--
--The comment you left in the exhibition gallery voting booth has me
wondering. Why did photos without the photographers name on the
thumbnail NOT capture your attention? Are you casting a vote for
the photo or the photographer?
I never put my name on the thumbnail......I want my photos to stand
on their own merits. Does that mean that you never consider my
photos when you are voting? Do you even look at them?
I am interested to know....I am sure that the other photographers
who don't add their name to the thumbnail are also interested to
know why their photos didn't capture your attention too. Some of
them are superb.
Gayle
--
'We don't make a photograph with just a camera. We bring to the act
of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen,
the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams
http://shot2shot.no-ip.com
--There was a time a few challenges ago where I believed some images
might have been getting votes based on who they were shot by.
Someone else suggested totally anonymous entries (with your details
logged with the host) but that was quickly rejected for many, many
reasons.
A compromise was sort of reached when someone suggested leaving the
name off the Thumbnail, just logging in the "Author's Name" field.
Personally, I believe this is a very good system and removes any
unintentional bias ("Ooh, that one's by John Smith, I'll have a
look at that") and hopefully gets everyone looking at all the
images.
I'd be saddened to think that any of my images weren't being voted
on because of this (as opposed to them not being good enough!).
Phil
--Which is exactly why I don't put my name on the thumbnail, but DO
attach it to the photo in the gallery. This does not make it a
blind voting system......all the names are there in the galleries,
but it makes it a little fairer, because then ALL the
interesting/good/dramatic/well composed photos get clicked on and
looked at...not just the ones taken by those who's work you already
know and admire.
I am just curious to know why Mark dismissed, out of hand, all the
photos that did not have the names on the thumbnails. Does having
the name there make it a better photo?
Gayle
--The comment you left in the exhibition gallery voting booth has me
wondering. Why did photos without the photographers name on the
thumbnail NOT capture your attention? Are you casting a vote for
the photo or the photographer?
I never put my name on the thumbnail......I want my photos to stand
on their own merits. Does that mean that you never consider my
photos when you are voting? Do you even look at them?
I am interested to know....I am sure that the other photographers
who don't add their name to the thumbnail are also interested to
know why their photos didn't capture your attention too. Some of
them are superb.
Gayle
--
'We don't make a photograph with just a camera. We bring to the act
of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen,
the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams
http://shot2shot.no-ip.com
'We don't make a photograph with just a camera. We bring to the act
of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen,
the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams
http://shot2shot.no-ip.com
http://www.pbase.com/whqttt/
--
--Which is exactly why I don't put my name on the thumbnail, but DO
attach it to the photo in the gallery. This does not make it a
blind voting system......all the names are there in the galleries,
but it makes it a little fairer, because then ALL the
interesting/good/dramatic/well composed photos get clicked on and
looked at...not just the ones taken by those who's work you already
know and admire.
I am just curious to know why Mark dismissed, out of hand, all the
photos that did not have the names on the thumbnails. Does having
the name there make it a better photo?
Gayle
--The comment you left in the exhibition gallery voting booth has me
wondering. Why did photos without the photographers name on the
thumbnail NOT capture your attention? Are you casting a vote for
the photo or the photographer?
I never put my name on the thumbnail......I want my photos to stand
on their own merits. Does that mean that you never consider my
photos when you are voting? Do you even look at them?
I am interested to know....I am sure that the other photographers
who don't add their name to the thumbnail are also interested to
know why their photos didn't capture your attention too. Some of
them are superb.
Gayle
--
'We don't make a photograph with just a camera. We bring to the act
of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen,
the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams
http://shot2shot.no-ip.com
'We don't make a photograph with just a camera. We bring to the act
of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen,
the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams
http://shot2shot.no-ip.com
--
--Let me clarify: I didn't say it was WRONG to try "special effects"
or shooting lights, I just wanted to explain why I chose like I
did. My personal preferences are just such that I am much more
impressed with a simple shot supported by good lighting, than I am
with an advanced shot of some unusual light source or phenomenon.
That's why I specifically wrote "to me".
Yes, you are so right in "to each his own"! In voting in these
challenges, I would hope and expect all to vote strictly according
to their own tastes and preferences - and no doubt, the votes will
spread on many different images. Thank goodness for that!
To sum it up: I wrote what I wrote to share the thoughts I had
during voting - not to say that other interpretations were inferior
in any way...
--
Olaf
I come from a flat land of horizontal sunlight and horizontal rains...
--
I didn't think that was what you were saying, but wasn't quite sure how to interpret your reply. I chose to clarify myself - to make sure I wasn't misunderstood...
Thanks and likewise!
Probably best wait for Jack to catch up with these posts. I'm sure he'll do what he can when he can.
--you TOTALLY misunderstood / misread what I was saying about no name
on the image, etc.
Here's my point:
Voting is VERY time consuming. I happen not to have alot of this
right now
(time)
I have spent a great deal of TIME, looking at all the images and
their rep image thumbs for day, commenting on MANY of the images!
Now it was time for voting.... and I didn't have a lot of time on
my hands....
so I focused my attention on the images that I liked that HAD the
artist name readily handy / available / under the thumb image,
where it SHOULD be.
This did NOT mean I didn't vote for someone I didn't "know". In
fact I was making an effort to vote for someone NEW who's image I
liked......
everybody deserves a chance
Ok? I hope I cleared THAT mistaken meaning up for everyone!
Markjay
--The comment you left in the exhibition gallery voting booth has me
wondering. Why did photos without the photographers name on the
thumbnail NOT capture your attention? Are you casting a vote for
the photo or the photographer?
I never put my name on the thumbnail......I want my photos to stand
on their own merits. Does that mean that you never consider my
photos when you are voting? Do you even look at them?
I am interested to know....I am sure that the other photographers
who don't add their name to the thumbnail are also interested to
know why their photos didn't capture your attention too. Some of
them are superb.
Gayle
--
'We don't make a photograph with just a camera. We bring to the act
of photography all the books we have read, the movies we have seen,
the music we have heard and the people we have loved.' Ansel Adams
http://shot2shot.no-ip.com
Photography allows me the opportunity to share what I see through
my viewfinder, with those who can apprecaite the beauty of the
world around us.
At the risk of sounding like a conservative who does not care for change [that's not really me in other respects (but sometimes I do tend to adhere to "if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it")] - I will say that I prefer the old way of voting... Somehow it just seems simpler. For one thing, keeping track of what photos each individual has voted for, has become more burdensome with the booth. Another advantage I see in the old way of doing it, is that I only need to keep track of two different sites, instead of three.
--
--
--
Everyone has their own agenda when voting, and you are not alone in
having little time.
My votes are cast for the 5 photographs I like the best, and that
best fit the theme. I don't vote for obvious Photoshop
composites....others seem to love them. I also don't cast my votes
based on who's been around for a while/won a previous challenge vs
new entrants. It's the photo that counts. For me, it will always be
about the photo and not the photographer (or the camera, for that
matter).
Gayle
