>>Technical - I didn't vote on technical, since I only really know POV. I
just
>>gave everyone 10.

>>It would have been nice to be able to give a neutral vote (ie. "N" meaning
>>"I give this the average score for this particular image" - essentially
>>saying that you trust the judgement of other voters) so that I could have
>>given a technical score to the pov pictures. I don't know enough about
stats
>>to know if this would work.

Technical in my voting has to do with the level I perceive the person
rendering the picture has aspired to in the development and commission of
their work.  For example, a bryce picture with only a couple of objects and
a very realistic texture can be a pretty impressive picture.  However, on a
technical level, this ranks very low on my scale.

Making a technical call requires you to read the text file associated with a
picture.  It is so important for people to submit this with their pictures
from the aspect of scoring this item.  The description of HOW someone did a
particular portion of their work can determine how good a score they deserve
for this factor.

Sometimes, simply looking at a picture doesn't give you a good view on the
level of technical know-how that went into producing that picture.  I did a
large amount of work on my 1stabomb submission for the history round.  I
included hundreds of human figures that were composed of strictly POV
primatives but lost out because they weren't poser figures or human-like
enough for the viewers.  If you examine the zip file for that submission,
you will find figures for each of the officer components of each unit and
several different figures for each unit type.  While these figures looked
funny from close up, the farther they are away from the camera, the more
acceptable the primative detail is.   The other problem people had with this
submission was that since they DIDN'T read the text file, they DIDN'T get
the joke.

If you don't feel qualified to vote on a particular venue, giving a picture
a 10 doesn't aid in separating the good ones from the bad ones.  You instead
contribute to making the entire group more average.  For example, giving
everyone a 10, if there were 3 votes, 20,10,20, the picture ends up with an
average of 16.67, you've effectively dropped that picture by almost 4
points.  On the other hand, on a particularly bad picture, 10,1,1, you move
it from a 1 up to a 4.   Where both pictures are already getting average
scores, you will move the score less, but both will tend to be more average.
Better that you read the text file and decide if the person has made a
technical breakthrough or done nothing exceptional and give 1's and 20's
instead.  Your basis for this scoring is the level of expertise compared to
your own knowledge that the person has given you.

Unfortunately, in your case, what would be beneficial for everyone is to be
able to not score a picture for a particular area.  Then you don't change
the relative score for all the other votes.

Post a reply to this message