 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Paul Bourke wrote:
>> 1) How do we accept new voters?
>> 2) Should submitters be allowed to vote in the round they submit to?
>
> I propose that submitters are the only people allowed to vote. They earn that
> privilege by contributing to the competition. I propose this is cumulative in
> the sense that any entrant who has successfully been awarded a prize/place is
> then a voter in perpetuity.
What if they become annoyances after this point? I don't think it will
be a major problem, but continuing privileges should come only with
continuing contribution.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
> 47d2ce11$1@news.povray.org...
>> I intend to allow voters to rate each image in 4 categories
>> - overall
>> - technical merit
>> - artistic merit
>> - concept and interpretation of theme
>
> It should be noted that with the IRTC, the 3 notes (techical, artistic,
> concept) were always extremely correlated.
It may also be that judges let their overall opinions color the
individual category scores. If they like the concept, judges tend to
ignore technical flaws, for instance.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
de news: 47d56279@news.povray.org...
> There are occasional outliers of course - for instance images with a
> moderately good artistic note and so-so concept - but on the whole having
> several voting categories is more intellectually satisfying than
> statistically meaningful.
Here are the graphs with the regression results.
http://www.oyonale.com/images/divers/image001.gif Artistic vs technical
http://www.oyonale.com/images/divers/image002.gif Artistic vs conceptual
http://www.oyonale.com/images/divers/image003.gif Technical vs conceptual
The strongest fit is artistic vs technical. That's really the same notion.
G.
--
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray, Cinema 4D and Poser computer art
- Posters
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
> It may also be that judges let their overall opinions color the
> individual category scores. If they like the concept, judges tend to
> ignore technical flaws, for instance.
I bet it works that way at the other end of the spectrum too. E.g. un-inspiring
images may get little attention paid to a clever concept etc.
I wonder, does anybody else have a tendency to open the description first before
bothering to look at the final product? :-)
Charles
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Charles C" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > It may also be that judges let their overall opinions color the
> > individual category scores. If they like the concept, judges tend to
> > ignore technical flaws, for instance.
>
> I bet it works that way at the other end of the spectrum too. E.g. un-inspiring
> images may get little attention paid to a clever concept etc.
>
> I wonder, does anybody else have a tendency to open the description first before
> bothering to look at the final product? :-)
>
> Charles
What I usually do is first read the description. Then I grade the image based
on its own merit. I then adjust my given score based on what I read, and end
up with a final score.
My orignal score was based somewhat like that of the French system. I never
gave more than an 18, and below 10 was for images that just didn't come of
good. That's how I did it.
--Nimish
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> Here are the graphs with the regression results.
> http://www.oyonale.com/images/divers/image001.gif Artistic vs technical
> http://www.oyonale.com/images/divers/image002.gif Artistic vs conceptual
> http://www.oyonale.com/images/divers/image003.gif Technical vs conceptual
I find the complete lack of dots on the upper left and lower right
corners rather telling.
Either nobody ever made an image which was superb in one category and
completely sucked in another (which I really find hard to believe), or
cross-contamination of categories is just an inherent property of the
human mind and there's nothing that can be done about that.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nimish Ajmani wrote:
> "Charles C" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>> John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>>> It may also be that judges let their overall opinions color the
>>> individual category scores. If they like the concept, judges tend to
>>> ignore technical flaws, for instance.
>> I bet it works that way at the other end of the spectrum too. E.g. un-inspiring
>> images may get little attention paid to a clever concept etc.
>>
>> I wonder, does anybody else have a tendency to open the description first before
>> bothering to look at the final product? :-)
>
> What I usually do is first read the description. Then I grade the image based
> on its own merit. I then adjust my given score based on what I read, and end
> up with a final score.
I generally view the entry first, and then read the description. This
is for the animations round (which is the side I enter). If I need the
description in order to understand the animation, then there is
something wrong with the execution of the concept.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Charles C" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht
news:web.47d5d90b32e069a82f046a7d0@news.povray.org...
>
> I wonder, does anybody else have a tendency to open the description first
> before
> bothering to look at the final product? :-)
>
No. Always image first, description later.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote:
> "Charles C" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht
> news:web.47d5d90b32e069a82f046a7d0@news.povray.org...
> >
> > I wonder, does anybody else have a tendency to open the description first
> > before
> > bothering to look at the final product? :-)
> >
> No. Always image first, description later.
>
> Thomas
Perhaps I should change my style of judging (granted I've only done it twice...)
--Nimish
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Nimish Ajmani" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht
news:web.47dfcc5e32e069a88c12d7010@news.povray.org...
>
> Perhaps I should change my style of judging (granted I've only done it
> twice...)
>
<grin>
I think it doesn't matter too much what technique or which procedure you
follow, as long as you get a balanced judgment in the end. That said,
however, personally I feel that the competition is about *images* or
*animations*, so my very first move is precisely towards the *image* or the
*animation*. That determines my first impression and, in the end, the
overall level of judgment. Description and so on, come second.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
