UKC

After assigning an increasing number of low-end scores to some hill-walking type photos on the galleries, I realised I'm judging them on 'non-personal interest' type basis, rather than an artistic or content basis. To me they frequently look dull and uninteresting, hence my low votes but I'm coming round to thinking that they're "just not my bag" so am probably being overly harsh. I've therefore decided not to vote on them at all in future.

Does anyone else do this or do you still vote on them?

In reply to Fraser: hi fraser in the spirit of your post and as a hillwalker ive just posted a few 1 scores on some of your pics, hope you dont mind.......

In reply to Fraser: I tend not to vote on anything I feel is less than a four. I think it's a bit mean (especially as the voters are anonymous) and pointless to give rubbish photos low votes, but maybe that's just me!

In reply to Nicholas Livesey:

I'm similar, I only vote on photos that grab me. However, I do give low votes to photos where I really don't agree with the current vote. for example, you do sometimes see some really poor photos that have been given 4 or 5s, presumably by the taker and/or his mates.

In reply to Monk:

I don't know, some people post some proper dross on here, I'll happily give properly awful photos low marks. It feels like otherwise you're demeaning the brilliant photos you see. Maybe that's just me though.

In reply to Fraser:

The whole voting thing is utter bollox.

A intelligent alternative is to just be able to tick a "like" box. No voting, no quantifying.

Job done UKC bosses; are you listening?

In reply to Removed Userlfenbo:


Not at all - a lot probably deserve considerably less!

Most of the scores I give are a 3, but I've no hesitation scoring less or more, depending on my initial reaction to people's shots. Otherwise, what's the point? I was just wondering how many users score according to their 'activity preference' rather than the more objective (if that's possible) artistic/photographic merits of the shot in question.

In reply to Fraser:

I try to be objective - I have given low scores in the past but have round to the thinking of only voting on things I really like i.e. a 4 or 5 vote.

I like Pylon's idea of a like button instead of the 1 to 5 vote.

In reply to Pylon King:

a Like box is voting, it's just on a scale of 0 to 1 rather than the current 0 to 5 (where 0 is not voting at all).

In reply to Fraser:

I always thought the number of votes was directly proportionate to the number of mates you have on UKC

In reply to Nicholas Livesey:

Surely the point of someone posting photos on UKC is to garner opinion. if it's a shit photo then people should say so. otherwise the galleries will be full of crap because no-one is willing to say so. (I hardly even look at the galleries never mind vote so my opinion here is mostly worthless anyway)

In reply to Toreador:

no it isnt

In reply to graeme jackson:

Incorrect - i dont remember ever voting on pictures at an art gallery.


correct

In reply to Pylon King:

yes it is

In reply to Toreador:

I may be arguing in my spare time

In reply to Pylon King:


I don't remember an art gallery where people walk in and hang up their own work.

In reply to Pylon King:

Completely agree!

In reply to Pylon King:
Maybe that's because there isn't usualy the oportunity to do so? I do agree with Toreador that a 'like' button is essentialy the same as giving a photo a score - you're quantifying the extent to which you do or do not like the photo. If the photo doesn't make the grade, you effectively give it a zero, by not voting.

Personally, I like being able to express an opinion on a photo, be it good or bad (ok, that could be done by 'adding a comment' alone). I also upload photos of my own to let climbing friends see a record of our days out, rather than to get feedback from the UKC masses on the photos themselves, but it can certainly be interesting how some of them get scored.

This thread has reverted to a discussion on the merits or demerits of voting, whereas the OP was intended to question whether or not people grade their mark according the the 'arena' of a photo's content.

In reply to Fraser:


Thank God

In reply to Fraser:


no its not - you like or you dont like - no numbers involved.

In reply to wildeybeast:

I do

In reply to Pylon King:
>

So you don't ever express an opinion on the 'works of art' you see? odd.

In reply to graeme jackson:

Actually the only time I have ever looked at the photos is:
a) if a mate tells me to vote on it
b) if I'm trying to get an idea what a route/crag is like

But then I'm not a photographer and don't generally randomly browse through photos for the hell of it.

In reply to Pylon King:

Thought you might.

Don't people vote with their feet where galleries are concerned? Plenty close down due to lack of interest, but the UKC galleries are going strong!

In reply to Fraser: IMHO there are 2 things going on with the phots. Firstly, there is a great library of route pictures which I have found v useful before I set out, particularly when faced with a 'slender' route description, such as 'Follow obvious line to top', when there is no obvious line. Secondly, there is a beauty parade for phots, which I am (slightly) less sold on. Most (if not all) of the top 10 pictures are outstanding and I really enjoy looking at them. However, there are some (the majority by definition perhaps) which are less good and there needs to be a methodology for filtering them if one wants to have a top 10. In terms of the original post, it is disappointing that as a combined outdoor community we cannot be a little more objective in our outlook. Stating the obvious, a good hill shot = a good hill shot (even if you are a climber).

In reply to graeme jackson:

Possibly, sometimes, i just enjoy it or not (mostly music) but i certainly feel no need to vote on it x-factor style.

In reply to wildeybeast:

I dont think its the voting that keeps the UKC gallery going, i think its the fact that people submit photographs.
I think at the very least we should be able to switch the voting off - like we can do with comments.

In reply to Pylon King:

Indeed. It would be much more useful to be able to disable voting than comments.

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber:

Actually ive just realised you can, by putting shots as Crag photos.

In reply to Pylon King: Another in agreement for having the option to disable voting. I'm not sure about this but if you put something under "crag" shots that isn't appropriate, won't it just get moved by the mods?

In reply to wildeybeast:

I'm glad to know i am not the only one!


not sure, it certainly isn't ideal and means going through every pic, which i cant be bothered to do.

In reply to Pylon King:

A fair comment that I'm actually in total agreement with. Where we appear to be diverging is the reason people are posting their photos in the UKC galleries. I can understand route photos being put up for information but I can't understand what reason anyone would have to post their personal pics on a public forum other than attention seeking in which case they should be prepared to have their work sensibly appraised.

In reply to graeme jackson:

I think we are probably both right.

Yes i imagine there are many people on here that do but for me ( and many others i suspect) its just sharing something that you find pleasing ( like i do with music i release) and doesn't need to be quantified in any way.

In reply to Pylon King:

Ah I understand now. Your disagreement isn't with voting, it's with the use of numbers. How about replacing 1,2,3,4,5 with Hate, Dislike, Take-It-Or-Leave-It, Like, Love?

In reply to Toreador:

There is simply no need to quantify the photos, besides ive seen many people vote 1 for a really great shot and vice versa. It's TOTAL BOLLOX!