Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Weekly Photo Contest, Sept 15 - 22, Color Discipline
- Thread starter Nathan King
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Pacific Park
In the past, we have gone with the most votes to select a winner. That would be anotherscotsman in this case. I think that would be a good choice! But as you say, lots of great photos.
He's got 48 hours , let the clock run out . Give him to the end of the 24th , maybe he's got to raise bail money
I'm just joking. He has 48 hours. Nathan is good about this stuff. If someoldguy is right, Nathan wouldn't get any message while he is behind bars anyway.
I just had to go review the rules as I honestly couldn't recall what the procedure was..... I'd always thought that if the winner from the previous week, the one who had started the new competition, were unable to complete the job by judging the enries that it would be the second-place winner from the previous week who would take over the judging. I was surprised to see that instead, as IndyDenny mentions, it is predicated on votes, which actually strikes me as rather contradictory to the rule which says no comments on images during the competition.
Even though a vote is not a verbal comment, when someone clicks the "like" button it seems to me that this is in and of itself a commentary. That's one reason why I've never added "likes" to any images I've seen in competition, even though I have in POTD threads, because I thought it was not permitted, just like written commentary. When I've seen "likes" on competition entries, I've wondered if this also wouldn't have the (subconscious) effect of also influencing the judge's decision as well? I wonder how many other people have not used the "like" system on competition entries for the same reasons?
This actually went back and forth for several years. It used to be that the only rule was that it went to the chosen second place. We went through a period quite a few years ago in which both first and second place winners disappeared, and we ended up with relatively long gaps between contests (over a full week in one or two cases.) In those cases, someone stepped up and volunteered to judge.
After some discussion, it was felt that the time lags were too long and it was a bit unfair to expect someone to volunteer. What we settled on was that the OP had 48 hours to judge, then the chosen second place had 24 hours to judge. The "most likes" approach applied only to the third judge.
Somewhere along the line that got rewritten into the "likes rule" we currently see. Now some judges post the incorrect "likes" rule and others post the incomplete "second place" rule, rather than what we had decided at that time. In either case, it has been extremely rare that neither the OP nor the chosen second place show up for judging.
Personally, I never had a strong feeling about the volunteer vs. most likes approaches. I'm here to have fun (as we all are) and I only care that someone does the judging.
Clix Pix's thoughts about not using "likes" is interesting, well taken, and worth discussing. I'm just not sure how we would really be able to control that.
Personally I don’t like counting Likes (and now the extras) in lieu of a real judge simply because it can be really easy for photos to get missed due to the wonky notifications. A photo that has 7 likes vs 5 may have just been seen by more people. Especially for those posting late in the week.
I do agree with the having fun part. ?
I do agree with the having fun part. ?
Agreed.
While I don't mind people posting "likes" on pictures, I think it a poor idea to think to have that taken into account as part of the judging.
Were this to become the case, (almost like FB), to my mind, it would detract from (my enjoyment of and possibly the merits of) the weekly competition.
Indeed, in that case, I would prefer to see "likes" (or "reactions" as they are now referred to) prohibited completely until after the completion of the judging.
I would agree on not allowing the "likes" until the contest is over. However, I'm not sure how we would enforce that!?
My favorite part of this has been the various contest ideas and having to come up with, or take, a photo that seems to qualify. I often don't even post a photo, but look through my library for photos that I've taken that might fit the criteria. I REALLY enjoy seeing how others interpret the theme as I often get really good ideas from them! Thanks
My favorite part of this has been the various contest ideas and having to come up with, or take, a photo that seems to qualify. I often don't even post a photo, but look through my library for photos that I've taken that might fit the criteria. I REALLY enjoy seeing how others interpret the theme as I often get really good ideas from them! Thanks
Thank you, Deep Diver, for clarifying things, especially the history behind some of this!
I absolutely agree that the bottom line here is for us to have fun — both participants and viewers in these competitions. It’s really interesting to see different photographers’ interpretations of a specific topic!
Molly has pointed out one of the potential problems with depending on the voting to determine the winner of a competition, and, yes, if someone doesn’t happen to see a particular entry or two and therefore does not click on the “like” or other “reaction” symbol, this skews the results of any voting.... Equally, if one does happen to see an image and really likes it but isn’t clicking on any of the reaction symbols for the reasons I mentioned above, that, too, affects the results. It really isn’t a valid competition in that case, is it?
Scepticalscribe has also made some astute observations. We’re MR, not FB. Fortunately, too, we are not talking Olympics-level competition with actual gold, silver and bronze medals at stake, but how we handle these competitions and their conclusions does deserve some further discussion and in the end a clearly-stated and nailed-down explanation and definition of whatever rule is established.
I absolutely agree that the bottom line here is for us to have fun — both participants and viewers in these competitions. It’s really interesting to see different photographers’ interpretations of a specific topic!
Molly has pointed out one of the potential problems with depending on the voting to determine the winner of a competition, and, yes, if someone doesn’t happen to see a particular entry or two and therefore does not click on the “like” or other “reaction” symbol, this skews the results of any voting.... Equally, if one does happen to see an image and really likes it but isn’t clicking on any of the reaction symbols for the reasons I mentioned above, that, too, affects the results. It really isn’t a valid competition in that case, is it?
Scepticalscribe has also made some astute observations. We’re MR, not FB. Fortunately, too, we are not talking Olympics-level competition with actual gold, silver and bronze medals at stake, but how we handle these competitions and their conclusions does deserve some further discussion and in the end a clearly-stated and nailed-down explanation and definition of whatever rule is established.
Well, it used to be the case that the 'no comment' rule before judging was complete was enforced (well, also self enforced), with polite reminders from others in the thread - plus, the thread starter - to please cease and desist from commenting on pictures/images until after judging was concluded.
Actually, the understanding was, that "comments" included "likes" - nowadays called "responses" or "reactions" - as well as actual comments, commentary, and remarks about images.
Personally, I would be happy to go back to that; while I understand "liking" a picture - and do it because many others do now, in truth, I am with @Clix Pix on this, and would prefer not to make preferences known until after judging concluded.
Not least because preferences might indeed serve to influence judging, which should be allowed to remain - and to be undertaken - entirely without prejudice.
Actually, the understanding was, that "comments" included "likes" - nowadays called "responses" or "reactions" - as well as actual comments, commentary, and remarks about images.
Personally, I would be happy to go back to that; while I understand "liking" a picture - and do it because many others do now, in truth, I am with @Clix Pix on this, and would prefer not to make preferences known until after judging concluded.
Not least because preferences might indeed serve to influence judging, which should be allowed to remain - and to be undertaken - entirely without prejudice.
Last edited:
All of these points are well taken. Please allow me to be bold enough to suggest:
1) We go back to first place, second place, volunteer as the order of succession keeping the 48 hour and 24 hour time frames in place. It only happened a few times that we needed a volunteer. If we keep the time frames in place, we will not having to worry about the long lags.
2) We add "no likes" to the "no comments" rule.
1) We go back to first place, second place, volunteer as the order of succession keeping the 48 hour and 24 hour time frames in place. It only happened a few times that we needed a volunteer. If we keep the time frames in place, we will not having to worry about the long lags.
2) We add "no likes" to the "no comments" rule.
I used to "like" every entry as an encouragement to everyone entering, but now I don't until after the competition is judged.
A "Like" in the daily pic thread has a different meaning to me. I generally apply a sliding scale to my "likes" based on the skill of the photog posting their pic. I see "Likes" as an encouragement for sharing. It's really just "I like that pic" and "keep shooting" - shrug. Now we have have "Wow" and "Love" to make "Like" less good and "Sad" and "Angry" also - what could possibly go wrong?
Photography used to be about just sharing pics with other folks and now it's turning into something else that doesn't make much sense to me.
A "Like" in the daily pic thread has a different meaning to me. I generally apply a sliding scale to my "likes" based on the skill of the photog posting their pic. I see "Likes" as an encouragement for sharing. It's really just "I like that pic" and "keep shooting" - shrug. Now we have have "Wow" and "Love" to make "Like" less good and "Sad" and "Angry" also - what could possibly go wrong?
Photography used to be about just sharing pics with other folks and now it's turning into something else that doesn't make much sense to me.
I think that is really what this discussion is about....... Making sure it stays "pure."
Shouldn't this all be in a separate thread and not in the current weekly competition - a little help moderators?
Sometimes these discussions come up very organically. We would have the same people participating if we did put it into another thread.
Besides, it is a good and timely filler while we wait for Nathan.
The Like button is like an easy button. Rather than take the effort to engage, we (myself included) just “like” and move on. There’s also an anxiety it creates, and not just from the contributor that worries about how their content is received. We are now compelled to respond to everything, when we used to just get by without having an opinion sometimes. And yes, I’m referring to beyond photo submissions.
I agree. (I was going to hit the "like" button, but now I feel self-conscious about it. That's okay. I'm seeing my therapist soon.)The Like button is like an easy button. Rather than take the effort to engage, we (myself included) just “like” and move on. There’s also an anxiety it creates, and not just from the contributor that worries about how their content is received. We are now compelled to respond to everything, when we used to just get by without having an opinion sometimes. And yes, I’m referring to beyond photo submissions.
As a woman I use the like and love buttons with some frequency. 🙂 As well as the occasional 🤩
I think this conversation is fine on this thread rather than starting a new one. People who don’t participate in the competitions will offer “advice” that may not be relevant.
I think this conversation is fine on this thread rather than starting a new one. People who don’t participate in the competitions will offer “advice” that may not be relevant.
Last edited: