Create Account

Stop the Bias Against non-Photoshop Users
#16

Hey all, I’ve read all the responses and I agree with the sentiment at large here. I understand that the graders don’t see how “the sausage is made” they just see the finished product, and I understand the objective nature of graphics grading.

With that, though, I think @TommySalami hit it on the head. These graphics are made to improve the look and feel of the site and our posts. My signatures certainly do that, as do most of the gfx that are made.

Did I spend 3 hours on one sig? No. Did I have the latest copy of Photoshop at my disposal? No.

But... I am proficient with GIMP and did many things to both the render, the background and the lighting that you could definitely consider “technically sound” and in no world do I deserve a 1/5 for any of my work. I can say that with conviction.

I have messaged the GFX Head privately, and I will also be taking all four to arbitration, and praying that I have a different grader for my next sets, one who will perhaps take a closer look and appreciate everything I did right to make the sigs look nice, because there’s a whole lot of that.


Again, not trying to start any trouble, just wanted to open a discussion about something I found to be unfair. It seems that many of you at the very least understand my issue or agree my work was graded unfairly, so I thank you as well!

Cheers
RD

[Image: 2JcMUJm.png]
Reply
#17

Whoever told you those sigs looked good was just being nice, to be completely honest. They are maybe 2/5.

Basically what’s being said is that people who make shitty sigs, but spend a lot of time making those shitty sigs, should be rewarded not for the actual final product, but the journey they took to get there. The problem is, you can’t grade on time/effort accurately because nobody actually knows.

S2, S5, S18, S22 Challenge Cup Champion
Hall Of Famers: (S7) Alex Reay | (S28) Daniel Merica


[Image: mckeiltbb.png]
[Image: Merica5.gif]
Thanks to Ragnar, Wasty and myself for the sigs.
Reply
#18
(This post was last modified: 01-02-2020, 02:05 AM by RainDelay.)

01-02-2020, 01:56 AMSimply Incorrect Wrote: Whoever told you those sigs looked good was just being nice, to be completely honest. They are maybe 2/5.

Basically what’s being said is that people who make shitty sigs, but spend a lot of time making those shitty sigs, should be rewarded not for the actual final product, but the journey they took to get there.  The problem is, you can’t grade on time/effort accurately because nobody actually knows.

You could be so many things, but for six, no... seven years now you choose to be a dick.

The sigs I make are all roughly using the same sort of functions and art-styles and I have received high scores on other site and people come to me when they need a sig. I don’t need your validation to know what I’m good at.

[Image: 2JcMUJm.png]
Reply
#19

As a graphics grader, I would like to chime in on this discussion a little bit.

Personally, when I grade graphics, I don't look at the user submitting them. I go in to the submissions and look at which sigs they submitted that particular week. People can make very different sigs week to week and to judge based on what you're expecting or the program being used, just doesn't seem right to me.

I grade based on the rubric/scale presented. I don't care what the sig looks like (for the most part, obviously), but if it hits the criteria, you get that grade. Everyone likes different things, and I'm just here to pay out the money. I cannot speak for all graders when I say this, obviously, but to me the scale is pretty clear and if the aspects are there, you get the grade. There is some judgment that goes in to it when you get towards giving a 3 or a 4, or a 4 or a 5. But at the bottom of the scale, it's pretty self explanatory, and if you have most of the items in the scale, I would say you deserve that particular grade.

I also know that as a grader, I'm not perfect and sometimes there are disagreements. I would encourage you to go to arbitration if you truly don't agree with the grade given to you. I'd also say that if I grade your submissions and you don't agree with the grade, you could also send me a PM and discuss it with me. Maybe there's something I missed which caused me to score you lower, and that can be brought up to when your sig goes through arbitration.

I don't think your assessment of a bias is accurate, as I don't think I know the program that many sig makers use. I personally don't believe the grading of your sigs was fair in this instance, so taking it to arbitration is the right move. If there is anything you'd like to discuss when it comes to graphics, feel free to message me, any other grader, or the head of the graphics department.

[Image: Otrebor13.gif]

[Image: 7MO9RpC.png]  [Image: gdppv5N.png]


Reply
#20

01-01-2020, 07:10 PMTomasnz Wrote: @Carpy48  thoughts?

That's really what the arbitration thread is for. To get a second opinion.

Since we have a wide range of skills among the submitters here, I believe it's just natural that some get a 5/5 while others occasionally get a 1/5. Since we changed from 1-10 to 1-5 it just seems more harsh, because earlier grades lower than a 5/10 were hardly given out. That's why we use the bonus system for in between grades. It's probably the same if written media was judged by categories like style, grammar etc. and not just by word count. Unfortunately we can't just give the same payment/grade to everyone. We do encourage everyone to submit graphics though, also beginners (and no, you don't need to use Photoshop) and to use the arbitration thread. Every grader here is human and sees things slightly differently, I don't think that's something we can change.. Currently we're still in the middle of making a few changes in the graphics department, but the new arbitrator is @Julio Tokolosh (a.k.a. my co-head).

[Image: zS2lCMp.png] 


[Image: carpy48.gif]
sigs either by @Wasty, @Nokazoa, @sulovilen, @Capt_Blitzkrieg, @sköldpaddor, @Ragnar, @enigmatic, @Lime or myself

Stars Lions Berserkers
[Image: p1gG0LD.png][Image: DKMMlC3.png][Image: sXDU6JX.png][Image: ctsxTFg.png]
my portfolio | my sig shop | gfx discord
[Image: 3GX9nYb.png]
Reply
#21

I mean... this seems to be the argument no matter what changes the graphics department makes. I've been on the site for a few years now, so I've seen the graphics department make lots of changes, and I've never seen any satisfaction with graphics grading. It's always been a point of contention. I honestly feel like I've seen this argued from every angle now: ps vs non-ps, graphics vs media, beginners vs "pros", effort vs quality, objective grading of subjective material... and it's crazy cause everyone usually comes out making good points. There's really no solution to please everyone.

For the record, I don't think those are 1/5 sigs, but it's not enough evidence that there's a fundamental problem, ya know?

[Image: Grapehead.gif]
TY NOKA AND VALOR FOR THESE WORKS OF ART
Player Page | Update Page




Stars Battleborn Czechia
Reply
#22

hello yes ive never used photoshop

is it completely different? yeah, it is. but i dont think theres any non photoshop bias, i mean, as far as i know theres no good way to tell.

if you want a set sum of money, your best bet is always going to be selling sigs direct to users.

[Image: sig-e-e-geck-atl.png]

e
Reply
#23

i dont know how much feedback was given along with your grade btw, but if theres zero feedback or justification to go with a 1/5 i think thats a distinct problem almost more so than the grade itself. i disagree with the 1/5, but i can see some elements that could be improved upon without too much trouble - mostly to do with render quality and cut. if gimp cant handle a higher quality render, that may be where some of the perceived bias is coming from?

[Image: sig-e-e-geck-atl.png]

e
Reply
#24

01-02-2020, 12:04 PMGeckoeyGecko Wrote: i dont know how much feedback was given along with your grade btw, but if theres zero feedback or justification to go with a 1/5 i think thats a distinct problem almost more so than the grade itself. i disagree with the 1/5, but i can see some elements that could be improved upon without too much trouble - mostly to do with render quality and cut. if gimp cant handle a higher quality render, that may be where some of the perceived bias is coming from?

There was feedback, but it seemed rushed. Also, GIMP is a lot less streamlined than PS which makes cutting a much more arduous process. Of course there’s always stuff to be improved on, but I didn’t like the “oh there’s not enough ridiculously advanced stuff” some of which GIMP can’t even do.

[Image: 2JcMUJm.png]
Reply
#25

01-02-2020, 12:06 PMRainDelay Wrote:
01-02-2020, 12:04 PMGeckoeyGecko Wrote: i dont know how much feedback was given along with your grade btw, but if theres zero feedback or justification to go with a 1/5 i think thats a distinct problem almost more so than the grade itself. i disagree with the 1/5, but i can see some elements that could be improved upon without too much trouble - mostly to do with render quality and cut. if gimp cant handle a higher quality render, that may be where some of the perceived bias is coming from?

There was feedback, but it seemed rushed. Also, GIMP is a lot less streamlined than PS which makes cutting a much more arduous process. Of course there’s always stuff to be improved on, but I didn’t like the “oh there’s not enough ridiculously advanced stuff” some of which GIMP can’t even do.

obviously not a fix-all kinda thing, but there are precut renders out there, which should if nothing else save you some time. cant remember the site rn, should probably be in resources somewhere?

[Image: sig-e-e-geck-atl.png]

e
Reply
#26

01-02-2020, 12:13 PMGeckoeyGecko Wrote:
01-02-2020, 12:06 PMRainDelay Wrote: There was feedback, but it seemed rushed. Also, GIMP is a lot less streamlined than PS which makes cutting a much more arduous process. Of course there’s always stuff to be improved on, but I didn’t like the “oh there’s not enough ridiculously advanced stuff” some of which GIMP can’t even do.

obviously not a fix-all kinda thing, but there are precut renders out there, which should if nothing else save you some time. cant remember the site rn, should probably be in resources somewhere?

Ahh, yes I am familiar with those resources. Has some good precut ones for many players but for some (most) I prefer finding an image that I feel is “right” and cutting myself with the lasso tool, even just for the challenge.

And for some renders like Matthias Seger who plays in Switzerland there just won’t be any pre-cut lol

Thank you though!

[Image: 2JcMUJm.png]
Reply
#27

Record your thoughts while working on a sig and upload it for that sweet, sweet podcast cash? Boom, your 400k for 3 hours of work just turned into 3.5 mil Tongue
Reply
#28
(This post was last modified: 01-02-2020, 01:17 PM by slothfacekilla.)

01-02-2020, 12:15 PMRainDelay Wrote:
01-02-2020, 12:13 PMGeckoeyGecko Wrote: obviously not a fix-all kinda thing, but there are precut renders out there, which should if nothing else save you some time. cant remember the site rn, should probably be in resources somewhere?

Ahh, yes I am familiar with those resources. Has some good precut ones for many players but for some (most) I prefer finding an image that I feel is “right” and cutting myself with the lasso tool, even just for the challenge.

And for some renders like Matthias Seger who plays in Switzerland there just won’t be any pre-cut lol

Thank you though!

I have used remove.bg (that's the actual url) before to cut out renders, but you can't control the size of the image it spits out if you don't pay for the full service. Could be something to look at to cut down on time with the lasso in GIMP. I remember that life...

[Image: 66818_s.gif]
Reply
#29

01-02-2020, 01:09 PMCementHands Wrote: Record your thoughts while working on a sig and upload it for that sweet, sweet podcast cash? Boom, your 400k for 3 hours of work just turned into 3.5 mil Tongue

Haha, except I don’t take 3 hours, probably around 30-40 mins per sig.

Unless I did a batch

[Image: 2JcMUJm.png]
Reply
#30
(This post was last modified: 01-02-2020, 01:28 PM by RainDelay.)

01-02-2020, 01:17 PMslothfacekilla Wrote:
01-02-2020, 12:15 PMRainDelay Wrote: Ahh, yes I am familiar with those resources. Has some good precut ones for many players but for some (most) I prefer finding an image that I feel is “right” and cutting myself with the lasso tool, even just for the challenge.

And for some renders like Matthias Seger who plays in Switzerland there just won’t be any pre-cut lol

Thank you though!

I have used remove.bg (that's the actual url) before to cut out renders, but you can't control the size of the image it spits out if you don't pay for the full service.  Could be something to look at to cut down on time with the lasso in GIMP.  I remember that life...

That’s pretty interesting, I’ll definitely check it out at least. Is the image clean at least?

Actually @slothfacekilla this seems like a very useful and clean tool. Thank you so much!

[Image: 2JcMUJm.png]
Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)




Navigation

 

Extra Menu

 

About us

The Simulation Hockey League is a free online forums based sim league where you create your own fantasy hockey player. Join today and create your player, become a GM, get drafted, sign contracts, make trades and compete against hundreds of players from around the world.