|
|
|
|
Greetings, I've been submitting to 1x for just under a year and a half and have received over 150 publications and 41 awards.
Please tell me one thing about curation.
I would like to know about the criteria for the promotion system from Member Curator to Expert Curator.
If I continue to participate in curation, which is open to free members, and accumulate points, can I become an expert curator who can influence publications?
Also, will their achievements as a photographer, such as awards received, be taken into consideration?
Hi,
It's purely based on points achieved in curation. Curators of level 7 and above are considered "Expert Curators", nothing to do with own achievements.
Regards,
Mike
Thank you so much . I see ....I knew it.
This is just my personal opinion.
We cannot have the Head curator's review our work unless it is published. The 'expert curators' currently have the de facto authority to make that decision.
Specialists like the 'Head curator' make decisions based on a great deal of knowledge and experience, and they seem to have a certain tolerance for diversity of expression.
However, I feel that some of their members who have just been promoted in the system do not yet have that.
So I feel that only certain patterns, somewhat basic and faithful to the basics, are being published moderately. Maybe it is just my feeling.
I would appreciate it if you could consider how this should be done once again.
Thank you very much !
I think that's not correct. Head curators will review also when works are not published. There was more than one occasion where photos were rejected and later awarded. Which proofs my assumption.
I think that's not correct. Head curators will review also when works are not published. There was more than one occasion where photos were rejected and later awarded. Which proofs my assumption.
Oh...I see!
I have experienced that case several times.
I know it is a lot of work, but it would be helpful if you could look through as many of the rejected works as possible.
Thank you for your kindness!
You're welcome! Please don't confuse critics and curators, I'm less a curator than a lot of members here. I rarely vote and my role is completely independant from curation.
takeborn299,
There is an explanation of how member curators are ranked as Apprentice, Curator, or Expert Curator - but it's not easy to find.
Click on the green 'Curate' button, and after the first photo appears, there are two small buttons at the bottom right of the screen. Click on the one to the right. That takes you to a new page. Under the green 'Start Curation' button you'll see 'Learn More'. Click there to see how members are ranked according to their points.
I hope that helps.
I've often wondered if the number of photos Published or Awarded is considered when choosing 'Expert Curators' - but have never found a definitive answer. I think it should be - but I don't make the rules. Mike K said in his reply to you that it's based only on the number of points a member has accumulated. It's said the the Expert Curators votes have more weight, but we don't know how much more. In the FAQ section under 'How does Curation work?' it's stated that "there is a built-in test in curation which determines how skilled each expert curator is" . That's another mystery.
. . . . Steven T.
takeborn299,
There is an explanation of how member curators are ranked as Apprentice, Curator, or Expert Curator - but it's not easy to find.
Click on the green 'Curate' button, and after the first photo appears, there are two small buttons at the bottom right of the screen. Click on the one to the right. That takes you to a new page. Under the green 'Start Curation' button you'll see 'Learn More'. Click there to see how members are ranked according to their points.
I hope that helps.
I've often wondered if the number of photos Published or Awarded is considered when choosing 'Expert Curators' - but have never found a definitive answer. I think it should be - but I don't make the rules. Mike K said in his reply to you that it's based only on the number of points a member has accumulated. It's said the the Expert Curators votes have more weight, but we don't know how much more. In the FAQ section under 'How does Curation work?' it's stated that "there is a built-in test in curation which determines how skilled each expert curator is" . That's another mystery.
. . . . Steven T.
Aaah!
I finally understand exactly what 'level7' mean.😅
I mistakenly thought that level 7 was the "apprentice" one.
This is something you have to be very skilled at to become one.
Thank you very much!
takeborn299,
There is an explanation of how member curators are ranked as Apprentice, Curator, or Expert Curator - but it's not easy to find.
Click on the green 'Curate' button, and after the first photo appears, there are two small buttons at the bottom right of the screen. Click on the one to the right. That takes you to a new page. Under the green 'Start Curation' button you'll see 'Learn More'. Click there to see how members are ranked according to their points.
I hope that helps.
I've often wondered if the number of photos Published or Awarded is considered when choosing 'Expert Curators' - but have never found a definitive answer. I think it should be - but I don't make the rules. Mike K said in his reply to you that it's based only on the number of points a member has accumulated. It's said the the Expert Curators votes have more weight, but we don't know how much more. In the FAQ section under 'How does Curation work?' it's stated that "there is a built-in test in curation which determines how skilled each expert curator is" . That's another mystery.
. . . . Steven T.
This is interesting for sure Steven. I have just made grade 1 curator and wondering about it all and how it works. So can I ask you Steven, how does the expert curator and head senior thing correlate of does it? Thanks, Kristin
Kristin,
Much of the site's structure is not very well explained. There's some information in the FAQ, but we have to figure the rest out ourselves.
It starts with the names . . . . there are Member Curators, Expert Curators, and Head Curators. In the Critique Forum we are named 'Senior Critics', but that has nothing at all to do with Curation. We get one vote just like any other member.
Having reached the 10,000 point threshold, I guess that makes you a 'Curator'. Congratulations! I'm curious, were you notified of the promotion?
. . . . Steven T.
Kristin,
Much of the site's structure is not very well explained. There's some information in the FAQ, but we have to figure the rest out ourselves.
It starts with the names . . . . there are Member Curators, Expert Curators, and Head Curators. In the Critique Forum we are named 'Senior Critics', but that has nothing at all to do with Curation. We get one vote just like any other member.
Having reached the 10,000 point threshold, I guess that makes you a 'Curator'. Congratulations! I'm curious, were you notified of the promotion?
. . . . Steven T.
Thanks for the explanation. I understand a lot of things now.
A boring gentleman with a lot of time to invest making comments and curing photos in his own way. Without any idea of composition or illumination, he can be a curator.
That's why I see so many photos posted with basic beginner flaws.
Well, that's what it is.
Thank you very much.
I will try to put my grain of sand, making constructive and didactic criticism of portrait photography.
Greetings.
David,
Please understand that I do not know all about the Curation process. Much of it has never been explained by the site's management. For example, from the FAQ . . . "To make sure only very high-quality photos are published, there is a built-in test in curation which determines how skilled each expert curator is. The most skilled curators get much more power in curation, to make sure that all decisions are accurate and taken by very skilled curators." I've always wondered what the 'built-in test is'. I'm guessing that a member's votes are compared to how the majority votes - or perhaps how the Head Curators vote. That's a recipe for clichés. When I vote I try to reward imagination with 'Publish' votes, and discourage clichés with 'Reject' votes. If I feel I've seen the photo a thousand times before - even if it's technically perfect - I wonder if we really need one more. Maybe that's not fair, but it's my small way of furthering the craft and art of Photography. Didactic? Perhaps.
I'm pleased to hear that you will try to add your 'grain of sand' to the comments and critique sections. There are two - one in Member Curation, and the other in 'Critique Forum'. I sometimes wonder if the erratic percentage scores in Curation result from a low number of members voting. A hundred votes will give a better evaluation than a dozen.
. . . . . Steven T.
Hi,
This forum section was helpful for my, but I still wondering if there is somewere a place where I can find a complete structure of site, definitions, purpose of curators, head curators, critiques and so on, and their voting power (if any difference) in order to follow why a photo is or is not published, and any other information of site working mechanism, in terms of photography curation only (not interesting in site build mechanism in terms of coding).
I'm new in photography and I want to learn, and I strongly feel that this site mechanism will help me to develop, but at this moment is just a feeling, and I need to find those information.
Thanks !
Voinea,
I see you've just joined in October. Welcome! And three published photos already - Congratulations!
You've asked where to find information about the "complete structure of site, definitions, purpose of curators, head curators, critiques, and so on, and their voting power (if any difference) in order to follow why a photo is or is not published". If there is a weakness to 1X.com it's my opinion that it's the lack of guidance and information available to members. Questions are asked in the Forum, and we try to help one another - but it would be better to have a full explanation from the 'HQ Team'.
Much can be learned by exploring the site. There is the 'About' section where you can see galleries and biographies of 'Crew' members including the Head Curators. Have a look there to see who is making the decisions to 'Award' photos.
The FAQ section is worth reading. There's an explanation there under 'How does Curation work?'
When you click on 'Curate', a page appears. There are two icons at the bottom right. Click the right one and then click 'Learn More'. I think that was suggested earlier in this thread. There's info there about the three levels of member curation.
There have been articles about Curation in the Magazine section. Here are links to some of those. The first one is not an article, but a forum post from Founder, Ralf, explaining the main criteria for Curation. He writes "The main criteria of 1x are high quality, original and artistic photos, which should be either very beautiful, very meaningful, very moody or preferable all of it."
One last suggestion is to look at the Published and Awarded galleries to see the sort of photographs that are rewarded by the member curators and Head Curators.
I hope this is helpful.
. . . . . Steven T.
https://1x.com/forum/site-related/awards
https://gallery.1x.com/blog/permalink/9176
https://gallery.1x.com/blog/permalink/8538
https://gallery.1x.com/blog/permalink/8283
Good morning. Regarding the comment below. One potential "test" of curator skill is the ratio of the numbers under correct/incorrect decisions. To find these, go to this page & then go to the stats. (See below)
David,
Please understand that I do not know all about the Curation process. Much of it has never been explained by the site's management. For example, from the FAQ . . . "To make sure only very high-quality photos are published, there is a built-in test in curation which determines how skilled each expert curator is. The most skilled curators get much more power in curation, to make sure that all decisions are accurate and taken by very skilled curators." I've always wondered what the 'built-in test is'. I'm guessing that a member's votes are compared to how the majority votes - or perhaps how the Head Curators vote. That's a recipe for clichés. When I vote I try to reward imagination with 'Publish' votes, and discourage clichés with 'Reject' votes. If I feel I've seen the photo a thousand times before - even if it's technically perfect - I wonder if we really need one more. Maybe that's not fair, but it's my small way of furthering the craft and art of Photography. Didactic? Perhaps.
I'm pleased to hear that you will try to add your 'grain of sand' to the comments and critique sections. There are two - one in Member Curation, and the other in 'Critique Forum'. I sometimes wonder if the erratic percentage scores in Curation result from a low number of members voting. A hundred votes will give a better evaluation than a dozen.
. . . . . Steven T.
Once here, click on See Full Statistics"
This still begs the question of what a correct or incorrect decision is. Cheers!
Good morning. Regarding the comment below. One potential "test" of curator skill is the ratio of the numbers under correct/incorrect decisions. To find these, go to this page & then go to the stats. (See below)
David,
Please understand that I do not know all about the Curation process. Much of it has never been explained by the site's management. For example, from the FAQ . . . "To make sure only very high-quality photos are published, there is a built-in test in curation which determines how skilled each expert curator is. The most skilled curators get much more power in curation, to make sure that all decisions are accurate and taken by very skilled curators." I've always wondered what the 'built-in test is'. I'm guessing that a member's votes are compared to how the majority votes - or perhaps how the Head Curators vote. That's a recipe for clichés. When I vote I try to reward imagination with 'Publish' votes, and discourage clichés with 'Reject' votes. If I feel I've seen the photo a thousand times before - even if it's technically perfect - I wonder if we really need one more. Maybe that's not fair, but it's my small way of furthering the craft and art of Photography. Didactic? Perhaps.
I'm pleased to hear that you will try to add your 'grain of sand' to the comments and critique sections. There are two - one in Member Curation, and the other in 'Critique Forum'. I sometimes wonder if the erratic percentage scores in Curation result from a low number of members voting. A hundred votes will give a better evaluation than a dozen.
. . . . . Steven T.
Once here, click on See Full Statistics"
This still begs the question of what a correct or incorrect decision is. Cheers!
I would also be interested in that. But I explain it so that the correct decision is agreement with the other curators in both cases (published x rejected). On the contrary, it is incorrect to disagree with others again on the decision (published x unpublished).
Porter and Radek,
Thank you for the explanations and screen shot. The graphs and summaries of 'correct/incorrect' are nice eye candy, but you hit the nail on the head, Porter, when you asked . . . . what is a 'correct' or 'incorrect' decision for a photograph? Who decides? Imagine voting for a Prime Minister or President and having your vote judged as 'correct' or 'incorrect'.
I hope that 1X members vote with their hearts - 'Publish' for the photos that they like, that they think are worthwhile because they are meaningful, that surprise us by showing us things we've never seen, that make us think - or feel, or tell an interesting story, or are just too beautiful for words. In my opinion that will further the art and craft of Photography more than voting 'Publish' for photographs that you think you're expected to choose because they look the same as what's already been chosen.
Steven T.
Explanations how everything works might be a good topic for an article in the Magazine... when I started here a few years ago, I also was completely lost, learned only by doing.
kind regards
Ulrike
Hi Steven,
I believe that in reality the true problem lies only in the use of the terms "correct decision" and "incorrect decision". It would be much clearer - and less misleading - to write: "compliant decision" or "non-compliant decision".
The decision expressed by each individual curator, in fact, is always "right": it is his opinion, therefore it can only be right, at least according to his personal judgement.
But the problem is that the final judgment on a photo placed in curation can be only one. And since there are a multiplicity of voting curators, the final outcome can only be the sum of all these "right" decisions.
But be careful: this does not mean that the “correct” decision was made about the photo; it simply means that has been adopted the most shared decision among all those who expressed their free and personal judgment.
And from this, it follows that: if the judgment that a curator has expressed is in harmony with the final result (i.e. with the majority of the individually judgments) then his vote is evaluated as correct (but it would be better to say "compliant" ); otherwise, his judgment is evaluated as incorrect (but it would be better to say "non-compliant").
It seems to me a reasonable method, I would say democratic. Difficult to find a better solution.
However, a corrector has been applied to this simple mechanism (as reported in the FAQ): to verify that the vote is the result of a carefully considered and non-random judgment, a test was included in the curation phase to evaluate the degree of reliability of the individual curators. And in relation to this test, curators with a higher degree of reliability are given greater decisional weight.
This is certainly a useful correction to ensure that the photos are evaluated in the best possible way and with due attention, but unfortunately the HQ Team has never specified the characteristics of this test, nor the extent of this greater decisional weight assigned to the more “skilled” curators.
And this is not very good, in my opinion, because it introduces an element of discretion which can also give rise to some suspicion.
Sergio,
Thank you for that well written reply. You vote a lot, and I'm sure you've given this matter some thought.
I agree that 'Compliant' and 'Non-Compliant' would be much better terms than 'Correct' and 'Incorrect'.
Like you I am puzzled about the 'built-in test' for Curators, and would welcome more information from the site managers. In the FAQ we see this . . . "To make sure only very high-quality photos are published, there is a built-in test in curation which determines how skilled each expert curator is. The most skilled curators get much more power in curation, to make sure that all decisions are accurate and taken by very skilled curators."
I've wondered if it's as simple as presenting the same photo several times to see if the member will vote 'Publish' or 'Reject' consistently each time. Maybe the algorithm looks at how many votes a member has made. Or, more likely the test is a measure of the 'correct' vs 'incorrect' decisions. And here we're back to defining 'Correct'.
So, should we follow the herd and vote for the photos we think are most likely to please others in order to raise our percentage score? Or should we ignore the scores, skip the cliché photos, and vote Yes! when we see a spark of creativity?
. . . . Steven
PS: A quote from Voltaire . . . I'm sure when he wrote this he was thinking of things much more important than points on an internet photo site.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong."
Dear Steven,
just like you, I also tried to imagine (better: guess) how this phantom control test could work... and the idea I got is this:
as you may have noticed, photos that have already been definitively judged are recurrently proposed in the curation. Sometimes these are rejected images, sometimes published images, sometimes even awarded images. It's quite clear that for these images your vote no longer contributes to forming a shared opinion (having already been judged).
So I asked to myself: what's the point of proposing them?
The only sensible answer I was able to give myself is: to verify that your vote is not random, hasty, not considered. I'll try to explain myself better.
We all know (because the 1x Team tells us) that only less than 1% of uploading photos are awarded. Of course we don't know what is the impact of the photos published on the photos uploaded, but I think it is reasonable to imagine that this percentage does not exceed 20%.
That being the case, if a curator rejected all curated photos he could have an accuracy rate of about 80%. Remarkable, isn't it?
Now, how can you understand if this 80% is really the result of an accurate curation? Simply: just insert some "bait" photos"-
If your curation is casual or hasty, it is very probable that your judgment regarding these "bait" photos does not conform, in the majority of cases, to the judgment already obtained. On the other hand, if your judgment is well thought out, it is very probable that your judgment regarding these "bait" photos will be compliant in most cases.
In summary: greater is the percentage of your compliant votes in relation to these "bait" photos, higher is your level of reliability, and then your weight, as curator.
Obviously I don't have any concrete proof regarding the validity of this theory, but I still consider it plausible and easily applicable.
But as I already said, a word of clarification from the HQTeam would be welcomed…
Kind regards
Sergio
PS. I really liked your quote from Voltaire. And regarding the curation process, I offer you another quote from the great philosopher:
“Ask a toad what is beauty…; he will answer you that it is his female, with two large round eyes projecting out of its little head, a broad, flat neck, yellow breast, and dark brown back” 😉
Sergio,
I think your theory of how the 'built-in test' works in Curation is a logical one. I often see a photo that I'm sure I've seen - and voted on - before. I try to vote on it the second time the same way as the first - so may not do well in the 'built-in test'. I go to Member Curation to see the photos. Now and then there is one that inspires me.
The toad's definition of beauty is a quotation I did not know. It reminds us that there is more to the world than our narrow vision allows us to see. It also explains whey my profoundly meaningful photographs aren't seen that way by others. :-)
. . . . Steven
Based on the observed pattern of voting and results, one can just as likely assume that the “complex curation process” is in fact nothing more than the random selection of a simple random state generator.
The aspect that should be given the main weight in the “popular” vote (about 80%) is the technical quality of the image. “Public opinion” can handle this quite well. other artistic aspects of photography are highly specialized for each specific genre.
Otherwise, with the same success, you can expect the start of sales in an impressionist gallery with a curator specializing in comics.
