Why people who didn't find the title of the movie put a mark such as 0 or 2 just because they didn't solve the snapshot. I've posted I don't know how many shots which had a low rating and no one had solved it. I precise it was not difficult at all because I don't look for rare movies ... Personally, I post very often snapshots and I'm a bit desperate by now when I see I have 2 or 3 just one minute after the upload. The shots I post are from known movies. I'm a bit disappointed to see that some popular movies had many many shots every week while some other ones have not because people are less numerous to find it. I don't talk just for me. But for instance, many many shots from The ghost and Mrs Muir have been posted. How many have been rejected just because few found it. I think more diversity will be nice.
I looked through your rejected stills and there are some great shots in there . . . I think it just has to do with luck sometimes . . I've seen someone else post the same shot I tried, and failed with, get through to FF and I know I have done the same thing myself (not on purpose) to others . . .
It's frustrating but don't give up . . . I am actually seeing a lot of lower rated, but nice, shots make it through now that the mods are helping here and there . . .
here and there? I think more than that, there are 30 shots which go on rating each 24 hrs. If you look at the number of shots which went through the last 24hrs: 80 shots, you can easily calculate the number of shots we pushed through. And we do not look at the rating at all for these. Rare/less known movies go through daily to the FF. But it is true, not everything can go, I think 80 is already a lot! Erin, I understand your frustration, and as LordMyst said, we wont change the way people are voting, it is a shame, but that's the way it is... but with the number of shots pushed through manually each day, there is still a good chance for a lower rated shot to make it! If your shot didn't make it, it probably means that there were also a lot of other good ones that day! but you shouldn't give up. The diversity is already there in my opinion, we push through all kind of shots: know, less known, rare movies, even if we dont know them as soon as it is interesting!
A question for the kind administrators: do they know the solution when they decide to push a shot through ? Many shots only make sense when you know the movie. For example I have seen this movie http://whatthemovie.com/shot/36460 yesterday (yes, very late) and realized that I missed many great shots in the past months. The shot itself is not so great but it becomes awesome if you know the movie. Other recent and easy examples of a priori not so great shots: http://whatthemovie.com/shot/36128 http://whatthemovie.com/shot/36675 http://whatthemovie.com/shot/36365
I think the awesomeness can only be fairly judged when you remember the scene and the movie. It has nothing to do with the quality of the movie itself. You don't rate the movie itself but the quality of the shot in relation with the movie. For example http://whatthemovie.com/shot/36128 is a poor picture. If you don't know the movie you even don't understand what is pictured. But it's a great shot once you know the movie.
I dont think its a poor picture. Its an interesting shot, interesting composition, a few puzzle clues etc.
Obviously though this is all subjective.
A lot of the subjectivity is removed from the equation if you vote for the awesomeness of the picture, and NOT the scene/movie itself. I think you totally CAN fairly judge the awesomeness of the picture without knowing the scene etc... because you should be voting on the picture itself, not its relevance in the movie.
Them00ch is right however I do understand what you mean Efji, there are sometimes shots which are good only if you remember the scene, and it happens that I push through some like this as well. And even without knowing the movie, we often push through shots with only little clues in it as them00ch said, if the composition is nice...
I also go into the time of disappointed and frustrated ... All the shots I've been trying to post the last few weeks that are not of great films or/and blockbusters have been rejected ... And were not that bad... It is very frustrating depending on the people's taste!
Efji has a good argument. I agree that some shots outside the context of the film lose much quality, but I - as a mere user - try to assess the shots I did not see the by quality, photography, installation, settings, or whether they are awesomes even decontextualized ...
The problem is and always will be that all evaluation is subjective ... The taste is personal and subjective, even when judging the shot itself, isolated from its context, we start with personal and non-transferable criteria. An example of this is that if we were to look at all the recent fatured movies we find shots that push by moderators who do not please us, they are not awesome for our taste or point of view ... So to say that "subjectivity is removed from the equation" like m00ch - who I do not know and love - says IS subjective ...
"So to say that "subjectivity is removed from the equation" like m00ch - who I do not know and love - says IS subjective ... "
I hope something got lost in the translation there, and you mean you "do know and love" :)
You are right. I said "A lot of the subjectivity is removed". You will never completely eliminate it. And you can never please everyone.
People keep mentioning about how only blockbuster movies and well known movies go through. To be honest, this is completely wrong. People who have been here long enough will remember that when WTM 2 was launched, that was a problem. But I hope us moderators have largely fixed that issue.
But you cant please everyone.
Perhaps we should open another thread where you can all bash the moderators, instead of derailing this one. ;)
To get the thread back on track. To stress again, it has NOTHING to do with the movie. If the picture is good, it has a good chance of going through, even if its from a film that only 1 person on WTM has seen.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way but I have had a look through your rejected shots, and I see a running theme. Headshots. Lots and lots of headshots. When taking an image, try to capture a moment or scene that is interesting visually and you may have more luck. Headshots of actors/actresses never rate that highly. I mean no offense to this, just trying to explain that your pictures havent failed because they are from unknown films.
I remember when wtm 2.0 was launched it was too easy. but now there is good balance in the FF thx to the mods. Sometimes I got frustrated but I admit they do a great job. ;)
@Erin I also saw your rejected shots and they are a lot of of headshots. Headshots are oke but keep them interesting.
@them00ch I mean I do not know you, never met you, you know?
I don't say ONLY blockbuster movies and well known movies go through, I say only MY blockbuster movies and well known movies go through... I agree 100% that the moderators do a great job pushing good shots that did not go up alone. I just said I'm frustrated because it seldom these shots are my (and I only post a shot that I like) ...
I think, like most, that's just a vent ... Like most of the uploaders, I am also frustrated by the hassle of looking for a different movie that has not already posted 20 shots, and look for the best shot of the film, which is not always going to be great, but has its value. .. And a minute after posting see the shot with very low notes type 3 or 4 ...
But as I can not propose any change that does not sound authoritarian, it is here only my sorrows ...
I'm sorry but I can't agree with you. I've posted headshots which have been rejected right but if you look at my shots in the FF they're for most of them, headshots. I do think a headshot from a movie only found by 20 persons is more accessible. I really try to take the best snapshots of the movie I've watched. But we have all a different sensibility. I don't want to offense anyone but I think I'll probably stop to upload just because I do think this system of rating is unfair. I know you can't keep all the shots but I've the feeling that people who rated are sometimes totally indifferent to the Cinema , every kind of cinema, and are not interessed in a cinema previous 1990.... Just my opinion ....
PS: you can't say a shot has nothing to do with the movie. Because, you recognise a shot from a movie, you like or not. Moreover, what do you mean by the awesomeness of a shot ? A scene in a movie context, a look, a face ....
Have a read through and hopefully you will understand what we mean a bit more.
Its nothing to do with people not being interested in films prior to 1990, you just have to find the right image from that film. An image which is cool to look at, imagine it as a piece of art on your wall for example. My most highly rated image, and the most favourited, is a film from the 1920's!!!
So dont think that people here aren't interested in films prior to 1990. In fact of all the movie communities, WTM's has to be one of the most diverse, well-rounded (and non-snobbish) , that I have experienced. A lot of the people I speak to here are very interested in film history, technical details, etc..
You are just going through a bad patch, but have a look at the images that go through to Feature Films, to see what sort of image scores well. And I mean the IMAGES, not the FILMS. you can get fantastic shots from crap films (#35555) and you can get bad shots from good films.
I'm posting a lot of shots lately prior to 1990. Erin is right: it's a tough job with all the low ratings, but the moderators are doing an eccellent job pushing the good ones through.