The Best Photographers of 2014 NEW RULES

  • 4
  • Problem
  • Updated 5 years ago
  • Solved
I just got a email stating that this year they are taking a persons total points in a category to determine Best Photographers of 2014. What this is saying is that its quantity and not quality that now counts. So if a person has 25 photos scoring say 650 or higher and a other person as 100 photos of 400 scores the one with 100 poor scoring photos gets the Best Photographers of 2014. Does this make sense to anyone.

Someone please tell me I am reading this wrong
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes

Posted 5 years ago

  • 4
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
Well your argument is wrong because unlike the old system where quantity counted and a member could scale the leader board with hundreds of 20% & 10% awards and end the year at the top ! Now with the graded points the only way to reach the top of the leader board and maintain a top place is to consistently submit good quality images that get in the top 10 week after week !

A far better way than saying someone who submits 10 good images in 365 days is the best photographer of the year ! which the old system was based on ?
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
Thanks Ralph for the reply but I still don't understand how this is going to work. Please explain more....Augie
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
from what i understand the old system was based on the top ten scoring images each tog took in each category were averaged and that score was used to determine the top 20 photographers of the year, when in actual fact all you have is the top 20 highest scoring images,?

so this year it is being based on the leader board scores, so the top 20 scoring togs who have consistently scored high enough to reach the top of the leader board will be called the top 20 photographers of the year ? in my mind the correct way to do it points based not on 10 good images ?

This could not be done in the past for the exact reason you mentioned first but now the points system is set up with a fair distribution it is only possible to get to the top with quality and not quantity !
Photo of Jasenka

Jasenka, Official Rep

  • 17800 Posts
  • 1285 Reply Likes
Thank you Ralph for helping Augie.
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
Thanks Ralph for taking the time to explain this I am sure it not only helped me to understand but many others....Augie
Photo of Dejan Nikolic Fotograf Krusevac

Dejan Nikolic Fotograf Krusevac

  • 25 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Augie is right,i agree with him,
a lot of players out over 1,000 images that take 10 % or 20% of the prize , which make a total assembled a larger number than someone who throws 50 images with the number of points over 700 , does that mean that such a photographer be ranked higher at the end of the year?
Photo of Jasenka

Jasenka, Official Rep

  • 17805 Posts
  • 1285 Reply Likes
Hi Augie and Dejan, as Ralph explained, points for place awards (#1 - #10) are much higher then points for 5%, 10% and 20% in same category. We have checked and almost all photographers would got Photographer of the year accolade in either method (this years calculation and previous years calculation).

I hope this helps.
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
Jasenka why don't they just post the actual method they are going to use so we all will know and fully understand it. I don't thinks that's to much to ask. the old one is still on the site just replace that one with the new one...Thanks
Photo of Garces & Garces

Garces & Garces

  • 574 Posts
  • 97 Reply Likes
In short, nothing really changes. As Jasenka explained, either of the methods will still yield almost the same results. That means, even if you submitted a thousand images in a year, still, your best 10 images and not the 990 images will determine your ranking. Why? Because that's how statistics works!
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
I Think the confusion is over which points are used,? There is a score each image gets in the daily, weekly & monthly competitions, and there are the points each image is allotted for the award won.

If an image scores 600 points for a daily submission and gets top 10% it will in the animals category receive an award of around 70 points which are added to the leader board total, A 5% would net around 120 points and a 20% would be only 20 ish, but the top 10 in animals can be in the 1000s

It is these points that are used to work out the player ranking and the end of year awards under the new system, unlike last year when it was the points awarded to the image ! ie the original 600.
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
So one photo in the top ten awards is worth as much as 100s of photos in the top 20% . its very clear now....how did you get that info.

Thanks again Ralph..
Photo of Eduardo Menendez Mejia

Eduardo Menendez Mejia

  • 21 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
The only thing that its not clear for me regarding the new method is...why didnot you post this method at the very beginning of the year? Do you think it is fair to change the rules at the very end? Dont you think there could be players that feel they are being foolished?
Photo of Lucky E. Santoso

Lucky E. Santoso

  • 123 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
Can a player make a request to be excluded from this new "Best Photographers" consideration? (I mean other than asking Pixoto to remove all of the player's images?)
Rather than (potentially) getting some mediocre-ranking accolade, I'd prefer not to get anything at all.

(This move of quantity-over-quality is saddening, albeit probably makes some business sense.)
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
There is no Quantity over Quality issue if you read the thread the new points system eliminated that last year !

The only way to reach the Top of the leader board is to Consistently submit good quality images that get top 10 places 5%, 10% & 20% awards will never get you there the points you get are too low !

Its about time people moved on from the old moan "quantity-over-quality" It dose not exist it just shows how ill informed and out dated some members are !
Photo of Augie Juliano

Augie Juliano

  • 179 Posts
  • 39 Reply Likes
I thought this was well explained Ralph by you and I don't understand why anyone is still questioning it.
Photo of Lucky E. Santoso

Lucky E. Santoso

  • 123 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
What really matters is the points from the upcoming yearly awards (to which points from daily, weekly, and monthly awards pale in comparison).
A top 10 image is only worth six (in the case of #10) to twenty (in the case of #1) top 5% images.
And as an old-timer, I know from experience that making HUNDREDS of top 5% images of the year (minimum score of around mere 650) is a FAR easier feat than making a single top 10 image of the year (minimum score of around 800!).
So, in accumulating points, quantity will definitely win over quality.

Don't get me wrong, i can understand that the new rule may make better sense (at least from a business standpoint), but telling people that there is no quantity-over quality issue would insult our intelligence.
Photo of Lucky E. Santoso

Lucky E. Santoso

  • 123 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
So, can a player make a request to be excluded from this new "Best Photographers" consideration?
Photo of Jason Kiefer

Jason Kiefer, Official Rep

  • 3044 Posts
  • 414 Reply Likes
Sure - we could take you out of the running. That said, given that you have the #1 and #5 image of the year in People right now I would expect to see your rank rise substantially when annual awards are assigned. You could always ask us to remove the badge after it is assigned...
Photo of Lucky E. Santoso

Lucky E. Santoso

  • 123 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
Yes, please take me out of the running, Jason. Thanks.
Photo of Ralph Harvey

Ralph Harvey

  • 896 Posts
  • 215 Reply Likes
If for 12 months competitions the competitions are based solely on quality over quantity to argue that the end of year awards are based on the reverse makes as much sense as the points analysis in your post above ?

The whole point of end of year awards is to give a final ranking to the years quality images, after all any low ranked non quality images will not get into the end of year awards !

As for opting out, you have been happy to get the award under its previous name for the last 2 years so why the sudden moan this year ? the only difference is its based on all your images not just your best 10 !
Photo of Garces & Garces

Garces & Garces

  • 574 Posts
  • 97 Reply Likes
To settle the issue I suggest Pixoto should just make two types of banners: TOP CONTRIBUTORS of the YEAR (based on the new rule) & BEST PHOTOGRAPHERS of the YEAR (for those togs with images in the top 20 - all category).

Honestly, I can't really appreciate one be named best photographer of the year if you see in their profile just full of flowers or just full of animals, etc., Unless, the banner will be specific like BEST PHOTOGRAPHER of the YEAR (Animal Category), etc.

In my opinion, those togs with images in the top 20 are truly the best! Other than that, they're just good and better.
Photo of Lucky E. Santoso

Lucky E. Santoso

  • 123 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
Firstly, regardless of whether they are good measures of quality, points from daily, weekly, and monthly awards are not significant when compared with points from yearly awards. (Take this image for an example: http://www.pixoto.com/images/54476519...
It got 838,788 points from yearly award but mere 73,464, 19,884, and 3,378 from its monthly, weekly, and daily awards respectively.)
So I'll just focus on what really matters: points from the yearly awards.

Pixoto's distribution of points is just not smooth enough: it's extremely skewed towards the best TEN images. So, for example, the #11th best image of the year (let's say with a score of 799) will get exactly the same points as the, say, #7,000th image with a score of, say, 650, because they would both get a top 5% yearly award.
Considering that images with huge quality difference could be getting similar points, it's clear that the points-based new rule cannot be taken as a serious measure of quality. And hence players who are concerned with quality (i.e. actively curating their own works) should be given a chance of opting out. IMHO.
Photo of Eduardo Menendez Mejia

Eduardo Menendez Mejia

  • 21 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I totally agree with Lucky. He explained that the key point is that pictures with image score from 650 to 800 at the end of the year will get the same result and of course they are not even similar quality. So there are only 10 big prizes that are not enough to stop a competitor that has lots of good quality, but no great quality. There is a big difference between good and great quality that is not taken into account with this method.

Otherwise I understand that there is a business decision to force people to submit as many images as they can and to stay lots of time here, what I can not understand is that the calculation method is changed at the very end of the year. Why didnot you settle the rules at the very beginning of the year? That way every one could have had the chance to understand the rules and behave accordingly.

I dont see a serious competition, not only photography but any kind of sport, around the world changing the rules with only three weeks left to the limit.

Changing the rules at the end of the year means that you are benefiting some people and of course discouraging others. Why didnot you just manitain the rules for a year that is almost done and then begin the new year with the new method?
Photo of Lucky E. Santoso

Lucky E. Santoso

  • 123 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
I couldn't have said it better, Eduardo. However, Pixoto is apparently not interested in maintaining the old rule, and I personally find it an acceptable compromise that they would make it possible for a player to opt out of competition.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.