 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
At this point I'm pleased because this thread has became very productive and
has made my rethink the entire project.
I've been reading your ideas and found them very good.
As Greg propossed I think the better system is that the same artist who
propose images for the museum rate them (not only their images also the
other's ones)
Cosidering the suggestion of Tim about the qualification of the curators,
maybe the votes of the differents curators could be weighted considering
their previous submision qualifications. For example, if "A" and "B" gives
10 points to two works but "A" has submitted works that were best rated than
"B" then their qualifications to the works would be differents (of course
"A" rate would be less than "B" rate)
These are my ideas. Comments please.
--
Pablo Viojo
pvi### [at] adinet comuy
news:40356c41$1@news.povray.org...
> How about every contributor also a curator?
>
>
http://www.zazzle.com/contributors/favorites/favorites.asp?cid=2380244271319
49824
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
First of all, Andrel mentioned animations. I'm guessing the bigger file
sizes wouldn't be workable, but if you somehow found server space, I've got
LOTS of anims to share! (See, that's a reason not to have anims!) ;-)
"Pablo Viojo" <arr### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:4035786b@news.povray.org...
> Cosidering the suggestion of Tim about the qualification of the curators,
> maybe the votes of the differents curators could be weighted considering
> their previous submision qualifications. For example, if "A" and "B" gives
> 10 points to two works but "A" has submitted works that were best rated
than
> "B" then their qualifications to the works would be differents (of course
> "A" rate would be less than "B" rate)
Ohh, that's one thing I *don't* like. While yes, nearly all of us would be
dying to see what Gilles thinks is "best" (I suppose an awful term), I
don't think his ratings would necessarily always be "more important" than
others.
Possible other ideas:
1) Every contributor also a curator and that means that everyone gets a
little corner of web space to say, "These are my favorite umpteen images by
other artists." Perhaps one rating system could be the number of times
your image ends up in favorite galleries. You Pablo the curator head could
periodically pick i) random private collections and ii) a private collection
of "an important povver" to be on the front page.
2) Just 15 curators, but from a wide slice of the pov community. They'd
perhaps be responsible for rating every image under the sun.
3) [Less sound] The zazzle system where one can go to a streaming view of a
series of large thumbnails for the images. You just rate things as they
come along.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
news:40357fa2$1@news.povray.org...
> First of all, Andrel mentioned animations. I'm guessing the bigger
file...
Maybe later, by non I'm thinking about still images only (becuase of file
size mainly)
> > Cosidering the suggestion of Tim about the qualification of the
curators,
> > maybe the votes of the differents curators could be weighted considering
> > their previous submision qualifications. For example, if "A" and "B"
gives
> > 10 points to two works but "A" has submitted works that were best rated
> than
> > "B" then their qualifications to the works would be differents (of
course
> > "A" rate would be less than "B" rate)
>
>
> Ohh, that's one thing I *don't* like. While yes, nearly all of us would
be
> dying to see what Gilles thinks is "best" (I suppose an awful term), I
> don't think his ratings would necessarily always be "more important" than
> others.
>
Yes, you're right about it.
> Possible other ideas:
>
> 1) Every contributor also a curator and that means that everyone gets a
> little corner of web space to say, "These are my favorite umpteen images
by
> other artists." Perhaps one rating system could be the number of times
> your image ends up in favorite galleries. You Pablo the curator head
could
> periodically pick i) random private collections and ii) a private
collection
> of "an important povver" to be on the front page.
>
> 2) Just 15 curators, but from a wide slice of the pov community. They'd
> perhaps be responsible for rating every image under the sun.
Maybe a combinated system. First the contributors select their favorites.
Then a group of "selected curators" chose theri favorites and based on both
choices the best works are selected. Of course that this would need an
automated system for rating the images.
> 3) [Less sound] The zazzle system where one can go to a streaming view of
a
> series of large thumbnails for the images. You just rate things as they
> come along.
Don't like it
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Pablo Viojo" <arr### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:403588bf@news.povray.org...
>
<snip>
My comments and suggestions....
I don't like the idea of different curators votes being given different
weights - you, as musuem owner, would reserve right of veto, but weighting votes
beyond that strikes me as both messy and divisive.
It wouldn't really matter if only a sub-set of the curators voted on each
image - just set an appropriate threshold of votes required before any image is
made available to the museum in general (assuming that the average vote was high
enough to warrant the image's inclusion).
As a minor suggestion to keep some sort of equilibrium between harsh and
generous curators, it might be worth applying some sort of function to a vote
that would help balance things out - in other words a high vote from someone who
rarely gave high votes would be worth more that a high vote from someone who
consistently gave generous votes (and visa-versa for low votes).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Among other things, Tom Melly wrote:
> As a minor suggestion to keep some sort of equilibrium between harsh and
> generous curators, it might be worth applying some sort of function to a
> vote that would help balance things out - in other words a high vote from
> someone who rarely gave high votes would be worth more that a high vote
> from someone who consistently gave generous votes (and visa-versa for low
> votes).
This reminds me of the rating system used in www.1001winampskins.com.
Apparently, they use a "Bayesian estimate", which weights the ratings
according to the current average throughout the site, and the amount of
votes a skin receives does matter too...
http://www.1001winampskins.com/messageboard.html?post_id=115
--
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
As one who always wants to learn from others whose works impress me, I'd
much appreciate being able to look for pictures from which I can learn.
So if I could sort (or easily determine) if they have Complete,
Partial or No Source Available, it'd be very, very helpful.
> It wouldn't really matter if only a sub-set of the curators voted on each
> image - just set an appropriate threshold of votes required before any image is
> made available to the museum in general (assuming that the average vote was high
> enough to warrant the image's inclusion).
That is what I assumed a "curator" would do: decide on what images
should be acquired by the museum.
Having featured "Tour Guides" that have a tour that displays a
collection of their favorite works *and their comments* could be an
interesting/convenient way to view the museum -- especially if one finds
a Tour Guide they trust.
> As a minor suggestion to keep some sort of equilibrium between harsh and
> generous curators, it might be worth applying some sort of function to a vote
> that would help balance things out - in other words a high vote from someone who
> rarely gave high votes would be worth more that a high vote from someone who
> consistently gave generous votes (and visa-versa for low votes).
I suspect that the variable weighting would be cumbersome to implement,
and it could be that that curator simply has REALLY odd taste. :-)
Also, a high vote from someone who rarely gives high votes has already
weighted their vote by doing just that.
Also, should voting be restricted to curators (other than to accept or
reject a submission)? Just as any bloke can write a review and submit a
rating on Amazon or IMDB, why not allow this in some fashion? It
doesn't matter a lot until there is too much content to peruse easily,
but at that point it would be helpful, perhaps.
Here are some other ideas:
- Ratings are averaged, not points accumulated. No average is shown
until a minimum number of ratings have been received for the image.
(Okay, maybe the Curator's rating...)
- Premier members (or some other name, but ranked between a curator
and a regular member) have their ratings shown separately. How
would someone be granted Premier membership? Dunno.
- Multiple ratings are shown: Curator Rating, Premier Rating, and
Overall Rating.
- "Memberships" are free, all members can comment and rate images
on several characteristics, like artistic, technical, the code
submitted (if any), etc.
- I can't quite determine how, but it might be possible to somehow
limit the number of points members can reward; either on the basis
of time (N per week), or the basis of how many images that have
been submitted. (The latter implies they would actually view
all/most of them, though, I think.) This conflicts with the average
rating concept.
[Okay, if all of these were implemented it would be really cumbersome,
I think. But it's given as food for thought.]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias v2.0 wrote:
>>Perhaps I should not answer because I am repeating myself, and you
>>already know how I stand on this. IMHO you are describing a voting
>>system for the www.POVidols.com site. The original suggestion was to
>>create a POVmuseum. No offense meant, there probably is a market for
>>POVidols also. I am not sure I would visit the site myself though.
>
>
> First of all: the link you gave doesn't work, it's either offline now (but
> googling didn't show up anything either) or you were trying to point me to a
> certain style of www-type of gallery. So if the following thoughts don't
> fit, perhaps clarify for me what you meant with POV-Idols-Site and how it
> deviates from POV-Museum.
The POVidols domain is something I just invented to try to get something
across (and failed apparently :( ). In many countries there are TV
programs called 'idols' 'popidols' or whatever. The main idea for
these programs is that the viewer decides which candidate is through
to the next round.
I wanted to contrast that to the way a real life (as opposed to web
based) museum works. Here some curators decide what will be on display
and what will stay in the basement, based on things like artistic and
technical merit, the place of a piece in its time, the influence it
had on other works, her personal taste etc. Also, I wanted to state
that the museum way has my preference over the community voting.
I know that the selection is partly based on personal taste and
that if I do not have the same taste as the curator I may be
disappointed and perhaps never return, as you suggested. My
experience (with real life museums), however, is that this is
seldom the case. Even an exhibition from someone with a
different taste is often more interesting than a random collection
of works. Simply because someone did think about it and put these
together in a meaningful way. That is why I prefer a museum
where the selection is put together by a knowledgeble curator
over a collection that a random collection of works selected by
the ignorant visitors like me.
> Now, to the point: if there are ten people picking what images are to be
> displayed, maybe their taste differs from mine so much that, in the end, I
> wouldn't like the museum at all. So, maybe that's just me, but we're trying
> to come up with an idea that will make the site worthwhile for old and new
> Povers, right? Additionally, I believe in interaction. It's not like I want
> thousands of subscribers to vote. But if there are 10 curators for a museum
> with an audience that come from about 150 miles off in the real world,
> what's a good relation for a museum that can be visited from everywhere on
> the planet?
>
> But, don't just let people subscribe. Have them show some qualification,
> e.g. some work with POV-Ray to show that they know the basics and
> fundamental differences between POV-Ray and every other Modelling/Rendering
> App like 3D Studio Max or Cinema 4D. Have them point a few images of their
> own to show that they do know the topic on which they'd be voting. And thus,
> you get competent curators for the museum. Not 10, maybe even more than 100,
> but still, they're competent.
For me the curators do not have to prove themselves by showing some
masterpiece (in the original meaning of a piece made for passing an
'exam') of themselves. For me a master of arts title or experience
on the same level would do also.
Someone suggested guided tours elsewhere in this thread.
That was exactly what I had in mind by suggesting that we
could have a number of curators and not just one overall
decission maker and selecting these curators on their knowledge.
I think guided tours is a nice way of capturing that.
Therefor: minimal requirements to pass as curator should
also include ability to write a guided tour.
> Now, the larger the number is, the less likely is it possible to say: Let
> each curator decide for one image, since there's limited bandwidth and
> webspace. And that's where my idea of the voting system comes into play.
>
I am not opposed to a voting or rating system, I
just want the selection of works to vote for be restricted
to a manageble subset of the available work. If there is a
relatively stable selection of, say, 50 works that everybody
votes for, the results are more meaningful then when you
have two thousand works to rate and that change every
month.
I am also not against being able to browse all the works
including the works not currently on display. I think it
should be a seperate section of the museum and bandwidth
is a real issue here.
(I do appollogize for the length of this mail, it is just that
e-mail sometimes lures me into taking too little time for
writing shorter texts).
Andrel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The POVidols domain is something I just invented to try to get something
> across (and failed apparently :( ).
Ah, now I get it. Leaving the quotation of your remaining post away (for
space reasons :-) I can see your point. And I think it is a valid one... So,
having curators create guided tours? That'd be interesting! How about three
parts in the museum: one created by curators. Then, another one created by
the community. And finally, the images that are in the "basement". That
section could be closed off if bandwidth gets too high.
I'd say, have the curators do the actual "work": they decide on which images
are to be put up for display.
The community would vote as "passer-bys": when seeing a certain image, no
matter if on display, already in the Community-section, or in the "basement"
section, they can vote on it. Images getting a high enough vote will be put
in the community section, replacing older images, or ones rating lower.
Maybe there should be a point where images get set to 0, like when they pass
out of the community-section, or when they get placed into it.
Just a quick idea I wanted to suggest, nothing that is well thought through
or such...
Regards,
Tim
--
"Tim Nikias v2.0"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>
Email: tim.nikias (@) nolights.de
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
how about making things as simple as possible, upon entering the site the
user gets shown two random images from the whole catalogue - they then pick
the one they like best and a league table can be made showing the top 10,
etc.
have a look at www.pickthehottie.com to see this system in action
jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias v2.0 wrote:
>>The POVidols domain is something I just invented to try to get something
>>across (and failed apparently :( ).
>
>
> Ah, now I get it. Leaving the quotation of your remaining post away (for
> space reasons :-) I can see your point. And I think it is a valid one... So,
> having curators create guided tours? That'd be interesting! How about three
> parts in the museum: one created by curators. Then, another one created by
> the community. And finally, the images that are in the "basement". That
> section could be closed off if bandwidth gets too high.
Duh, this begind to sound like support for my point of view.
Please stop that immediately, or I starts doubting myself ;).
Andrel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
