Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Or at least damn few people.

I know because I'm one of them. I just flipped through the new images and got up to page 8 (!!) before I found anything with more than 1 vote, and I'm pretty sure all the 1 votes were mine.

So is no one interested?

...and as I just mentioned in another thread...those that DO vote are probably more critical for the wrong reasons than they should be.

Well my voting philosphy tends to be:

table top quality is a 3, cause there's all kinds of good minis (so I want to leave room at the top) but just one kind of bad one.

And no matter how good something is if the image isn't rotated right or is blurry it's going to get a low score.

I think a 3 for table top quality is a bit harsh. That leaves tabletop models with bad/decent/good ratings only.

Some tabletop models are good, and some are great. I wouldnt rate a tabletop model over a 7 or so.

8-9-10 are enough points to decide AWESOMELY painted models on. Specially here where the rating system is almost unused....and the gallery itself has a lack of any real attention.

I don't worry too much about me being harsher than normal, as long as I'm consistant and there are other posters/voters. When I look and see that for 8 pages, I'm pretty much the show... then it's a problem.

There are just too many images. I am fed up of scrolling through pages of nearly identical, out of focus pictures of someone's WIP flash git, or whatever.

For me,

1-3 = trash
4 = poor tabletop
5-6 = decent tabletop
7 = good tabletop or competent show-off
8 = good showoff
9 = exceptional showoff
10 = I'll actually remember it, even when I navigate away, for example the Emperor, Migsula's Alpha Legion & the yellow and black hazard lines dreadnought (I think it was orky, but it may have been chaos - so it was memorable, but confusing!)

I am consistent within that, but as long as everyone else is consistent to their own scoring, no problem, I reckon.

Personally, I've not done any scoring for too long...

Well, I stopped voting when I would take the time to vote every day at lunch, trying to give a realistic score on unpainted WIP, some absolute crap, and I receive 0's on my stuff that I at least painted. Then you see some worthless out of focus unpainted crap get 10's because he had his friends all get on and vote for his stuff...

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Well my voting philosphy tends to be:

table top quality is a 3, cause there's all kinds of good minis (so I want to leave room at the top) but just one kind of bad one.

And no matter how good something is if the image isn't rotated right or is blurry it's going to get a low score.

Same here.

If the model is obviously done in a minimal tabltop quility scheme, I give 3 or 4.

If the pic is blurry, you automatically get a low score of 2or3 no matter how good you think your model is because I cant see the damned thing.

I usually give good coolness rating though for models even if I score them on a lower scale because most that I have seen so far out of a few hundred votes are actually pretty damned cool.

The highest I ever vote is 9 for paint and that is for quality that is usually seen on work such as Grimteef's paintjobs.

I value good conversions, so I almost always rate them highly in coolness even if paintjob is N/A.

This image

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/13067-Dakka%20Mekboy%20Challenge%20-%20You%20Get%20to%20Convert%20Da%20Kopta%20-%20Entry%2011.html

has I think 7 colours plus highlighting, inking and weathering but only rate 4.29 for paintjob. It only got 7 votes out of 277 views. The average between Golden Demon winner and unpainted is 4.5.

These images

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/16314-Napoleonic%20Russian%20Cossacks.html
http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/16315-Napoleonic%20Russian%20Cossacks.html

rated 3.5 and 6.2 for painting respectively. THEY ARE THE SAME MODEL from different angles. (I didn’t paint the Cossacks. They are in the gallery as examples of historical figures.)

This shows that voting is highly variable and subjective.

Kilkrazy wrote:This shows that voting is highly variable and subjective.

Well... of course. Voting is, by its very nature, both of these things.

It doesn't invalidate the process, and increased quantities of votes should generally serve to smoothe this out.

My 2 cents...and I have wished for some kind of "dumping system" that voters can dump something in the trash and if 10 other voters agree or disagree, it gets saved or dumped ASAP. But that's probably what we're actually doing, but it sucks realizing that loving this hobby sometimes means sitting there methodically for awhile and then realizing you're actually distinguishing the difference between a 2 on painting and a 3 on coolness or a 3 on painting & 2 on coolness. Then you suddenly realizing its all crap including the one you just realized is YOURs from nine months ago!

But man every once in awhile you get a string of 9s & 10s and you're wicked impressed and if this voting system gets better, ten months from now, we'll have some really well-deserved recognition for some great & inspiring painters.

...and there should be a separate category for funny b/c some of that stuff is hilarious.

Fifty wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:This shows that voting is highly variable and subjective.

Well... of course. Voting is, by its very nature, both of these things.

It doesn't invalidate the process, and increased quantities of votes should generally serve to smoothe this out.

It does invalidate the process. It's pointless voting a scale of 0-10 if the same item can get a 3.5 or a 6.2.

Voting is the system used to determine scores in ice skating and gymnastics. You can't claim those scores are highly variable and subjective because they obviously aren't.

What's happening in our gallery is that some people have given no consideration to the voting range, so their votes are basically meaningless as a guide to what is good or not. Also, there are too few votes on lots of items, so there is no way to get a reasonable average.

Unfortunately new images are being added to the gallery faster than users can view and vote on them.

I propose a simple change.

No-one should be allowed to upload more images than they have voted on.

Is there a way to keep stuff uploaded from being part of the voting process? Nothing I uploaded is worth voting on, I didn't even know there was going to voting till after mine were uploaded. I'd prefer to just not have people bother having to vote on em -- only reason they are up was to test it out and to have shots for a WIP thread.

I tried voting and as above I got tired of seeing the same f-ing cmodel 10+ times. If someone putting up WIP pics could simply take them off of voting consideration, that might help (ontop off a way to get them voted out of the rotation).

how about instead of every image being votable, users can submit pictures from their gallery to be voted upon.

I have pictures of garage made guns and some WIP stuff in my galleries and have no desire to have any vote applied to them.

I've tried to vote on people's stuff before but getting the same stuff, or stuff that isn't wargames related really starts to wear on me.

Yes, those are both good ideas.

I got tired of flipping through when the same damned images kept coming up every time..

Kilkrazy wrote:

No-one should be allowed to upload more images than they have voted on.

I think this is a good idea.

Deadshane1 wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

No-one should be allowed to upload more images than they have voted on.

I think this is a good idea.

I second that motion

Now we have to convince legoburner.

I think that the split gallery option would be optimal, The idea to submit only the images you want to have people vote on.

Maybe an actual guide of the ratings would be handy.

I mean I am mortifed by a result of 3, because 3 for me is far under Ttop quality, 5 is normal as the average, so I see 5 as Ttop, which is something I picked up from another site.

If people are marking 3 as what the owner would consider 5 minimum as a basic nice Ttop standard, then no wonder people are getting irritated at the bizarre scoring jumps.

Faux Pas wrote:I think that the split gallery option would be optimal, The idea to submit only the images you want to have people vote on.

This also wouldnt be a bad idea. I really dont much care what people think about my "Tabletop" models. If I personally wanted something rated....I'd be trying to do as well as I could on it.

I wonder how many people have looked at Ein's or grimteefs work and just thought 'wow, i can't possibly upload my stuff as it looks crap in comparison?' I've said on another thread that i only really upload my work to get some feedback on the colour schemes etc...

Personally, i would like to see the 'coolness' rating rating replaced by a 'modification' rating. It would be grand to be able to browse things on the merit of how much effort has gone into making something unique rather than, as it seems, how good the basic model looks!

J.Black wrote:I wonder how many people have looked at Ein's or grimteefs work and just thought 'wow, i can't possibly upload my stuff as it looks crap in comparison?' I've said on another thread that i only really upload my work to get some feedback on the colour schemes etc...

Not many when you look at the huge numbers of quite mediocre images uploaded.

J.Black wrote:
Personally, i would like to see the 'coolness' rating rating replaced by a 'modification' rating. It would be grand to be able to browse things on the merit of how much effort has gone into making something unique rather than, as it seems, how good the basic model looks!

I've always counted 'coolness' as either modification or unusualness of the image, or a very interesting paint job. There's nothing cool about a bog standard model anyone could buy and take a photo of.

burb1996 wrote:Well, I stopped voting when I would take the time to vote every day at lunch, trying to give a realistic score on unpainted WIP, some absolute crap, and I receive 0's on my stuff that I at least painted. Then you see some worthless out of focus unpainted crap get 10's because he had his friends all get on and vote for his stuff...

Exactly. After it became clear that voting could easily be used as a anonymous trolling tool, I became totally disinterested in the process. If I give people reasonable scores*, and get crapped on in return I'm not interested. *5 for table top, ie 5 for AVERAGE, and adjust from there.

frgsinwntr wrote:I got tired of flipping through when the same damned images kept coming up every time..

I ran into a lot of that. For some reason I literally got about 100 images of somebody's hive tyrant. It was a beautiful model, but after the 9-10th time it showed up I started hitting the skip button.

frgsinwntr wrote:

Deadshane1 wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:
No-one should be allowed to upload more images than they have voted on.

I think this is a good idea.

I second that motion

I think this is a very bad idea, since the idea to be able to share. Maybe people shouldn't be able to put up more models for voting than they've voted on, but totally denying people access to the gallery would defeat the purpose of having a gallery, since most people don't vote.

Faux Pas wrote:I think that the split gallery option would be optimal, The idea to submit only the images you want to have people vote on.

Exactly.

Ifalna wrote:Maybe an actual guide of the ratings would be handy.
I mean I am mortifed by a result of 3, because 3 for me is far under Ttop quality, 5 is normal as the average, so I see 5 as Ttop, which is something I picked up from another site.
If people are marking 3 as what the owner would consider 5 minimum as a basic nice Ttop standard, then no wonder people are getting irritated at the bizarre scoring jumps.

Yes, 3's very harsh for some that people put some effort into. I mean, if you've painted to a table top standard, it usually means you've bought a model, assembled it, primed it, painted it, and then took a picture. It's a lot of work, then to have somebody put it as below average is a slap in the face.....

Kilkrazy wrote:

This image

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/13067-Dakka%20Mekboy%20Challenge%20-%20You%20Get%20to%20Convert%20Da%20Kopta%20-%20Entry%2011.html

has I think 7 colours plus highlighting, inking and weathering but only rate 4.29 for paintjob. It only got 7 votes out of 277 views. The average between Golden Demon winner and unpainted is 4.5.

"Number of techniques applied" is not a reasonable measure of how good a model looks. The overall effect on that model is IMO quite poor; in fact, I would describe it as worse than an ordinary cleanly painted and highlighted model. Hence, my rating of four. What do you mean by "the average between Golden Dæmon winner and unpainted?"

Voting is indeed pretty damn subjective. I've had two of the same type of model, painted the same way, where one was rated 1 with two votes and one was rated 6.5 with 2 votes.
For me it is:
0-1: barely painted/primered
2-3: painting outside the lines everywhere, clashing colors, etc
4-5: painting mostly inside the lines, colors look alright. No highlights/drybrushing/thorough basing
6: painted inside the lines, based, some techniques used.
7: painted very well for tabletop quality, techniques done well, based well
8: painted really well. Above tabletop quality.
9: Lower end golden daemon, very high quality
10: Completely awesome golden daemon quality.

Votes will average out but you need 10 or so, 5 is the bare minimum.

Maybe we should go back to showing no score before you hit 5?

But it all comes back to, we need more votes! More votes solves everything!

One idea, make people vote on their own stuff when they post. Now I generally don't vote on my stuff, but if everyone is doing it it might work.

Sure some people will rate their unpainted night goblin a 10/10 but at least they'll have to think for a second. And if they do it rises to the top of the chart and then someone will vote down pretty fast.

Fetterkey wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

This image

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/13067-Dakka%20Mekboy%20Challenge%20-%20You%20Get%20to%20Convert%20Da%20Kopta%20-%20Entry%2011.html

has I think 7 colours plus highlighting, inking and weathering but only rate 4.29 for paintjob. It only got 7 votes out of 277 views. The average between Golden Demon winner and unpainted is 4.5.

"Number of techniques applied" is not a reasonable measure of how good a model looks. The overall effect on that model is IMO quite poor; in fact, I would describe it as worse than an ordinary cleanly painted and highlighted model. Hence, my rating of four. What do you mean by "the average between Golden Dæmon winner and unpainted?"

It should be 5 average.

The aesthetic of this model is a bashed together Ork conversion which has been in combat. It shouldn't look like a Tau vehicle just rolled off the production line.

However, that's beside the point. The key point is that it has had 277 views and only 7 votes, only 2.5% of viewers bothered to vote.

The topic of this thread is too few people voting in the Gallery.