UKC Photo Voting

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Sam W 22 Aug 2016
Low votes for quality photos is a long running grumble, and for me it's now reached the point where I'm going to disallow voting on any new photos that I post to the UKC gallery. A solution to the problem would be very welcome, wondering what people's thoughts are on this.

My suggestion would be showing who has voted on the photo and what mark they gave it, accountability would go a long way in discouraging people from giving a 1* vote to pictures that clearly deserve better. Any other ideas?
12
 Fraser 22 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

> A solution to the problem would be very welcome, wondering what people's thoughts are on this.

1st world problem. Relax.

1
 FactorXXX 22 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Do away with the 'Rubbish/Poor/Average' ratings and replace them with something akin to the star rating system used in climbing.
That way, the good photo's still get highlighted, but all the others remain anonymously in the background.
If someone wants their photo and/or gallery critiqued, then they can always ask for that in the Photography Forum.
 d_b 22 Aug 2016
In reply to FactorXXX:
Wont work. People will just treat it as a good/average/rubbish system and assign stars accordingly.
Post edited at 12:35
1
In reply to Sam W:

You have quite a few ok photos with quite high scores, so maybe someone has a slight vendetta? Trying to correct what they see is deliberate over-grading?

I think a 10 point scale would be much better, or maybe a different algorithm than a pure average? Something that discounted/weighted outliers?

At the end of the day, it matters not a hoot!
 Tom Last 22 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

To be fair the voting on your photos looks pretty much par for the course to me, you've got some good shots, no absolute belters really and no crap. To reflect this you've received mostly 3s and 4s and a few 5s, seems fair enough. Which images specifically were you thinking have been sold short?

For what it's worth I agree that the voting system is mindless rubbish, as somebody mentioned above a star system might be better. Better yet you can just put your images in the 'crag shot' (I think) gallery which disables the voting and hopefully encourages actual comments from those who feel strongly enough - though this can go both ways!

Cheers,
Tom

PS, I haven't voted on any of your pics.
OP Sam W 22 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Thanks for the responses, and to those who have commented on my photos.

To clarify, the part of voting that frustrates me is that I can see from the way the average changes that usually about 20% of people will give 1* to photos. I recognise that I've got a long way to go before I deserve photo of the week, but at the same time I don't think that anything in my gallery actually deserves a 1 star rating.

Given that I don't play any politics to get votes on my photos (i.e. don't ask friends to vote on them), I'm assuming that other contributors to the gallery have the same problem.
 Fraser 22 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

It could also be accidental voting. I've sometimes done that and it can only be corrected straight away otherwise there's no retrospective adjustment possible. None of your photos has an average lower than 3 which is pretty good.
 aln 22 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

A good solution is not giving a f*ck.
1
cap'nChino 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:
Just looked through your gallery, I would say your photos have been voted on fairly.
Also for full disclosure I am one of the three "dislikes" on this thread.

The voting system generally evens out and is a good way of sorting through the chaff if you want to have a quick look at the great/good shots of the week without having to look at a load of bum shots.

Wouldn't take the voting too seriously, you've got some nice photos in your gallery, keep at it, improve and win the crowd.
Post edited at 12:11
1
 MeMeMe 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

I don't think your idea would work as there are plenty of pseudonymous people on here who don't care if their fictitious name is linked to a crap vote.

Just be happy with your photos, you don't need validation from others if you're pleased with them yourself.

 Mick Ward 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Allocating numerical scores for artistic endeavour has always seemed to me rather vulgarly reductionist. (I'm not saying it can't be done with reasonable validity but it's just not my cup of tea.) This being so, rather than give a score, it seems (to me) preferable to make a comment to express my appreciation. At the very least, this is surely more personal.

Years ago Al Evans used to get wound up on here with unknown folk giving ludicrously low scores to some of his photos - even iconic ones. Al had been a spectacularly successful photographer/cameraman for several decades. What did he know?

There's always somebody, somewhere wanting to drag you down - especially from behind a keyboard. Don't let them.

Mick
1
 Robert Durran 23 Aug 2016
In reply to cap'nChino:

> Wouldn't take the voting too seriously, you've got some nice photos in your gallery, keep at it, improve and win the crowd.

Don't go too far to win the crowd though - there is a danger you'll end up going over the top with post processing. But do look at others' good photos to help work out what pleases you.

1
 d_b 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Mick Ward:

> There's always somebody, somewhere wanting to drag you down - especially from behind a keyboard.

That dislike was just me proving your point
2
cap'nChino 23 Aug 2016
In reply to davidbeynon:

It amazes me how much people take dislikes seriously and to heart on this forum. The lemming was almost in tears the other month if I recall due to persistent dislikes.

People need to keep in mind its all fake internet bo11ocks and to not get pants in a twist.

Ps. I disliked your post..wanted to prove my point further.
5
 Danm79 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Reminds me of the comedian tapping the microphone when a punchline is met with silence, ("Is this thing on?")
 d_b 23 Aug 2016
In reply to cap'nChino:

But you know you have arrived on a forum when you get your first dislike stalker!
7
 felt 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Danm79:

They all laughed when I told them I was going to be a comedian. They're not laughing now.
 IM 23 Aug 2016
In reply to felt:

> They all laughed when I told them I was going to be a comedian. They're not laughing now.

Classic Monkhouse!
Lusk 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:
To be brutally honest, as you ask, they're average at best. I can't do any better myself.
None of of them warrant 5 stars compared to many pictures on UKC that most certainly do!



These are 5 star pics ...
http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/author.html?nstart=0&sort=v&id=32371
Post edited at 18:44
1
 PPP 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

I had a quick look at your photos. I think ratings you got are very fair. It's hard to judge your own photos, unless it's due to poor technique. For example, your black and white photos just look gray and some of narrow DOF photos just look poor (sorry!) as the foreground is blurred, with no additional value and still takes a third of the photo. Just doesn't look appealing to me. I ain't photographer, but earned a bit of cash when I was younger and got few photos displayed in the youth/local exhibitions.

P.s. Given I got into TOP 10 few weeks ago with a selfie (!!!), I think the system works well. Maybe too well.
 Mick Ward 23 Aug 2016
In reply to mac fae stirling:

> Classic Monkhouse!

Beautiful! Didn't know he'd said that. Thanks.

Mick
 IM 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Mick Ward:

> Beautiful! Didn't know he'd said that. Thanks.

> Mick

He also said; 'I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my Father; not screaming and shouting like his passengers'

Mac

PS apologies for the thread hijack..
 ScottTalbot 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Whatever you do, don't ever post photo's on a photography forum, you'd have a nervous breakdown!
 icnoble 23 Aug 2016
In reply to PPP:

I totally agree with your comments.


 PPP 23 Aug 2016
In reply to icnoble:

Once I got better at photography, I understood that my photos are still crap. The only difference now is that I know what's a better photo.

Taking photos on film can make a big difference. Unfortunately, I was born in 90s and I feel like my generation was the last which could still justify film photography without being called hipster.
OP Sam W 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Thanks for all the comments. My original post wasn't intended as a whinge, but it seems I have a problem that either doesn't exist, or is so insignificant that nobody else is bothered, therefore I shall let it lie. I shall also take the general comments that there is room for improvement in my photography at face value and continue trying to improve it.

In the meantime, if anybody does feel that a photo in the gallery, whether posted by me or someone else, does deserve a rating of 1, how about making a comment at the same time as voting? If people really are putting photos that bad up, you would be doing them a favour by helping them improve, and hopefully improving the general quality of photos in the gallery at the same time.
 galpinos 23 Aug 2016
In reply to PPP:

> Taking photos on film can make a big difference. Unfortunately, I was born in 90s and I feel like my generation was the last which could still justify film photography without being called hipster.

With your hipster beard and specs and the fact you were born 10yrs too late, you're walking a fine line....
 PPP 23 Aug 2016
In reply to galpinos:

I'm also into third wave/specialty coffee a lot. Ride a single speed/fixed, too. Thanks.

But I don't have a MacBook, so surely I'm alright.
 galpinos 23 Aug 2016
In reply to PPP:

> I'm also into third wave

I'm assuming that's a coffee thing and not feminism? I have a hand grinder, Brikka and Aeropress but I guess you'd take things a few steps further!

> But I don't have a MacBook, so surely I'm alright.

Hmm, I'm not hip enough to know if MacBooks are still hip. I have one so I'd just assumed they're not!

 PPP 23 Aug 2016
In reply to galpinos:

> I'm assuming that's a coffee thing and not feminism? I have a hand grinder, Brikka and Aeropress but I guess you'd take things a few steps further!

Aye, third wave/specialty/etc is about single origin (single farm or region at worst), freshly roasted and high quality coffee. Just couldn't go back.
A step further here (Aeropress, V60, Chemex, Sowden, Kalita Wave, Clever Coffee Dripper and Feldgrind as a hand grinder), but planning to step into espresso game within next few months.

But oh well . Hipster term is just overused anyway.
 jim jones 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

> To clarify, the part of voting that frustrates me is that I can see from the way the average changes that usually about 20% of people will give 1* to photos. I recognise that I've got a long way to go before I deserve photo of the week, but at the same time I don't think that anything in my gallery actually deserves a 1 star rating.<

I've noticed much the same thing.



 Big Ger 23 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Why bother with what others think?
1
 Justin Reid 24 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

TBH I've noticed low ratings occasionally but they tend to even out over time. I usually put it down to folks not quite getting the point of the photo which I use as a learning experience. Life's too short, take photo's you enjoy first and foremost, post what you feel to be the best composition but expect the occasional troll vote/comment.
 petestack 24 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

> for me it's now reached the point where I'm going to disallow voting on any new photos that I post to the UKC gallery.

You can't. You can only allow/block comments (not votes) and/or post to non-voting categories like crag shots, people or wildlife. But (while I don't particularly care for the 'competition' aspect either and haven't voted on a photo for years) you don't have to post photos at all if you don't like the system!
 Al Evans 25 Aug 2016
In reply to Mick Ward:

Thing is Mick, I used to post pictures which were technically crap, but iconic or historic, these were always voted low by some people, but it got that the same people were also voting any of my pictures low, quality or not. I stopped posting pictures except in the categories that couldn't be voted on. There is an intrinsic quality in a historic picture which has nothing to do with it's technical brilliance and it should have been reflected in the vote but it rarely was. Many of Brian Croppers photos fall into this category. BTW hope you are well Mick.
 Fraser 25 Aug 2016
In reply to Al Evans:

> There is an intrinsic quality in a historic picture which has nothing to do with it's technical brilliance and it should have been reflected in the vote but it rarely was.

I'd have to disagree. There are plenty of bad, old ('historic'?) photos as well as bad, 'modern' ones. Age doesn't guarantee quality.

Or do you mean something else by the term 'historic'?
 andrewmc 25 Aug 2016
In reply to Fraser:

> Or do you mean something else by the term 'historic'?

Probably. I suspect Al means 'historic' in the sense of 'significant in history' sense, not just the 'old' sense. The Apollo 11 landing footage is of truly awful quality, but still historic...
 Mick Ward 25 Aug 2016
In reply to andrewmcleod:

A good climbing example might be the photo of the FA of Woubits, taken of Whillans by Brown (or vice versa) in 'The Black Cliff'. The rain's pelting down so much, it's almost like lines on the photo. It's black and white. The climber is blurry, dark, indistinct (well, as I remember, not seen it for yonks!)

But the remarkable thing is that all these deficiences 'make' the photo. They become its strengths. It's not a professionally posed shot (though nothing wrong with these). It's the belayer taking a snap of his mate. They're in a serious situation in rapidly deteriorating weather. Even though they're the two best climbers of their generation it could, all too easily, end in tears.

Another, even better example (which has just occurred while writing the above) is Tony Howard's amazing shot of the retreat from the Troll Wall in 1967(?) Dark figures on a rain-lashed ledge. Exhaustion setting in. German soldiers on the Russian front, brave guys who'll fight till they drop but... they're getting weaker and weaker.

And then the unforgettable feral look in Tony Nicholl's eyes. To stop him, you're going to have to cut his heart out.

He got them down. Four lives were saved. And all of it's in this (technially crap) historic, utterly iconic photo.

Mick
 Mick Ward 25 Aug 2016
In reply to Al Evans:

Hi Al, lovely to hear from you. I'm bimbling along and hope you are too. Michele spends the winters in Altea and I come out at Christmas and April to take her back. Would be great to meet up some time.

For what it's worth, the low voting on your photos seemed to be more of an internet thing than anything else. Although you probably don't think about it much, the fact is that you're an intrinsic part of British climbing history, courtesy of the first ascents you made, the climbing partners you had, etc.

And while many people on here are great, I think everywhere there will be a small-minded minority who will get a kick out of putting others down. If they can get a notable target anonymously, from the safety of their keyboard, well they're in heaven. Except of course it really ain't heaven. It's jerksville. But the more upset you got (because you were taking things seriously), the more they loved it. (I know, sad beyond compare.)

That's my reading of it - though I still feel sorry for Ian Parsons getting Tippexed out of history by Birtles. He redeemed himself though by the best strapline ever in a climbing mag: 'Can this be Britain's first 6c?'

All best wishes,

Mick
In reply to Mick Ward:
That Troll Wall picture has stuck with me ever since seeing it in a book I read in a mountain hut. I tried to find it again but without knowing who or what it was about. The search ended when I bought the Tony Howard book and saw it in there.
 Mick Ward 25 Aug 2016
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I first saw it in a big mountaineering compendium book circa 1970. It transfixed me. A haunting image of mountaineering when the dice go against you and you're well and truly in the shit.

Am so glad they survived. At first, looking at the photo, you think, 'No chance'. And then you see the look in Tony Nichcoll's eyes. Absolutely unforgettable.

Mick
 Sean Kelly 25 Aug 2016
In reply to Mick Ward:

> A good climbing example might be the photo of the FA of Woubits, taken of Whillans by Brown (or vice versa) in 'The Black Cliff'. The rain's pelting down so much, it's almost like lines on the photo. It's black and white. The climber is blurry, dark, indistinct (well, as I remember, not seen it for yonks!)

> But the remarkable thing is that all these deficiences 'make' the photo. They become its strengths. It's not a professionally posed shot (though nothing wrong with these). It's the belayer taking a snap of his mate. They're in a serious situation in rapidly deteriorating weather. Even though they're the two best climbers of their generation it could, all too easily, end in tears.

> Mick
The classic example of a bad photo that became iconic is Robert Capa's photos of the Americans going ashore on Omaha Beach on 'D' Day. It's totally blurred and a whole role of film practically wiped by poor processing, but that one shot made it. Taking pics is bad enough without some German trying his best to kill you!
 AllanMac 25 Aug 2016
In reply to Sam W:

Photo criticism should be constructive and articulated with words, not just an empty, anonymous number. If someone chooses to slap down a photo with a 2 or a 1, I want to know who it is doing the slapping, and why.
 Robert Durran 25 Aug 2016
In reply to AllanMac:

> Photo criticism should be constructive and articulated with words, not just an empty, anonymous number. If someone chooses to slap down a photo with a 2 or a 1, I want to know who it is doing the slapping, and why.

Some photos are just plain crap and will get loads of 1's and 2's, so no argument there. Maybe the names of the 1 and 2 voters should be visible for photos averaging, say, 4.5 or more to make them accountable.
 FactorXXX 26 Aug 2016
In reply to davidbeynon:

Wont work. People will just treat it as a good/average/rubbish system and assign stars accordingly.

Really?
I would assume that people would give one star for a good photo, two for a very good one and three for an exceptional one (remind you of something?).
Anyway, if they did award stars to 'Rubbish' photo's they would in effect be upgrading them to good. Sort of defeats the object of their cynicism doesn't it?
 d_b 26 Aug 2016
In reply to FactorXXX:

That may work if you were introducing photo voting as a new thing, but you aren't starting from scratch. People already have expectations about how this stuff works and will just treat anything new as a different interface to something familiar.

I see this sort of thing all the time in software. Changes are ignored or resisted.

 Al Evans 26 Aug 2016
In reply to davidbeynon:

The other thing to remember is the the cameras avaiable that could be carried on a route was definitely restricted compared to cameras today. A great deal of effort was generally required to produce a great climbing only 20 years ago compared to now, the earlier efforts should be judged as of their time.
 d_b 26 Aug 2016
In reply to Al Evans:

A couple of years ago I read an article that claimed that 10% of all photos ever taken had been taken in the last year. Even crap photographers like me are bound to get some good ones if they keep pressing that button.

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...