All Entries In Challenges NOT Getting Equal Number of IMAGE DUELS

Hello Amrita, I have checked and duels for challenges are indeed done in same way as they are done in categories.

I have often found your system to be wrong though ? i have submitted images which have paused presumebly because pixoto dont expect them to do well so i unpause them do this a couple of times and they take off in some cases i have picked up good places top 5% !!
If you are applying the same rule to challenges where we can not unpause them you are unfairly stopping some images from reaching there true potential !

2 wins, 4 losses Paused. Pixoto can tell within 6 image duels your photo will fail to rate in the category? My top image was paused at 2 wins, 4 losses. After using about 20 credits, the photo went on to win the day, join the 700 Club and has fared well since.

Take into account that there is an uncomfortably high amount of people that just click anywhere in the duels to earn the credit and might not even have their eyes open when doing so..... and you've got the recipe for a bad souffle. Yet, Pixoto operates under the assumption that every vote in the Image Duel is calculated using an honest, set criteria. That ain't happenin. :)

Jeff has hit the nail on the head here. I like the 'peer group' rating system via image duels, but allowing ANYONE to vote on an image just isn't working (you may disagree on this point, I'm sure) There are several instances where images so poor that they wouldn't get through scrutineering for entry to a local club competition are being awarded 700+ points. My own view is that some test of TECHNICAL image appreciation should be applied before members are allowed to vote. To give you some ideas, here's a list I've used before (from iconicphoto.com) to determine whether an image has any 'distractions'

1. Is it out of focus: A main subject or a part of it may be blurry (or “soft”). Another potential distraction occurs when background intended to be out of focus, as in a vague blur, instead appears partly in focus (a “tweener”) which can distract from the main subject.

2. Vacant space: A sizable part of the photograph is empty or has no meaningful content, to an extent that the view appears wanting.

3. Objects “out of synch” or cut off: Even slight distractions such as an odd
hand, bright color or shadow appearing in front of or behind a main subject
may cause an image to be rejected. Viewer focus may also be interrupted
when a significant element or parts of the image are cut off by the borders of
the photograph.

4. Excessive contrast: One or more areas or colors appear too bright or dark.
Unless an image is obviously abstract or includes an intended area of dark
shadow, all significant areas of a photo should be lit adequately to show some
texture or other detail.

5. Hot spots: When lighting is not uniform, a photograph may have a few areas
of particularly bright illumination that detract from the image.

6. Weak coloration: Faded color, or a gaping absence of tone where strong color
saturation would normally be expected, is considered a technical fault by
many judges (for example, a substantial white (or “bald”) sky.)

7. Over-saturation: Colors appear too strong or exaggerated for effect.

8. Overuse of HDR: In the past few years, some judges have expressed dislike
for what appears to them as excessive application of HDR (high dynamic
range) as indicated by “unnatural” skies or other odd-looking hues.

9. Over- or underexposure. A relatively rare occurrence these days with
automatic exposure control with digital imaging.

10. Glare and the like: Offputting reflections, blurs of motion and other
unintended consequences of capturing an image under challenging conditions
may also dilute artistic effect.

11. Image not level: Applies particularly to water views and landscapes with
horizon, and to architectural photography. Images taken with wide-angle
lenses are particularly susceptible. Notwithstanding opportunities for digital
correction, a tripod and/or spirit level continue to be recommended for use
with wide-angle lenses.

I don't completely agree with everything here, as some "technically wrong" aspects of a photograph can be an artistic choice -- and art has always been and always will be subjective. The penalty to such images should not be refusal from the site, but from a low score from the voters. And if there isn't a low score.....well, the voters have made their choice. Sure, I see images I don't think should score high, but the votes show otherwise. The issue is not so much with the photos as it is with the folks who keep voting for them.

Unlike other stock photography sites where images must be accepted before going on the site -- and photos are critiqued and may not be accepted -- Pixoto is truly an "anything goes" site.

Also, one other point. Photos that are taken on a cell phone and edited on the phone as well can honestly look good -- on the phone. ONLY on a phone. It is only when viewed on a computer screen that they look horribly wrong, with over-saturation and over-sharpening completely ruining the photo. Folks who only use their mobile device with Pixoto may not be aware of how bad their own photos look. or how bad the photos they vote for really look.

My point was that votes for an image are issued based on nothing, by a disturbingly large base here. I had an image on here, that I made, that was nothing but a white dot on a black background. It's wins and losses were tied at 18 each. 18 people voted for the dot. I think it is likely, to any prudent person, that the ones who clicked on that image were not concerned at all with what it looked like, rather just wanted the credit that came along with the mouse click.