Greedy People

[CaTaClYsM]

Passing out in the hallway at a con is what won me over.

[Beowulf]

On the topic of video quality I'd like to add that I think its a very good idea to take the filesize into consideration. The technology is avalible today to have everyone make a nice 720x480 1st pass XVid quality version of their video but some people don't have that kind of bandwidth to throw around.

Urban Ragnarok is a prime example of this. That video in the above mentioned format would be roughly 250 megs. That is of course unacceptable by any standard so he scaled it down to a 320x240 88 meg version. While this version is VERY compressed and low resolution, it is obvious that DVD source was used, and a lot of thought went into the encode to make it look as good as it does. I'd give that a 9 for video quality.

And then, on the other size of the spectrum you have people like Rozard who just make all there videos in 720x480 and don't care about the space

[CaTaClYsM]

Just rate it on how well the final product looks,. If the video is half an hour long but they still manage to get into into a reasonable filesize then yes, rate it higher than you would a shorter vidoe of the same quality. And if someone someone gets a 1 minute video up to 100 megs. I don't care what the reason, you drag them out into the street and shoot them for needlessly wasting all that space. But that's should only be a difference of 1 or 2, maybe 3 at the most points.

[Rozard]

And then, on the other size of the spectrum you have people like Rozard who just make all there videos in 720x480 and don't care about the space

LOL

I was actually talking to my friend Matt about this today, and how I need to go back and reencode all my AMVs to that they're a smaller resolution and filesize. To be honest, why I do that is because I'm too lazy to take the time to look up resizing sizes, and to do it correctly

[Castor Troy]

And then, on the other size of the spectrum you have people like Rozard who just make all there videos in 720x480 and don't care about the space

LOL

I was actually talking to my friend Matt about this today, and how I need to go back and reencode all my AMVs to that they're a smaller resolution and filesize. To be honest, why I do that is because I'm too lazy to take the time to look up resizing sizes, and to do it correctly

I think your videos are taking the most space on some of my AMV cds.

[Rozard]

And then, on the other size of the spectrum you have people like Rozard who just make all there videos in 720x480 and don't care about the space

LOL

I was actually talking to my friend Matt about this today, and how I need to go back and reencode all my AMVs to that they're a smaller resolution and filesize. To be honest, why I do that is because I'm too lazy to take the time to look up resizing sizes, and to do it correctly

I think your videos are taking the most space on some of my AMV cds.

;_; sowwy

[TaranT]

No I know what he was saying, but regardless of if you have 100 "bad" data points, let's say you have 200 opinions? Are we supposed to say 50% of your data is "outliers" or "bad?" That doesn't seem right.

Maybe 50% are "bad". The point is we don't know and can't know. And the assumption that most are ok is just that - and unprovable.

I mean I see your point about how different people grade differently, but that's why things are averaged. For you to say one data point is "invalid" is more or less saying that that person scores incorrectly and that their opinion is worthless.

Not worthless - inconsistent. Like I said, on a one-to-one basis anything is fine. It's when you try to add them together that you have problems.

Now don't take this the wrong way (well not you since you brougt it up, but others), but I can see what you mean in that some folks give all 10's all the time and some rate with a 5 as average (vs. 7). However, regardless of these points, it's still valid data and it's still their opinion.

I guess I'm just arguing with the fact of calling it "invalid" when it is their opinion and the fact we all grade differently. The average is taken and more or less it weighs itself out. I imagine that takes care of some (but not all) of it. There's no such thing as a PERFECT scoring system or an accurate score with respect to these things.

At the same time, the argument could be made that no video is accurate in results until *EVERYBODY* who saw it, scores it. That would be the only way to get "accurate" results I guess...*shrug*

True, there is no perfect system, and I'm not suggesting this one be changed. Problem is, there are people who are using these scores and star ratings to measure their progress as AMV editors, and that's simply wrong. About the only help for that is to educate them.

[FallenPhoenix]

I almost went quoting every part of Cataclysm's post in order to rip it to shreds, but I took a few minutes to chill out and realize that part of it was the headache eating at my patience. Sorry 'bout that.

What I will say, however, is that it's not for you to decide, really, what people should and shouldn't give. There's a reason it's called an 'opinion.' Maybe I like the little logos in the corner. Maybe I like the subtitles at the bottom. Maybe I like lower video quality and interlaced footage. Even if there's rules against it, that won't stop me from liking it. If marijuana is illegal in my country, will that stop people from liking it? No. In any case, just because someone -else- told you it's bad doesn't mean that you should think it's bad as well. Everybody's got their own tastes, and the true beauty of the system is that, no matter what, I can tell the guy what I liked and disliked about his video and to hell with what the rest of the world thinks. To put any restrictions on it would be invalidate the reason it's called an 'opinion.'

[CaTaClYsM]

Ah. I see. So just because Phade says you arent allowed to use downloaded footage doesn't mean I shouldn't use it. What does he know?
If you like interlacing and low bitrates you shouldn't be giving opinions. It would be a slap in the face to everyone who actually tries to make their videos CORRECTLY.

[dwchang]

Not worthless - inconsistent. Like I said, on a one-to-one basis anything is fine. It's when you try to add them together that you have problems.

Nah, I can see your point, but I could make the argument that if someone is "inconsistent", that is to a degree part of their opinion. I guess it sounds odd, but let's say someone gives all 10's to most videos. Sure I don't necessarily agree with that, but if they're "inconsistent" like that all the time, to a degree, they're being "consistent."

I guess it's not as relevant (and I don't necessarily agree, playing devil's advocate), but one could say that if someone grades harshly/too highly all the time, in essence they more or less average themselves out. Also when you get a decent distribution of both harsh and nice reviews, I feel it does average out. It's a matter of which you get more of which in turn biases the data in that direction. I feel the "too nice" is that bias and it's shown in our global averages.

True, there is no perfect system, and I'm not suggesting this one be changed. Problem is, there are people who are using these scores and star ratings to measure their progress as AMV editors, and that's simply wrong. About the only help for that is to educate them.

Oh I wholeheartedly agree on the degree of weight some people put in their star scores or opinions. I mean it's nice and all, but there's no such thing as "perfect data." I mean even after 100 opinions, you still only have 100 opinions when there are over 100,000 members. As I said, I may be arguing about the validity of the day, but I by no means think the system is accurate as I stated previously.

As for changing the system, I've actually made quite a few suggestions and last I heard (saw a reply from Phade), they're all in the "to do" list. I think these things would help considerably, but we won't know till he tries.