often know the mechanics or techniques employed in fractal creation to decide on the attributes of a good fractal, or they don't know what depth of field or rule of thirds mean to be able to determine if a photo is good quality."

"To the fractal folks. My apologies. I am one of the people you are referring to. I have downloaded Apopphysis and played with a bit, but don't have the slightest idea of what I'm doing. If one of you would like to help educate me (hint, hint Lauren) I'd appreciate it, but right now I have no idea how much work, or creativity went into producing the end result so I end voting on whether I like it or not. I usually go back and compare my vote to the c-index and to be honest I usually blow it."

And as I have said over and over that its not hard for someone to look at a fractal and say whether they like the colour, design, the detail involved..

I don't believe I said anything to refute what you said, Jackie. Maybe I don't comment on your fractals often, but I do vote on them with regard to their composition, design, color, and overall appeal. I have given many high marks to fractals that I have found appealing. I said my opinions were subjective, not the all consuming truth of the matter.

You have read what I wrote wrong.. why do you always think that I'm complaining when I make a comment??? There was no need to go off like that about my comment.. All I was responding to was where you said about "those voting don't often know the mechanics or techniques employed in a fract creation to decide on the attributes of a good fractal" I was giving MY suggestions on how people can work out how to vote on them.. if thats a stab at you in any way I must be blind because there was NOTHING in what I said directed at you for commenting or voting on my images whatsoever..

I guess I should have been ready for that response because everytime I have an opinion on the voting method/cindex and suggesting (helping) people on how to look at a fractal to vote without knowing the mechanics I ALWAYS get jumped on for MY OPINION.. I'm finished with this rubbish.. Don't bother replying to this comment you think what you like.. oh and if you want to complain about me having an opinion and suggesting how to vote go right ahead.

Annnnnd ... this is where things potentially get bogged down. :o\

Let's try and not let it though, shall we?

No one, that I have noticed or read has directed any comments or words at anyone specifically.

In fact, save the times when it was made readily apparent that someone was responding to, or replying to someone in particular ... the tone has been general in nature.

Carry on ...

Thankyou!

screaming???? lmao.. my dear girl I was not screaming..

Okay, that's enough.